Previous daf

1)

(a) Rav Yehudah describes ...

1. ... 'Shalach' (a cormorant) as - a bird that catches fish from the sea (because it is a derivative of 'ha'*Sholeh* Dagim min ha'Yam').
2. ... 'Duchifas' (a wild peacock) as - a bird with a double comb (on its head [because it is the acronym of 'Hodo Kafus']).

(b) This is borne out by a Beraisa - which also attributes to the Duchifas the bringing of the Shamir worm to the Beis-Hamikdash (to cut some of the stones).

(c) When Rebbi Yochanan saw a cormorant, he would cite the Pasuk "Mishpatecha ki'Tehom Rabah". If this describes the Shalach, whom Hashem delegated to punish the fish of His choice, and the Pasuk "Tzidkascha ke'Harerei Keil", when he saw an ant - to acknowledge that Hashem feeds even the minutest of creatures.

(d) Alternatively, we might explain - that Hashem troubles the cormorant to work hard for its sustenance, whereas the ant finds its sustenance without difficulty.

(a) Ameimar permits Likni and Botni. Shakna'i and Batna'i, he says, depends upon Minhag - depending on whether the Peres and Ozniyah reside there (in which case they are Asur, since both possess one Simon) or not (and they are permitted), as we learned earlier.

(b) Abaye declares Ku'i and Kaku'i Asur, but permits Kakvasa. Whereas in Eretz Yisrael - they would give Malkos to someone who ate Kakvasa.

(a) "Tinshemes" is both a Sheretz and a bird. In the former case - it is a mole, in the latter - an owl (or a bat).

(b) We know that one is a bird and one, a Sheretz - because the word appears once in the the Parshah of birds, and once in the Parshah of Sheratzim (and we have a principle that the Torah presents things according to their topics ('Davar ha'Lameid mi'Inyano').

(c) The Beraisa describes both of the above as - the ugliest of their category.

(d) When Abaye says 'Ba'os she'be'Ofos Kifuf, Ba'os she'bi'Sheratzim Kurpeda'i' - he is merely mimicking the Beraisa, but in Aramaic.

(a) Rav Yehudah translates "Ka'as" and "Racham" as 'pelican' and 'magpie', respectively. The latter is ...

1. ... called 'Racham', says Rebbi Yochanan - because it is a harbinger of Divine mercy to the world.
2. ... also known as 'Sherakrak' - because when it chirps, it sounds as if it is saying 'Sherakrak'.

(b) Rav Bibi bar Abaye explains that its Midah of Rachamim is only manifest when it sits on something and chirps. Based on the Pasuk "Asharkah Lahem Va'akabtzem", he adds that if it was to sit on the floor and chirp - Mashi'ach would come at once.

(c) When a certain bird sat on a furrow and chirped - a marble stone fell from Heaven and cracked its brain.

(d) When Rav Ada bar Shimi asked Mar bar Rav Ada'i why Mashi'ach did not come instead, he replied - that the bird was an imposter, pretending to be a magpie when it wasn't.

(a) We learn in a Beraisa "Orev", 'Zeh Orev'. "Kol Orev", 'Zeh Orev ha'Amaki'. From "le'Miyno" - he includes a raven with a dove's head.

(b) The problem with the Lashon "Orev", 'Zeh Orev' is - that unless the Tana was holding a raven in his hand (or pointing at one), his statement makes no sense.

(c) We therefore amend the Beraisa to read - "Orev", 'Zeh Orev Uchma' (to pertain to a black raven [based on the Pasuk in Shir ha'Shirim "Kevutzosav Taltalim Shechoros ka'Orev"]).

(d) We interpret 'Orev *ha'Amaki'* as a white raven - on the basis of the Pasuk in Tazri'a 'u"Mar'ehu *Amok* min ha'Or' (which teaches us that something that is bright always looks deeper than something dark.

(e) Rav Papa explains 'ha'Ba be'Roshei Yonim' - to mean (not that the raven actually had the head of a dove, but that it bore a resemblance to it).

(a) Another Beraisa states "ha'Netz", 'Zeh ha'Netz'. We do not ask the same question as we asked on the previous Beraisa ('Atu Kaman Ka'i' - because here, since the Tana is not including any other kind (like it did by Orev) the Tana is simply saying that this is the only bird that is called Netz.

(b) There is no difference between the Tana, who explains "le'Miyno" by Netz to include bar Chiraya and Abaye, who includes Shurinka - the latter is merely giving the Aramaic term for the former.

(c) "Chasidah" is a stork. Rav Yehudah bases ...

1. ... its name - on the fact that it performs Chesed with its friends (perhaps it provides them with food).
2. ... the name "Anafah" - on the fact that it makes its friends angry (as is implied by its other name 'Dayah Ragzanis').

(a) Rav Chanan bar Rav Chisda ... Amar Rav Chanan B'rei de'Rava Amar Rav states that there are twenty-four Tamei birds. Rav Chanan bar Rav Chisda queried this. The number of Tamei birds listed ...

1. ... in Shemini is - twenty.
2. ... in Re'ei is - twenty-one.

(b) Bearing in mind that in Shemini the Torah includes "Da'ah and Ayah", and in Re'ei "Ra'ah Ayah and Dayah", Rav Chanan bar Rav Chisda initially believe we now have - twenty-two Tamei birds (twenty in Shemini plus Ra'ah and Dayah in Re'ei).

(c) When Rav Chisda de'Rav Chisda quoted to his son (Rav Chanan) his mother's father, he was referring to his own father-in-law, Rav Chanan bar Rava.

8)

(a) From the two times "le'Miynah", once "le'Miyno" and once "le'Miynehu" written in connection with "Anafah", "Ra'ah", "Ayah" and "Dayah" respectively, Rav learned - the missing four Tamei birds.

(b) The problem with this explanation is - that we will then have twenty-six Tamei birds and not twenty-four?

(c) We prove that Ra'ah and Da'ah are one and the same bird - because Devarim comes to add things that are missing (not to omit things that are written), so it would make no sense to insert Ra'ah by omitting Da'ah.

(d) Abaye accounts for the fact that there are twenty-four Tamei birds and not twenty-five - by concluding that just as Ra'ah and Da'ah are one and the same, so too, are Ayah and Dayah ...

(e) ... from the fact that the Torah writes "le'Miynah" by Ayah in Shemini, and by Dayah (and not Ayah) in Re'ei.

(a) The Torah sees fit to insert both ...

1. ... Da'ah (in Shemini) and Ra'ah (in Re'ei) - to prevent a situation whereby people who live in a place where the bird is called Ra'ah permit it, based on the argument that the Torah forbids another bird called Da'ah (and not Ra'ah [or vice-versa]).
2. ... Ayah and Dayah (in Re'ei) - to avoid a situation where someone permits a bird that he calls Ayah, based on the argument that the Torah forbade Dayah (and not Ayah [or vice-versa]), as Rebbi explained in a Beraisa.

(b) The Pasuk in Re'ei adds - the Shesu'ah to the list of Tamei animals.

(a) With reference to the Parshah in Re'ei, according to the Beraisa, the Torah repeats the Din of ...

1. ... the animals - because of She'su'ah, which is not mentioned in Shemini.
2. ... the birds - because of Ra'ah, which is not mentioned in Shemini either.

(b) Based on the Chidush regarding Shesu'ah, we expect to explain - that Ra'ah too, is the name of a bird that has not been mentioned before (a Kashya on Abaye and Rav).

(c) To refute the Kashya, Rav will explain - that even though "Shesu'ah" is coming to teach us the name of a new Tamei animal, "Ra'ah" is coming to teach us another name for "Da'ah", as we explained.

(a) Rebbi Avahu disagrees with Rav and Rav Chisda. According to Rebbi Avahu, Ra'ah and Ayah are one and the same, and it is called 'Ra'ah' - because of its phenomenal eyesight.

(b) According to the Beraisa, it is able to see carrion in Eretz Yisrael - from as far away as Bavel.

(c) We think that Rav Avahu must hold that Ra'ah and Da'ah are two different birds - because based on the premise that he holds like Rav, if Ra'ah is synonymous with Ayah, it cannot at the same time be synonymous with Da'ah (because then there will not be twenty-four birds).

(d) Based on this assumption, the problem with the fact that the Torah writes ...

1. ... "Ra'ah" in Shemini and "Da'ah" in Re'ei - is why the Pasuk omits Ra'ah in Re'ei (as we explained above).
2. ... "le'Miyno" by Ayah in Shemini, and by Dayah in Re'ei is - why it does not write "le'Miyno" by Ayah in Re'ei.

(e) This forces us to conclude - that according to Rebbi Avahu, Ra'ah, Da'ah, Ayah and Dayah are all one and the same, and that there are only twenty-three Tamei birds, and not twenty-four (as Rav maintains).

(a) Isi ben Yehudah in a Beraisa refers to a hundred kinds of Tamei birds in the east - which he states, are all species of Ayah.

(b) Avimi b'rei de'Rav Avahu cites a Beraisa which speaks of seven hundred species of fish - and eight hundred species of locusts.

(c) The Beraisa concludes 'u'le'Ofos Ein Mispar'. The problem with that is - that, assuming that the Tana is referring to Tamei species, from where does he find 'numerous species', when the Torah lists only twenty-four.

(d) To solve the problem, we establish the Beraisa - by Kasher species.

(a) Rebbi in a Beraisa explains that the Torah lists the Kasher animals on the one hand, but the Tamei birds on the other - because Hashem knows that there are more Tamei species of animals, but more species of Tahor birds.

(b) The Torah lists - the Kasher Chayos.

(c) Rebbi is really coming to teach us the Chidush of Rav Huna Amar Rav (who was perhaps quoting Rebbi Meir), who states that when teaching a Talmid - one should always be brief and concise.

(d) Rebbi Yitzchak permits eating any species of bird only if one has a tradition - either by having seen a reliable Yisrael eating it, or by having heard it from one's Rebbe or from an expert hunter.

(a) Rebbi Yitzchak rules - that a hunter is believed if he testifies that his Rebbe taught him that a certain species of bird is Kasher.

(b) Rebbi Yochanan qualifies this latter statement - by confining it to where his Rebbi was an expert both in the names of the animals and in the animals themselves (i.e. that he was able to identify them).

(c) Rebbi Zeira was not sure - whether the 'Rebbe' to which Rebbi Yitzchak referred was the hunter's Torah Rebbe or his hunting tutor.

(d) We resolve this quandary from Rebbi Yochanan - who required the Rebbe to be an expert in the animals as well as in their names, something which one could hardly expect from a Talmid-Chacham.

(a) The Beraisa - permits purchasing eggs from a Nochri anywhere.

(b) We are not concerned about - Neveilos or Tereifos.

(c) To answer the Kashya that maybe the eggs were laid by a Tamei bird, Shmuel's father establishes the case where the seller named the Kasher bird that laid them, and we believe him - because he knows that we can check whether he told the truth or not.

(d) It will not however, suffice for him just to say that the birds were laid by a Kasher bird - because whichever bird we check on, he will always be able to say that these eggs came from a different species.