לזכות רפואת ר' ישראל עמיחי בן לאה בתוך שח"י
When I glance at blogs and other media outlets on the Internet I don't find many discussions of Rambam Hilchos Shear Avos Hatumah, which makes me pity the readers that they are not learning these crucial Halachos. Like, is there a whatsapp group discussing these Halachos? So to redress this miscarriage of justice - here goes!!
Says the Rambam [שאר אבות הטומאה א-ז]:
These are the parts of a carcass that do not impart impurity: the bones, the horns, and the hoofs etc.
The Gemara in Chullin [77b] says:
טומאת נבילות נמי תנינא (ויקרא יא, לט) בנבלתה ולא בעור ולא בעצמות ולא בגידין ולא בקרנים ולא בטלפים
With regard to the ritual impurity of animal carcasses also, we already learn in a braisa: The verse states: “And when a domesticated animal dies, of those that you eat, one who touches its carcass shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:39). The verse indicates that one is rendered impure if he touches its carcass, but not if he touches its hide, and not its bones, and not its sinews, and not its horns, and not its hooves.
ואמר רבה בר רב חנא לא נצרכה אלא שעשאן ציקי קדרה
And Rabba bar Rav Chona said with regard to this braisa: This derivation is necessary only for a case in which one prepared these parts of the animal as a meat pudding [tzikei kedera], in which they are cooked for an extended period and spices are added. One might have thought they would be considered edible flesh and therefore impart the impurity of a carcass. The braisa therefore teaches that this is not so.
Why did the Rambam omit the אוקימתא of Rabba that this is talking about a case when these parts were prepared as ציקי קדירה?
Rashi says:
לא נצרכה - למעוטינהו דהא ודאי לאו בשר נינהו:
אלא שנעשה ציקי קדרה - בשלן הרבה עם תבלין:
Rashi makes an assumption!! The assumption is that in order to have טומאת נבילה it must be בשר and therefore said that the Gemara was troubled by the fact that these parts aren't בשר. But how does Rashi know that in order to have טומאת נבילה it needs to be בשר? Where does it state this in the pasuk??
Be that as it may.... Rashi explained that even WITHOUT a pasuk we know that these parts have no טומאת נבילה because they are not בשר.
What is the הוה אמינא of the Gemara that an animal could receive טומאת נבילה later even though at the time of death it did not have טומאת נבילה? How does cooking it with spices magically turn a non-נבילה into a נבילה? [The Keren Orah Nazir 51b ד"ה מת שטחנו actually says that something could be un-tumahed and then go back to being טמא - see there].
Maybe the Rambam learned the Gemara that the הוה אמינא is that since he could make these parts into ציקי קדירה they are טמא immediately even if he didn't make them into ציקי קדירה. And the Gemara is teaching us that they are not טמא [ever] because they are not בשר. So the chiddush of the Gemara is not that there is no טומאת נבילה if he made it into ציקי קדירה but that there is no טומאת נבילה even if he DIDN'T make it into ציקי קדירה. That would explain the Rambam's "omission". He omitted nothing because according to his reading the Gemara is not teaching us about an actual ציקי קדירה.
[עפ"י ס' טעם ודעת]
