The short answer
Because the rabbis extended the meat-dairy prohibition to poultry by rabbinic decree, even though chicken does not produce milk — to protect the biblical prohibition by fencing it off. So chicken-with-dairy is rabbinically prohibited even though the biblical verse concerns a kid.
Why people ask this
This specific puzzle (chicken isn't a kid in milk) is resolved by the rabbinic-fence logic; understanding it clarifies how derabbanan works.
Key terms
- DeRabbanan
- Rabbinic enactment, here extending the biblical rule.
Jewish perspectives
- Traditional: poultry is rabbinically included in the meat-dairy prohibition.
- Some historically debated whether this should apply, but it became normative practice.
Scholarly & historical context
The rabbis decreed poultry's inclusion to safeguard the biblical law; the debate is recorded but the decree held.
What is agreed upon
The extension is rabbinic, not biblical.
Where the disagreement begins
Whether such rabbinic extensions bind everyone.
Practical consequences
Expect chicken to be treated as 'meat' for kashrut purposes in traditional communities.
Original sources
Related questions & knowledge graph
Why are some laws accepted by traditional communities even when not explicitly stated in the Torah?
#52Why do traditional Jewish communities separate meat and dairy?
#54How do different Jewish movements approach keeping kosher?
#47What is the difference between biblical commandments and rabbinic prohibitions?
Ask privately
Continue exploring this question in private. Your question stays yours until you explicitly choose to share it — and sharing with a scholar always requires your consent first.
Public discussion
Public contributions are separately reviewed and approved. Beit Ha'Vaad never turns a private question into a public one without explicit consent.
Revision history
Scholarly corrections, source updates and substantive changes are versioned here. This question's current status — Source-reviewed — is shown above.