Pisqa’ 2271
1
“If you happen across a bird’s nest” (Dt.22:6)—
this excludes from the rule
birds that are ready at hand
[as opposed to wild birds].2
The minimum number intended
by the plural, “fledglings” (Dt.22:6), is two,
and the minimum of “eggs” (Dt.22:6) is two.3
How do I know that
even if there is but one fledgling or one egg,
he is obliged to send off the dam?
The Teaching states:
“A nest” (Dt.22:6)—
a nest with any number of young.4
2
Inferring from what is said:
“Before you in the path, . . . and the dam is crouching over the fledglings or the eggs” (Dt.22:6)—
is it possible to say that
I might exclude from the rule
ducks or chickens nesting in an orchard?
The Teaching states:
“Before you” (Dt.22:6)—
[birds raised for your needs are exempt from the rule].5
I might infer only that
[the rule applies to]
nests found in a private area.
On what basis do I know that
[it applies as well to]
a public thoroughfare?
The Teaching states:
“In the path” ( Dt.22:6)—
[that is, a road traversed by a multitude].
On what basis do I know that
the rule applies to [nests found] on trees?
The Teaching states:
“In any tree” ( Dt.22:6).
On what basis do I know that
the rule applies to [nests found] on the ground?
The Teaching states:
“Or on the ground”(Dt.22:6).
3
“And the dam is crouching over the fledglings or the eggs” (Dt.22:6) —
just as with fledglings, [the rule applies]
only to those capable of surviving [with proper care],
so, too, with eggs, [the rule applies]
only to those capable of surviving [with proper care].
This excludes [from the rule] abnormal eggs
[since they will not survive].
Now, just as eggs require the dam’s care,
so, too, fledglings require the dam’s care.6
“And the dam is crouching over the fledglings or the eggs” (Dt.22:6)—
[send the dam off] while she is crouching over them,
but not if she is fluttering about.7
Is it possible to say that
[the rule applies] even where her wings are in contact with the nest?
The Teaching states:
“And the dam is crouching over the fledglings or the eggs” (Dt.22:6)—
even if [momentarily] she is not with them,
[she is still considered in contact with the nest].8
Is it possible to say that
if an unclean bird was crouching over the eggs of a clean bird,
or if a clean bird was crouching over the eggs of an unclean bird—
one still stands under obligation to send off the dam?9
The Teaching states:
“And the dam is crouching over the fledglings or the eggs” (Dt.22:6)—
[the rule applies only to birds]
that are all of a single type
[whether clean or unclean].10
4
“You may not take the dam as well as the young” (Dt.22:6).
Inferring from what is said:
“Then the Priest shall take for the purificant two living birds that are clean” (Lv.14:4)—
is it possible to say that
he may take the dam from the nest
in order to cleanse a victim of Scale-disease?11
The Teaching states:
“You may not take the dam as well as the young” (Dt.22:6)—
not even to cleanse a victim of Scale-disease!12
“You may not take the dam” (Dt.22:6)—
This is a proscriptive commandment.