1)

(a)Rabban Gamliel states in a Bereisa that a bird which is Doreis - is Tamei (like we learned in our Mishnah).

(b)When he goes on to say that a bird that has an extra claw, a crop and whose Kurk'van is easy to peel is Tahor he means - besides the fact that it is not Doreis, as he already stated.

(c)According to Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Tzadok, in the latter case one still needs to ensure that the bird is indeed not Doreis - by placing it on a taut rope and observing whether it parts its claws two on one side of the rope and two on the other (in which case it is Tamei [because that is the way it holds down its prey]) or not (in which case it is Tahor).

2)

(a)Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar declares a bird that catches food that one throws it from the air in its beak - Tamei.

(b)To reconcile this with the fact that a Tahor bird called Tzipr'sa does this too - Abaye explains that, whereas the latter puts it down before eating it, the birds referred to by Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar eat it immediately.

(c)Initially, we connect Acherim (according to whom we can tell the status of a bird from the birds with which it nests), with Rebbi Eliezer (whom we already cited earlier, and) - who considers a starling Tamei, because it nests with ravens.

(d)We nevertheless reconcile Acherim with the Chachamim as well - because he is referring to where the bird in question also resembles the bird with which it nests.

3)

(a)We learned in our Mishnah that the wings of a Kasher locust must cover the majority of its body. Rav explains this to mean the majority of its length. It might also mean - the majority of its circumference.

(b)Rav Papa therefore - requires both, before a locust can be declared Kasher.

(c)Rebbi Eliezer b'Rebbi Yossi in another Beraisa (in support of the Tana Kama) learns from the word "Lo" (in the Pasuk in Shemini [in connection with the locusts] "asher Lo Kera'ayim mi'Ma'al le'Raglav", and which is written with an 'Alef', but read with a 'Vav') that - even if a locust is born without jumping legs, and they grow only later, it is Kasher.

(d)Abaye translates Zachal discussed in a Beraisa as Iskarin. The Tana cites Zachal - as the species of locusts whose jumping legs grow only later.

4)

(a)The Pasuk names four kinds of Kasher locusts (Arbeh [Guvai, in Aramaic], Sol'am [Rishon], Chargol [Nipul] and Chagav [Gadi'an]) - adding by each one the word "le'Miyno" or "le'Miyneihu".

(b)The first Tana includes an additional species from each "le'Miyno/le'Miyneihu" (Tzipores Keramim from that of Arbeh, Yuchna Yerushalmis from that of Sol'am, Artzuvya from that of Chargol and Harzavnis from that of Chagav).

(c)What the ...

1. ... Sol'am and Yuchna Yerushalmis have that the Arbeh and Tzipores K'ramim do not is - a clean-shaven head,.

2. ... Chargol and Artzuvya have that the precious two sets do not is - a tail ...

(d)Chagav and Harzavnis differ in looks from the previous three sets in that - they both have a long head.

(e)The four above sets of locusts differ in the way that we just described. What they all have in common however, is - the four Simanim specified by our Mishnah.

5)

(a)Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael too, learns something from each of the subsequent species mentioned by the Torah. Bearing in mind that the Torah has already taught us the Heter to eat ...

1. ... Arbeh and (from "le'Miyno") Tzipores Keramim, he learns from "le'Miyneihu" of Sol'am - that even the species Ushchaf (as well as Yuchna Yerushalmis) which has a clean-shaven head (like it does), is Kasher as well.

2. ... Arbeh and Sol'am, he learns from "le'Miyneihu" of Chargol that - Karsefes and Shalchanis (as well as Artzuvya) which have a tail (like it does), are permitted, too.

3. ... the previous three, he learns from "le'Miyneihu" of Chagav that - locusts that have a long head (such as the Harzavnis) are also permitted.

(b)When Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael says 'Eilu K'lalei K'lalos ve'Eilu P'ratei P'ratos', he means that - there are a number of K'lalim in the Pasuk ("le'Miyneihu") and a number of P'ratim ("Sol'am" and "Chagav"), which come to teach us ...

(c)... not just one thing each like the first Tana of the first Beraisa explained, but a number of things (and we will explain his opinion in more detail shortly).

6)

(a)Based on the Pasuk "Asher Lo Kera'ayim Tocheilu ... Arbeh (plus the other three) ... le'Miyno (and le'Miyneihu)", Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael learns the above from a K'lal u'P'rat u'K'lal, that it is not the individual Simanim that each one possesses that causes the Torah to permit it, but ...

(b)... the four common Simanim that they all four share.

(c)Finally, Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael learns from ...

1. ... "Chagav" that - only a locust that is called Chagav (which all the above are) is Kasher, even if it has the four Simanim.

2. ... "le'Miyneihu" (both of which are otherwise superfluous) that - the fact that it is called "Chagav" alone will not suffice, unless it also has the four Simanim.

7)

(a)Rav Acha'i asks on the 'K'lal u'P'rat u'K'lal' that - since we are learning the four Simanim from Arbeh, Sol'am and Chargol (and no longer from Chagav), how can we include locusts with long heads from the K'lal u'P'rat u'Ch'lal?

(b)We suggest that perhaps, according to Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael, it will suffice for the Limud to resemble the P'rat in some respects (even if it does not resemble them in all respects) - because perhaps he considers the last K'lal to be the crucial one, whereas from the first one we include anything that partially resembles the last K'lal.

(c)We counter this with 'I Hachi, Chargol Nami de'Shavi l'hu, Lo Lichtov ... ' - meaning that, in that case, we will also be able to learn Chargol from Arbeh and Sol'am, both of which have the four Simanim, even though it differs in that it has a tail ...

(d)... a proof that - the Torah needs to write Sol'am, to counter the Kashya that it is different in that it has a tail (in other words, the Limud must resemble the P'rat in all respects). And the reason for this is because Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael goes after the first K'lal, and the last K'lal comes to include whatever is similar to the P'rat in all respects). By the same token, we cannot learn Chagav from the others because it has a long head.

8)

(a)Rav Acha'i therefore explains that in fact, Sol'am is superfluous too - because we can learn it from Arbeh which (like it) it has no tail) and Chargol which (like it) has a clean-shaven head.

(b)And the Torah mentions it to teach us that - a locust with a long head is Kasher, too.

(c)Despite the fact that a Sol'am does not have a long head, we learn it from there - via the principle Im Eino Inyan, since it is superfluous (because its other specifications, as we just explained, we already know from Arbeh and Chargol).