Chullin 63a — the Talmud in English

The bird whose name is

bat mezaga hamra

is permitted

for consumption!

And your sign:

so that you should not exchange them with one another, this is what we hold concerning oaths:

the power of the son is greater than the power of the father.

So, mezaga hamra is forbidden, whereas bat mezaga hamra is permitted.

Rav Yehuda said:

The bird whose name is

shakitna

and which has two varieties—the variety that has

long shanks

, its shanks being long,

and is red

, its body being red—

is permitted!

And your sign:

The bird whose name is

morazma,

which was established for them as a pure bird, and whose shanks are long and whose body is red; so too that bird called shakitna, whose shanks are long, is permitted.

But the second variety of that bird, which is

short

, its shanks being short,

and red

, its body being red, is

forbidden!

And your sign:

This is what we hold concerning the blemishes of kohanim:

a dwarf

, a kohen who is a dwarf, is

disqualified

for the service. So too that shakitna whose shanks are short like those of a dwarf is forbidden for consumption.

But shakitna that has

long shanks

, whose shanks are indeed long,

and is green

, but whose body is green, is

forbidden

, and it is forbidden for consumption despite the fact that its shanks are long.

And your sign:

This is what we hold above, on folio 56a: if the intestines of the bird became scorched and turned

green, they are disqualified. So too that shakitna whose color is green is forbidden.

Similarly, that shakitna whose color is green is forbidden.

Rav Yehuda said:

The bird

shalkh

mentioned in the Torah among the impure birds—

this

is the bird

that fishes fish from the sea.

The dukifat

mentioned in the Torah among the impure birds is the bird

whose crest is folded

, whose crest is thick and folded inward toward its head.

It was also taught thus: The dukifat—

whose crest is folded, and this is

the bird

that brought

the shamir stone to

the Temple

, as it is stated in tractate Gittin.

Rabbi Yohanan, when he would see a shalkh, would say

the verse in the Book of Psalms [chapter 36]:

“Your judgments are the great deep.”

That is, You judge and take vengeance upon the fish of the sea, and kill the fish that are destined to die.

Rabba, when he would see an ant, would say: “Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains,”

for even an ant, which is a small living creature, has vitality like a large living creature.

Ameimar said:

The birds whose names are

laknei and batnei

are permitted!

But the birds whose names are

pelican and bittern—

then,

where the custom is to eat

them,

they eat; where the custom is not to eat

they do not eat

them!

And we raised an objection:

Is the matter dependent on custom?

Does their prohibition and permissibility depend upon custom?

And we answer:

Yes,

indeed the matter depends upon custom,

and it is not difficult

how this can be possible.

This

case in which they are forbidden is speaking

in a place

, in a place

where the peres and the ozniyya are common

, for we have seen them there, and we are concerned that perhaps the pelican and the bittern are of the species of the peres and the ozniyya, which also possess a sign of purity.

This

case in which they are permitted is

in a place where the peres and the ozniyya are not common

, and we do not presume that they are of the species of the peres and the ozniyya, since they are not found in settled places.

Abaye said:

The birds whose names are

koa and qaqoa are forbidden

for consumption. But the bird whose name is

qaqoata is permitted

for consumption.

In the West

in the Land of Israel,

they flogged for it

, they flogged one who ate the qaqoata,

and they called it teḥavta.

The Sages taught:

It is written in the passage of the impure birds [Leviticus 11]: “And the tinshemet and the kaat.”

Tinshemet—

this is a bird that cries at night, and it is

the most repulsive

among birds,

“among birds!”

You say

that the tinshemet is

“the most repulsive among birds,” or

is it only “the most repulsive

among creeping creatures”?!

For the tinshemet resembles a creeping creature, except that it has wings like a bird.

You have said: Go out and learn from the thirteen hermeneutical principles by which the Torah is expounded,

and one of these principles is

a matter learned from its context.

What does the verse

in which the tinshemet is mentioned

speak of?—

Of birds!

And according to this principle of “a matter learned from its context,” you learn that

also here,

the tinshemet is speaking

of birds

and not of creeping creatures.

And we raised an objection: But

it was also taught concerning creeping creatures in this same manner

as you expounded concerning birds!?

For it is written in the passage of creeping creatures: “And the anaqa, and the koah, and the letaah, and the ḥomet, and the tinshemet.”

And we say:

Tinshemet—it is

“the

most repulsive

among

creeping creatures!”

You say

that it is

the most repulsive among creeping creatures, or is it only the most repulsive among birds?

You have said: Go out and learn from the thirteen hermeneutical principles by which the Torah is expounded,

and one of these principles is the principle of

a matter learned from its context.

What does the verse

, the passage in which the tinshemet is written,

speak of—

of creeping creatures; therefore

the tinshemet written

here

speaks

of creeping creatures

and not of birds!?

And we answer:

Abaye said:

The tinshemet that is

“the most repulsive among birds”

is the bird called

kipof.

Whereas the tinshemet that is

“the most repulsive among creeping creatures”

is the creeping creature called

korpadai.

Rav Yehuda said: The kaat

mentioned in the verse [“And the tinshemet and the kaat and the raḥam”]—

this

is the bird called among us

the kuk.

The raḥam

mentioned in the verse—

this is the shrakrak.

Rabbi Yohanan said: Why was it called raḥam? Once the raḥam comes, compassion comes—

rains—

to the world.

Rav Bibi bar Abaye said:

When is the appearance of the raḥam a sign of rain?—

And that is when it sits on something

, sitting upon some object,

and it makes shrakrak

, chirping and sounding as though it is saying “shrakrak.”

And we have a tradition

,

that if it sits on the ground and whistles

, if it sits upon the earth, although it is not accustomed to sit upon the ground, and whistles—

the Messiah has come

, the Messiah will come.

As it is stated

in the Book of Zechariah [chapter 6]:

“I will whistle for them—

and gather them.”

Rav Adda bar Shimi said to Mar bar Rav Idi: But what of that shrakrak, which sat in a plowed field

, having settled in the place of plowing upon the ground,

and whistled, and a round stone came

, a round stone came from above,

and split its brain

, splitting its brain and killing it! And we see that the whistling of the raḥam while it sits upon the ground is not a sign of the coming of the Messiah.

He said to him

—Mar bar Rav Idi—:

That one—

a deceiver

, a liar—

it was!

The time of the Messiah had not yet arrived, and therefore it was punished.

The Sages taught:

It is written in the passage of the impure birds [Leviticus 11:15]: “Every raven according to its kind,” and we expound:

“Raven”—

this is a raven! “Every raven,”

the inclusion “every” comes

to include the valley raven! “

According to its kind,”

the verse comes

to include the raven that comes at the heads of doves!

As it will be explained below.

The Master said: “Raven”—

this is a raven!

And we raised an objection:

Is it standing before us?

Did the tan­nay hold the raven in his hand and say that the raven written in the Torah is this raven that he is holding in his hand? But since we have learned that there are several types of ravens, the tan­nay should have said: “Raven”—this particular raven! So that we would know what an unspecified raven is.

And we answer:

Rather, say: “Raven”—

this is a black raven

, black.

And so it says

in the Song of Songs:

“His locks—

curly, black as a raven.”

And we learn from it that an unspecified raven is black. “

Raven

of the valley”—

this is a raven

that is white

, white.

And so it says

in the passage of afflictions [Leviticus 13]:

“And its appearance is deeper than the skin.”

The meaning of the verse is that the appearance of the white affliction seems deeper than the appearance of the skin, and this matter is

like the appearance of the sun, which is deeper

, which appears deeper

than

the appearance of

the shadow

[and the meaning of “the valley raven” is that the white appearance of the white raven is deeper than the appearance of the black raven].

And the raven that comes at the heads of doves—

Rav Pappa said: Do not say

that it is a raven

that comes

, that comes

at the head of doves

, before the doves,

but

this is a raven

whose head resembles a dove

, whose head resembles a dove.

The Sages taught:

It is written in the verse, “And the nes to its kind,” and we expound:

“The nes”—

this is the nes. “To its kind”—

to include the bar ḥirya.

And we explain:

What is the bar ḥirya? Abaye said—

shurinka.

Rav Yehuda said:

It is written in the verse, “And the ḥasida, the anafa”—

“The ḥasida”—this is a white kite.

And

why was it called ḥasida? Because it performs acts of kindness with its companions,

dividing its food among them.

“The anafa”—

this is an angry kite.

Why was it called anafa? Because it becomes angry

, it fills with anger,

with its companions.

Rav Hanan bar Rav Ḥisda said, Rav Ḥisda said, Rav Hanan, son of Rava, said, Rav said: There are twenty-four impure birds

that are mentioned in the Torah.

Rav Hanan bar Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Ḥisda

, his father:

Where?

Where are those twenty-four birds enumerated?

If [you mean] Leviticus,

if you mean the impure birds mentioned in the Book of Leviticus in the passage of Shemini, then

twenty

birds

are

enumerated there, and not twenty-four!?

If [you mean] Deuteronomy,

and if you mean those enumerated in the passage of Re’eh, then

there are twenty-one,

and not twenty-four!? In the passage of Shemini it is written, “And the daah, and the ayah according to its kind,” while in the passage of Re’eh it is written, “And the ra’ah, the ayah, and the dayah according to its kind.”

And if you would say

that the bird called

daah, which is written in Leviticus

in the passage of Shemini,

but is not written in Deuteronomy

in the passage of Re’eh,

add it

to

them

, to the birds written in the passage of Re’eh, and one additional bird will be added for you.

There are still twenty-two

birds alone

there are

, and not twenty-four!?

He said to him

, Rav Ḥisda to Rav Hanan, his son:

Thus said

Rav Hanan bar Rava, my father-in-law, who is

the father of your mother

, my mother’s father,

in the name of Rav:

It is written in the passage of Shemini, “The anafa

according to its kind,” “the ayah

according to its kind,” and in the passage of Re’eh it is written, “Every raven

according to its kind,”

“and the nes

according to its kind,”

and the nes

according to its kind.

Here are four words from which four additional birds are included.

And we challenge this:

If so,

since you include four additional birds among the twenty-two already mentioned, then

there are twenty-six

birds

there are,

and not twenty-four!?

Abaye said: “And the

daah”

mentioned in the passage of Shemini, and “

mentioned in the passage of Shemini, “

the

ra’ah”

mentioned in the passage of Re’eh—

they are one!

For if it would enter your mind that they are two

different birds,

they are