We begin this daf by wrapping up our discussion on the signs of kosher and non-kosher birds. The Gemara analyzes the unique way the Torah writes the name of the non-kosher bat ya'anah, showing how the scribal layout of the words teaches us that even its egg is prohibited. From there, we delve into a series of Braisos that offer practical ways to identify kosher birds, including the way they catch their food, how they split their feet on a cord, and whether they dwell with non-kosher species.
Next, the Gemara transitions to the halachos of kosher grasshoppers, as outlined in the Mishnah. We learn the physical requirements for a grasshopper to be kosher, such as having four legs, four wings, and two jumping legs, as well as wings that cover most of its body. The Gemara clarifies what constitutes "most of its body" and discusses species that are kosher even if they have not yet grown these features but are destined to do so later.
בְּתַרְתֵּי תֵּיבוֹת, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ תְּרֵי שֵׁמוֹת נִינְהוּ.
Since the Torah writes the name of the bat ya'anah into two words, conclude from it that they are two distinct names, which teaches that the egg is prohibited as well.
אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה ״אֶת כְּדׇר לָעֹמֶר״ דְּפָסֵק לְהוּ סָפְרָא בִּתְרֵי, הָכִי נָמֵי דִּתְרֵי שְׁמֵי נִינְהוּ?
The Gemara asks: If that is so, what about the name "Chedorlaomer" which the scribe splits in two so that it appears as Chedor Laomer? Is it also true there that they are two names? But he is clearly only one person!
אָמְרִי: הָתָם בִּשְׁתֵּי תֵּיבוֹת פָּסֵיק לְהוּ, בִּשְׁנֵי שִׁיטִין לָא פָּסֵיק לְהוּ, אֲבָל הָכָא אֲפִילּוּ בִּשְׁנֵי שִׁיטִין נָמֵי פָּסֵיק לְהוּ.
They say in response: There, with regard to Chedorlaomer, the scribe splits them into two words, but he may not split them into two lines if the first half falls at the end of a line. But here, with regard to bat ya'anah, he may split them even into two lines, which shows they are completely separate names.
אֲבָל אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: כׇּל עוֹף. תַּנְיָא, רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: דּוֹרֵס וְאוֹכֵל – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא, יֵשׁ לוֹ אֶצְבַּע יְתֵירָה וְזֶפֶק וְקֻרְקְבָנוֹ נִקְלָף – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר.
The Mishnah stated: But the Sages stated that any bird that claws its prey and eats it is non-kosher. It is taught in a Braisa: Rabban Gamliel says: A bird that claws and eats is certainly non-kosher. If it has an extra digit, and a crop, and its gizzard can be peeled, it is certainly kosher.
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי צָדוֹק אוֹמֵר: מוֹתְחִין לוֹ חוּט שֶׁל מְשִׁיחָה, אִם חוֹלֵק אֶת רַגְלָיו, שְׁתַּיִם לְכָאן וּשְׁתַּיִם לְכָאן – טָמֵא, שָׁלֹשׁ לְכָאן וְאַחַת לְכָאן – טָהוֹר.
Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: One stretches a line of cord for it; if it splits its feet on the line, with two digits here and two digits there, it is non-kosher. If it places three digits here and one digit there, it is kosher.
רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: כׇּל עוֹף הַקּוֹלֵט מִן הָאֲוִיר – טָמֵא.
Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Any bird that catches food out of the air is non-kosher.
צִיפַּרְתָּא נָמֵי מִקְלָט קָלְטָה!
The Gemara objects: But the tziparta also catches food out of the air, and yet it is kosher!
אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: ״קוֹלֵט וְאוֹכֵל״ קָאָמְרִי.
Abaye said: They are speaking only of a bird that catches and eats its food in the air. The tziparta, however, lands before eating what it has caught.
אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: שָׁכֵן עִם טְמֵאִים – טָמֵא, עִם טְהוֹרִים – טָהוֹר.
The Braisa concludes: Others say: If a bird dwells with non-kosher birds, it is non-kosher; if it dwells with kosher birds, it is kosher.
כְּמַאן? כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: לֹא לְחִנָּם הָלַךְ זַרְזִיר אֵצֶל עוֹרֵב, אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מִינוֹ.
The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is this? Is it in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer, as it is taught in a Braisa: Rabbi Eliezer says: It was not for naught that the zarzir went to dwell with the crow, but because it is of its same species?
אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבָּנַן, שָׁכֵן וְנִדְמֶה קָאָמְרִינַן.
The Gemara rejects this: You may even say that the opinion of "Others say" is like the Rabbis, who disagree with Rabbi Eliezer and deem the zarzir kosher. For we say a bird is non-kosher only when it both dwells with a non-kosher bird and resembles it, whereas the zarzir does not resemble the crow.
וּבַחֲגָבִים, כֹּל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ כּוּ׳. מַאי רוּבּוֹ? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: רוֹב אׇרְכּוֹ, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: רוֹב הֶקֵּיפוֹ.
The Mishnah states: And with regard to grasshoppers, any grasshopper that has four legs, and four wings, and two jumping legs, and whose wings cover most of its body, is kosher. The Gemara asks: What is considered "most of its body"? Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Most of its length. And some say that he said: Most of its circumference.
אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: הִלְכָּךְ בָּעֵינַן רוֹב אׇרְכּוֹ, וּבָעֵינַן רוֹב הֶקֵּיפוֹ.
Rav Pappa said: Therefore, to satisfy both versions, we require most of its length, and we also require most of its circumference.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵין לוֹ עַכְשָׁיו וְעָתִיד לְגַדֵּל לְאַחַר זְמַן, כְּגוֹן הַזַּחַל – מוּתָּר.
The Rabbis taught in a Braisa: If a grasshopper has no wings or jumping legs now, but is destined to grow them after a time, such as the zachal, it is permitted.
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: ״אֲשֶׁר לֹא כְרָעַיִם״ – אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ עַכְשָׁיו וְעָתִיד לְגַדֵּל לְאַחַר זְמַן.
Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yosei, says: The verse states: "Which have [lo] no jointed legs," written with an alef meaning "not," to teach that even though it does not have them now, but is destined to grow them after a time, it is kosher.
מַאי זַחַל? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: אַסְקְרָא.
The Gemara asks: What is the zachal? Abaye said: It is called askara in Aramaic.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אֶת אֵלֶּה מֵהֶם תֹּאכֵלוּ אֶת הָאַרְבֶּה וְגוֹ׳״. אַרְבֶּה – זֶה גּוֹבַאי, סַלְעָם – זֶה רָשׁוֹן, חַרְגּוֹל – זֶה נִיפּוּל, חָגָב – זֶה נַדְיָאן.
The Rabbis taught in a Braisa: The verse states: "These of them you may eat: The arbeh..." The arbeh is the govai; the solam is the rashon; the chargol is the nippul; and the chagav is the nadyan.
מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״לְמִינוֹ״ ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ אַרְבַּע פְּעָמִים? לְהָבִיא צִיפּוֹרֶת כְּרָמִים, וְיוֹחָנָא יְרוּשַׁלְמִית, וְהָעַרְצוּבְיָא, וְהָרַזְבָּנִית.
Why must the verse state "after its kind," "after its kind," "after its kind," "after its kind," four times? To include the vineyard bird, and the Jerusalem yochana, and the artzuveya, and the razbanit, which are also kosher.
דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל תָּנָא: אֵלּוּ כְּלָלֵי כְלָלוֹת, וְאֵלּוּ פְּרָטֵי פְרָטוֹת. ״אַרְבֶּה״ – זֶה ״גּוֹבַאי״, ״לְמִינוֹ״ לְהָבִיא
The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: These appearances of "after its kind" are generalizations, and these species mentioned explicitly are details. "Arbeh" is the govai, and "after its kind" comes to include other similar species.
צִיפּוֹרֶת כְּרָמִים.
This refers to the vineyard bird, which is a kosher species of grasshopper.
אֵין לִי אֶלָּא הַבָּא וְאֵין לוֹ גַּבַּחַת.
The Braisa continues: I have only derived that a grasshopper which comes before us and does not have a smooth forehead, like the arbeh, is kosher.
הַבָּא וְיֵשׁ לוֹ גַּבַּחַת מִנַּיִן?
But one which comes and has a smooth forehead, from where do we know that it is kosher?
תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״סׇלְעָם״ – זֶה נִיפּוּל, ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ – לְהָבִיא אֶת הָאוּשְׁכָּף.
The verse states: "Solam" to include a species; this is the nippul grasshopper, which has a smooth forehead. And the word "after its kind" written by solam serves to include the ushkaf, which also has a smooth forehead.
וְאֵין לִי אֶלָּא הַבָּא וְאֵין לוֹ גַּבַּחַת. הַבָּא וְיֵשׁ לוֹ גַּבַּחַת, הַבָּא וְאֵין לוֹ זָנָב, הַבָּא וְיֵשׁ לוֹ זָנָב מִנַּיִן?
And I have only derived that a grasshopper which comes and does not have a smooth forehead, or which comes and has a smooth forehead, is kosher. Furthermore, we only know of those that come and have no tail, since neither the arbeh nor the solam has a tail. But one which comes and has no tail, or one which comes and has a tail, from where do we know that it is kosher?
תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״חַרְגֹּל״ – זֶה רָשׁוֹן, ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ – לְהָבִיא אֶת הַכַּרְסֶפֶת וְאֶת הַשַּׁחֲלָנִית.
The verse states: "Chargol" to include a species; this is the rashon grasshopper, which has a tail. And the word "after its kind" written by chargol serves to include the karsefet and the shachlanis, which also have tails.
וְאֵין לִי אֶלָּא הַבָּא וְאֵין לוֹ גַּבַּחַת. הַבָּא וְיֵשׁ לוֹ גַּבַּחַת, הַבָּא וְאֵין לוֹ זָנָב, הַבָּא וְיֵשׁ לוֹ זָנָב, הַבָּא וְאֵין רֹאשׁוֹ אָרוֹךְ, הַבָּא וְרֹאשׁוֹ אָרוֹךְ מִנַּיִן?
And I have only derived that a grasshopper which comes and does not have a smooth forehead, or which comes and has a smooth forehead, or which comes and has no tail, or which comes and has a tail, is kosher. Furthermore, we only know of those whose heads are not long, since none of those mentioned so far have long heads. But one which comes and its head is not long, or one which comes and its head is long, from where do we know that it is kosher?
אָמַרְתָּ: הֲרֵי אַתָּה דָן בִּנְיַן אָב מִשְּׁלׇשְׁתָּן, לֹא רְאִי אַרְבֶּה כִּרְאִי חַרְגּוֹל, וְלֹא רְאִי חַרְגּוֹל כִּרְאִי אַרְבֶּה, וְלֹא רְאִי שְׁנֵיהֶם כִּרְאִי סׇלְעָם, וְלֹא רְאִי סׇלְעָם כִּרְאִי שְׁנֵיהֶם.
You shall say in response: Behold, you can derive a paradigm from the three of them through a common denominator. The aspect of the arbeh, which has no smooth forehead and no tail, is not like the aspect of the chargol, which has both. And the aspect of the chargol is not like the aspect of the arbeh. And the aspect of both of them is not like the aspect of the solam, which has a smooth forehead but no tail, and the aspect of the solam is not like the aspect of both of them.
הַצַּד הַשָּׁוֶה שֶׁבָּהֶן – שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אַרְבַּע רַגְלַיִם, וְאַרְבַּע כְּנָפַיִם, וְקַרְצוּלַּיִם, וּכְנָפָיו חוֹפִין אֶת רוּבּוֹ; אַף כֹּל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אַרְבַּע רַגְלַיִם, וְאַרְבַּע כְּנָפַיִם, וְקַרְצוּלַּיִם, וּכְנָפָיו חוֹפִין אֶת רוּבּוֹ.
The common denominator among them is that they have four legs, and four wings, and jumping legs, and their wings cover most of their body. So too, any grasshopper that has four legs, and four wings, and jumping legs, and its wings cover most of its body is kosher, even if its head is long.
וַהֲלֹא הַצַּרְצוּר הַזֶּה יֵשׁ לוֹ אַרְבַּע רַגְלַיִם, וְאַרְבַּע כְּנָפַיִם, וְקַרְצוּלַּיִם, וּכְנָפָיו חוֹפִין אֶת רוּבּוֹ, יָכוֹל יְהֵא מוּתָּר?
The Braisa asks: But does not this tzartzur (cricket) have four legs, and four wings, and jumping legs, and its wings cover most of its body? Might one think it should be permitted as kosher?
תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״חָגָב״, שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ חָגָב.
The verse states: "Chagav" to teach that its name must be chagav, which excludes the tzartzur.
אִי שְׁמוֹ חָגָב, יָכוֹל אֵין בּוֹ כׇּל הַסִּימָנִין הַלָּלוּ?
The Braisa asks: If its name must be chagav, might one think that any grasshopper called chagav is kosher even if it does not have all of these signs?
תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ – עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בּוֹ כׇּל הַסִּימָנִין הַלָּלוּ.
The verse states: "After its kind" to teach that it is not kosher until it has all of these signs.
פָּרֵיךְ רַב אַחַאי: מָה לְהָנָךְ, שֶׁכֵּן אֵין רֹאשָׁן אָרוֹךְ?
Rav Achai refutes this derivation: What is unique about these three grasshoppers, the arbeh, chargol, and solam, that allows them to be kosher? It is that their heads are not long! Perhaps a grasshopper with a long head is indeed invalid.
וְכִי תֵּימָא: כֵּיוָן דְּשָׁווּ בְּאַרְבַּע סִימָנִין מַיְיתִינַן וְלָא פָּרְכִינַן – אִי הָכִי, חַרְגּוֹל נָמֵי דְּשָׁווּ לְהוּ, לָא לִיכְתּוֹב וְתֵיתֵי מֵאַרְבֶּה וְסׇלְעָם!
And if you say: Since they are equal in the four signs of legs, wings, jumping legs, and body coverage, we bring and include all others with these signs and we do not refute the derivation based on other differences—if so, chargol also, which is equal to them in these four signs, let the Torah not write it, and let it be derived from arbeh and solam!
אֶלָּא, אִיכָּא לְמִיפְרַך: מָה לְהָנָךְ שֶׁכֵּן אֵין לָהֶן זָנָב.
Rather, you must agree that the Torah had to write chargol because without it, there is a refutation: What is unique about these, the arbeh and solam? It is that they have no tail, whereas the chargol has a tail.
הָכִי נָמֵי אִיכָּא לְמִיפְרַך: מָה לְהָנָךְ שֶׁכֵּן אֵין רֹאשָׁן אָרוֹך?
If so, here too there is a refutation regarding the long-headed grasshopper: What is unique about these three? It is that their heads are not long!
אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אַחַאי: סׇלְעָם יַתִּירָא הוּא, לָא לִיכְתּוֹב רַחֲמָנָא ״סׇלְעָם״, וְתֵיתֵי מֵאַרְבֶּה וּמֵחַרְגּוֹל,
Rather, Rav Achai said that the derivation is as follows: The word "solam" is redundant. Let the Merciful One not write "solam" and let it be derived from arbeh and chargol.
דְּמַאי פָּרְכַתְּ? מָה לְאַרְבֶּה דְּאֵין לוֹ גַּבַּחַת – הֲרֵי חַרְגּוֹל דְּיֵשׁ לוֹ גַּבַּחַת,
For what can you refute? If you say: What is unique about the arbeh is that it does not have a smooth forehead—behold, there is the chargol which has a smooth forehead.
מָה לְחַרְגּוֹל דְּיֵשׁ לוֹ זָנָב – הֲרֵי אַרְבֶּה דְּאֵין לוֹ זָנָב,
And if you say: What is unique about the chargol is that it has a tail—behold, there is the arbeh which has no tail.
סׇלְעָם דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְיָן לְגוּפוֹ – תְּנֵהוּ עִנְיָן לְרֹאשׁוֹ אָרוֹךְ.
If so, why do I need "solam" which the Merciful One wrote? If it is not needed for its own matter, since it could be derived from the others, apply its matter to a long-headed grasshopper to teach that it is kosher.
The daf concludes the discussion on birds with various Braisos, clarifying that a bird is non-kosher if it catches and eats its food in mid-air, or if it dwells with and resembles non-kosher birds. We then learn the signs of kosher grasshoppers, with Rav Pappa concluding that their wings must cover most of both the length and circumference of their bodies. Finally, the Gemara expounds on the Torah's verses regarding grasshoppers, explaining that species like the zachal are kosher because they will eventually grow wings and jumping legs, and utilizing a common denominator (binyan av) from the arbeh, solam, and chargol to include various other kosher species with different physical traits, such as a smooth forehead or a tail.
The Gemara brings down a powerful rule of nature from the Braisa: "It was not for naught that the zarzir went to dwell with the crow, but because it is of its same species." Even when we cannot clearly see a bird's inner characteristics, we can know exactly what it is by looking at who it chooses to associate with. A bird that chooses to dwell with the non-kosher reveals its own true nature.
This is a profound lesson in our own avodah. We often think we can remain completely unaffected by our surroundings, telling ourselves that we can hang out with the wrong crowd or put ourselves in spiritually damaging environments while keeping our neshama pure and untouched. But Chazal are teaching us a fundamental truth about the human nefesh: your environment is a mirror of your inner self, and it silently shapes who you are.
If you want to know where you truly stand, look at your "zarzir"—look at the friends you seek out, the places you go, and the environments you choose when nobody is forcing you. To grow in yiras Shamayim, we must actively place ourselves in environments of Torah and chesed, surrounding ourselves with people who inspire us to be better.
Today, make a conscious choice to elevate your surroundings. Spend five minutes speaking with someone who inspires you spiritually, or choose a clean, Torah-focused environment for your learning or davening.