Masechet Chullin is sponsored by Judi Felber in honor of the Hadran Community. “During my first cycle of Daf Yomi, just as we began Masechet Chullin, my son was injured while serving in the IDF. Throughout those two and a half months of difficulty and uncertainty, my fellow learners never left my side. With profound gratitude to the community that held me, encouraged me, and ensured I could keep up with the Daf during those trying times.”
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Fred Hochstadter, Ephraim ben Kayla veBaruch on his 18th yahrzeit on ח׳ אלול. “We continue to be inspired by his dedication to daily learning, from the Daf and beyond, to its surrounding philosophical, historical and legal nuances. We miss him greatly and can only strive to emulate his wise, kind and elegant ways.”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Summary
The Mishna states that the four physiological signs of a kosher bird are not explicitly detailed in the Torah, but are instead established by the Sages. The Gemara challenges this assertion based on a braita, which indicates that these kosher indicators are actually derived through a comparison of the anatomical details of each type of bird—specifically evaluating the characteristics of the nesher (griffin vulture), which is listed as non-kosher, against those of the tor (turtledove), which is known to be kosher due to its role in sacrificial offerings. Abaye resolves this difficulty by explaining that the analytical comparison of the physical details between the tor and the nesher outlined in the braita is precisely the methodology employed by the Sages to formulate and define these diagnostic signs.
Rabbi Chiya introduces a braita asserting that a bird possessing even a single kosher sign is permitted, based on the premise that only a bird structurally identical to the nesher—which lacks all four signs—is fundamentally excluded, along with the other non-kosher species explicitly enumerated in the Torah. The Gemara raises a difficulty, noting that one could argue the exact inverse: using the tor as the absolute paradigm, one could deduce that a bird is kosher only if it possesses all four signs. Since the other non-kosher birds listed in the Torah possess either one, two, or three kosher signs, the Gemara resolves the difficulty by explaining that if all four signs were universally required to render a bird kosher, there would be no logical necessity for the Torah to detail the other twenty-three non-kosher species, as their status as non-kosher would already be self-evident.
The Gemara then proceeds with a series of analytical queries, asking why the halakhic paradigm should not be derived from those forbidden birds that possess three signs, two signs, or one sign, respectively. In each instance, the Gemara answers using a redundant-case logic: if any of those categories served as the baseline paradigm, the Torah would have had no need to explicitly list the remaining forbidden species that possess fewer kosher signs (simanim).
The premise of the final query assumes that the peres and ozniyah (birds possessing a single kosher sign) could have established a binding paradigm were it not for the counter-example of the nesher. The Gemara immediately questions this, invoking the hermeneutical rule that two biblical verses teaching the same law cannot serve as a general paradigm (shnei ketuvim haba’im k’echad). Since both the peres and ozniyah share the same baseline characteristics, how could it be suggested that they form a general rule? The Gemara answers that they represent two distinct halakhic categories; one of them is completely unique because, within the entire biblical list of non-kosher birds, it is the sole species that possesses a specific, distinct kosher sign not found in any of the others.
In conclusion, the ultimate paradigm is the nesher (representing the principle that a bird is kosher unless it shares all the forbidden traits of the listed species), and we do not derive the rule from the tor. The tor (with all four kosher signs) is explicitly mentioned in the Torah solely to indicate its validity for sacrifices, rather than to serve as a universal archetype for kosher birds.
Today’s daily daf tools:
Masechet Chullin is sponsored by Judi Felber in honor of the Hadran Community. “During my first cycle of Daf Yomi, just as we began Masechet Chullin, my son was injured while serving in the IDF. Throughout those two and a half months of difficulty and uncertainty, my fellow learners never left my side. With profound gratitude to the community that held me, encouraged me, and ensured I could keep up with the Daf during those trying times.”
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Fred Hochstadter, Ephraim ben Kayla veBaruch on his 18th yahrzeit on ח׳ אלול. “We continue to be inspired by his dedication to daily learning, from the Daf and beyond, to its surrounding philosophical, historical and legal nuances. We miss him greatly and can only strive to emulate his wise, kind and elegant ways.”
Today’s daf is sponsored by Dina Kaufman in honor of the pidyon haben of their grandson, Ilan Yishai, son of Elisheva and Janiw Palacchi, taking place today in Tel Aviv.
Chullin 61
מָה נֶשֶׁר מְיוּחָד שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה וְזֶפֶק וְאֵין קוּרְקְבָנוֹ נִקְלָף וְדוֹרֵס וְאוֹכֵל – טָמֵא, אַף כׇּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ – טָמֵא. תּוֹרִין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה וְזֶפֶק וְקוּרְקְבָן נִקְלָף וְאֵין דּוֹרְסִין וְאוֹכְלִין – טְהוֹרִין, אַף כׇּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן – טְהוֹרִין. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לֹא נֶאֱמַר פֵּירוּשָׁן מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים.
Just as a nesher is unique in that it has no extra digit or crop, and its gizzard cannot be peeled, and it claws its prey and eats it, and it is non-kosher, so too, all like birds with these four signs are non-kosher. And just as doves and pigeons, which have an extra digit and a crop, and whose gizzard can be peeled, and do not claw their food and eat it, are kosher, as they are fit for sacrifice on the altar (see Leviticus 1:14), so too, all like birds with these four signs are kosher. If so, why does the mishna state that the signs were not stated in the Torah? Abaye said: The mishna means that the explanation of the signs of a kosher bird was not stated in the Torah. Rather, one learns it from the statements of the Sages, i.e., the baraita.
תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: עוֹף הַבָּא בְּסִימָן אֶחָד טָהוֹר, לְפִי שֶׁאֵין דּוֹמֶה לְנֶשֶׁר. נֶשֶׁר דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל – הוּא דְּלָא תֵּיכוֹל, הָא אִיכָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד – תֵּיכוֹל.
Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches: A bird that comes before a person with one sign of a kosher bird, and which is not listed in the Torah as non-kosher, is kosher, since it is unlike a nesher. The verse did not need to state that the nesher is non-kosher, since one could have inferred this from the list of other non-kosher birds. Rather, the verse mentions the nesher specifically to indicate that it is only a bird like a nesher, which has none of the signs of a kosher bird, that you shall not eat. But if there is a bird that has even one of the signs, you may eat it.
וְלֵילַף מִתּוֹרִין: מָה תּוֹרִין דְּאִיכָּא כּוּלְּהוּ אַרְבְּעָה, אַף הָכָא נָמֵי עַד דְּאִיכָּא כּוּלְּהוּ אַרְבְּעָה?
The Gemara asks: But why learn specifically from the case of a nesher? Let one derive the opposite from the case of doves: Just as doves, which the Torah mentions explicitly as kosher, have all four signs, so too here, no other bird is kosher unless it has all four signs.
אִם כֵּן, שְׁאָר עוֹפוֹת טְמֵאִין דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי?
The Gemara responds: If it is so that one learns from the case of a dove, why do I need the rest of the non-kosher birds that the Merciful One wrote? Since none of them has all four signs of a kosher bird, their non-kosher status could simply be inferred from the case of a dove. Rather, since the Torah states explicitly that they are non-kosher, it follows that one does not learn from the case of a dove.
וְנֵילַף מִינַּיְיהוּ: מָה הָתָם תְּלָתָא וְלָא אָכְלִינַן, אַף כֹּל תְּלָתָא וְלָא נֵיכוֹל, וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן תְּרֵי וְחַד?
The Gemara objects: But let us derive instead from them, i.e., the rest of the non-kosher birds, which each have only three signs, the following: Just as there, those birds have three of the signs of a kosher bird mentioned in the mishna, and we still do not eat them, so too, all other birds that have three signs should have the same halakhic status, and we will not eat them. And all the more so should this apply to a bird that has only two signs or one.
אִם כֵּן, עוֹרֵב, דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא, לְמָה לִי? הַשְׁתָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ תְּלָתָא לָא אָכְלִינַן, דְּאִית לֵיהּ תְּרֵי מִיבַּעְיָא?
The Gemara responds: If so, why do I need the crow that the Merciful One wrote among the non-kosher birds? Now that it is established that we do not eat any bird that has three signs, is it necessary to mention the crow, which has only two? Rather, those birds explicitly listed as non-kosher are prohibited, and all other birds with any number of signs are kosher.
וְלֵילַף מֵעוֹרֵב: מָה הָתָם תְּרֵי לָא, אַף כֹּל תְּרֵי לָא? אִם כֵּן, פֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? הַשְׁתָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ תְּרֵי לָא אָכְלִינַן, דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד מִיבַּעְיָא!
The Gemara objects: But one should derive instead from a crow: Just as there, a bird with two signs is not kosher, so too any other bird that has only two signs is not kosher. The Gemara responds: If so, why do I need the peres and the ozniyya that the Merciful One wrote among the non-kosher birds? Now that it is established that we do not eat any bird that has two signs, is it necessary to mention these birds, which have only one? Rather, even birds that have only one sign are kosher, save those mentioned explicitly in the Torah as non-kosher.
וְנִיגְמַר מִפֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה? אִם כֵּן, נֶשֶׁר דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? הַשְׁתָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד לָא אָכְלִינַן, דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל מִיבַּעְיָא! אֶלָּא נֶשֶׁר דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל – הוּא דְּלָא תֵּיכוֹל, הָא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד – אֱכוֹל.
The Gemara objects: But let us learn instead from the peres and ozniyya themselves that all other birds with only one sign are non-kosher. The Gemara responds: If so, why do I need the nesher that the Merciful One wrote? Now that it is established that we do not eat any bird that has one sign, is it necessary to mention the nesher, which has none? Rather, the Torah mentions the nesher to indicate that it is a nesher, which has none of the signs of a kosher bird, that you shall not eat. But if you find any bird that has even one of the signs, you may eat it.
וְאֶלָּא, טַעְמָא דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא נֶשֶׁר, הָא לָאו הָכִי הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: לֵילַף מִפֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה? הָוֵה לֵיהּ פֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה שְׁנֵי כְתוּבִין הַבָּאִין כְּאֶחָד, וּשְׁנֵי כְּתוּבִין הַבָּאִין כְּאֶחָד אֵין מְלַמְּדִין.
The Gemara objects: But if so, the reason for eating birds with even one sign is only that the Merciful One wrote: “Nesher.” One can infer, then, that if not for this, I would say: Derive from the peres and ozniyya that any bird with one sign is non-kosher. But that cannot be, since the peres and ozniyya are two verses that come as one, i.e., that teach the same matter, and as a rule, two verses that come as one do not teach a principle.
גְּמִירִי, דְּאִיכָּא בְּהַאי לֵיכָּא בְּהַאי, וּדְאִיכָּא בְּהַאי לֵיכָּא בְּהַאי.
The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that the sign present in this, the peres, is absent in that, the ozniyya, and that which is present in that is absent in this. Accordingly, this is not a case of two verses that come as one, since each case would teach only that any other bird with only its respective sign is non-kosher. Consequently, it would have been possible to derive from them that any bird with only one sign is non-kosher. The verse therefore states: “Nesher,” to indicate otherwise.
מִכְּדֵי עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת טְמֵאִים הָווּ, אִי אֶפְשָׁר דְּחַד דְּאִיכָּא בְּהָנָךְ לֵיכָּא בְּהָנֵי, וְהָווּ לְהוּ שְׁנֵי כְּתוּבִים הַבָּאִים כְּאֶחָד.
The Gemara persists: Now, there are twenty-four non-kosher birds mentioned in the verses. It is impossible that the one sign present in these, the peres and ozniyya, respectively, is absent in all those other birds. Consequently, the mentioning of the peres, ozniyya, and the other birds constitutes two verses that come as one. If so, one could not have derived from the cases of the peres and ozniyya that a bird with one sign is not kosher, and the inclusion of the nesher is unnecessary.
גְּמִירִי: עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת טְמֵאִים הָווּ, וְאַרְבָּעָה סִימָנִין. תְּלָתָא הָדְרִי בְּכוּלְּהוּ, עֶשְׂרִים מֵהֶם שְׁלֹשָׁה שְׁלֹשָׁה, וּתְרֵי בְּעוֹרֵב, חַד בְּפֶרֶס וְחַד בְּעׇזְנִיָּה, דְּאִיתֵיהּ בְּהָא לֵיתֵיהּ בְּהָא. מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא לֵילַיף מִינֵּיהּ – כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״נֶשֶׁר״, נֶשֶׁר דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל הוּא דְּלָא תֵּיכוֹל, הָא אִיכָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד – אֱכוֹל.
The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that there are twenty-four non-kosher birds, and four signs of a kosher bird. The same three signs can be found in all of them, with the exception of either the peres or the ozniyya. Twenty of them have all three signs, and two of those signs can be found in a crow. One sign is found in a peres and one in an ozniyya, and the sign present in this is absent in that, i.e., one of them has the fourth sign, which is absent from the other twenty-three non-kosher birds. Lest you say: Derive from it that any other bird with only that sign is non-kosher, the Merciful One wrote about the nesher to indicate: It is a nesher, which has none of the signs of a kosher bird, that you shall not eat. But if there is any bird that has even one of the signs, you may eat it.
אֶלָּא, תּוֹרִין דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? אָמַר רַב עוּקְבָא בַּר חָמָא: לְקׇרְבָּן. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן:
The Gemara asks: But if one learns from nesher that a bird with even one sign is kosher, why do I need the doves that the Merciful One wrote are kosher, which have all four? Rav Ukva bar Ḥama said: The dove was not mentioned to teach that it is kosher, but rather to teach that it is the only bird fit to be sacrificed as an offering. Rav Naḥman says:
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
In my Shana bet at Migdal Oz I attended the Hadran siyum hash”as. Witnessing so many women so passionate about their Torah learning and connection to God, I knew I had to begin with the coming cycle. My wedding (June 24) was two weeks before the siyum of mesechet yoma so I went a little ahead and was able to make a speech and siyum at my kiseh kallah on my wedding day!
Givat Shmuel, Israel
I had never heard of Daf Yomi and after reading the book, The Weight of Ink, I explored more about it. I discovered that it was only 6 months before a whole new cycle started and I was determined to give it a try. I tried to get a friend to join me on the journey but after the first few weeks they all dropped it. I haven’t missed a day of reading and of listening to the podcast.
Elkins Park, United States
Minnesota, United States
3 years ago, I joined Rabbanit Michelle to organize the unprecedented Siyum HaShas event in Jerusalem for thousands of women. The whole experience was so inspiring that I decided then to start learning the daf and see how I would go…. and I’m still at it. I often listen to the Daf on my bike in mornings, surrounded by both the external & the internal beauty of Eretz Yisrael & Am Yisrael!
Raanana, Israel
I started learning at the beginning of the cycle after a friend persuaded me that it would be right up my alley. I was lucky enough to learn at Rabbanit Michelle’s house before it started on zoom and it was quickly part of my daily routine. I find it so important to see for myself where halachot were derived, where stories were told and to get more insight into how the Rabbis interacted.
Ra’anana, Israel
Since I started in January of 2020, Daf Yomi has changed my life. It connects me to Jews all over the world, especially learned women. It makes cooking, gardening, and folding laundry into acts of Torah study. Daf Yomi enables me to participate in a conversation with and about our heritage that has been going on for more than 2000 years.
Skokie, IL, United States
I learned Mishnayot more than twenty years ago and started with Gemara much later in life. Although I never managed to learn Daf Yomi consistently, I am learning since some years Gemara in depth and with much joy. Since last year I am studying at the International Halakha Scholars Program at the WIHL. I often listen to Rabbanit Farbers Gemara shiurim to understand better a specific sugyiah. I am grateful for the help and inspiration!
Berlin, Germany
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Haifa, Israel
I started the daf at the beginning of this cycle in January 2020. My husband, my children, grandchildren and siblings have been very supportive. As someone who learned and taught Tanach and mefarshim for many years, it has been an amazing adventure to complete the six sedarim of Mishnah, and now to study Talmud on a daily basis along with Rabbanit Michelle and the wonderful women of Hadran.
Jerusalem, Israel
Hearing and reading about the siyumim at the completion of the 13 th cycle Daf Yomi asked our shul rabbi about starting the Daf – he directed me to another shiur in town he thought would allow a woman to join, and so I did! Love seeing the sources for the Divrei Torah I’ve been hearing for the past decades of living an observant life and raising 5 children .
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
Studying has changed my life view on הלכה and יהדות and time. It has taught me bonudaries of the human nature and honesty of our sages in their discourse to try and build a nation of caring people .
Kfar Saba, Israel
In January 2020, my chevruta suggested that we “up our game. Let’s do Daf Yomi” – and she sent me the Hadran link. I lost my job (and went freelance), there was a pandemic, and I am still opening the podcast with my breakfast coffee, or after Shabbat with popcorn. My Aramaic is improving. I will need a new bookcase, though.
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
It’s hard to believe it has been over two years. Daf yomi has changed my life in so many ways and has been sustaining during this global sea change. Each day means learning something new, digging a little deeper, adding another lens, seeing worlds with new eyes. Daf has also fostered new friendships and deepened childhood connections, as long time friends have unexpectedly become havruta.
Northwest Washington, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi in January 2020 after watching my grandfather, Mayer Penstein z”l, finish shas with the previous cycle. My grandfather made learning so much fun was so proud that his grandchildren wanted to join him. I was also inspired by Ilana Kurshan’s book, If All the Seas Were Ink. Two years in, I can say that it has enriched my life in so many ways.
New York, United States
Blacksburg, United States
I started at the beginning of this cycle. No 1 reason, but here’s 5.
In 2019 I read about the upcoming siyum hashas.
There was a sermon at shul about how anyone can learn Talmud.
Talmud references come up when I am studying. I wanted to know more.
Yentl was on telly. Not a great movie but it’s about studying Talmud.
I went to the Hadran website: A new cycle is starting. I’m gonna do this
Cambridge, United Kingdom
I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!
Minnesota, United States
Philadelphia, United States
Last cycle, I listened to parts of various מסכתות. When the הדרן סיום was advertised, I listened to Michelle on נידה. I knew that בע”ה with the next cycle I was in (ב”נ). As I entered the סיום (early), I saw the signs and was overcome with emotion. I was randomly seated in the front row, and I cried many times that night. My choice to learn דף יומי was affirmed. It is one of the best I have made!
אפרת, Israel
I started my journey on the day I realized that the Siyum was happening in Yerushalayim and I was missing out. What? I told myself. How could I have not known about this? How can I have missed out on this opportunity? I decided that moment, I would start Daf Yomi and Nach Yomi the very next day. I am so grateful to Hadran. I am changed forever because I learn Gemara with women. Thank you.
Mitspe, Israel
Chullin 61
מָה נֶשֶׁר מְיוּחָד שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה וְזֶפֶק וְאֵין קוּרְקְבָנוֹ נִקְלָף וְדוֹרֵס וְאוֹכֵל – טָמֵא, אַף כׇּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ – טָמֵא. תּוֹרִין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה וְזֶפֶק וְקוּרְקְבָן נִקְלָף וְאֵין דּוֹרְסִין וְאוֹכְלִין – טְהוֹרִין, אַף כׇּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן – טְהוֹרִין. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לֹא נֶאֱמַר פֵּירוּשָׁן מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים.
Just as a nesher is unique in that it has no extra digit or crop, and its gizzard cannot be peeled, and it claws its prey and eats it, and it is non-kosher, so too, all like birds with these four signs are non-kosher. And just as doves and pigeons, which have an extra digit and a crop, and whose gizzard can be peeled, and do not claw their food and eat it, are kosher, as they are fit for sacrifice on the altar (see Leviticus 1:14), so too, all like birds with these four signs are kosher. If so, why does the mishna state that the signs were not stated in the Torah? Abaye said: The mishna means that the explanation of the signs of a kosher bird was not stated in the Torah. Rather, one learns it from the statements of the Sages, i.e., the baraita.
תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: עוֹף הַבָּא בְּסִימָן אֶחָד טָהוֹר, לְפִי שֶׁאֵין דּוֹמֶה לְנֶשֶׁר. נֶשֶׁר דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל – הוּא דְּלָא תֵּיכוֹל, הָא אִיכָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד – תֵּיכוֹל.
Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches: A bird that comes before a person with one sign of a kosher bird, and which is not listed in the Torah as non-kosher, is kosher, since it is unlike a nesher. The verse did not need to state that the nesher is non-kosher, since one could have inferred this from the list of other non-kosher birds. Rather, the verse mentions the nesher specifically to indicate that it is only a bird like a nesher, which has none of the signs of a kosher bird, that you shall not eat. But if there is a bird that has even one of the signs, you may eat it.
וְלֵילַף מִתּוֹרִין: מָה תּוֹרִין דְּאִיכָּא כּוּלְּהוּ אַרְבְּעָה, אַף הָכָא נָמֵי עַד דְּאִיכָּא כּוּלְּהוּ אַרְבְּעָה?
The Gemara asks: But why learn specifically from the case of a nesher? Let one derive the opposite from the case of doves: Just as doves, which the Torah mentions explicitly as kosher, have all four signs, so too here, no other bird is kosher unless it has all four signs.
אִם כֵּן, שְׁאָר עוֹפוֹת טְמֵאִין דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי?
The Gemara responds: If it is so that one learns from the case of a dove, why do I need the rest of the non-kosher birds that the Merciful One wrote? Since none of them has all four signs of a kosher bird, their non-kosher status could simply be inferred from the case of a dove. Rather, since the Torah states explicitly that they are non-kosher, it follows that one does not learn from the case of a dove.
וְנֵילַף מִינַּיְיהוּ: מָה הָתָם תְּלָתָא וְלָא אָכְלִינַן, אַף כֹּל תְּלָתָא וְלָא נֵיכוֹל, וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן תְּרֵי וְחַד?
The Gemara objects: But let us derive instead from them, i.e., the rest of the non-kosher birds, which each have only three signs, the following: Just as there, those birds have three of the signs of a kosher bird mentioned in the mishna, and we still do not eat them, so too, all other birds that have three signs should have the same halakhic status, and we will not eat them. And all the more so should this apply to a bird that has only two signs or one.
אִם כֵּן, עוֹרֵב, דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא, לְמָה לִי? הַשְׁתָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ תְּלָתָא לָא אָכְלִינַן, דְּאִית לֵיהּ תְּרֵי מִיבַּעְיָא?
The Gemara responds: If so, why do I need the crow that the Merciful One wrote among the non-kosher birds? Now that it is established that we do not eat any bird that has three signs, is it necessary to mention the crow, which has only two? Rather, those birds explicitly listed as non-kosher are prohibited, and all other birds with any number of signs are kosher.
וְלֵילַף מֵעוֹרֵב: מָה הָתָם תְּרֵי לָא, אַף כֹּל תְּרֵי לָא? אִם כֵּן, פֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? הַשְׁתָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ תְּרֵי לָא אָכְלִינַן, דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד מִיבַּעְיָא!
The Gemara objects: But one should derive instead from a crow: Just as there, a bird with two signs is not kosher, so too any other bird that has only two signs is not kosher. The Gemara responds: If so, why do I need the peres and the ozniyya that the Merciful One wrote among the non-kosher birds? Now that it is established that we do not eat any bird that has two signs, is it necessary to mention these birds, which have only one? Rather, even birds that have only one sign are kosher, save those mentioned explicitly in the Torah as non-kosher.
וְנִיגְמַר מִפֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה? אִם כֵּן, נֶשֶׁר דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? הַשְׁתָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד לָא אָכְלִינַן, דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל מִיבַּעְיָא! אֶלָּא נֶשֶׁר דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל – הוּא דְּלָא תֵּיכוֹל, הָא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד – אֱכוֹל.
The Gemara objects: But let us learn instead from the peres and ozniyya themselves that all other birds with only one sign are non-kosher. The Gemara responds: If so, why do I need the nesher that the Merciful One wrote? Now that it is established that we do not eat any bird that has one sign, is it necessary to mention the nesher, which has none? Rather, the Torah mentions the nesher to indicate that it is a nesher, which has none of the signs of a kosher bird, that you shall not eat. But if you find any bird that has even one of the signs, you may eat it.
וְאֶלָּא, טַעְמָא דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא נֶשֶׁר, הָא לָאו הָכִי הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: לֵילַף מִפֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה? הָוֵה לֵיהּ פֶּרֶס וְעׇזְנִיָּה שְׁנֵי כְתוּבִין הַבָּאִין כְּאֶחָד, וּשְׁנֵי כְּתוּבִין הַבָּאִין כְּאֶחָד אֵין מְלַמְּדִין.
The Gemara objects: But if so, the reason for eating birds with even one sign is only that the Merciful One wrote: “Nesher.” One can infer, then, that if not for this, I would say: Derive from the peres and ozniyya that any bird with one sign is non-kosher. But that cannot be, since the peres and ozniyya are two verses that come as one, i.e., that teach the same matter, and as a rule, two verses that come as one do not teach a principle.
גְּמִירִי, דְּאִיכָּא בְּהַאי לֵיכָּא בְּהַאי, וּדְאִיכָּא בְּהַאי לֵיכָּא בְּהַאי.
The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that the sign present in this, the peres, is absent in that, the ozniyya, and that which is present in that is absent in this. Accordingly, this is not a case of two verses that come as one, since each case would teach only that any other bird with only its respective sign is non-kosher. Consequently, it would have been possible to derive from them that any bird with only one sign is non-kosher. The verse therefore states: “Nesher,” to indicate otherwise.
מִכְּדֵי עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת טְמֵאִים הָווּ, אִי אֶפְשָׁר דְּחַד דְּאִיכָּא בְּהָנָךְ לֵיכָּא בְּהָנֵי, וְהָווּ לְהוּ שְׁנֵי כְּתוּבִים הַבָּאִים כְּאֶחָד.
The Gemara persists: Now, there are twenty-four non-kosher birds mentioned in the verses. It is impossible that the one sign present in these, the peres and ozniyya, respectively, is absent in all those other birds. Consequently, the mentioning of the peres, ozniyya, and the other birds constitutes two verses that come as one. If so, one could not have derived from the cases of the peres and ozniyya that a bird with one sign is not kosher, and the inclusion of the nesher is unnecessary.
גְּמִירִי: עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה עוֹפוֹת טְמֵאִים הָווּ, וְאַרְבָּעָה סִימָנִין. תְּלָתָא הָדְרִי בְּכוּלְּהוּ, עֶשְׂרִים מֵהֶם שְׁלֹשָׁה שְׁלֹשָׁה, וּתְרֵי בְּעוֹרֵב, חַד בְּפֶרֶס וְחַד בְּעׇזְנִיָּה, דְּאִיתֵיהּ בְּהָא לֵיתֵיהּ בְּהָא. מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא לֵילַיף מִינֵּיהּ – כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״נֶשֶׁר״, נֶשֶׁר דְּלֵית לֵיהּ כְּלָל הוּא דְּלָא תֵּיכוֹל, הָא אִיכָּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ חַד – אֱכוֹל.
The Gemara responds: It is learned as a tradition that there are twenty-four non-kosher birds, and four signs of a kosher bird. The same three signs can be found in all of them, with the exception of either the peres or the ozniyya. Twenty of them have all three signs, and two of those signs can be found in a crow. One sign is found in a peres and one in an ozniyya, and the sign present in this is absent in that, i.e., one of them has the fourth sign, which is absent from the other twenty-three non-kosher birds. Lest you say: Derive from it that any other bird with only that sign is non-kosher, the Merciful One wrote about the nesher to indicate: It is a nesher, which has none of the signs of a kosher bird, that you shall not eat. But if there is any bird that has even one of the signs, you may eat it.
אֶלָּא, תּוֹרִין דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? אָמַר רַב עוּקְבָא בַּר חָמָא: לְקׇרְבָּן. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן:
The Gemara asks: But if one learns from nesher that a bird with even one sign is kosher, why do I need the doves that the Merciful One wrote are kosher, which have all four? Rav Ukva bar Ḥama said: The dove was not mentioned to teach that it is kosher, but rather to teach that it is the only bird fit to be sacrificed as an offering. Rav Naḥman says:
