## Chullin Daf 66a

###### Chullin 66a:1
[Chullin 66a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:1)

בְּמַאי קָמִיפַּלְגִי תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַב וְתָנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל? בְּרֹאשׁוֹ אָרוֹךְ קָמִיפַּלְגִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **With regard to what do the *tanna* of the study hall,** who taught the first *baraita* above, **and the *tanna* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael disagree? They disagree with regard to** a grasshopper **whose head is long.** According to the *tanna* of the study hall it is prohibited, and according to the *tanna* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael it is permitted.


###### Chullin 66a:2
[Chullin 66a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:2)

תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַב סָבַר: ״אֲשֶׁר לוֹ כְּרָעַיִם״ – כָּלַל, ״אַרְבֶּה״ ״סׇלְעָם״ ״חַרְגֹּל״ ״חָגָב״ ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ – פָּרַט, כְּלָל וּפְרָט אֵין בַּכְּלָל אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁבַּפְּרָט, דְּמִינֵיהּ – אִין, דְּלָאו (דמיניה) [מִינֵּיהּ] – לָא, וּמְרַבֵּי דְּדָמֵי לֵיהּ מִשְּׁנֵי צְדָדִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **The *tanna* of the study hall holds** that the previous verse, permitting all species **“which have jointed legs”** (Leviticus 11:21), is **a generalization.** The species ***arbeh*, *solam*, *ḥargol*,** and ***ḥagav*,** and the phrase **“after its kinds,”** that appears after each, are **a detail.** As a rule, in any instance of **a generalization and a detail, the generalization includes only that which is** spelled out **in the detail.** Therefore, only grasshoppers **of the** same **species as** those detailed in the verse **are** kosher. Grasshoppers **that are not of the** same **species as** them are **not** kosher. **And** the phrase “after its kinds” **amplifies** the *halakha* to include grasshoppers **that are similar to** the named species **in two aspects,** i.e., that are very similar to them. Since all the named species have short heads, grasshoppers with long heads are forbidden.


###### Chullin 66a:3
[Chullin 66a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:3)

תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל סָבַר: ״אֲשֶׁר לוֹ כְרָעַיִם״ – כָּלַל, ״אַרְבֶּה״ ״סׇלְעָם״ ״חַרְגֹּל״ ״חָגָב״ – פָּרַט, ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ – חָזַר וְכָלַל, כְּלָל וּפְרָט וּכְלָל – אִי אַתָּה דָן אֶלָּא כְעֵין הַפְּרָט, וּמְרַבֵּי כֹּל דְּדָמֵי לֵיהּ בְּחַד צַד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
By contrast, **the *tanna* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael holds** that the phrase **“which have jointed legs”** is **a generalization.** The species ***arbeh*, *solam*, *ḥargol*,** and ***ḥagav*** are a **detail.** And by the phrase **“after its kinds”** after each species, **it then generalized** again. In any instance of **a generalization, and a detail, and a generalization, you may deduce** that the verse is referring **only** to items **similar to the detail. And** the verse therefore **amplifies** the *halakha* to include **any** grasshopper **that is similar to** the named species **in** even **one aspect,** i.e., that has the four signs listed in the mishna, even if its head is long.


###### Chullin 66a:4
[Chullin 66a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:4)

וְהָא לָא דָּמֵי כְּלָלָא קַמָּא לִכְלָלָא בָּתְרָא? כְּלָלָא קַמָּא – ״אֲשֶׁר לוֹ כְרָעַיִם״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, דְּאִית לֵיהּ אֱכוֹל, דְּלֵית לֵיהּ לָא תֵּיכוֹל. כְּלָלָא בָּתְרָא – עַד דְּשָׁווּ בְּאַרְבָּעָה סִימָנִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** how can this be considered a generalization, a detail, and a generalization? **The first generalization is not similar to the latter generalization.** In **the first generalization, the Merciful One states: “Which have jointed legs,”** indicating that you may **eat** a grasshopper **that has** jointed legs, but **you may not eat** one **that does not have** jointed legs, irrespective of any other sign. However, **the latter generalization:** “After its kinds,” indicates that no grasshopper is kosher **unless it shares** all **four signs** with the named species.


###### Chullin 66a:5
[Chullin 66a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:5)

תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בִּכְלָלֵי וּפְרָטֵי כִּי הַאי גַוְונָא דָּאֵין, וּדְאָמְרִינַן נָמֵי בְּעָלְמָא דְּדָאֵין תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בִּכְלָלֵי וּפְרָטֵי כִּי הַאי גַוְונָא מֵהָכָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **The *tanna* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael deduces** from **generalizations and details like this case,** even if the generalizations are not similar to one another. The Gemara notes: **And** that **which we also say generally, that the *tanna* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael deduces** from **generalizations and details like this case,** is derived **from here.**


###### Chullin 66a:6
[Chullin 66a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:6)

אָמַר מָר: אִי שְׁמוֹ ״חָגָב״, יָכוֹל אֵין בּוֹ כׇּל הַסִּימָנִין הַלָּלוּ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״לְמִינֵהוּ״ – עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ בּוֹ כׇּל הַסִּימָנִין הַלָּלוּ. אֵין בּוֹ כׇּל הַסִּימָנִין הַלָּלוּ מֵהֵיכָא תֵּיתֵי? ״אַרְבֶּה״ וְ״חַרְגּוֹל״ כְּתִיב!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes the *baraita* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael: **The Master said: If its name** must be ***ḥagav*,** one **might** have thought that any *ḥagav* is kosher, even if **it does not have all these** four **signs.** Therefore, **the verse states: “After its kinds,”** indicating that it is not kosher **unless it has all these signs.** The Gemara asks: **From where would this be derived,** that a grasshopper is kosher even if **it does not have all these signs?** How could one entertain this possibility? ***Arbeh* and *ḥargol* are written** beforehand, indicating that all kosher grasshoppers must share the signs they both possess.


###### Chullin 66a:7
[Chullin 66a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:7)

אִי לָא כְּתִיב ״סׇלְעָם״ – כִּדְקָאָמְרַתְּ, הַשְׁתָּא דִּכְתִיב ״סׇלְעָם״ – לְרַבּוֹיֵי רֹאשׁוֹ אָרוֹךְ, אֵימָא לִירַבֵּי נָמֵי כֹּל דְּהוּ – קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **If *solam* had not been written** as well, it would be **as you said.** But **now that it is written: “*Solam*,” to include long-headed** grasshoppers even though none of the named species have long heads, **I will say: Let us also include any** grasshopper that is called *ḥagav*. Therefore, the phrase “after its kinds” **teaches us** that this is not so.


###### Chullin 66a:8
[Chullin 66a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:8)

מַאי שְׁנָא הָתָם דְּאָמְרַתְּ: ״סׇלְעָם״ – זֶה ״רָשׁוֹן״, ״חַרְגֹּל״ – זֶה ״נִיפּוּל״, וּמַאי שְׁנָא הָכָא דְּאָמְרַתְּ: ״סׇלְעָם״ – זֶה ״נִיפּוּל״, ״חַרְגֹּל״ – זֶה ״רָשׁוֹן״? מָר כִּי אַתְרֵיהּ וּמָר כִּי אַתְרֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is different there,** in the *baraita* of the study hall, **that you say** that the ***solam* is** the ***rashon*,** and the ***ḥargol* is** the ***nippul*, and what is different here,** in the *baraita* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael, **that you say:** The ***solam* is** the ***nippul*,** and the ***ḥargol* is** the ***rashon*?** The Gemara responds: This **Sage** refers to them **in accordance with** the custom of **his locale and** that **Sage** refers to them **in accordance with** the custom of **his locale.**


###### Chullin 66a:9
[Chullin 66a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/66a:9)

וּבַדָּגִים כֹּל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ סְנַפִּיר וְקַשְׂקֶשֶׂת. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵין לוֹ עַכְשָׁיו וְעָתִיד לְגַדֵּל לְאַחַר זְמַן, כְּגוֹן הַסּוּלְתָּנִית וְהָעַפְיָאן – הֲרֵי זֶה מוּתָּר. יֵשׁ לוֹ עַכְשָׁיו וְעָתִיד לְהַשִּׁירָן בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעוֹלֶה מִן הַמַּיִם, כְּגוֹן

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states: **And with regard to fish, any** fish **that has a fin and a scale** is kosher. **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: If a fish **does not have** scales **now but will grow** them **after** a period of **time, such as the *sultanit* and *afyan*** fish, **it is permitted.** Likewise, if **it has** scales **now but will shed them when it** is caught and **rises from the water, such as**