1) “SIMANIM” OF BIRDS THAT ARE “TAMEI”

(a) (Mishnah): Chachamim said, any bird…
(b) (Beraisa – R. Gamliel): Any bird that is Dores (Rashi – holds its food in its claws while eating; R. Tam – eats its prey before it dies) is Tamei;
1. If it (Rashi – does not Dores and) has an extra toe, a crop, and the stomach can be peeled, it is Tahor;
(c) R. Eliezer b’Rebbi Tzadok says, we prepare a string for it to perch on:
1. If it puts two toes in front and two in back, it is Tamei; if it puts three in front and one in back, it is Tahor.
(d) R. Shimon ben Elazar says, any bird that catches food (that is thrown to it) in the air is Tamei.
1. Interjection: Some Tahor birds do this!
2. Answer (Abaye): If it catches and eats the food in midair, it is Tamei.
(e) Others say, if it dwells with Tamei birds, it is Tamei; if it dwells with Tahor birds, it is Tahor.
1. Suggestion: Others hold like R. Eliezer, who says that Zarzir dwells with ravens because it is a species of raven (it is Tamei.)
2. Rejection: Others can hold even like Chachamim – they mean, a bird that dwells with Tamei birds *and resembles them* is Tamei.
2) THE “SIMANIM” OF LOCUSTS
(a) (Mishnah): Any Chagav (locust)…(that has wings that cover the majority…)
(b) Question: Which majority must they cover?
(c) Version #1 – Answer (Rav Yehudah): They must cover most of its length.
(d) Version #2 – Answer (Rav Yehudah): They must cover most of its circumference.
1. (Rav Papa): We must be concerned for both versions; it is forbidden unless both majorities are covered.
(e) (Beraisa): If it doesn’t have legs for jumping, but will grow them later, like the Zachal species, it is permitted (if it has the other Simanim);
(f) R. Eliezer b’Rebbi Yosi says, “Asher *Lo* Chera’ayim” – even if it lacks them now, but will grow them later it is permitted. (“Lo” is written with an Aleph, connoting ‘does not have’; a tradition from Sinai teaches that it is pronounced as if it was written with a Vav, connoting ‘it has’; today, most traditions of pronunciation do not distinguish these sounds.)
(g) (Abaye): ‘Zachal’ is the species called ‘Askrin’.
3) HOW WE LEARN WHICH LOCUSTS ARE “TAHOR”
(a) (Beraisa #1): “These you may eat…Arbeh Sal’am Chargol Chagav” – these refer (respectively) to red locust, yellow locust, gray locust (or long-horned Chagav) and small white locust (alternatively – Chagav is a general term for many species of locusts.)
1. It says “l’Minehu” (or “l’Mino”) after each of them – these include Tzipores Keramim, Yuchna Yerushalmis, Artzuviya, and Razbanis respectively
(b) (Beraisa – Tana d’Vei R. Yishmael): The Torah taught here extra Klalim and Pratim:
1. “Arbeh” – this is red locust; “l’Mino” includes Tzipores Keramim.
65b—————————————65b

2. Had the Torah written only this, we would have learned (from the Klal Prat u’Klal) species that have no Gabachas (Rashi – bald head; Aruch – hump);
3. Question: What is the source to include species with a Gabachas?
4. Answer: “Sal’am l’Minehu” include them.
5. Had the Torah written only Arbeh and Sal’am, we would include species with or without a Gabachas, but only if they do not have a tail;
6. Question: What is the source to include species with a tail?
7. Answer: “Chargol l’Minehu” includes them.
8. This only teaches species with or without a Gabachas, with or without a tail, that do not have a long head.
9. Question: What is the source to include species with a long head?
10. Answer: We learn from a Tzad ha’Shaveh (the common aspect) of these three species:
i. Each has different Simanim; the Tzad ha’Shaveh is that they have four legs, four wings, extra legs for jumping, and the wings cover the majority of the body.
11. Suggestion: Tzirtzur has all these, perhaps it is also Tahor!
12. Rejection: “Chagav” – it must be called Chagav.
13. Suggestion: If it depends on being called Chagav, perhaps the above Simanim are not needed!
14. Rejection: “l’Minehu” – it must also have the Simanim.
(c) Question (Rav Achai): Arbeh, Sal’am and Chargol all have short heads – we cannot learn to species with long heads!
1. Suggestion: Since they all have the four Simanim, we are not concerned about the head.
2. Rejection: If so, why did the Torah write “Chargol” – we should learn from Arbeh and Sal’am, since they have all four Simanim!
3. Rather, we cannot learn from Arbeh and Sal’am, since they have no tail – likewise, we cannot learn (species with long heads) from species with short heads!
(d) (Rav Achai): Rather, Sal’am is extra, for it could have been learned from Arbeh and Chargol:
1. They are both Tahor, even though Arbeh has a tail and Chargol has a Gabachas – also Sal’am is Tahor, even though it has a tail and Gabachas.
2. Since Sal’am is extra, it teaches that a species (with the other Simanim) is Tahor even if its head is long.