הלכה על חולין 228:11

And yet its warning – meaning to say, the explicit negative commandment, besides the punishment that is mentioned here – is from that which is written in the inauguration [of the tabernacle], "it shall not be eaten, as it is holy" (Exodus 29:34). And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Pesachim 24a) that this verse includes in its warning all that which has been spoiled of the [sacrifices] and is not fitting to eat, like notar and piggul. And likewise did they, may their memory be blessed, say (Avodah Zarah 66a) that they are included in the warnings, "You shall not eat any abomination" (Deuteronomy 14:3) – which they expounded (Chullin 114b), "Anything that is abominable for me, is forbidden to eat." And since this is so, we shall say that [that warning (negative commandment) is to make one liable for] additional negative commandments; and the verse here is speaking about the punishment of the one who eats it, as so did the explanation come about it. And that which it stated (Leviticus 7:18), "If it shall surely be eaten on the third day," is meaning to say that he thought about it to eat it on the third day. As so did they, may their memory be blessed, expound (Zevachim 29a), "'And if it shall surely be eaten, etc.' – that is piggul." Bend your ear to hear that the verse is speaking about one who thinks to eat his sacrifice on the third day, that it is spoiled with this thought. And one who eats it is liable for excision, as it is stated about it, "and the soul that eats from it will carry his iniquity." And it is stated about notar (Leviticus 19:8), "And the one who eats it will carry his iniquity, as he has profaned the holy of the Lord, and he shall be excised." And we learned [about] it in Keritot 5a, "Let not an inferential comparison (gezara shava) be light in your eyes; as behold piggul is one of the [important] bodies of Torah, and Scripture only taught it through a gezara shava." As we learn it] from notar, from [the use of] ‘iniquity’ [in both cases] – "just like there it is excision, here too it is excision."

To not eat from consecrated [animals] that have been disqualified: That we not eat from consecrated [animals] that have been disqualified. And [about] this negative commandment with the consecrated [animals] that have been disqualified, they, may their memory be blessed, explained in Tractate Bekhorot 34a that it is specifically when we make the blemish in the consecrated [animals], and that they are disqualified by our hand, and afterwards we ate from them - [that] then is there a negative commandment in their eating; and so too, if the sacrifice gets disqualified in any way after its being sacrificed - in this too is there a negative commandment. And about all of this is it stated (Deuteronomy 14:3), "You shall not eat any abomination." And so does it say in Sifrei Devarim 99, "'You shall not eat any abomination' - the verse is speaking about consecrated [animals] that have been disqualified." And there it says further, "Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says, 'From where [do I know] for one who slits the ear of a first-born animal and eats from it, that he is transgressing a negative commandment? As it is stated, "You shall not eat any abomination."'" And they, may their memory be blessed said further that included in the category of this negative commandment is the warning not to eat notar (remainder) and pigul (that disqualified by thought) - and I have written their content in the Order of Tsav (Sefer HaChinukh 144) - and so [too,] all forbidden foods. And [it is] like the matter that they, may their memory be blessed, expounded (Chullin 114b), "'You shall not eat any abomination' - anything that I have made abominable to you, behold it is [included] in 'do not eat.'" And nonetheless, it is not called a general negative commandment, since its essence is only coming about the consecrated [animals] that have been disqualified, and the rest of the prohibitions are derived by its implications. [This is] meaning to say that from that which Scripture brought out this warning in a general expression - since it stated, "any abomination," and it did not explicitly state, "You shall not eat the consecrated [animals] that have been disqualified" - because of that, we consider it a specific negative commandment in its essence, that we can learn from its warning to other matters. And accept the truth form the one that says it.