“EdenOne”: “There is an obvious contradiction between Leviticus 17:15 and Exodus 22:31, don't you agree? After all, what kind of God would command something in such imperative terms (Exodus) and then later, and without recanting from the previous command, concedes that such command may be violated with just a minor defilement of the flesh (Leviticus).”
That’s quite an interesting point. The only thing I can think of is perhaps the verse at Exodus 22:31, which may pertain more to the conditions of traveling through a hot desert and which comes before Leviticus in the Old Testament Pentateuch, focuses more on the aspect of physical cleanliness and health, insofar as an animal found already killed by another beast could potentially have been dead long enough to become ridden with toxic bacteria and become rancid (i.e., serious food poisoning). This could be along the similar line of the command not to eat a communal meal left over by “the third day”: “5 “‘Now if you offer a communion sacrifice to Jehovah,+ you should sacrifice it in such a way that you gain approval for yourselves.+ 6 It should be eaten on the day of your sacrifice and on the next day, but what is left over until the third day should be burned in the fire.+ 7 If, though, any of it is eaten on the third day, it is an offensive thing that will not be accepted with approval. 8 The one eating it will answer for his error because he has profaned a holy thing of Jehovah, and that person* must be cut off*from his people.” – Leviticus 19:5-8.
On the other hand, the verse at Leviticus 17:15 possibly was more oriented towards the legalistic, ceremonial angle, as regards the idea of “uncleanness,” than any considerations of eating meat that had possibly gone rotten.