In this week’s parsha we learn about which animals one is allowed to eat, and which animals one must avoid. Although by animals and fish things are relatively simple and the Torah gives clear signs to help determine which species is kosher and which is not, when it comes to bird’s things get a bit more complicated. This week I hope to discuss what exactly is needed in order to make a bird kosher, and we will focus on the big question of whether one may eat the species of bird known as “Turkey”, and we will try and understand what exactly is behind the great debate.
Signs of Kashrus for Animals, Fish and Birds
For an animal to be considered kosher, we learn in this week’s parsha (14:6): וכל בהמה מפרסת פרסה ושסעת שסע שתי פרסות מעלת גרה בבהמה אתה תאכלו – “Any animal which has split hooves, a complete split so that it looks like two, and chews the cud, such an animal may be eaten.”
Similarly for a fish we learn that in order for it to be considered kosher: כל אשר לו סנפיר וקשקשת תאכלו וכל אשר אין לו סנפיר וקשקשת לא תאכלו טמא הוא לכם – “Any fish which has fins and scales may be eaten, and anything which doesn’t have fins or scales, may not be eaten. It is considered impure for you” (14:9-10).
However, when it gets to bird’s things get a bit more complicated. The Torah says: כל צפור טהרה תאכלו – “All kosher birds may be eaten” (14:11) and the Torah doesn’t offer any simanim to indicate which birds are kosher to eat and which are not. The Torah simply lists twenty-four birds that are forbidden to eat, without offering any reasons why they are forbidden, and the Torah expects one to derive that all other birds that are not listed are kosher.
The Rambam (Hilchos Macholas Asuros 5:14) and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah 82:1) simply say: “The simanim [signs] for a kosher bird are not explained in the Torah, rather, the Torah lists the non-kosher species alone, and all other birds are kosher. The species that are forbidden, are the twenty-four that are listed in the Torah.”
However, the Mishnah in Chullin (3:6) explains the simanim that make a bird kosher. The Mishnah says: סימני בהמה וחיה נאמרו מן התורה וסימני העוף לא נאמרו אבל אמרו חכמים כל עוף הדורס טמא כל שיש לו אצבע יתרה וזפק וקרקבנו נקלף טהור – “The signs for a kosher animal and wild animal are mentioned in the Torah, however, the signs for a kosher bird are not. However, Chazal said, any bird that is doreis (we will explain this soon) is tomei. Any bird that has an “extra claw”, has a crop, and the inner lining of its gizzard (the pupek) can be peeled, is tohar.”
Signs of Doreis
We find three distinctive features that demonstrate whether a bird is doreis. The first, recorded by the Mishnah, is that any bird that, when sitting on a rope or stick, places two of its claws on one side of the rope or stick and the other two on the opposite side is definitely doreis and non-kosher. The second is that a bird that swallows its food in mid-flight is not kosher (Chullin 65a). The third is that any bird that has webbed feet and a wide beak is certainly not doreis (Baal HaMaor).
It comes out that for a fish to be kosher it needs to have fins and scales, for an animal it needs to have completely split hooves and chew the cud, and for a bird to be kosher, it needs to be not doreis, have an “extra claw”, a crop, and the inner lining of its gizzard (the pupek) needs to be able to be peeled.
Kosher Birds Can Only Be Eaten With a Mesorah
From the Mishnah it would seem that if one can see on the bird the four kosher signs, then there is no reason to refrain from eating it.
However, from the Gemara it’s clear that the simanim are not enough and one must have a mesorah [tradition passed down from previous generations] as well. The Gemara (Chullin 63b) says: עוף טהור נאכל במסורת – “A kosher bird can only be eaten if one has a tradition that it’s kosher”. This means that even if one can see that the bird has the four aforementioned simanim it doesn’t help and unless one has a clear mesorah that the bird is kosher, one isn’t allowed to eat it.
The reason for this is clear from a sugya in Chullin (62b). The Gemara says: אמר רב פפא תרנגולא דאגמא אסירא תרנגולתא דאגמא שריא וסימניך עמוני ולא עמונית דרש מרימר תרנגולתא דאגמא אסירא חזיוה דדרסה ואכלה והיינו גירותא – “Rav Pappa says: The swamp rooster is forbidden, but the swamphen is permitted. And your mnemonic to remember this is the statement “The Ammonite man is unfit to enter the assembly, but not an Ammonite woman” (just like there the male species is subject to the prohibition, here as well the male species is subject to the prohibition). Mareimar taught: The swamphen is forbidden, because the Sages saw that it claws its prey and eats it. And this is the giruta, a non-kosher bird (see 109b).”
Rashi explains: ומתוך שאין אנו בקיאין בהם נראה לי דעוף הבא לפנינו יש לומר שמא ידרוס דהא הך תרנגולתא דאגמא היו מחזיקין בטהורה ולאחר זמן ראוה שדורסת ואין עוף נאכל לנו אלא במסורת עוף שמסרו לנו אבותינו בטהור ושלא מסרו לנו יש לחוש ובמסורת יש לנו לסמוך כדאמר לקמן (חולין דף סג ): שעוף טהור נאכל במסורת – “Because we are not experts in birds, it appears to me that if a bird comes in front of us we have to be worried that perhaps it is doreis [claws its prey]. As the “swamp rooster” originally people thought it acted like a kosher bird, and after a bit of time it became known that it is doreis, therefore, we can’t eat birds unless we have a mesorah [tradition] that in previous generations it was eaten and was kosher. If we don’t have a mesorah we need to be worried, however, if we have a mesorah than we can rely on it, like it says later on (Chullin 63b) ‘a kosher bird can only be eaten with a mesorah’”.
It's clear from here that the “swamp rooster” was assumed to be kosher as when it was checked it seemed to have the correct simanim and it wasn’t doreis, however, after a while it was seen to be doreis. We see that one can’t rely on simanim alone, as it could be that when the bird is being checked it acts like a kosher bird, however, in truth it is not and later on it may be doreis. Therefore, a bird can only be determined that it’s kosher if there is a clear mesorah.
This is brought down l’halachah in Shulchan Aruch (82:2): ואע"פ שיש לו ג 'סימנים אלו אין לאכלו לפי שאנו חוששין שמא הוא דורס אלא א "כ יש להם מסורת שמסרו להם אבותיהם שהוא טהור – “Even if a bird has three signs of being kosher (“extra claw”, has a crop, and the inner lining of its gizzard can be peeled) it shouldn’t be eaten, as we are worried that perhaps it is doreis, unless one has a clear mesorah past down from his forefathers that it is kosher.”
What it means to have a mesorah is clear from this same halachah, where the Shulchan Aruch writes: ועוף טהור נאכל במסורת והוא שיהיה דבר פשוט באותו מקום שזה עוף טהור ונאמן צייד לומר עוף זה התיר לי רבי הצייד והוא שיוחזק אותו צייד שהוא בקי במינים הטמאים האמורים בתורה ובשמותיהם – “A kosher bird may be eaten with a mesorah, which means that it is obvious and accepted in that place that this type of bird is kosher. A hunter is believed to say that rabbi so and so the hunter told me that this type of bird is kosher. However, the hunter must have a track record of being an expert in which type of birds the Torah forbids, and their names.”
Who Is Trusted to Past Down the Mesorah
Now that we have seen that having a mesorah is what determines which birds are kosher, the question is, who can we rely on to pass down the mesorah?
We mentioned above the Rema that says: ונאמן צייד לומר עוף זה התיר לי רבי הצייד והוא שיוחזק אותו צייד שהוא בקי במינים הטמאים האמורים בתורה ובשמותיהם – “A hunter is believed to say that rabbi so and so the hunter told me this type of bird is kosher. However, the hunter must have a track record of being an expert in which type of birds the Torah forbids, and their names.” It is clear from here that one may rely on the testimony of someone who is an expert in birds to identify the status of an unknown bird. Seemingly this is based on the principal that: עד אחד נאמן באיסורין – When it comes to a question of whether something is permissible or prohibited, we can rely on the testimony of a single witness.”
The above explanation is clear from the Chochmas Adam (Klal 36, sif 9) who writes: ואם בא לפנינו עוף שאין אנו מכירין אותו כלל לא שייך בו מנהגי מדינה ואם עד א 'מעיד עליו שהוא מקובל מפי נאמן שעוף זה טהור הוא נאמן דעד א 'נאמן באיסורין – “If a bird comes in front of us which we don’t recognize at all, we can’t simply follow the custom of the town. If, one witness testifies that he has a tradition from a trustworthy person that this bird is kosher, then we trust him, as when it comes to matter of determining whether something is permissible or not, we rely on a single witness.”
The Maharil (siman 95) adds: Although a single witness is believed, he must be a great person and someone we can rely on. Nowadays there is virtually no one like this, therefore, we don’t really have this concept of mesorah by birds today (see lashon below).
R’ Yonasan Eibshitz (Kreisi U’Pleisi, Yoreh Deah 82:1) writes similar thing: שורת הדין אם עד אחד אומר שמקובל מפי נאמן שעוף הזה טהור הוא נאמן דעד אחד נאמן באיסורין רק עכשיו לגרעון הדורות בע "ה אין לסמוך רק על אדם מוחזק בכשרות ובר דעה שלימה ששמועתו מכוונתו ואומר מפי ת "ח בקי בדברים ובקי בהן ובשמותיהן ולכן מאוד צריך עיון לחדש בזמנינו מסורת חדשה על עופות לא שערום אבותינו – “Strictly speaking if a single witness says that he has a tradition from someone trustworthy that such and such a bird is kosher he is believed as a single witness is believed in such matters. However, nowadays unfortunately with the weakening of the generations we can only rely on someone who has a reliable status in the field of kashrus and who is very clear and has everything correct, and says something from the name of a Talmud Chocham who is an expert in this area, and knows all the types of birds and their names. Therefore, it’s very difficult to be able to say nowadays that a bird that wasn’t previously known to be kosher can be considered kosher today.”
In light of all this, the Chochmas Adam says very clearly: בזמן הזה אין לסמוך כלל על שום אדם ואסור לאכול רק מה שהוא פשוט וידוע שהוא טהור – “Nowadays we can’t rely on anyone, and it is forbidden to eat a species of bird, unless it is clear and known to everyone that such a species of bird is kosher.”
The Chochmas Adam adds: ונראה לי פשוט דאפילו ידעינן בודאי שאוכלין אותו במקום אחד צריך שיהא ידוע שאותו מקום אוכלין על פי תלמידי חכמים וותיקין משא"כ מקום חדש שנתיישב בקרוב ואינם מצוים שם חכמים שראוי לסמוך עליהם ודאי דאין עדותן כלום דאולי הוא טעות בידם – “It appears to me that it’s obvious, that even if one knows that in a certain place they eat a certain type of bird, it needs to be known that the reason they eat it in that place is based on Talmiday Chachomim from earlier generations. If, however, one arrives in a new place and there are not Talmiday Chachomim there that can be relied on, certainly testimony from people in that place doesn’t mean anything, as they could easily be making a mistake.”
Witnesses Need to Testify That They Saw With Their Own Eyes This Same Bird Being Eaten Both Here and In Other Places
In addition to the above, when relying on mesorah that such a species of bird was eaten in another place, one must have testimony from the witnesses that they saw with their own eyes this type of bird being eaten in another place, and the bird now in this place is the exact same bird. Like R’ Moshe Feinstein writes (Igros Moshe, Yoreh Deah 1:34): “Nonetheless, just knowing the name is certainly not enough to rely on, as there may be similar species with the same name, additionally, the names change from one place to the next. Therefore, the testimony must be that the witnesses saw and recognize with their eyes that this specific bird was eaten in another certain town, and they must be meticulous people, who don’t compare one thing to the other.”
R’ Moshe is saying, that the witnesses must be precise and give clear testimony that this exact bird was eaten in another place, and it’s not enough with a doubtful statement such as “I saw a bird similar to this being eaten”, or “I saw a bird with the same name being eaten in another place”.
The Encyclopedia L’Kashrus HaMazon (Mazon Min HaChai, pg. 98) sums up the above as follows: “Any bird where there is a doubt concerning its identity and its status of kashrus, even if its name seems to fit with another type of bird that is known to be kosher, we can’t rely on it. The reason being, that the names of animals change over time and from one place to the next. And even within one language it sometimes changes. Not always the names that are mentioned in seforim are the same names that are given today. Similarly, certainly one can’t rely on the names given by scientists, as the names and definitions given by Chazal certainly don’t have to fit with what the scientists say.”
Relying on Written Testimony and Pictures
In addition to all the above, the Munkatcher in his sefer Darkei Teshuvah (Yoreh Deah 82:34) when addressing the issue of the Turkey (which we will expand on below) writes that one can’t rely on written testimony to allow the eating of birds. He writes: “At that time a kuntros came out from HaGaon Rav Meeas called “Oif Tahor” and he brings letters from great Rabbonim in the Holy City of Yerushalayim, that the birds found in the Holy Land appear to have the same description and the pictures look like they are the same, and they were eaten there without any questions. He also brings two kuntrasim from Rav Shmuel Heller of Tzefas. At first he said that these birds are not the same as those in Eretz Yisroel, however, later on he retracted and said they are permissible, and he testified that they appear to be exactly the same type of bird. He speaks about the topic at great length, and then says we can’t rely on the testimony of Rav Shmuel Heller, neither to permit or to forbid, as according to the Torah, we only accept testimony from the mouths of witnesses and not from what they write. In monetary matters Chazal were lenient to rely on written testimony because they didn’t want to make it difficult for people to be able to borrow money, however, in matters of Issur V’Heter, and Dinei Nefoshos, certainly, written testimony is no good, and the testimony must be given directly from the mouths of the witnesses.”
Interim Summary
So far what we have seen is, that the Torah doesn’t mention the simanim of what makes a bird kosher. However, Chazal gave three simanim to help identify a kosher bird: An “extra claw”, has a crop, and the inner lining of its gizzard (the pupek) can be peeled. According to the Mechaber one may determine the status of a bird based on simanim, and there is no need for a mesorah, however, according to the Rema a mesorah is needed as well.
The Chochmas Adam said that when it comes to a mesorah on birds, we can only rely on great people who are reliable and expert, and because of this caveat nowadays we can’t really rely on anyone, and it is forbidden to eat a species of bird unless it’s obvious and well known to everyone that it’s kosher.
We also saw, that when testifying about a mesorah the witnesses must provide clear testimony that they saw this exact bird being eaten in another place, and it is not enough for them to say, “we saw something similar to this being eaten” or “we saw a bird with the same name being eaten”. We also saw that written testimony is no good.
I think by now, we are ready to dive in and discuss the big shailah which arose close to three hundred years ago, when the Turkey bird was first brought over to Europe from America. At the time, a big discussion arose as to whether such a bird was permissible to be eaten or not.
