Avodah Zarah Daf 41 עבודה זרח דַף 41

The next Mishnah states: המוצא שברי צלמים – if one finds broken pieces of images, הרי אלו מותרין – they are permitted. מצא תבנית יד או תבנית רגל – If he found a figure of a hand or foot, they are prohibited, מפני שכיוצא בהן נעבד – because such [items] are worshipped in that form. Shmuel teaches that the Mishnah’s first ruling does not only mean to permit broken "צלמים", which are not known to have been worshipped (and therefore are a ספק ספיקא – a double safek, since they may have never been worshipped, and even if they were, they may have been nullified when broken). Rather, אפי' שברי עבודת כוכבים – even fragments of idols which were definitely worshipped are permitted, because we assume they were nullified when they were broken. Still, the Mishnah taught that the figure of a hand or foot are prohibited, and Shmuel explains this case is בעומדין על בסיסן – where they are standing on their bases, which indicates they are worshipped.

The Gemara discusses עבודת כוכבים שנשתברה מאיליה – an idol which broke on its own (i.e., it was not shattered intentionally by a person). Rebbe Yochanan says: אסורה דהא לא בטלה – it is still forbidden, because [the עכו"ם] did not necessarily nullify it merely because it broke. Reish Lakish says: מותרת מסתמא בטולי מבטיל לה – it is permitted, because presumably he nullified it, because he says to himself: איהי נפשה לא אצלה – “It could not even save itself (from breaking); לההוא גברא מצלה ליה – can it save that man (me)?!” The Mishnah stated that broken "צלמים" are permitted, which implies that only those which were never known to have been worshipped are permitted when broken, but those which were definitely once worshipped remain prohibited when they are broken on their own, which proves we cannot assume they were nullified!? Reish Lakish answers that the inference of the Mishnah should be that only broken צלמים are permitted, but unbroken צלמים are prohibited, and the Mishnah follows Rebbe Meir’s opinion that all צלמים are prohibited even if they are not known to have been worshipped.

Rebbe Yochanan explains further that broken צלמים are permitted because they may not have been worshipped, and even if they were, they may have been nullified when they broke. But a broken idol, known to have once been worshipped, is prohibited, because ודאי עבדוה – they definitely worshipped it previously; מי יימר דבטלה – who says that he nullified it when it broke? הוי ספק וודאי – It is thus a case of uncertainty against a certainty, ואין ספק מוציא מידי ודאי – and an uncertainty cannot remove something from its prior certain [status]. This principle is challenged from a Baraisa teaching that if a חבר died and left behind a storehouse of produce, even if its processing was completed that day, it is בחזקת מתוקנין – it is presumed to be resolved (i.e., that מעשר, etc. was removed from it). Here, although the produce was certainly initially טבל, and it is only a ספק if the חבר removed maaser, the ספק is still able to remove the produce from its definite טבל status!? The Gemara first answers that it is a ודאי that the חבר removed maaser, because there is a חזקה that a חבר does not allow anything unfit for consumption to leave his hand. Alternatively, it answers that its original status as טבל is also a ספק, since the produce may have brought into his house inside the chaff, and Biblically exempt from maaser (therefore, the ספק can be מוציא from the first ספק).