David, Baruch she'Kivanta! Some of your questions are asked by the Maharshal (in Yam Shel Shlomo, Chulin 8:9) and other Mefarshim. However, I will try to come to the defense of the Rambam and explain his Shitah.

It must of course be pointed out that the Gemara does mention the idea of meat between the teeth and cites a verse for this. However, one has to understand the flow of the Gemara. When Rav Chisda cited the verse about the meat stuck between the teeth, Rashi explains that one learns from this that meat between the teeth is considered meat. The Rashba adds in the name of Rabeinu Chananel that meat between the teeth is "Basar Gamur," totally considered as meat.

1) The Rambam writes that this meat does not clear away through "Kinu'ach." He does not mention the possibilty of a toothpick. It must be that he learns that one cannot rely on this as a common practical solution. I would like to suggest the following reason why. We notice in the laws of milk and meat several Chumros which are not common in other areas of Halachah. Mid'Oraisa, meat and milk are forbidden only when actually cooked together. If one drinks a cold mixture of meat gravy and milk, he transgresses only a Rabbinical prohibition. However, there is an additional Halachah that one must wait 6 hour between meat and milk. The latter is a further Chumra on the more basic Isur d'Rabanan. I suggest that the reason why the Halachah is so strict about meat and milk is that it is a situation that occurs every day, and it would be easy to eventually transgress the actual d'Oraisa prohibition. Therefore, we do not rely on the brush and the toothpick because it is not realistic that every Jew will practice this solution correctly every day.

2) The fact that the size of the meat between the teeth is tiny is not a sufficient reason to make it permitted l'Chatchilah. This is because there is a Halachah that "Ein Mevatlin Isur l'Chatchilah" -- we may not, in the first place, take a prohibited food and mix it with more than 60 times permitted food in order to permit it (see Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 99:5). Therefore, if one knows that one has meat between his teeth, he is not allowed to drink a cup of milk and rely on the fact that there will be 60 times more milk than meat.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

1) It is true that the simple understanding of the Gemara's reference to meat between the teeth is that it is not necessarily connected to the amount of time one waits between meat and milk. Rather, we can explain that Rav Acha bar Yosef asked Rav Chisda: What is the status of meat between the teeth? Rashi writes that the question was: Is the meat between the teeth considered meat that would prevent one from eating cheese before removing the meat?

Accordingly, Rav Acha was in doubt about whether the meat stuck between the teeth is sufficiently important to be considered meat with respect to the prohibiton of eating cheese with meat. (Possibly, Rav Acha thought that the normal way of eating meat with milk is not accomplished by merely eating these small pieces, so they are not significant enough for Chazal to require one to remove them before drinking milk. Do not forget that the entire discussion here refers only to a Rabbinical prohibiton because, mid'Oraisa, only meat and milk cooked together are forbidden.)

2) However, Rav Chisda replied that there is a verse in the Torah which refers to meat between the teeth as meat. Rashi writes that we learn from this that meat between the teeth does possess a Halachic status of meat. Therefore, it must be removed before eating cheese. The Rashba adds in the name of the Ba'al ha'Itur that even if one had already waited 6 hours but felt meat between the teeth, it must be removed.

3) Even though we have seen that the conclusion of the Gemara is that meat between the teeth does possess the status of meat, nevertheless we have not yet seen anyone who links this with the requirement always to wait a fixed amount of time between meat and milk. It seems that the Rambam was the first to mention this idea. The Rambam's Chidush is that the reason one must wait about 6 hours is because of the meat between the teeth.

4) The Me'iri seems to have a new Peshat in the Gemara that may help us understand the Rambam. Rav Chisda said that if one ate meat, he may not eat cheese afterwards. Since Rav Chisda gave no further qualifications, this implies that it is always forbidden, even if one wiped his mouth after the meat. Rav Acha challenges this, but -- out of respect to Rav Chisda -- he did not challenge him directly but merely asked a question. It was difficult to understand how Rav Chisda could imply that wiping was not sufficient, because wiping surely must clear away all of the fatty meaty substances stuck on the palate. If so, the only thing that Rav Chisda could possibly be worried about was the meat stuck between the teeth, but Rav Acha found it difficult to believe that Rav Chisda took that into account. However, Rav Acha politely asked a simple question about the meat between the teeth and Rav Chisda indeed replied that he was concerned about that.

Now that we know that Rav Chisda took into account the meat between the teeth, we may say that the only practical ramification for that concern is that one must wait before he eats cheese (because the possibility of wiping was not mentioned by Rav Chisda). Since Rav Chisda is telling us that one must wait, this must mean that one waits the length of time between one meal and the next, because we know of no other period of time mentioned as a period of waiting. If so, this is around 6 hours, according to the Rambam.

5) There are other Rishonim and Acharonim besides the Rambam and the Mechaber who mention the issue of meat between the teeth. The Tur (Yoreh Deah 89:1) cites two reasons why one must wait 6 hours between meat and milk. The first reason is because the taste of the meat is felt for a long time after eating. According to this reason, if one did not eat the meat but merely chewed (such as to make it edible for a baby), one need not wait 6 hours. However, the Tur then cites the Rambam that the reason for waiting 6 hours is because of the meat between the teeth. According to this reason, even one who chewed the meat to help a baby eat it must wait 6 hours. The Tur writes that it is good to adopt the stringent ramifications of both of these reasons.

6) The Rema (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 89:1) writes that if one finds meat between one's teeth after 6 hours, it should also be removed and the mouth should be rinsed out before eating cheese. The Shach #3 cites the Ran who says that it is not necessary to wait 6 hours from when one removes the meat, but it is sufficient to wait 6 hours from the time of eating.

7) Kinu'ach is not the same as the toothpick. Kinu'ach is wiping. The toothpick is more thorough.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

1) It is not quite accurate to say that according to Tosfos and Rabenu Tam one does not have to wait at all between milk and meat. Mar Ukva is reported on 105a as saying that if he ate meat he would not eat milk in the same meal. The Halachah follows Mar Ukva. Tosfos (DH l'Se'udata) writes that one may eat milk immediately on condition that the table is removed and one says Birkas ha'Mazon.

So there is no specific time gap necessary according to Tosfos, but it must not be in the same meal.

2) It is reasonable to assume that Tosfos learns the Gemara about meat between the teeth in the same way that Rashi learns; namely, that Rav Acha bar Yosef asked Rav Chisda if meat stuck between the teeth is considered meat with respect to the prohibition of eating meat and milk together. Possibly, Rav Acha thought that it may be that since this is not the usual way at all of eating milk and meat it is therefore not included in the Isur. Rav Chisda answered that meat between the teeth is indeed considered meat. However, Tosfos learns that it is only considered meat if it is still present between the teeth, but it has nothing to do with the amount of time one has to wait.

3) I agree that the Rambam's position is a Chidush which Tosfos and Rabenu Tam do not accept. However, this is not the first time that such a thing has happened. One of the special features about the way the Rambam wrote his Sefer is that he usually does not reveal what his sources are, and from the time the Rambam was Niftar, and even in his own lifetime, people have been trying to figure out the sources for much of what he wrote. Hundreds, even thousands, of books have been written to help us understand the Rambam's Yad ha'Chazakah.

4) However, I claim that the Rambam's ruling about waiting 6 hours is not a total Chidush to Tosfos, because Tosfos himself writes that "another meal" mentioned by Mar Ukva does not mean that one must wait between the morning and evening meal. Often, when Tosfos writes that one should not say such and such a thing, this means that Tosfos is aware that other Rishonim do say this idea but Tosfos is coming to disagree. I argue that one could say here that Tosfos admits that the simple explanation of "another meal" means that one must wait 6 hours, and Tosfos knows that it is a Chidush to state that this is not necessary.

5) The real Chidush of the Rambam is that the reason why 6 hours are necessary is because of the meet between the teeth. This is explained by the Me'iri I mentioned earlier. Rav Chisda said that one may not eat cheese after meat, which implies that wiping the mouth does not help. The only reason for why this could be is the meat between the teeth. However, after about 6 hours, even if the meat is still between the teeth, it is as if it has been digested already, and one may now eat cheese.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

1) It is not quite accurate to say that according to Tosfos and Rabenu Tam one does not have to wait at all between milk and meat. Mar Ukva is reported on 105a as saying that if he ate meat he would not eat milky in the same meal. The Halacha follows Mar Ukva. Tosfos DH l'Seudata writes that one may eat milky immediately on condition that the table is removed and one says Birkas Hamazon.

So there is no specific time gap necessary according to Tosfos, but it must not be in the same meal.

2) It is reasonable to assume that Tosfos learns the Gemara about meat between the teeth in the same way that Rashi learns; namely that Rav Acha bar Yosef asked Rav Chisda if meat stuck between the teeth is considered as meat with respect to the prohibition of meat and milk together. Possibly Rav Acha thought that it may be that since this is not the usual way at all of eating milk and meat it is therefore not included in the issur. Rav Chisda answered that meat between the teeth is indeed considered meat. However Tosfos learns that it is only considered meat if it is still present between the teeth, but it has nothing to do with the amount of time one has to wait.

3) I agree that the Rambam's position is a chidush which Tosfos and Rabenu Tam do not accept. However this is not the first time that such a thing has ever happened. One of the special features about the way the Rambam wrote his sefer is that he usually does not reveal what his sources are, and ever since the Rambam was niftar, or even in his own lifetime, people have been trying to figure out where he got his pshat from. Hundreds and thousands of books have been written to try and help us understand the Yad HaChazakah.

4) However I claim that the Rambam's psak about 6 hours is not a total chidush to Tosfos, because Tosfos themselves write that "another meal" mentioned by Mar Ukva does not mean that one must wait between the morning and evening meal. Very often, when Tosfos writes that one should not say such and such a thing, this means that they are aware that other Rishonim do say this pshat, but they are coming to disagree. I argue that one could say here that Tosfos admits that the simple explanation of "another meal" means one must wait 6 hours, and they know they are saying a chidush by stating that this is not necessary.

5) The real chidush of the Rambam is that the reason that 6 hours are necessary is because of the meet between the teeth. This is explained by the Meiri I cited last time. Rav Chisda said that one may not eat cheese after meat, which implies that wiping the mouth does not help. The only reason this could be is because of the meat between the teeth. However after about 6 hours, even if the meat is still between the teeth it is as if it has been digested already, and one may now eat cheese.

KOL TUV

Dovid Bloom

1) David, I found a Maharsha in Chulin 17a who possibly expresses what you are finding difficult about the Gemara. He explains the simple meaning of what the Torah states, "The meat was still between their teeth," as follows. The verse (Bamidbar 11:4) tells us that the Erev Rav possesed a lust and cried out, "Who can feed us meat?!" The Maharsha explains that if they would have asked for fish, there would have been nothing wrong with that. The problem was that they were not allowed in the desert to eat meat merely out of desire (see Chulin 16b). This is why the Torah said that even while the meat was between their teeth, they received a punishment "Midah k'Neged Midah" for their lust for meat.

2) When the Gemara on 105a cites this verse, it is taking it out of its simple meaning. The verse in the Torah does not seem to have been mentioned with any Halachic intentions, and the Chidush of the Gemara is to derive a Halachah from it.

3) However, once the Gemara has given us that Chidush, for the Rambam to say that meat between the teeth is considered by Halachah as meat is no more of a Chidush than what Rashi writes (that one learns from this verse that meat between the teeth is considered meat). The Chidush of the Rambam is that meat between the teeth is the reason for why the Gemara says that one must wait the length of time until the next meal.

4) The Rema and others who maintain that one does not require six hours learn that if meat is found in the teeth, one must remove the meat and rinse the mouth.

5) It does not seem that there is anything medical about the fact that we consider meat between the teeth as meat. It is a Halachic definition stating that such meat possesses enough significance to be considered meat.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom