5785/2024

Rav Schachter and Turkey

It is well-known that Rav Hershel Schachter refrains from eating turkey. The short explanation is that the Shulchan Aruch and the Rama (Y.D. 82:3) echo Rashi (Chullin 62b s.v. Chazyuha; based on Chullin 63b) that we only eat fowl regarding which we have a tradition (Mesorah) of being kosher. There cannot be such a tradition regarding turkey since it is a New World bird. For this reason, Rav Schachter refrains from consuming this bird.  

Rav Schachter is not the first to avoid turkey. In the generation preceding him at Yeshiva University, the eminent Rav David Lifshitz did not eat turkey. A century beforehand, Rav Shlomo Kluger (Teshuvot Ha’Elef Lecha Shlomo Y.D. 112) strongly objected to eating turkey.

Nonetheless, the widely accepted practice among all Jews today is to eat turkey. What is our basis? 

The Torah

The Torah sets clear guidelines for identifying kosher animals, fish, and locusts. However, regarding birds, Hashem does not present such identifiers. Instead, the Chumash (VaYikrah Perek 11 and Devarim Perek 14) lists twenty-four non-kosher birds. The Gemara (Chullin 63b) explains that most birds are kosher; therefore, the Torah lists only the twenty-four groups that are not. 

A superficial examination of this list leads one to conclude that turkey is a kosher bird. After all, it seems at first glance not one of the twenty-four birds listed in the Chumash. However, the list no longer informs us which is a kosher bird since we are unsure of the identity of many of the twenty-four forbidden birds. For example, Tosafot (Chullin 62b s.v. mai) casts doubt on whether the Orev is a raven, and Tosafot (Chullin 63a s.v. netz) questions whether a Nesher is an eagle. Thus, due to the ambiguity, Rav Hirsch and Stone Chumash do not translate the names of the twenty-four non-kosher birds into the vernacular.  

One might be shocked at the loss of a Mesorah regarding the twenty-four birds. By contrast, we have steadfastly maintained our Mesorah about many other matters, such as how to make Tefillin or the four species of Sukkot. The difference is that it is much easier to maintain a positive Mesorah for items that are a regular part of Jewish life. 

However, preserving traditions regarding birds from which we abstain from eating is much more difficult. This is especially so regarding birds that live in remote parts of the world. For this reason, we flip this Halachah to its positive side – we eat only birds from which we have a tradition to eat. Thus, we wonder how all Jews consume turkey absent a tradition of its Kashrut.   

It is not surprising that the Torah leaves the determination of the Kashrut of birds to a Mesorah instead of presenting clear indicators as it does by fish, animals, and locusts. This is one of many indications that the written law does not stand alone. The oral tradition is an indispensable supplement to the Torah. Requiring an oral complement makes the Jewish People, the bearers of the Oral Torah, an integral part of Torah’s transmission and perpetuation. The twinning of Torah and Am Yisrael marries us to the Torah and guarantees our eternity with the Torah. Interestingly, the Darkei Teshuva (82:34) cites sources that require a verbal and personal, rather than a written, testimony to the acceptability of a bird. This seems to have been the opinion accepted by Rav Moshe Feinstein (Teshuvot Igrot Moshe Y.D. 1:34). After all, we are dealing with oral law in action.  

The Mishnah and Gemara

Due to our inability to identify the Torah’s forbidden birds, the Mishnah (Chullin 59a) presents three signs of a kosher bird and one of a non-kosher bird. The Gemara (Chullin 61a) explains that the Mishna arrived at these signs by comparing the only bird the Torah lists as kosher – the dove – and the Nesher (eagle or griffin vulture), which appears on the list of non-kosher birds. 

Kosher birds have an extra toe and a crop, and we can easily peel its gizzard by hand. These identifying marks are relatively straightforward (though there is much debate concerning the precise definition of the extra finger). The Orthodox Union’s Rav Chaim Loike clearly presents these three signs in a video archived at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iag6S6i5244&ab_channel=onlineyeshiva, minutes 3:55 to 7:55. 

The Mishna’s much more vague sign is naming an Of Hadores (possibly translated as a clawing bird) as the indicator of a non-kosher bird. While the docile dove undoubtedly is not an Of Hadores, there are potentially somewhat aggressive birds regarding which there is a tradition of Kashrut. The chicken is a prime example. How do we know if a bird is not an Of Hadores?   

The Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 82:2) presents three definitions of an Of Hadores. First, it cites Rashi (Chullin 59a s.v. hadores), who defines it as a bird that grabs its food with its claws and lifts it to eat it. Second, it presents Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok’s view (cited by the aforementioned Mishna) that when placed on a string, the bird splits its claws two toes in one direction and two in the opposite direction. Third, it quotes Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar’s view that it grabs its prey and eats it midair.  

Even during the Gemara’s time, it was difficult to know whether a bird is an Of Hadores. The Gemara even relates (Chullin 62b) that Rav Pappa permitted a Tarnagolta D’Agma, but later, Mereimar rescinded this ruling after noticing it is an Of Hadores. 

Rashi famously concludes from this incident that we must refrain from eating birds unless we have a positive Mesorah to avoid similar mishaps. As mentioned, the Shulchan Aruch and Rama codify Rashi and the Chochmat Adam (36:6) and Aruch HaShulchan (Y.D. 82:29), writing that this is the accepted Halacha.  

Application to Turkey 

Accordingly, how may we eat turkey? While turkey satisfies the three signs of a kosher bird, how can we be certain it is not an of Hadores (especially since turkeys can become somewhat aggressive)? Rav Ari Zivotofsky writes a masterful summary of the various opinions on this matter in an article archived at https://www.kashrut.com/articles/turk_part3/. 

The Darkei Teshuva (82:26 citing the Arugat HaBosem, Teshuvot number 16) presents the most persuasive explanation. He argues that the Rama only requires a Mesorah to resolve the doubt. However, we have observed thousands of turkeys for many years, and it is beyond any reasonable doubt that they do not match any definition of an Of Hadores. Mesorah provides clear knowledge of a bird’s kosher status; therefore, clear and indisputable knowledge constitutes the Halachic equivalent of a Mesorah.    

The Gemara (Temurah 16a) speaks of traditions from Sinai that were lost during the seven days of mourning for Moshe Rabbeinu and were restored by Otniel ben Kenaz. Accordingly, we see that knowledge is the equivalent of a Mesorah. Moreover, Shevu’ot 34a states that knowledge is the equivalent of witnessing an event. Thus, our knowledge of turkey not being an Of Hadores is equivalent to a Mesorah's testimony. 

Conclusion

Tosafot (Menachot 20b s.v. nifsal) teach a cardinal principle - Minhag Yisrael Torah Hee, the universally accepted practice of the Jewish people constitutes Torah. For example, Rav Asher Weiss (Teshuvot Minchat Asher 1:30) writes that the universal acceptance of electricity as forbidden on Shabbat is the equivalent of a Bat Kol (heavenly voice) endorsing this practice.  

Similarly, the universal acceptance of turkey as kosher by all segments of the Jewish community is the equivalent of a Bat Kol proclaiming its permissibility. Only the exceptionally pious and learned Gedolei HaDor, such as Rav David Lifshitz or Rav Hershel Schachter, should refrain from eating turkey. 

Postscript – Sephardic Practice

However, even the most righteous of Sepharadim should have no hesitation to enjoy Turkey, as the Kaf HaChaim (Y.D. 82:21) and Yalkut Yosef Y.D. 82:1) wholeheartedly permit it. While the Shulchan Aruch (Y.D. 82:2-3) agrees that a Mesorahis necessary, Rav Karo cites an uncontested opinion that allows a bird with a wide beak and wide feet (like a duck) that has all three kosher signs even absent a Mesorah. The webbed beak and feet clarify that the bird is not an Of Hadores. The Rama comments that even in such a case, we require a Mesorah.