(For the riddles, please see back page)
- In the meforshim we find several explanations for this:
The Ibn Ezra (11:3) and the Chizkuni (11:6) explain that there are no male rabbits, therefore, the Torah uses the feminine term.
ii) Rabbeinu Bechayah (11:4) says a similar idea, he says that rabbits have signs of both males and females (like an androgynous), and they can both give birth and help create children. However, there are no rabbits which are just male, therefore, the Torah refers to them in the feminine.
iii) Rabbeinu Yehudah HaChosid in his Sefer Gematrias (Pinchos, ois 7) writes: Rabbits are one month male and one month female. The Paneach Raza also writes: “The rabbit, one month male and one month female”.
iv) The Radak in his sefer Sefer HaShroshim (erech 252) explains that when looking at a rabbit one can’t see any difference between a male and a female, therefore, the Torah says ארנ בת in the feminine, as even the male appears female. [According to this explanation, there are both male and female rabbits, it’s just that it’s hard to differentiate between them.]
v) The Sefer Kesav VeHakabalah writes: “It could be that the rabbit is referred to in the feminine, as people who know about nature say, the female rabbit rules over and forces the male species to do tashmish”. (See Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh for a further reason).
- The Ben Yehoyodah (Megillah) explains: The wife of Talmei was unique and had very short hands, and due to this irregularity when she was born they called her ארנבת. Just like a rabbit is different in that it has short arms, similarly since she had short arms, they called her ארנבת. It was normal to call a child after something that happened when it was born or based on a something unique about the child. Just like Yaakov was called “Yaakov” because he held onto Eisav‘s heels, and Eisav was called Eisav because he was born full of hair, Talmei’s wife was born with short arms, so they called her ארנבת. Considering this, they were scared to write את צעירת הידים, as Talmei may still think they are referring to his wife, therefore, they changed it and wrote את צעירת הרגלים.
ii) The Torah Temimah (heorah 20) writes, that he found an alternative girsa [textual version] and instead of עירת הרגליםצאת it says, עירת הרגליםשאת – hairy legs, and this is the correct text as the people who are expert in nature say it is the nature of rabbits to grow long hair on their feet.
- The Sefer Tishbi (erech dovar) writes: “We call the chazer a “dovar acher”. It seems to me the reason is, we don’t want to mention its name in front of children as they will come to ask about it and will come to eat it, just like we don’t mention the word “bread” on Pesach for the same reason.”
R’ Yeshaya Pik Berlin in his hagaos on the Sefer Tishbi writes that this reason is very strained, as if that is the case we shouldn’t mention the name of any tomei animals, why are we only concerned about the chazir? Further he wonders: By all other forbidden foods we aren’t worried that by mentioning them one will come to eat them, as Bnei Yisroel are careful to refrain from these items all year round. Specifically, by chometz, when people are accustomed to eating it all year round, are we worried that by mentioning it one will get drawn after it and come to eat it (see Shach, Yoreh Deah 88:2).
ii) R’ Yeshaya Pik then offers his own reason: Chazarim are plagued with tzora’as, like we find in Kiddushin (49b), “Ten measures of tzora’as came down to the world, and chazarim took 9 of them.” We find in Chazal that tzora’as is referred to as “dovar acher”, therefore, the chazir is as well. He then writes, Rabbeinu Yehudah HaChosid in his Sefer Gematrias (Inyonim Shonim, ois 201) already says this.
iii) R’ Yeshaya Pik offers another reason: When the chazar rests it sticks out its split hooves showing off how it’s tahor, therefore, perhaps we refer to it as a “dovar acher” to show that it is something different from what it makes itself out to be.
iv) The Sefer Otzar Pelois HaTorah brings another reason: Chazal say that in the future the chazir will be kosher. Perhaps for this reason we call it “dover acher”, as we are saying that in the future it will be something else to what it is now, and it will be a kosher animal.
- The Shu”t Pnei Mavin (Orach Chaim 38) says that one can’t use saliva for mayim achronim.
He cites proof from the Gemara in Eruvin (17a). The Gemara says: “Those who are out at war are exempt from netilas yodayim. Abaye says: This only applies to washing before the meal, however, mayim achornim is obligatory.” Says the Pnei Mavin, if one can wash mayim achronim with saliva let him use saliva, we see from here that saliva doesn’t help.
The Shu”t Minchos Elozor (3:53) however, refutes this proof, he writes that perhaps the Gemara means: Since saliva is suitable for mayim achronim when out in the camps fighting one isn’t exempt. One might have thought that since it requires great effort to use saliva, as one has to create enough saliva to remove the bad smell from his hands, and one isn’t always able to create saliva. And according to the Arizal, one should use an entire utensil full which requires great effort when using saliva, one may think he is exempt, therefore the Gemara says, even still one should.
The Minchas Elozor concludes that one shouldn’t use saliva as mayim achronim needs to be done with cold water not warm water, and saliva is warm.
Additionally: It’s disgraceful to use saliva and is not fitting for an act of kedusha.
