Chulin 63

Today's daff is and we are six lines from the top of so we're moving along discussing the of kosher birds versus non-cooser birds and we saw the mission already made the observation that whereas the tra when describing the kosher animal versus the non-coosher animal same is true for the kosher fish versus the non-cooser fish the tyra states specific how it is you're supposed to know what's kosher and non- kosher. For example, as it relates to the Torah says, in other words, if it has split hoofs malaso, additionally, it chooses its allowed to eat. However, if it's a malro and it's not maf or if it's paras and it's not malos and like the ra says in the beginning of paras if it's not a malas and it doesn't have splits there the is so the delineates very clearly with how you're supposed to know what makes up the kosher be and what's the non-coosher beh as it relates to the however the is more ambiguous the doesn't give any sim in how you're supposed to know what kosher is versus a non-coosher. What the Tyra does do is the Tyra mentions many many birds and says that those birds are not kosher and it almost appears just from reading the sukum and thera that those birds are not kosher. Everything else however is kosher. stating that we saw it's it's rather complicated and the truth is just to go through these doin that we're learning now is a challenge in of itself let alone when you go into the I don't mean the names of the birds in the pictures that's the easy part it's more understanding what exactly was what exactly was so in the a lot of time that we have we try to do what we do but regardless regardless what emerged from the is that the reality is it's not only the 24 birds that are mentioned in the Torah that are hakally considered non-coosher birds, but really there's one of those 20 birds that's considered the paradigm for the non-coosher bird. And anything that's similar to that would also be considered non-coosher. And that was the bird referred to by the Tory as the Nesher, loosely translated as the eagle. Stating that we'll see a little bit later that it's not so simple amongst the that the Nesher is what we know today as the eagle. But regardless, the Tyra or Kazal said that just like the is lacking four sim or has four unique character traits, we learn from there that any animal that has those four traits would be considered non- kosher. If however an does not have the four traits that the neure has in other words it doesn't have those money rather it has even one sim of tyra is that would be enough to render it kosher what then are the money for it's on the one hand and malas on the other hand as it relates to the it's number one it has to have an esper it has to have a ze It's cork has to be able to be peeled and it has to be a an that's we also saw both speak out that any that's an you have to reconcile that with everything that we just said but regardless whereas as it relates to the made it very clear there's two of what makes up a kosher animal when it comes to the didn't mention anything about the kosher bird what the said was there's a whole list of non-coosher birds okay what's the list of non-coosher birds So the truth is that just from being you'll see there are two of us there's a list in par and then there's a list again in par which is not such a is which to a degree is regardless you have the list in pari and you have the list again in par the list in pari reads as follows we're going to go through each one or almost each one in today's the says That's a those those make up the list of the that are non- kosher. If you look at parishes, there's another list and the list is very very similar, but it's not the same list. In fact, there's three differences between what the list says and the list of parishes. Number one, we have one of the non-coosher birds mentioned is the duh the parisia. Number four on the list is the du is not mentioned in paras. Additionally in paras there are two birds listed as non that are not mentioned in parishi. Number one you have not the duh but you have the and number two you have the d. So we had here in pari that's the in we don't have the we have the we have the and whereas we have the ay in par we also have another bird that rhymes with and that is the d either way there's three differences between parish meaning we have the duh we don't have the du in par in par we have the ra and the both of which we don't have in par. Why is that? That's going to be discussed in great detail in today's regardless the is going to begin with a detailed discussion trying to understand what exactly these birds mention the as said which is one of the which bird is that how do you identify that that's the bird that scoops up fish from the bottom of the sea. What's that? It's h it has this hat, so to speak, of feathers, which is really nice. It gives it its beauty. It's kos. It gets tied down to its head. Rashi seems to describe it as its feathers can sometimes pop up or it can sometimes be folded into his head and tied. Regardless, it's the word. It's made up of and it's the bird whose that's the bird that used to bring the totes the mak is gar says that when built the biktosh he had the assistance of a worm a worm known as the shamir and was trying to get the shamir but he didn't have access to it so there was a paragol that knew how to bring the shamir the used to get the that's one of the non-os birds mentioned he would say the following reaches all the way to the depths of the sea because as we said the goes to the depths of the sea to find its prey. So you see that those birds that are on the bottom of the sea, they're subject to the because through the they're being consumed would see an ant. He would say, ironically, he would say that is massive. It's like the mountains. And he was looking at a very small creature, not a very large creature was trying to say that the is so abundant. It's so incredible that Hashem does even with the lowly even with the little anti these are two birds they're kosher birds depends if you live in a place where it's to eat it and you can eat it like if you live in a place where the is not eat it don't eat it says what does this mean it's it's yeah there's a concept of and there's a whole parag that talks about but obviously that's only with regards to things that have nothing to do with whether these birds are kosher birds or non- kosher birds should not be but rather you should have to look at the and go through these difficulties that we're learning right now and determine whether it's kosher or not kosher how could it be in au okay yeah not sometimes you find a concept place can talk about should be m But how can be the determining factor whether these birds are permissible to eat or not says no yesterday's not these birds all had one sim of a kosher bird that they had one sim of a kosha bird. The only birds that you would have to rule out before you eat it is the paris and the we said that the paris were but apparently there were places where they weren't sometimes. Thus the mim where sometimes it was a paras and people would not eat any bird that had one simmon of a kosher bird cuz they were afraid that it might be the paris and the where people lived in areas that there was no parisnia. So you didn't have to worry about it. So that's this not that the is based on we know exactly what this bird is. It has one kosher. If you live in an area where you can't eat it why because you're afraid that it might be the parasil. If you live in a place where there you'd be allowed to eat and says that even though they used to give malus for people that eat it for they had a different name for it. They used to call it tinus is one of the non-coosher birds mentioned in the list. It's in the list in parasi. on the list in par says the what exactly is this maybe it's the and the reference of that is another where the is not talking about the non-cos birds the talking about the so we know that there are whole paric where if they die and they fall on somebody the person becomes So not every is there's only the the special group of the this is an exclusive group of of insect where they have the ability to be and when the Torah lists the it says so there's the bird and then there's the so the speaks out that how do you know when it says tamas among the non- kosher birds it's referring to the it's the tamas bird Maybe it's referring to the gives a very obvious answer. This is this is easy. This is 101. Why? Just look at the context. It doesn't make sense. We're talking about a whole bunch of birds that are nonosher. We mention the tamas. We're not probably not referring to the to the sherets. We're probably referring to the you find a similar in the reverse in the context of the the over there was discussing and it mentions it and says that that is the type of maybe the mention the parish of the is actually referring to the of look at the context one of is in English. Look at the context, right? What's the context? We're talking about then is probably the we're talking about then is probably the version. Either way, what exactly is this? What is that? If you look at Rashi, Rashi vars a few French words when describing what exactly this tinas is. And if you look at the English translation of the French words that Rashi quotes, it seems that Rashi had what is either the owl or the bat. What is the zu? That's another one of the non- kosher birds. Why is this shrack rack called? Because as soon as it comes it brings into the world. Rashi says in one word. So apparently the would come it would make noise and you knew that it was that it was going to rain. So being that this bird would signal rain. Rain is thus it's called the because it brings this is only true if it's sitting and it makes noise English shrieks that if the would sit not just on something but it would sit sit on the ground that would be a sign that not only is coming but it means is coming as the says So before Msiah comes what's the it's that bird that's the rack which is the which is a non-cos bird interesting but regardless when that bird makes noise when it is it shre ordinarily if it long as it's sitting what it means is that is coming one word if it would sit on the ground then it would do It means coming. I once saw a bird. It sat in a plowed field. It shrieked. And you know what happened? Didn't come. A rock came and it cracked its skull. He told that bird was a liar. It wasn't telling the truth. And as a result, it got punished for not telling the truth. But it would only shriek sitting on the ground. If you see that happening means you have to get ready. What is the it's the okay? When it says in the it's coming to include not just the as in the standard typical but also the when it says the word it's and the is going to explain. So again the P is four words. We spoke a little bit about this in yesterday's. Now so it's the number one. That's what the word means is coming to include and then when the says the last word in the P it's right. It sounds like there was some confusion of what exactly the was. So the T the B said you want to know what the is it's now was sitting here and the T was pointing to the so it would make sense you see that that's what it is but there was no when the T was saying overenders and so so what does it mean how you supposed to know what that means says it means which is a black raven how do you know that the raven is black it's a It's black like an what is the that's included from the words that's not the black raven but rather it's the white raven the says the context over there is the is talking about a white nega and it describes its appearance as being deeper than the flesh deeper than the skinare. So you see that white is considered ammo. Thus the white raven is called additionally another person can marry the appearance is considered to be more than the shade. It's lighter. So you see lighter is considered. Thus is the light color. It's the white raven as opposed to the black raven. What does that mean? So we said that when it says it's called is coming to include that don't think that what it means is that that it's the like it leads the the pigeons. It's the the means of the there's an whose head looks like the head of a pigeon and that's that includes also because it says it says in theorates What's the It's the bird known as says it shares its food and it's for that reason it's called said that if the so why is it a non-coosher bird? It should have been a kosher bird. She said the does but only in she only does with her friends. She doesn't do with people that are not part of her that are not her friends. As a result, it's a non-cos bird. What's that bird? Why is this angry bird so to speak called? So why is it called says you find is ager. So that's the idea of the it's the direct. If you sit down and you do the math and you count all the birds, what you're going to see is there are 24 birds. So again, a little bit of of an introduction just the what we spoke at in the intro to the DA because the next part of the DA it's not so hard but it's going to get technical and that is the mentions the non-coosher birds twice in the mentions it in par and the mentions it in par again incidentally in par in when the hazers over the list of the non- kosher birds so over there the prefaces the list of non-coosher birds by You're allowed to eat every I saw in the he brings from the in who says he said that the word which the Torah is mentioning here in the context of the kosher called is a to the four of a bird. What are the four ances and a cork? He says the second letter of each one of the four is that's the ze that's the pay is that's the and is that's the so he said is kavan he brings from the that's the told us of the abenezar was once told this vart of and the first thing he said was that no could have said something like this was he said that really what's the VV we said the truth is the is not that it's the is that it's so he said if anything it should have been why is it he said the truth is the v is silent because when you say you don't pronounce the it's perish in mikra there's not even av It's only in the you have the so you know why the VV is silent because it's dyus it's not really dy it's but regardless so it's called you have the list in parishes you have the list in in paras now we said there's three differences between the two lists number one in pari thera mentions a bird called the which is the non- kosher bird it's not mentioned in par additionally in par there's a bird called the ra there's a bird called the ra which is mentioned as a non-commercial which is not mentioned in parishes. Additionally, you have the d which is mentioned in paras which is not mentioned in parishes. Now if you do the math in pari there are 20 non-cooser birds mentioned. If you do the math in par there are 21 non-coosher birds that are mentioned right it's the same list. We said there's one that parishes has that parish doesn't have. There are two that parishes has that parish doesn't have. So you have a net positive of one in parish. It's 20 in parishes and it's 21 in parish. Now we kept on saying we had it already right in the beginning of the sug there 24 non-coosa animals. How do you get to 24? It's either 20 or it's 21 or if you want to add the duh to the list of the 21 then you would have 22. How do you end up with 24? That's the gar. So again, there 24 non-cultural birds. How do you come up with 24? If you go through the birds that are mentioned in it's 20. If you want to count the ones that are mentioned in which is and what it means is you have to take the one that's mentioned added to the 21 that are mentioned in so then you have 21 plus one back to the envelope arithmetic that what you're going to end up is 22 have 24 there's four times that the mentions the word lino ini we just had now it's called but there's four such mentions each one is coming to be another non-coosher bird in other words what you have is an additional four but the says it still doesn't work let's let's go back to the drawing board let's do the math because you should have the 21 of the of which gives you 22 Plusino is another four. You should end up with 26. You have to say that the D mentioned in pari and the mentioned in paras are really one and the same. So you don't have one ini that's not mentioned in one in that's not mentioned in we said the du is in parmini. It's not mentioned in paras. The raw is mentioned in par. It's not mentioned in pari. They're one of the same. The duh and the R are the same. Said I'll prove it to you because the if you're going to tell me that the and the are two different birds when it over the birds in the intention was not to subtract from what was already mentioned in par. It was either or more more likely to add something that wasn't mentioned in So how's it possible that in par the would omit something that was already mentioned in in pari it must be it's not possible that there's something in that's not mentioned because and here it's a subtraction you have something mentioned in that's not mentioned in must be the it must be the one and the same okay so if they're one and the same how many do you have now so you have 21 plus 4 right we thought we had 22 But we just omitted one because we said the run the d that we were counting as two really should be counted as one. Okay, 22 minus one is 21 plus the four you end up with 25. You still only have 25 just like the and the are so the and the are also one. So the ay is mentioned in pari and in par. The d is not mentioned in pari. That's the other one that's mentioned in par that wasn't mentioned in pari the and the in fact when the brings it it says soay that just like the and the du it sounds similar. They're the same. So to the and the which also sound similar they're also the same. And he said I'll prove it to you. It has to be that way. tell me that the are not the same. We said is coming to add to when the mentions it says the the and it says that's so it says the word with regards to the but when the mentions the in it doesn't say it says the it doesn't say that the is going to be lina doesn't make sense we said it's is going to be something it's called we said it's coming to be a certain type of so clearly is being something it's it's it adding to what you would otherwise think if that's the case if it mentioned lina by the ini and it doesn't mention lina by the par it would mean that paras is subtracting from what we already have in ini and that can't be. You know what you have to say and must be one if and are one. So we're not subtracting because it says it says and is the same thing. So both by and by you both have point is is and is the same. We were counting them as two. Really they're only one. So you end up with how much? 20. So we thought you had 22. How'd you get 22? You took the 21 you added the D which is mentioned in that's not mentioned in you have 22 + 4 you have 26 how does it with the messiah of 24 the answer is is that we were counting ra and d as two we were also counting I and they're both mentioned separately in the same par as two really I and is one raw and d is one so it's not 22 + 4 it's 20 + 4 that's how you end up with your 20 says if I and one mention both. So explained it because we wanted to be we wanted to make this as clear as possible. There must have been some confusion with what this bird was called. Some people called it ayah. Some people call the that's the to make it clear the not that they're two birds but it doesn't matter what you call it. The bottom line is it's 100% awesome over the kosher and non-coosher animals in because there's one that's mentioned in that we don't know from and that is of the says the is a whole different animal as the Gmorra had discussed earlier. So, and we're equating the of the mentioned in Paris to the of the mentioned in Paris. It doesn't sound like they they should be the same. We should be consistent and just like the is a new maybe by it's a new we said now there's no new it's the same list. The list in Paris is the same as the list in Paris. Right. At the end of the day, there's 20 mentioned in Paris Shini. That's the 20 20 in parish and the 21 mentioned in Parish is the same list. It's really 20 plus the but regardless. But it doesn't it sound a little bit from this that which is a new type of is the same as says no but we just said and that is there are 24 non-cooser birds this is not consistent with something that said the is the Why is it called the reason it's called the is because it can see very far says this is a mash from the spell that even the ay can't see it it sees so far how far could the see it could be standing above of and it's able to see an okay so before we go and the gar makes the so says the gumar well what we just said that there's 24 birds based on two assumptions that the and the du are the same and the and the are the same thus you have 20 mentions of non- kosal birds plus that's how you end up with 24 it's pavo this doesn't work with rabau said why because rao said that the ra is the ayah. And if that's the case, according to Ravo, you're not going to have 24. You're going to end up with 23. Why? Because if the ra is the ayah and the ra is the duh and the ayah is the da. So that means that those four just became one. It's all one and the same. We had the ra and the d is one and the ayah and the da is the one. If the ra and the ayah are also one, that means the ra and the d, the ay and the da are four names for the same exact bird. So if it's all one then what we counted as two cuz we had the d and the d one. So in our of 24 the four were two in rabbin of 24 the four are really one. If that's the case it must be that he has one less than what we have. So we have 24 rao had 23. Thus says the gumaru who plead with the rabbau our said that there's 24 non-cos birds doesn't sh with now the gumar is going to just make the inside how do you know maybe holds of 24 as well but rao doesn't agree that either the ra is the duh or that the ayah is the d he holds that the ra is the ayah but that one of the others are not the same. If that's the case, maybe you could end up with the same exact 24. I think is going to say it's not possible based on the that we said before because we proved that the raw and the dah were one. WE'VE PROVED THAT THE AYAH AND the d one this this one just this the proved how did the prove it because if the ra and the d are not the same that it comes out that the d is mentioned in par and it's not is mentioned in parish and it's not mentioned in parish that means par omitted one of the non-coos that were mentioned in parish and that can't be said is coming to be so it must be that somewhere that does mention the rate where's it mentioned it's probably the it's the raw, the raw and the one and the same. So it wasn't just the we had proved it. We also proved that and was the same. How did we prove it? Because when the mention it says when the Torah mentions the paras it doesn't say it's coming to include something. So if it doesn't say that means the list of parishes is taken away again from par and again they can't be. So it must be and is the same. So even though it doesn't say it says damino and is is essentially the same thing. So the iso that really he can't say that rao holds the 24 and although rabau said the ra and the ayah are the same but maybe he holds the and the duh aren't the same or maybe holds the ay and the da aren't the same. So just like we made two from these four. Rabo also made two from these four, albeit a different two because both of the twos that we made from four. Both of those were proven the ayah had to be the da and the raw had to be the d. And it's not possible for to disagree with that. It's not possible to disagree with that. And holds that the raw is the ayah. So if the raw has to be the du and the ayah has to be the da and the raw also has to be the ayah it means that the raw also has to be the d and the d also has to be the ayah and the it means it's all the same right so if it's all the same it comes out you have 23 everything we just spoke out we'll see inside something the only way to being 24 if the is is by saying that the du is not the you can't say that it has to be one and the same because otherwise you have the in that you don't have in that's not possible says okay the only other way to make work and say holds of 24 is maybe the is not the same but says that I can't either because If they're all one must be has one less than we had cuz we made from those four too made from those four one we had 24 must be has 23 says the drop more there 24 birds and they're all different types of There's 700 types of dog 800 types of grasshappers says the what do you mean I thought it's means there's no limit to the amount of there are exhale we'll pick up the gar tomorrow just but before we end just to end with one and that is so we're discussing over here the And as mentioned and the make up a kosher bird and a non- kosher bird are not mentioned the so whereas by the singles out exactly what the sim are of a kosher animal and a non- kosher animal when it comes to the bird the doesn't mention anything about what makes up a a kosher bird and a non-com does do is the mentions 20 21 which is really 24 noncosher birds as it relates to everything else it's a little confusing using what exactly we're supposed to take away from the as we mentioned in the introduction. But the seems to be that as long as an has one of the four kosher has that would be enough for it to be kosher. And the reason is because the paradigm of the non-coosher bird is the national. It's the first of the birds that the Tory mentions is non-coosher. It's first in the list in Parishi. It's first in the list in in paras. So the paradigm of the non-cooser bird became the and being that the paradigm became the ner. It's for that reason just like the nasher doesn't have any simra. It's a it doesn't have the it doesn't have a z. It's kaban is not. So too in order for a bird to be considered non-cosher it would have to be similar to the ner. It's interesting that the Nesher was chosen as the symbol of the non-cooser bird because the Nesher has a lot of significance within in the in the I mean you find the mentioned very often number one in the the looks up he says he saw the and he saw four faces on the he saw the mus he saw the mus of a lion he saw the mus of a and he saw the so the is in the it's a non-coosher the truth is the lion is also non-coosher but it's interesting that he saw an adam he saw a he saw a lion an sawer as well and I saw in in parini he says that the reason that these four faces are etched into the because they're all the they're all the kings of their respective kingdoms. The Adam is is the lion is the king of the animal kingdom. The sh is the king of the and the is the king of the birds. So it's more because of the fact that it's a king that it's mentioned. It's less so it's less so because of the fact that it's it's kosher. It really is a non-coosher. Another place you find the is so we just learned this on says I think it's just to digress just to lighten the mood a little bit for a few minutes with regards to this. So we're talking about so we'll just talk about you know it's interesting it's that when Msiah comes we're all going to go on the wings of eagles quote unquote and we're all going to be taken to where does it come from presumably this I think it's a little bit of a misnomer because this is not describing an event that's going to happen in the future. This busting is actually describing an event that took place in the past. This is talking about to get to and they get a little smoo before. Some of the most beautiful in the are right here. And one of the things says this is the old truth discuss when exactly did this happen? When in history did this take place said I took you on the wings of eagles. So Rashi already addresses the question. Rashi says that we know that when they were in Mits where did they live? They lived in Gisha. But when they left Mit, where did they depart from? Where was the proverbial airport? Where did they leave Mit from? They left from Rams. So, how did all of how did they get to Ramis to be able to exit and begin the 40-year journey in the midbar? Says the Rams. This is the day that the went to Ram. They were spread throughout the on the wings of eagles and he TOOK THEM TO SAY that's what the is referring to when it says if you look in the on this so this is Aramaic not so easy to read. which was like not literally it was like and where did he take the so he went where he took them to the to be able to bring the garb we know the brought a garb when they were in they brought the pes where was the pes brought it was brought in the pes m wasn't brought it was actually brought in the Mikd but the Yidden were in in they were in Ram says how did they get to the Mikto says that took the he took them on the night he brought them to the end of the so when exact what was the it wasn't from Ram that we should all be now ready to depart rather what it meant was he brought them to I saw that in his so he says something beautiful says that we say in the par of so the says he brings it to he's going to give it to and and he has to thanks from the beginning and he works up finally he brought his And you gave us the land where milk and honey flow. So what does he say? You gave us the and you gave us that. Why does it mention first the and then? It should have been in the reverse order. First he gave us the Bikto, then he gave us came into with Yeshua. But 480 years later. So really the Biktosh chronologically came much later centuries later than actually getting. It's very nice. The Yidden came first to the Bikto. When was that? That's when the Yidden came to the Bikto. And it was years later 40 years later. But that didn't but regardless that's beautiful that it was in that order. I saw another shot. I saw in those nine again from the he says maybe a different shot. What does it mean? says when the yuden left they were in the meant described it in very great detail in where the yidden were stupid they were steeped in the culture of the Egyptians the raman talks about it in his regardless the yidden were in a very bad spiritual place when they left mim what happened it wasn't that much later that the yidden stood at the foot of hari and they were mabyra They had they needed mitzvah in order to be. So they had ever they were pushing trying to mitzvah so that they should have some but they did they went 0 to 60 in a nancond. They literally went from being a and all of a sudden they're bringing a carbon and this and and all of a sudden there's and then where every single year was I mean all the schoolers everything that we know this all happened in such a short period of time. So he said the went from being so low to so high in such a short period of time not just physically where they were but spiritually says the that's the emphasis took the and he put them on the proverbial he brought them so high spiritually he lifted them up from the depths of the toma that they were So now they should be in where they should be able to see where they should be able to suggest that it's very very high. Rashi says why the why not any other bird says like when it carries its children it carries it on top of its wings all the other birds when they carry their children they carry them beneath them in their feet because they're worried about a bird that flies high in them it should come after them but this he's only worried about the person. He goes, "He flies higher than any other bird. There's no bird that flies as high as him." It's for that reason. It's for that reason that he puts him on top of his birds. I did the same exact thing. Didn't just go. They didn't just travel. This wasn't just an airplane quote unquote a Boeing. This was they were as high as you can possibly be. And he just he says it so beautifully. He says ordinarily when somebody finds himself in a in a dark place and he wants to creep out, it's not so easy to creep out. It could take time. It could be work. But I was thinking there says that the whole is is something that although it was an event was an episode that happened at one point in history but every single person can find himself in his own mit and every person has to leave his his own and a lot of the school that you find that happen and the idea of of of everything that of these are things that sometimes will repeat themselves in a person's life. So perhaps this idea as well that sometimes sees a person, he's struggling, he's in a very dark place. He's in a place of but there's a there's a will take a person and he'll lift him up to the highest of all highs just to bring him closer. This is something that we could all be to in our own personal but just to end on a on a more technical note and that is so what exactly is the again on wings of eagles right it comes from this but is the really the eagle so the truth is that it's it's a some seem to attribute this ner to the eagle whereas others seem to suggest that it's not in fact the raan when the raan talks about the neer. So the Ramban refers to it as the bald neer which would be very tempting for an amateur to say oh the bald neer it's the bald eagle right the neer is the eagle the bald eagle this is the national bird of the United States of America so it would seem to be a it would seem to be a very natural segue just laav for a moment so you know that the bald eagle that's the symbol it's the national bird it's the national animal of the United States of America it appears on some of your shekels that you have in your pocket so it's interesting that after the founding fathers decided that bold eagle should be the national bird. So Benjamin Franklin wrote the following letter. Apparently he wasn't so happy about it. I quote, he said, "I wish that the bald eagle had not been chosen as the representative of our country. He is a bird of bad moral character. He does not get his living honestly. You may have seen him perched on some dead tree. We're too lazy to fish for himself. He watches the labor of the fishing hawk. And when that diligent bird has at length taken a fish and is bearering it to its nest for the support of his mate and young ones, the bald eagle pursues him and takes it from him. Besides, he is a ranked coward. The little kingdom not bigger than a sparrow attacks him boldly and drives him out of the district. He is therefore by no means a proper emblem for the brave and honest dot dot dot of America. Now, his suggestion was that the turkey should be the the national bird of the United States. That's a whole another discussion. So my Mus I and I I stumbled upon this letter and I said, "Oh, look at this." So the eagle is first of all, he's not such a melik after all. I mean, Benjamin Franklin seemed to describe him as a rank coward. He's also a bird of bad moral character. So I mean, that would explain maybe why he's the symbol of of the non-cooser bird. But the truth is is all a mistake. Number one, the bald eagle is not bald. It has hair. It has white hair. And because it has white hair, based on the etmology of the word bald, he's known as the bald eagle. But it's not simply because he's mig that's not the reason that he's called the bald eagle. Regardless, this bald neer that the Ramban was describing was really bald. It really had no hair. But anyway, some do say that the that the neer is the ego. But it seems that the more conventional approach to what exactly the neer is is it's actually a vulture. It's specifically the grief and vulture. G r i ff o n. the grief and vulture. That seems to be what it is. I'll just tell you just I researched it a little bit. Just one interesting anecdote and that is that the grief and vulture flies very very high. See I left this at home have the wrong page but regardless it flies very high. In fact the highest recorded flight that a bird ever took was in the early 1970s. There was a a bird that crashed, believe it or not, with an airplane flying over West Africa. Its altitude was 37,000 ft. And it was none other than the grief and vulture. Rashi says that there's no that is Pak higher than Beser. It's the highest. Thus, it's able to take its children and not carry it underneath him. But rather put it on top. It's the grief and vulture which it seems most Risham held was the nash.