Chullin — Daf 65a

בתרתי תיבות ש"מ תרי שמות נינהו

אלא מעתה (בראשית יד, ד) את כדר לעומר דפסק להו ספרא בתרי הכי נמי דתרתי שמי נינהו אמרי התם בשתי תיבות פסיק להו בשני שיטין לא פסיק להו אבל הכא אפי' בשני שיטין נמי פסיק להו:

אבל אמרו חכמים כל עוף [וכו']: תניא רבן גמליאל אומר דורס ואוכל בידוע שהוא טמא יש לו אצבע יתירה וזפק וקרקבנו נקלף בידוע שהוא טהור ר"א בר' צדוק אומר מותחין לו חוט של משיחה אם חולק את רגליו שתים לכאן ושתים לכאן טמא שלש לכאן ואחת לכאן טהור ר"ש בן אלעזר אומר כל עוף הקולט מן האויר טמא

ציפרתא נמי מקלט קלטה אמר אביי קולט ואוכל קאמרי

אחרים אומרים שכן עם טמאים טמא עם טהורים טהור

כמאן כר' אליעזר דתניא ר"א אומר לא לחנם הלך זרזיר אצל עורב אלא מפני שהוא מינו אפי' תימא רבנן שכן ונדמה קאמרינן:

ובחגבים כל שיש לו כו': מאי רובו אמר רב יהודה אמר רב רוב ארכו ואמרי לה רוב הקיפו אמר רב פפא הלכך בעינן רוב ארכו ובעינן רוב הקיפו

ת"ר אין לו עכשיו ועתיד לגדל לאחר זמן כגון הזחל מותר ר"א בר' יוסי אומר (ויקרא יא, כא) אשר לא כרעים אף על פי שאין לו עכשיו ועתיד לגדל לאחר זמן מאי זחל אמר אביי אסקרין

ת"ר (ויקרא יא, כב) את אלה מהם תאכלו את הארבה וגו' ארבה זה גובאי סלעם זה רשון חרגול זה ניפול חגב זה גדיאן מה ת"ל (ויקרא יא, טו) למינו למינהו למינהו למינהו ד' פעמים להביא ציפורת כרמים ויוחנא ירושלמית והערצוביא והרזבנית

דבי ר' ישמעאל תנא אלו כללי כללות ואלו פרטי פרטות ארבה זה גובאי למינו להביא

into two words it proves that it is two distinct terms).1 But according to this will you also say that Chedarlaomer.2 seeing that the scribe has divided it into two, is two distinct names? — I reply, in the latter case it is true that he has divided the word into two but he has not separated them on two lines,3 but here he has even separated them on two lines.4 BUT THE SAGES HAVE SAID, EVERY BIRD [THAT SEIZES ITS PREY IS UNCLEAN]. It was taught: Rabban Gamaliel says, [If a bird] seizes prey and eats it, one may be certain that it is unclean; if it has an extra toe, and a crop. and its gizzard can be peeled. one may be certain that it is clean.5 R. Eleazar son of R. Zadok says: A cord is stretched out for it, and if [when perched on it] it divides its toes evenly, two on each side, it is a clean bird, but if it places three toes on one side and one on the other, it is an Unclean bird. R. Simeon b. Eleazar says: Every bird which catches food [thrown to it] in the air is unclean. (But does not the zipparta catch food in the air?6 — Abaye answered: It means, catches food and eats it in the air.)7 Others say: Those that dwell with unclean birds are unclean, those that dwell with clean birds are clean. According to whom is this rule? Is it only according to R. Eliezer? For it was taught: R. Eliezer said: Not for nothing did the zarzir follow the raven but because it is of its kind!8 — It might even be according to the Rabbis too, for we speak here of those that dwell with and also resemble [unclean birds].9 OF LOCUSTS: ALL THAT HAVE . . . [AND WINGS COVERING THE GREATER PART OF THE BODY]. What is meant by THE GREATER PART? — Rab Judah said in the name of Rab, It means the greater part of the length [of the body]. Others say [in the name of Rab]. The greater part of the girth [of the body]. R. Papa said: We therefore require the [wings to cover the] greater part of the length, as well as the greater part of the girth of the body. Our Rabbis taught: If it has no [leaping legs] now but will grow them later on, as in the case of the zahal,10 it is permitted. R. Eliezer son of R. Jose says. [The verse], Which have leaping legs,11 includes those that have none now but will grow them later on. What is the zahal? — Abaye answered: It is the iskera.10 Our Rabbis taught: Even those of them ye may eat, the arbeh after its kind,12 etc. The ‘arbeh’ is the gobai,13 the ‘sol'am’ is the vashon,13 the ‘hargol’ is the nippol,13 and the ‘hagab’ is the gadian.13 Wherefore does the verse add ‘after its kind’ to each? To include the zipporeth keramim, the Jerusalem yohana, the ‘arzubia and the razbonith respectively. In the school of R. Ishmael it was taught: [In this verse] we have a number of general propositions and a number of particular instances.14 Thus, the arbeh is the gobai, ‘after its kind’ includes written as two words, thus rngk rsf connotation, and ,c refers to the egg. upon the ground (Rashi). always in the company of ravens. traditional reading). According to the former the rendering of the verse is, ‘Which have no leaping legs’, and according to the latter, ‘which have leaping legs’. R. Eliezer b. Jose interprets the verse on the basis of the were and the Kethib, viz., those that have none (Kethib) now but have them (Kere) later on are permitted. each is identified here by a more popular name. In the verse each is followed by the phrase ‘after its kind’, which serves to include the various types of each particular species. The identifications suggested are purely tentative and for the most part are based on Lewysohn, Zoologie des Talmuds, p. 286ff. respectively. head of the verse there is also a general proposition (‘These ye may eat’, Lev. XI, 21) which serves as such for each of the specifications. Hence we may argue on the principle of ‘generalisation and specification’ for each of the four specifications. V. infra p. 66a top.