The turkey is a New World animal, no? For it to be on the list, it must have been added post-1492, surely. Why, then, can the ostrich not be added if its eating habits are akin to those of a chicken?
Because the ostrich is, IIRC, explicitly forbidden in the Torah (Leviticus). As has been pointed out, unlike land animals and sea creatures, there are no explicit signs given for kosher birds, only a list of forbidden ones.
Also IIRC, turkey was accidentally grandfathered in when it was mistaken for a bird that the Indian (South Asian) community had a tradition of eating. This was before it was understood that America was not East Asia. By the time the mistake was realized, a tradition of eating it had already developed. I have heard that there are some communities that observe a stringency to not eat turkey, because of this mistake.
Rick
Having gotten home, with a chance to check my impression, I must regrettably inform you that it is incorrect.
What is true is that there is no prohibition against eating ever min hachai (flesh from a living being) in the case of grasshoppers (or fish). So that if someone cut off a part of a live grasshopper, it would be permissable to eat it. This was the source of my confusion. But to eat the whole animal while it is actually alive is prohibited, due to an unrelated ban on eating disgusting things. (Zev, see Y.D. 13:1).
I apologize for the misinformation.
Thank you IzzyR for the correction. I was under the impression that the prohibition of ever min hachai was on all animals. Thank you for the source.
Zev Steinhardt
Yes, Leviticus was written prior to Linneanus, so they followed a different system- which was as logical. Animals that fly (and are not insects) are “birds”. Swimming/sea creatures= 'fish". Since the actual word was in hebrew, not english, there is no problem with this, and they are perfectly correct, if not scientifically accurate.
However, Lev 11:22 specifically lists as OK: “locusts, bald locust, grasshoppers and beetles, and all these ‘after their kind’”, so i cannot understand why these insects are not Kosher. Did not John the Baptist eat Locusts & Honey?
And, Lev11:13> list specific birds that are specifically unclean- but the rest, then should be OK- and that would include the ostrich.
I remember hearing at some point that the reason that locusts were allowed to be eaten (because otherwise bugs are not allowed) is that when locusts come around, there’s nothing else left to eat.
With all this talk about the ostrich being/not being clean/kosher, what can we determine about the emu?
The bas ha-ya’anah at the beginning of verse 16 is usually translated as the ostrich. Not kosher.
Zev Steinhardt
As mentioned earlier, any bird not specifically mentioned is kosher. Since, IIRC, the emu is not mentioned, it may very well be kosher. As a practical matter, however, Jews only eat birds that are known from tradition to be kosher. The emu is not one of them.
Zev Steinhardt
I don’t think so. If one is in danger of starvation, one could eat anything (locust, pig, ostrich, etc.)… the locust wouldn’t have to be pointed out as a permitted animal if it was only becuase we should eat it in case of starvation.
Zev Steinhardt
I tried to find a source for what I stated above, but to no avail. I did find the following:
In any case, although God does allow us to eat anything to stay alive, it is a sign of divine kindness that he allowed us to eat something that probably otherwise would be prohibited as a “crawling thing”.
To my knowledge, the source for locusts being kosher is the Torah itself, in Leviticus 11:22 –
(My favorite website for searching Bible quotes, and the place where I looked up this one, is http://www.stg.brown.edu/webs/bible_browser/pbeasy.shtml Of course, it has the same dangers that any translation has, as opposed to using the original Hebrew version, but it is still pretty useful.)
I’m not denying the source is the Torah, just questioning the “reason for the commandment”.
It is extremely rare for “reasons” to be given in the Torah itself for any commandment, other than the grandiose reason “you shall be holy because the Lord your God is holy” or “you shall be to me a holy people.”
Rabbinic literature, meaning the Talmud and other commentaries up to the present day, often tries to assign meanings and reasons to the commandments. The Reform Movement, for instance, for many decades was fond of arguing that all the dietary laws of the Torah were for “health reasons” and various convoluted interpretations thereof. Such rationales attract various adherents at various stages in Jewish history, but the bottom line is that the Torah text itself almost never gives a reason for any rule.
Daniel,
Well, some kinds of locust and grasshopper are kosher. We just, today, don’t know which kinds. Therefore, out of what in legal terms would be called a “surfeit of caution”, grasshoppers are out, because it’s better not to eat an animal that is kosher, than to eat an animal that isn’t.
zev: I am about a start a “talmudic’ arguement. In Lev11:16, my translations goes “and the Owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind” as forbidden fowl. Now, i do understand that the Hebrew word is basicly untranslatable, but scholars have ruled it means “ostrich”. But, I maintian there is actually a logic to the 'forbidden fowl” - they are raptors, birds of prey or carrion eaters. The ostrich is none of these. Am I crazy? Has this argeument been used before? I am sure that whether ostrich is forbidden has been debated.
However folks “weasles & ferrets” are ‘right out’. 
The Hebrew words in verse 16 are * bas haya’ana, tachmas, shachaf & naitz*.
I have three translations available to me. They are:
a) the Jewish Publication Society translation
b) The Pentatuch (by Rabbi Sharfman)
c) The Living Torah, by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan (IMHO, the most accurate of the three).
All three translate bas haya’anah as the ostrich. And all three also translate naitz as the hawk.
In any event, even if all three of my translations prove wrong, we still would not eat the ostrich since we now only eat birds that we know from tradition are kosher.
Zev Steinhardt
Another kosher question. The other day my wife and I were enjoying a delicious meal of bagels and lox. However, I noted that we were spreading cream cheese on the bagels as well. Doesn’t that violate the meat-and-milk rule? Or is fish not considered meat?
I know cheeseburgers would be out, but could you have a cheesefishburger? And if not, why do we think of bagels, lox, and cream cheese as a typical Jewish food?
And: How long do you wait between a dairy meal and a meat meal?
And: So, if you are a kosher deli, you can’t sell cheese along with the meat? You’d have to go to a separate cheese shop for cheese? How separate do you have to keep meat and dairy? Separate refridgerators?
**
Fish is not considered meat. You may have fish with dairy.
**
I don’t know why these foods have become stereotypical of Jews.
**
After a dairy meal, one can usually go right away to a meat meal, provided he cleans his mouth out from any dairy agents. Eating a piece of bread or drinking some water usually take care of this.
From meat back to dairy is a matter of local custom. Most Orthodox Jews wait six hours. Some Jews of Germanic origin developed the custom to wait only three. I believe there are even those who wait only one hour.
Most kosher delis will not sell cheese and dairy products at all.
You can store meat and dairy items in your refrigerator together. As long as the actual foods do not come in contact, you are OK. Even if they do come in contact, in most cases, since the food will be cold, you can rinse off the “offending” food and you’ll be OK. However, in cases such as this, one should ask their local rabbi just to be certain.
Zev Steinhardt
There are few places which sell both meat and dairy items, because it would require extra supervision and care. There is one place here in Baltimore that does. At home, the vast majority of people who keep kosher have one refrigerator. Many people have two ovens, two ranges, two sinks, and even two dishwashers - one for “meat dishes,” and one for “dairy dishes.” (Dishes, silverware, and all cookware must be used either for dairy or meat - not both.)