Hello again. It's great to be able to write to you.
Shechting a Parah Adumah "Chutz MiGitah" accordinf to Reish Lakish is when the earth beneath the place of Shechita was not checked for Tumas Mes
This is an Issur, although there is no Kares
But why is it Assur, ... since we have the rule that Safek Tumah BiReshus HaRabim, Sefeika Tahur.
And when we learned this rule, we learned that the resulting Tahor is to be treated as Vadai Tahor.
Thank You in advance
A Good Chodesh and may we greet Moshiach very soon,
Nasson Tzvi
In effect, this question is asked by Tosfos DH Chutz. He asks how is it possible to say that mideoraisa it is necessary to check the earth beneath?! Ma'areh Cohen (cited by Mesivta Yalkut Biurim page 203 #15) explains that since Safek Tumah biRshus Harabim is Tahor, it follows that one need not be concerned that anyone is buried beneath. Tosfos answers that we require the verse "And he did not bring it to the door of the Ohel Mo'ed" for a scenario where he burnt the Parah in a place which is certainly tamei. According to this, "Chutz MiMakom Habaduk Lah" means a place which is certainly tamei.
Wishing you a Kesivah v'Chasimah Tovah
Dovid Bloom
Here is another way of answering this important question.
1) It is possible that the rule that Safek Tumah BiReshus HaRabim Sefeiko Tahor does not apply to Parah Adumah. The reason is because the purpose of every Parah Adumah is to create water to render Tahor, people who have up till now been Tamei. But this means that such people have had a Chazokah until now of being Tamei, so we do not say that safek Tumah biReshus Harabim is Tahor when this contadicts a chazoka.
2) A source for this is the Mishnah in Mikva'os 2:2 which states that if one measured a Mikveh and found it to be lacking the necessary quantity of water, all Tahor food that was used by people who immersed in this Mikveh, is now Tamei, because we assume that the people's immersal in the Mikveh did not make them Tahor. The Mishnah states that this applies even if the Mikveh is situated in Reshus Harabim. The Bartenura explains that the rule that a Safek in Reshus Harabim is tahor does not help here, because in this case the people were certainly Tamei, and the doubt now is whether they became Tahor. This is a case of Safek Tahara, not a case of Safek Tumah.
3) This rule of the Bartenura is applied by Mishnah Achronah, printed on the page of Mishnah Parah 11:2 DH Tahor, explicitly to Parah Adumah. He writes that since the waters of the Parah are made to purify Tamei people, so if there is a safek one should say that one leaves the Tamei person with his Chazoka of Tumah even if the safek occurs in Reshua Harabim.
Metzapim leYeshuah,
Dovid Bloom