פּירוש אויף דברים 14:4

זֹ֥את הַבְּהֵמָ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר תֹּאכֵ֑לוּ שׁ֕וֹר שֵׂ֥ה כְשָׂבִ֖ים וְשֵׂ֥ה עִזִּֽים׃

דאָס זײַנען די בהמות װאָס איר מעגט עסן: אַן אָקס, אַ שעפּס, און אַ ציג,

Rashi

זאת הבהמה … איל וצבי ויחמור THESE ARE THE BEASTS [WHICH YOU MAY EAT] THE HART AND THE GAZELLE AND THE FALLOW DEER — This (the fact that Scripture begins with זאת הבהמה and goes on to enumerate חיות) teaches us that חיה is included in the term בהמה (Sifrei Devarim 100:1; Chullin 71a; cf. Rashi on Leviticus 11:2, last sentence, and Note thereon). It further teaches us that there are more unclean beasts and wild animals than clean ones, for where two contrasted classes are spoken of it always enumerates by name the individuals of the smaller class (Sifrei Devarim 100:3; Chullin 63a.) (Since it enumerates here the clean animals these must be the minority.)
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Ibn Ezra

the ox [and] Scripture omits the connective vav the sheep kid and the goat kid The word “kid” can, in Hebrew, be applied both to the goat species and the sheep species.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Rabbeinu Bahya

שור שה כשבים ושה עזים, “an ox, sheep, and goat.” The three mentioned so far are צאן, domesticated animals kept in flocks or herds. By adding איל, צבי, יחמור,אקו דישון, תאו and זמר we get an additional 7 species making a total of ten categories of animals fit for consumption by Jews. The last-named seven, while permitted for private consumption, are not permitted as offerings on the altar. (Zevachim 34) Any free-roaming animal, חיה, is by definition not permitted as a sacrifice. [How could it serve in lieu of man who has not tamed it and exercised his authority over it? Ed.] The names of the seven last named animals reveal that they are “pure” i.e. possess the physical features described by the Torah as making them fit to eat. In Song of Songs 2,7 the first word השבעתי if read with the dot on the left side of the letter ש means that G’d provided as food ample supplies of איל and צבי, proving these animals chew the cud and have split hooves. The יחמור is alluded to in Chabakuk 3,15 where it is compared to many waters, something which is ritually pure. [I confess I do not follow this since in that same verse horses are compared to the ocean which is equally pure, whereas horses do not have split hooves. I will leave untranslated the balance of this paragraph as I do not understand it. Ed.]
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy