FIRST KASHRUT SOURCES · 3 OF 5
Birds and received tradition
Compare the Torah’s bird list with the Mishnah’s opening observation, then read Rambam on knowledge and received tradition.
In this lesson
Look for the form of the teaching
Our first two readings of kashrut, the Jewish food laws, encountered signs: a fully divided hoof with bringing up cud, then fins and scales. Leviticus 11:13–19 takes a different form. It names forbidden kinds in the bird section.
The Torah, the five books of Moses, provides this list. The Mishnah, our sages’ collection of teachings, draws attention to the difference in presentation. Rambam, Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, later discusses knowledge and received tradition in his law code, the Mishneh Torah. Our task is to follow those source relationships.
A list of forbidden kinds
ואת אלה תשקצו מן העוף לא יאכלו שקץ הם
These you shall hold as detestable among the birds; they are not to be eaten, they are detestable.
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
The verse continues with names, and the list runs through verse 19. The opening אלה, “these,” points forward to those listed kinds. The words לא יאכלו, “they are not to be eaten,” establish the list’s food-law role.
1. Is the list naming permitted kinds or forbidden kinds?
Forbidden kinds. “They are not to be eaten” governs the list that follows. Reading it as a menu of permitted birds would reverse the opening instruction.
Several entries add a phrase meaning “according to its kind”: למינה in verse 14, למינו in verse 15, and למינהו in verse 16. The forms refer back to the kind named in their own entries.
Compare two descriptions of this passage: “a list of named kinds, sometimes expanded by ‘according to its kind’” and “a general rule requiring fins and scales.” Choose the description supported by the text.
2. What distinguishes this passage from the fish passage?
The bird passage names forbidden kinds and uses “according to its kind” within the list. The fish passage gives fins and scales as signs. We preserve that difference rather than borrowing the fish rule for another group.
Read the Mishnah’s observation precisely
סימני בהמה וחיה נאמרו מן התורה, וסימני העוף לא נאמרו.
The signs of domesticated and wild land animals were stated in the Torah; the signs of birds were not stated.
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
סימני, simanei, means “the signs of.” The Mishnah contrasts the Torah’s presentation of the groups. The Torah states the land-animal signs; for birds, it gives the forbidden list instead. The Mishnah goes on to teach signs from our sages. Its opening does not mean there are no bird laws.
3. Repair “The Mishnah says that the Torah permits every bird.”
Write: “The Mishnah says the bird signs were not stated in the Torah in the way the land-animal signs were.” Leviticus 11:13–19 still names forbidden kinds. An absence of that form of sign statement is not an absence of food laws.
Knowledge of the kinds matters
In Forbidden Foods 1:14, Rambam explains that the Torah names forbidden bird kinds rather than explicitly presenting the signs of a permitted bird. In 1:15, he describes a person who is expert in those kinds and their names: that person can recognize birds outside the forbidden list.
This knowledge is more than finding a familiar-looking bird or recognizing a word in an English list. Rambam’s condition includes expertise in the kinds themselves and their names.
4. What does “I recognize one translated name” leave unestablished?
It leaves unestablished the expertise Rambam describes in the forbidden kinds and their names. His statement concerns a knowledgeable identification, not the impression that an unfamiliar bird looks unlike one remembered picture.
Read the received-tradition clause
The same paragraph also speaks of mesorah, received tradition. Try this clause before revealing its English rendering:
ועוף טהור נאכל במסורת, והוא שיהיה דבר פשוט באותו מקום שזה עוף טהור.
- ועוף טהור = and a tahor bird; here tahor classifies a permitted kind for food.
- נאכל במסורת = is eaten on the basis of received tradition.
- והוא שיהיה דבר פשוט = provided it is an established matter.
- באותו מקום = in that place; שזה עוף טהור = that this is a tahor bird.
Join the chunks. In your rendering, keep both the permission and the condition that follows it.
5. How can you render the whole clause?
“A tahor bird is eaten on the basis of received tradition, provided it is established in that place that this is a tahor bird.” The condition belongs with the statement. Rambam describes an established local tradition about the bird’s status.
Read this clause as a way reliable knowledge is transmitted. A personal guess does not become a mesorah merely by being repeated.
6. Which better matches this clause: “I have a hunch” or “This kind has an established local tradition”?
The established local tradition matches the clause. Rambam names מסורת and qualifies it by what is established in that place. A private hunch supplies neither that transmission nor that condition.
Write a careful source summary
A study partner writes: “The Torah gives no bird laws, and Rambam says received tradition is the only possible basis for recognizing any permitted bird.” Use the three sources to replace this with two accurate sentences.
7. What should the corrected summary preserve?
One possible answer: “The Torah lists forbidden bird kinds, while Mishnah Chullin 3:6 observes that the bird signs were not stated there as the land-animal signs were. Rambam’s Forbidden Foods 1:15 discusses both expertise in the forbidden kinds and their names and an established received tradition about a permitted bird.”
This preserves the Torah’s list and both parts of Rambam’s paragraph. It does not turn the received-tradition clause into his only route or replace established knowledge with appearance.
Return next session
Without looking above, describe the difference between the Torah’s land-animal signs and its bird list. Then explain mesorah in this passage and recall the other kind of knowledge Rambam describes.
8. What should you recover?
The land-animal passage states the signs; the bird passage names forbidden kinds. The Mishnah draws attention to the difference. Mesorah is received tradition, qualified here by an established local understanding that the bird is tahor. Rambam also discusses expertise in the forbidden kinds and their names.
Read in context
Read Leviticus 11:13–19 for the list. Compare the opening of Mishnah Chullin 3:6 and Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Foods 1:14–15 for the source relationships and knowledge conditions. Our Mishnah quotation is its opening observation, not its later signs discussion. The English renderings and activities are our own.
Continue with Meat and milk to examine how a food question can involve more than the kind of animal.