Why does the Torah add the (otherwise superfluous) phrase ? See Sifsei Chachamim - "ve'Zeh asher Lo Sochlu Meihem"?
What is the translation of all the Tamei birds?
The Living Torah 1 : "Nesher" - eagle; "Peres" - ossifrage; "Ozniah" - osprey; "Ra'ah" - white vulture; "Ayah" - black vulture; "Dayah" 2 - kite; "Oreiv" ? raven; "Bas ha'Ya'anah" 3 - a young ostrich; "Tachmas" - owl; "Shachaf" - gull; "Netz" - hawk; "Ko'ach" - falcon; "Yanshuf" - ibis; "Tinshemes" - swan; "Ka'as" - pelican; - "Rachamah" - magpie; Shalach" 4 - comorant; "Chasidah" - stork; "Anafah" - heron; "Duchifas" - hoopoe; 5 "Atalef" - bat.
The author gives alternative translations to some of the birds. Da'as Zekenim, Hadar Zekenim (on Pasuk 14) and Rosh ? "Nesher" is not an eagle, because an eagle has an Etzba Yeseirah (an extra claw), whereas a Nesher has no Siman Taharah - Chulin 61b. And "Oreiv" is not a raven. (This depends on the interprettion of [Doreis and] Etzba Yeseirah. Some say that it is a fourth claw, or higher than the other toes, or bigger than them, or extra, since the others are in front of wheres it is in back. See also Sichas Chulin p.421, who also cites different interpretations of 'Doreis'.)
Rashi (citing Chulin 63b): Ra'ah, Ayah and Dayah are one and the same. Refer to 14:13:1:1, and in Bava Metzi'a, 2a, he translates "Dayah" as a vulture.
Ba'al ha'Turim: So-called because it is cruel (Me'aneh) to its babies - See Chulin, 64b, which is why the Torah places it after the raven, which is also cruel to its babies - See Eruvin, 22a.
Rashi (Vayikra 11:7): Targum Onkelos (and Targum Yonasan) translates it as "Shalei Nuna", which is the acronym of 'Sholeh Nuna' (draws out fish) from the sea (a seagull).
Rashi: A wild rooster, which sports a double comb on its head.
Why does the Torah list the fish, which are sea-creatures, before the birds?
Oznayim la'Torah: It lists first the the animals, which Hashem formed out of earth, them the fish, which He formed out of water, and then the birds, which He formed out of mud (a mixture of the two).
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that the Torah forbids the Shechutah, and permits the Meshulachas (the one that is sent away). Perhaps it should be the reverse?
Moshav Zekenim: Living animals are not subject to Tum'ah. Therefore, the Metzora's Tum'ah does not affect the Meshulachas. It does however, affect the Shechutah, rendering it despicable and forbidden to eat.
Kidushin 57b #1: The Torah would not command to send away the bird to be a stumbling block for one who will hunt the bird and eat it, unaware that it was used for a Metzora.
Kidushin 57b #2 (according to R. Yochanan): It is unusual for living creatures to become forbidden.
Kidushin 57b #3 (according to Tana de'Bei R. Yishmael): The Torah writes "He shall send it towards the field" thereby equating the bird to a field, in that just as a field is permitted, so too, is the Meshulachas. 1
Even though the Pasuk also teaches us that the Metzora stands inside the city and sends it outside, the 'Hey' in "ha'Sadeh" is superfluous.
