מפרסת. שם התואר וכן מקרין מפריס והטעם כל שהוא מתוארת שהיא בעלת פרסה: PARTETH. Mafreset (parteth) is an adjective.2Even though it has the form of a verb. I.E. renders kol mafreset parsah (whatsoever parteth the hoof) as whatsoever has parted hoofs. Similarly makrin mafris3Makrin and mafris are adjectives. (horned and hoofed) (Ps. 69:32).4Translated according to I.E. It means all animals which are described as having a hoof.
ושוסעת שסע. שם התאר והטעם שפרסותיה שסועות: AND IS WHOLLY CLOVEN-FOOTED. Shosa’at (wholly cloven) is an adjective. The meaning of ve-shosa’at shesa perasot (and is wholly cloven-footed) is, whose hoofs are cloven.
מעלת גרה. מגזרת גרון ומעלת פועל. והזכיר הגמל והשפן והארנבת והחזיר בעבור שיש לכל אחד הסימן האחד ודרך לשון הקדש להזכיר הזכר מכל מין כי הנקבה בכלל הזכר היא והזכיר ארנבת יש אומרים לפי שלא ימצא הזכר מהם ויש אומרים שהזכר ישוב נקבה והפך הדבר והראשון קרוב אלי: AND CHEWETH THE CUD. Gerah (cud) is related to the word garon (throat).5The root of which is gimel, resh, resh. The word ma’alat6Literally, brings up. (cheweth) is a verb in the present.7Unlike mafreset and shosa’at. Scripture mentions the camel (v. 4), the rockbadger (v. 5), the hare (v. 6), and the swine (v. 7) because each one has one sign.8They either chew the cud or have split hoofs. These animals are enumerated in order to emphasize the fact that the law requires a clean animal to have both signs. It is the style of Scripture to mention the male of each species because the masculine also takes in the feminine.9The masculine form of a noun at times refers to males and females; that is, the term “man” sometimes refers to males and females. Most of the names of the animals mentioned in verses 4-7 are in the masculine. I.E. points out that the same law applies to females of the species. Otherwise only the male animals listed would be forbidden to be eaten. Scripture mentions the arnevet (hare).10Arnevet is feminine and so does not seem to follow the rule stated by I.E. Some say that it does so because the male is not found among them.11Some interpret this to mean that the male of the species is rarely seen. However, this opinion seems to be saying that this species has no male. There are others who say that the male turns into a female and vice versa. However, the first interpretation appeals to me.