Q&A: Muktzeh for One Person but Not for Another
Muktzeh for One Person but Not for Another
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I was unsure about a question regarding pork that is intended for sale: would it be muktzeh on the Sabbath because it is designated for merchandise, or should we say that since a prohibition on commercial dealing applies to it, its status should be like ordinary pork, which may be moved for the sake of feeding an animal? The case is one where the owner of the meat runs a store selling pork products, and he is knowingly violating the prohibition against dealing commercially in pork. The question is whether the laws of muktzeh are determined by the mindset of a specific person, or by the mindset of the average person (meaning that an individual's atypical view is disregarded compared with everyone else).
A similar question is whether a certain object can be muktzeh for one person but not muktzeh for another.
Best regards,
Answer
If it is intended for sale, then that is its designated purpose. Why should it matter that it is prohibited? Its owner wants to sell it. The prohibition of muktzeh in Jewish law is determined by the mindset of the owner of the object. After all, you cannot feed it to an animal against the owner's wishes, because you would be violating the prohibition of theft.
In principle, it is accepted in Jewish law that if something is muktzeh, it is muktzeh for everyone, and as stated, this depends on the owner's intent. However, there is a discussion in the Talmud about something being muktzeh for the wealthy but not for the poor; see what was ruled in the Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayim 308:52, against that view. The discussion there is about from whose perspective it must be set aside in order to be considered muktzeh, and the ruling is that if it was set aside by the wealthy, it is muktzeh, and therefore the poor as well are forbidden to move it.