Mesorah of Kosher Birds | Shiur by Rabbi Yehuda Schwartz, Author of Sefer Siach Haofos

Okay, thank you everybody for coming. Uh, I'd like to thank the for inviting me here to come uh and speak about this very uh interesting topic. Um, I've to learn in the RS ever since I've been learning this. So forem it's a cover to be. So I don't know how many people here you know you always have you're supposed to know the crowd before you speak about something. Um, I'm assuming some people here learned Tafi and for those that didn't, I'll give a basic background for how uh we know what birds are kasha in the tea and how we uh how we uh how what we do. So it's very clear that a animal is kosher based on if it has malag para if it chooses cut and has split hooves that's what makes a animal kosher. What makes a fish kosher? Snapasquez has fins and scales that makes a kasher. What makes a bird kasher? It's very not clear uh other than the names that are given in the so the say um the following in Paris many different names the names and that's it. There's no other indication of what makes something kasher. So if you know all these names then you're good. You know what's kasher and what's not. The problem is uh most of these names are fell into disuse a long time ago and we would have no idea what to do. Um we could we could uh try to get all this back but it's it and and try to learn the old languages and dig up some indications but it's a very it's a would be a very hard thing to do. So Kazal and the Mishna gives some indications of what makes a bird kasher and the Mishna says in um gave the following that is what does mean the give say various nuances but they all agree that darus means that a bird eats in a vicious or uh or a very aggressive way either that means ripping its prey attacking some sort of uh prey uh preying way on on on bigger birds or rodents or or similar creatures. That is what makes for sure that is a tammed bird. There are three other simum that the Mishna gives and that is zeic if it has a crop which is a enlargement in the esophagus that stores food. If it has a cork of a nicl which means that it could the innermost stomach has a coil layer that could be peeled or if it has a spa which means that its toe alignment is uneven. Rashi and the Ramban give different variations of that. But that's the that's the sim. However, the Gmorra says very clearly that that does not mean that if you find these sim that automatically means that the bird is either kosher or not that you could ascertain one way or another. It's very clear that a dus is tummy. That's for sure. Then the garra says that most bird non-coosher birds have three signs and some have two and some have one. Very vague. Again, Rashi understands the gar to mean that all other non-coosher birds are just theirs. They just have this aggressive behavior, but they have all the other sim. And therefore, knowing that the garra says that if you have a bird that has two sim um then you can as long as it's not an which is the only bird with two sim you're allowed to eat it. The problem is is that the Ramban has a whole different idea of how to learn the and he says that it's the opposite. A bird that has three sim tum is the general rule and the Ramban says this because he dissects he he talks about a trip that he actually dissected over 12 birds that are mentioned in the terrace to such as an eagle. Uh he doesn't mention an eagle, he mentions a vulture, he mentions a kite, he mentions uh ostrich, owls, he a bat the Ramban literally took all these birds apart and he says most birds do not have any more than one simmon of kash. Okay, so this is this is a that's a big mus and a lot older take sides. So by the way if uh if anything comes out unclear please ask questions. Uh I want to be as clear as possible. >> Considers a bad bird. >> Yes, he considers a bad a bird. Um almost all rishu consider a bad a bird. Um I'm not I'm not familiar with anyone who says clearly that it's not. Um even Rashi who doesn't learn that atal is a bad he says it's a different bird. So everybody agrees that a bat is a bird which which is we see that the Torah has a much broader understanding of what a non-coosher bird uh what a bird is. Right. Okay. So that's now even with this uh with this uh introduction we can see that the suga is a very very hard suga to use to actually apply to practically let's okay let's inspect the bird because Rashi has one opinion the Ramban has an opposing opinion um most side with the Ramban and the value of that is is that the Ramban says that if a bird has all three signs if it has a gizzard that can be peeled. If it has a crop and it has a uneven toe alignment, you can be rest assured that it is not a dus and therefore you'll be fine with all the sim. And therefore, for example, let's pick the chicken. The chicken has an uneven toe alignment. It has a longer toe in the front and one in the back. It has a very thick coiling layer in its gizzard which can be easily peeled. It has a crop and it is not the as far as we know. Therefore, even if we didn't know that if it's Darius or not, we just by the way its anatomical structure is set, we can assume that it's for sure not going to be Darius because um such a body is meant to process food in a non-dairous way. The reason why a gizzard could be peeled is because the stomach lining is much thicker because the bird is usually eating much smaller things, seeds, rocks, pebbles, not eating uh softer flesh. Um and the same goes for all the other. So who are the agree with the Ramban? It's Raan the Balamar the Ran and the Rajba the Mai and this is all quoted from which who was the Rashiva of Narva in the time of the Raan. So that's a big lineup. However, Rashi in and Sam Bam says uh regarding a story that the Gmorra records of a bird called a tarnalta agma. A tanagult agma is roughly translated as a swamp pen which actually check it up. There's still such a bird with that name today in English. Um it's a gala form which means that it's similar to a chicken in the sense that it's a fatter animal that only stays on the ground. It doesn't really fly but it hangs around in the marshes and it eats little fish sometimes. And the garra says that they considered that bird to be tahar and they ate it. Rashi and Tyus both both understand that and one day they saw that it was dy and they realized that they may have made a mistake. Most risham understand that the mistake was that the they the the gizzard was only able to be peeled with a knife and they understood that that would be considered cook of a nicl and now when they realized that it was theirs they obviously realized that that was the mistake that they made. However, Rashi learns that they actually all the three simus and yet they assumed that it wasn't theirs and then they found that it was. So Rashi says the following because of this mistake any bird that comes to us we might assume we can assume that it might be one day this understood it and they considered it to be and afterwards they saw that it's theirs. So basically they kazal realized that you can't we can't go based on these and therefore you need to do you need to find uh another way of of of catching getting a sim and rash. Therefore a person if he wants to know if a bird is kosher he needs to have a he needs to know by tradition that this bird is kosher that it's tar that our forefathers told us that is tar that is raj. Yeah. >> Is it is it the nature changed or doesn't understand what happened? >> So most understand that the nature did not change. It was it was uh >> mistake. >> It was it was it was a mistake and had on because Gomorrah actually has a sufficin if that's good or not. And the sha learns that this actually answered our question that it was not a that it was that that it was not a way of quantifying niklaf and it needs to be bias whether it was aggressive or not. >> Right. But they could have used the simum as an indication whether it would be aggressive because according to Mosim that would have been a way to know. >> So it was aggressive, >> right? >> Whether it or not I see it's aggressive. >> So then you obviously understand that you made a mistake in how you you you learned the yeah the is very clear that way. He says that that today we might and oh I was about to get to that that the miri says that who knows if we got the sim right. Maybe we don't understand how the siman work and therefore we got to be very careful and therefore we need to have a messiah >> and according to the ram you clear it has all three sim >> the ramban says very clearly if it has all three sim you do not need a messiah >> but what happens if you see a vidaris then not clear he >> so then maybe then maybe you made a mistake but it doesn't but again but that doesn't mean as a rule of thumb that you can't rely on the sim again relative had they had a messiah on the road. >> So it seems that they didn't have a mess, right? And the Gomorrah never mentions that you need a mess and a bird. The Gomorrah says that you could be makeo. You you if you have a messiah on a bird, then you don't have to worry about the sim. For example, a duck, by the way, does not have a crop. It doesn't have a zeic, which means it doesn't have all three signs. And yet we eat it because it was a mess from the times of before that it's a kasher or a bird. So we don't have to worry about that. As long as we have a mess, that's for sure that the Gumar says the question is if we don't have a miser but it looks like it's kasha from all the sim can we eat it just based on that and that says we need a miser that's that's summ of of eggs yeah that's that's a different issue >> it's not the same >> not the same right yeahis and and the ra both say that it's either we use it in the raan himself says So it's very clear that in this in this in this yes right >> correct that's the that's the main point of this uh yeah um so the so we just mentioned one reason why we need a ms but that's rashi rashi is because we can't rely on how we understand sim also points out that since this is so complicated there are so many since there are so many opinions let's just not get involved. Let's just go with Misera and that's the best way to go. The rush uh says that he thinks that really the the rashim are correct that you do not need a messer. However, he says at the end he brings rash and he says you should follow rashi. Now, it's a little interesting why um and the Marishal points out a story that the rush himself records in Chouas, which might explain why um the rush adopted this idea of meeting a miser as well because it seems that the Tanagalta Dagma wasn't the only story that happened. Um the rush writes in Chuis that he you know I think most people know this that the rush actually grew up in Germany and because of uh different issues forced he was forced to flee and get and go to Spain. When he came to Spain besides getting involved in the community there he made contacts with another country called at the time called Provence which was more connected to Spain and there were a lot of good there as well. Rebroim at the time was was uh was was one of the good there and the rush mentions that he has heard that in Provence they're eating a bird called the sugana. The sugana is in French and is the saconia which would normally be translated as the stork and the rush says I can't understand how it's possible that people in proven are eating this bird. This bird is literally according to rashi and many other is one is called the which is one of the birds mentioned in the terra as a t bird. How could people eat such a such a bird? And he says it must be because people made a mistake in how to look at the sim and therefore they ended up uh they ended up uh that they're eating this bird and it's a total mistake and we have to we have to get rid of this uh we have to be very clear about this. Now the rabbin it seems responsive because iner talks about this uh sugana and he says you know I'm hearing that people are upset at this at this bird the sugana and I think it's perfectly fine and uh it's has all the sim and I don't understand the problem and he says people think it's a that it's a everybody always makes mistakes in how to translate the birds so this is a very very interesting mus um there are people that suggest that it was actually a language barrier There's a sugana. We know that a C and a G could in French could have could be very tricky. And there's two birds. There's a saconia which is the stork and the siggonia which is the swan. And it seems that it's very likely that it was actually a swan being eaten. And so no one was really eating trafe. But uh but but we see that the rush was really being concerned that what's what's going on here? So the rush adopts this idea of needing a mess. Okay. Now the mahab and paskins that you need a messiah bas this is the rush this is the tour he pask this way the one thing that the mahab uh does here is that he gives you a little leeway and that's the balamarita the balamar says that being that the only need for a mro is because it might be dyus if it has a flat beak like a duck and webbed feet it's for sure can't be theirs and that much you don't have to you don't have to need you don't need a messiah for and the mahabas this way the rama argues is he says miser it's a rule of thumb we cannot play any games and therefore he holds that you need to have a miser no matter what okay so getting to the next question what is a miser so we see from that the main reason why we need a mess is because we it might be not kosher you never know so the question is discuss does that mean that you heard it from someone like pepe like you know your rebi told you like this is our mess or did you find it in a safer and you did all the research and you know that it's kasher is it or not? So each one there's opinions on on everything with in this regard. The the way the shock understands it uh says that being that it's only a way to know what's kasha and what's not. If your community is just unaware of a mira they don't have any specific way to understand if this bird is kasha or not you can rely on a different community's mess. However, if your community has been that this bird is not kosher, then we follow the Russia's rule that even in if in provenance they felt that the the the stork maybe was not kosher, it was kosher then but it if you live in Spain and you know that it's and you have a that it's not kosher, you can't follow it. So that opens us up to a lot of information because again there were birds that were only you know in certain countries and we can sometimes uh follow uh certain community uh to know if something is kasher or not. Most piskin go with this. There are pisk especially the ekish pkim that are not so happy with this. Um and said that no every community has to have their own mess but most place can disagree with that and therefore that would work. Um as a chuva that you could make any mistakes in any names and therefore uh he says that you need to have someone telling you with with with showing you a bird very clearly that this is the bird that's eaten. Um but the writes very clearly that if there's a list of miseras and you know that it's the right bird and you're clear then then it's fine. So it's the uh says like so um the min in the the kash organizations is to be m to need a very very clear messiah but it's worth knowing that it's not a very uh clear thing. Now the bigger question is um what what is a misera? Meaning you have a messa that a chicken is kosher. Well chickens could look different from place to place. A duck could look different from place to place. What does it mean that you have a mess? So um the first people that speak about this is uh the in the 1600s uh the first where he discusses a different type of duck and he says that if something looks very different than what you're used to you cannot rely on the previous miser for all you know it's a completely different species. However that's a very that's still very gray. So the later give more indications. One of them is that the garra points out that what makes a non-coosher min to for example you have an ay is a raven or crow how about a hooded crow how about magpie these things are very similar and the garra says that if it's venidma if it looks like it and it hangs around it and the way some actually learn it means that it hybridizes then that is considered the same min so therefore and understand that if they hang around each other to a point that could that they can hybridize that for sure means that it's the same men and therefore you don't have to worry that it's a different messiah other people are very against this idea and they say that no you have to know for sure that it looks exactly the same and if you came to a place where uh the the only available if there the only available chicken there looks completely different than what you used to that's just part of gullis that you're just not going to have a miser so there are people that took a very hardline approach there are people that were or so usually not those are >> the what >> correct oh okay it's a very good point and so the there is a that says as well and the question is if we passing like that and he was asking that um the garra say only to make a bird so the question is could we use that indication to know that that a similar to bird if two if two birds are similar that you can make that you consider them to So um then actually says no but he does say if they hybridize it's fine. He says but if they look like each other that's not good but if they hybridize it's fine. Um the the uh um the fure and many other learn that it is good enough even for so that's that's a in itself. Okay. So that's uh that's the basic outline of what the parameters are. If we could have a if we have a miser today, most cautious organizations follow the idea that if they hybridize to a point that they produce viable offspring, which means that they could actually that the ne that the that the that the offspring is fertile, then we know for sure that it's the same species. If not, then we're going to have a much more uh uh then it's going to be much more complicated. >> The offspring will >> be able to have have other children. Correct? Because the Ramban and the Danzra and others say that one of the that something is clim that uh is that the terra made that there's no km to climb in the world which means the climb can't last. You put a dunkey and a and a horse together you're going to get a mule. The mule is going to be sterile. You're not going to be able to have you're not going to be able to have more mules. So in so so if something cannot produce viable offspring that's assuming that it's completely two different meaning. >> Now the bigger question is >> h genetically modified birds. >> Okay. So the from updated genetically modifying birds with other with genetics from other species is extremely hard because the um uh birds expel would be okay. >> Yes. Um yes the and the reason is because what are you doing? You're not you're not you're not mixing in any >> right? So there are people that discuss that but again it won't work being that gen genetically modifying a bird only works within its own kind. So even though initially was very very nervous about this uh he said that bringing that it only works within its own kind it's impossible. Actually there are many birds today that are so fat that they cannot hybridize naturally and they uh artificially inseminate them. That's literally a lot of turkeys that's exactly how they're that how they're raised. So we would have a big problem if uh if we didn't hold that way. So so uh yeah. So being that I just mentioned >> what >> summarize someone comes and tells me that he knows when he was growing up this is a kind of bird and he shows me the birds. So the Marel says, right? So the Marel says, >> so the Marel there are those that argue, but the most pisk who say that as long as he's a daikon, which means that he knows what he's talking about, >> um then he then he for sure can be he can be relied on as long as he's saying that this was undisputed in wherever I came from >> and that's considered a miser. >> Okay, so that's a that's a longer discussion. Um it's uh some people hold that it is the same. The shak says it's the same. So there are well yeah well we won't get into that but >> yeah that's for another year. >> So the shock says it's exactly the same. There might be a difference because we might have a ma against it. That that's that's a question. So again if we have a mess against then it's for sure a problem. But if we don't have any miser against something uh for example quail was not a very common bird shed anywhere but in Poland for some reason they had a hard time with chickens and they were actually shuckling quail for for a while and the polish what >> yeah but >> right correct but you're learning that in the you need a mess for that as well right that's the that's the whole discussion so there was a famous who came who was a redsk and he came and he told everybody I'm telling telling you we my family she did it for at least 150 years and uh and therefore uh a lot of people do eat quail today some people are a little nervous that it was just one person who says we need we need a lot of them I'm saying so that gets into more controversy but but that's uh you know that's the that's the mainline approach okay the bigger question is what about Turkey what's the problem with Turkey Turkey as far as we know was discovered in America it was brought back to Europe roughly in the year 1517 um as early as the year 1620 it's discussed in different uh that Kalis eats it with no mention of if there's a messiah or not the bach just talks about yeah the tag that hang around that are that look like this and he describes the turkey the m of the many other many other uh pkin from that time and there's a safer called domestic are printed in the mid600s that writes that you're for sure allowed to eat turkey because it has all three sim like a chicken. No mention of miser. Now, no one really spoke about this if you need a miser if you don't. In the 1800s when the whole question of miseran chickens came up, all of a sudden then people started asking, wait a minute, why are we eating turkey? By that time, people knew very clearly that turkey was not something that came from Turkey. It wasn't something that came from India. It was something that came from America. And what's what's going on? Why are we allowed to eat turkey? So, there are many explanations given. I I like breaking them up into three. The ones that hold that there was really was a messera. The ones that hold that you don't need a messera and there are ones that hold um that there's a cut off point. So we'll discuss all three positions. There were those and it could be that this was true that there were rumors that this came from India and there were Jews in India that had a mess on it. Some people wanted to say that it came from America but the Sashvatam were there. Things like that that were all rumors. um that were not substantiated. So no one really uh goes with those reasons today. Um another reason that's given by is that the only reason why we need a messiah is because it might be dy. But if something was around for 300 years, we don't have to worry that it's being darus. Uh the did not like that reason. He says on your farm it's not dy. Go watch it in the wild for 300 years. You go see if then it's theirs. So the did not like that reason. Um the classic reason given um this was suggested by the David Eisenstein um brings this down that even though we said that the pas like Rashi and says that you need a messiah in the time of the still was not accepted as we pointed out that there are most say you do not need a mess and by the way the and the on the right that really the is most that you don't need a mess but we follow Rash's opinion to need a regardless. So it's very interesting that this is actually treated as a now the preesh he actually writes that is like and you need a but most that you do not need a it's a because of that not everybody was the writ that's good enough you don't need a writes this in and there are other from that time as well he writes this as well in the Sodaka and uh there are people that were make. So it's no surprise that in 1517 if a Turkey shows up in Europe that there were many people that were following the Marshall that did not require a messiah. Now that things changed do we go back and we say listen we know that there wasn't a mess. Do we go back? So the niv has a chandis and the nitiv writes the niv actually was ascertaining that it's possible that this was a complete mistake. Um, the Nitsv seems to have taken the position that the reason why people were eating turkey was actually because like it's named Turkey that there's a similar bird in Turkey that was eaten by the yender called the guinea fell. If you see a picture of it, it's definitely different than a turkey but pretty close to a turkey more so than a chicken. And the siren were eating a deer. And it's possible that there was some confusion. And the nitiv says that even if there was a confusion when it was when people were starting to eat it today that it's so accepted you do not have to stop eating it because that this that you need a mess is only because you know we could get something wrong something may happen we might make make a mistake so there's a ma we have a like a almost like a rule that we don't do we don't eat any as he writes we don't eat any new bird without a but if something uh is was something that we were eating already. As long as we don't have a ray that it's user, we could continue eating it and no problem. This is what the nitiv writes. So some people are a little nervous to accept this nitiv. However, being that it's very possible that the reason why the turkey was accepted is because it was it was the it was panon by many piskin who held that you do not need a mess. And again the first safer that says that a turkey is kosher says that because it has three sim and that's all you need to make that it's kasher. So obviously was actually based on that it's kasha without a need for a messiah and therefore today that doesn't change and that's a big but that um that puts the perspective that um we that it's it's a and we have to take that and and when we discuss a new a new man or whether there's a how how we will be uh in light of the fact that this is a and a mda that we don't that we don't start eating new ones. What is the schlurkey? >> I I looked very hard to find the schlah. Um the the family of the harowitses don't eat turkey. There are a few families. The helers also the helers are of the tus. They both say that they have a kabala from from their grandparents not to eat turkey. I I don't know where it comes from. I I don't find and we didn't find the we still have their tavas and it doesn't say it in their um it could be that it's the family of the shalah and the family of tam accepted this um I find it very hard because again no one discussed Turkey till the 1860s why there's no miser it was only a question that came up later it's a big kish that the schla who lived in the in the late 1500s or the 1600s would discuss it >> why until 1860 to ask this question why >> so no one no one asked this question until there were other questions regarding other birds so what happened is in the 1840s um there were new chickens that showed up from China that looked very different >> what year >> well it was let's say it was the was accepted by the year 1600 yeah >> 1600 at 1600 turkeys came >> so it seems that people understood that there was a miser at that point there was a miser that everybody was eating it and they assumed that it was coming from >> right right the question is who was the first person to make that decision but once someone made that decision the well again till the 1800s there was very little discussion about miserero other than one issue. There was one type of duck that people were talking about if it has a misera and that was in the late 1600s. But there was the only time that this issue exploded was in the 1860s with regard to chickens. Um the chickens that showed up in Europe in the in the 1840s50s um looked very different and some people were were were skeptical to say that they were chickens at all. Um and now today all our chickens are descended from these from these chickens. So we obviously follow came from China. >> The the coin chicken that showed up in that came from China in the 1840s um was subsequently mixed in with all our breeds and because chicken >> I I don't know what you mean by type. >> The two you just mentioned one >> there are at least 30 >> 30 in the whole >> unless they look radically different such as let's say there's a silky chicken you can look it up looks radically different because it has black skin. >> Most cautious organizations don't eat it. turkey. >> So the wild turkey the Oh, you got actually gives a ha too because it's clearly the same. >> Well, >> no, I understand that. I I I only I'm one track minded in that sense as well. I mean, >> the guinea fell underneath >> Guinea fell. Okay, so the guinea fell. So that's a good that's a good point. The guinea fell there was a in Morocco, but it was disputed in Tunisia and the in in in Europe, they were hearing conflicting reports. So therefore theam said not to eat it. So today Ashkanazm don't eat the guinea fell and some understand that it's like again an opposing maser that we don't eat something but if we just don't have a m something for exactly for for example partridge pardridge was something only available in Friday countries and when people started coming to and they saw Friday meeting partridge um they accepted the Friday ms and today there it's not a very common bird especially in America but people are of many pe say you could be sumridge even though we in Europe they did not have it >> why did not eat turkey. >> Again, I I don't know. I I couldn't find any material on the schlaw with regard to turkey. >> I heard it was because he saw them acting on >> Right. So, okay. So, there's a Okay, so I I actually found this today. There is a RV in the 18 in the 1930s >> who says that he married a woman from the family of the Schla. And that's what his wife told him. His wife told him that that's why that the Schla saw the turkey being dus. That's what his wife said. I I don't I don't know exactly anything more than that. >> There are chickens that are also dy >> so chickens are not okay. So >> chicken fights, right? >> Okay. So that very very important point. Um uh the question is what is dyus? So again there are three in either that it attacks its prey alive and says that it attacks prey it means big prey. It has to look like a very vicious attack. If it's small uh prey, he says even a mouse uh the rabbi time says is not considered a darus. Um the rashi says that it rips its prey between its beak and its claws and and rips it apart. That's considered a dire. And the ramban says that it that it catches its prey alive with its talons and and kills it that way. None of these uh behaviors are exist in a chicken. If they peck at each other and they even kill each other, by the way, doves do that too. There there are there you could there are there are videos of doves poking at each other's brains out and that's that's not called theirs. Um, not only that, there's a Gumar that says the Gumar Baka says that they one time, you know, we kill a shar, right? A shar that that that gores uh and kills we we kill it. >> I'm not aware of it, but the garumar says that they found a tarnle that was that killed a baby. Rashi says that it poked its its head out and and the garra says they gave the tarnle skil and yet we still eat tarnle today. So the fact that turkeys or chickens can even kill that doesn't mean that they're darous. That's a very important point. >> We will get into the different reasons for the turkey. >> So okay. So so again let's wrap up the reasons for the turkey. The main reasons for the to the turkey is because for whatever reason it was accepted three are enough and the says once something is accepted we don't go backwards. That is the reason why uh we eat turkey today. The same would apply to chickens. There are people that have a question with regard to certain chickens and many can point out that the natives uh uh point could be uh could be brought here as well. That be being that a that a chicken is something that was accepted by all of Claris always unless a new chicken comes on the scene that we have to discuss that we have to worry about then we could discuss it. But once it's once it is accepted and they they all look like chickens at the end of the day um then the minig today is to be makeup. >> Canadian goose. >> So the okay so the Canadian goose um its body looks very similar to the old goose that was eaten. Um it can hybridize with an oldw world goose. So according to the pisk that you can hybrid that hybridization is a good enough uh uh point of reference to know that it's the same men. Um there are many place in rebels can know for sure that they're that they're considered the same men and you don't need a special mess in it. Pretty >> aggressive. >> Again, aggressive doesn't mean that it's theirs. All birds can be aggressive especially when you when you try to take their young. >> No. So the uh most ps can point out that you do not need a messiah to do unless you want to eat eggs. So as long as it's there's no ria that it is um if you look in the say for he brings down a lot of especially from today's day and age of that any uh bird that has any indication that we would say that it may be kasher then you could do then you could do on it. Um but if it's let's say a seagull or a hawk or anything like that that we know for sure is not kosher then you can't do. Anything else about the turkeys? >> That's that. Yes, that's that's the main thing with Turkey. >> So, when I go to a restaurant, which chicken should I avoid? >> The only the only um there are only two chickens today that let's say the u would be very skeptical with about and that is the silky chicken, which is a chicken that it's its entire body is dark purple or almost black. Um and the aracuna chicken, which lays green eggs. So if you go to a farm and you see green eggs then that is that is a questionable chicken. Um there are those that hold there's there's a reb of mine who holds that it's completely mutter uh all chickens but that's not that's not the necessarily accepted opinion. >> They can but they look just look right now very different. So if they come from yeah it's it's it is a but that is but that is a >> chickens every single 30 chickens. we have on chickens and they all >> so no we have on chickens and we could talk about the chickens that we for sure have a misera on for >> correct let's say the main misera that we have on a chicken is the leg horn chicken which all our white eggs come from um that is that is the strongest miser about any chicken that we have everything else is because they're similar >> what was that that bird that was making waves >> so that was the breckle right that was the breckle so the breckle right so that yeah that that's a discussion um there is a problem with trying to figure out if something can hybridize and that is is that even if you have the same species, but for whatever reason a chicken grew up only around brown chickens and you take a white chicken, you put it in its pen, it won't recognize that at its as its own kind. If you raise it in a mixed crowd, right, like today, you know, if you have if someone grows up in a color blind society, then he'll be less a little less particular, but if you grow up in a more sheltered society, you're going to be more careful. So, um, the breckle was a very isolated bird, which is not necessarily recognizable to other chickens, but if you put them in in places where they're where they're very diverse, then they would hybridize. So, it's it's uh they also have black feet. Most of our chickens have yellow feet. So, there were there were a few questions on it. Um, but there it's not really it's not really such a popular chicken because it doesn't really taste good. It's a much more of a leaner chicken. >> That one duck. >> What? that one duck that you're mentioning, tell me what I was. >> I I did not mention the Muscovi duck, but we can talk about it. Yeah. So, the Muscoi duck is a an American duck. It was found in America. It was never um known in Europe. And if it hybridizes with a regular malard duck that you that you see in the park, what >> it cannot produce viable offspring. The the offspring is sterile. >> So, so some people thought Yeah, there it was not. It was not called the MScoi. Yeah, it was. Yeah, they although in Moscow they did have them. They they they wanted them. But so so that is a classic example of a of a duck that could for sure eat because the makab says that you're allowed to eat any duck because you know that it's not dyus because it has a flat beak and and has has a webbed feet. But Ashkanazim uh it seems like there should not be a messiah on it. However, um the nitiv was actually seemingly to be writing about this uh duck because at for a long time it was accepted to be eaten in America and the reason is because the in Charlotte were were mata the bird and then it spread to the Ashkanazm in New York and for a few days people for like 40 years people were eating it. So the mitzv has it sad to say that if people were already eating it then they could continue eating it just like the turkey >> not enough >> right because we know that the msara is not a maser we know that it's a it's a based on we know that it's because >> turkey >> correct but we all ate it we but we're already eating it that's what is saying we already eat it >> correct we can't take a new thing that's based on we can't we have to work with our rules when we want to eat something Wow. >> Correct. But it was only in a few communities. So that's the question. Up till today there's still argument about this in there were a few cases organizations that were that was that were giving a ha to it. No no ha in America was giving it. So >> so pheasants are um it was a very expensive bird. So it was very hard to still today. So it was very hard to uh to get a hold of it. In Germany, it seems that there was a miser in it and it seems to be the pissi mentioned in the garumar as one of the most expensive birds. Um, Raisha has a chua specifically about a pheasant and he said that he asked a few German rabbanum and they said they don't remember such a thing. Um, and then what cuz it was expensive. Correct. Um, and there are other but there were other that came later after was written that they said the says that he knows for sure that it was eaten in in other places. So today it's that's that's more of a controversial bird because there seems to be a miser on it but Raisha already says that you can't just be sent on a name like we got to be very clearly you know we got to be able to see it and it's a question if it was the green pheasant or the common pheasant maybe it's the same in anyway so you don't have to worry about it so that's that's a big question there are there are those that are makeel the standard uh the standard mahalas mak so it it sounds like from what people are interested I could I I do have a list here of the birds that are I have a list of of of four of four types of messaras. I have the completely acceptable miseras that no one argues about. The ones that are almost uh fully accepted but there were always they were a little question they were questionable. The more controversial misaras and then there are miseras that um we know from people were eating but today there is no community that claims to have such a mess and following not to uh count something written in a safer as a ma no community eats them today. So the the the the the birds that are have a unquestionable messair are the grey lag goose, the malard duck, the pecking duck, uh the sparrow. If anybody wants wants wants to eat one, there's a clear misair on it. Um the common Yeah, they're tiny. Um the common pigeon or turtle dove and the leg horn chicken. These are very clear. There's a very clear mess on these birds. Um now uh the birds that are included in that uh I'm sorry the birds that are accepted uh you know broadly among at least 90% of clarity are um all ant geese that are similar to the grey legs such as the talos goose which actually is what okay yeah so the talos goose um the the runner duck the Philippine duck um all all um all common versions of partridge uh kernix quail and all common versions of chicken and the turkey. The ones that are more more controversial, which is each one is a discussion in itself, is the Muscovi duck, the teal duck, uh the peacock, believe it or not, uh the pheasant, the guinea foul, and more exotic breeds of chicken. And the birds that we know for sure there was a miserero on but it's again today we no one has one is like the Chinese swan goose, the swan, the shell duck, the woodcock, the white-bellyied swallows, uh the flamingo and um and the grass. So these are birds that we definitely know that people were eating at some point. Today we do not have such miser. Okay. >> The best sian chicken is probably the one you eat every night. the boy. It's called a