THE WHISKEY COLLECTION
A Moral Dilemma for the Shabbos Table
By Rabbi Yitzi Weiner
We know that there is a mitzva to get rid of all of one’s chametz on Pesach. One way that we get rid of our chametz is by selling it to a non Jew. This brings us to the following true question.
A man whom we will call Yosef had a large collection of expensive whiskeys in his cellar. Every year when Pesach arrived, he sold his chametz, and included his extensive whiskey collection in the sale.
One year a fire broke out in his cellar on Pesach. Luckily, Yosef had fire insurance. Once the holiday was over, the insurance company made a large payout to Yosef, based on the contents of his cellar. A large part of the payment was intended to cover the loss of the liquor. Yosef wondered if he was allowed to accept payment for the chametz.
He thought,’’if I accept the money I will be benefitting from chametz. Also, this particular chametz didn’t even belong to me; it belonged to the non Jewish gentleman who purchased it from me. Additionally, if I accept this money, it will be clear that I never took the sale of the chametz seriously.”
Yosef took his question to a Rav. Would it be permitted to keep the insurance money? What do you think?
I am entirely unqualified to answer this question. But a friend posed it today as an interesting problem, so here is my response, purely for the purpose of a theoretical halachic discussion.
By halacha, Yosef sold, and does not own, the chametz that was destroyed. However he appears to have an insurable interest in the chametz of a non-Jew. I am not aware of any halachic (specifically halachic!) prohibition on maintaining insurance on the property of another. If that is permitted, then Yosef and the company entered into a contract in which Yosef agreed to pay premiums and the company agreed to pay Yosef for a loss of the non-Jew’s property.
Now it appears that Yosef would benefit from chametz by accepting payment under the insurance agreement. To this I would argue first, that the benefit does not occur until payment is actually made. As long as the policy benefit is not received during Pesach, Yosef has not transgressed.
I would argue second, that maintaining an insurance policy on a non-Jew’s chametz is not the usual manner of deriving benefit from chametz; the benefit is not from the chametz itself, but rather from the insurance policy on the chametz.
A fascinating question for sure; I look forward to hearing the correct answer from a qualified posek.
A third argument occurred to me. Just as Yosef would buy back the chametz from the non-Jew after Pesach, so too he would buy back the benefit of insurance coverage for the fire loss.