Average Guy Really, Im Completely Normal

dude.

I keep seeing a bunch of different types of long furbies, and I started categorizing them in my head-

So since I’m bored, I thought I’d make a post for it.

Each species has subspecies including

Spine or spineless

Material type

Etc.

But Without further ado...

Classic Long

common

Body is like a tube, with feet at the bottom

Greatest length variety

Examples: Original long furby and strange aeon’s Thursday Boy Porridge

Caterpillar

Very rare

Typically around 3ft

Multiple pairs of feet going down the belly section

Example is from boots-with-the-furb on Instagram

Centipede

Very rare

Have pairs of legs going down the sides of the body

Often no feet

Body tapers at end

Examples: from @lumeneas and me bc I can’t find very many different examples o o f

Humanoid/long legged

Uncommon

Have human like hands or other other body parts

May have pair of long legs as well

Examples: Buttered Noodle from @buttered-noodles and Handsome Ryan from @well-i-guess-i-own-a-furby-now

Mobius/double headed

Extremely rare

Have 2 heads, one on either side of a tube-like body

Example: from @furbyrights

Wide

Legendary, possibly a myth

Long furby, but wide instead of long

Artist’s depiction by @par-vollen

And there we go! Please tell me if I missed anything, or if you find credit for me to add. I know there’s more, however these are the species I could come out with-

Humanoid furbies are not kosher. Wrong kinds of feet. 

Caterpillar and centipede furbies are also not kosher. They are crawly-things that fail to meet the necessary designations for hoppy-things. (Unless they have six legs and you want to try and make the argument that they are one of the unknown/disputed species of locust, which is an altogether horrifying thought, even by furby standards.)

I am... somewhat confused as to how to designate the mobius furby -and the classic long, for that matter. For some reason, I feel that that the former is aquatic. 

For both of them, though, if they are animals, the same answer about their kashrut as in the original post applies. It is important to clarify that the laws RE split hooves are not “they must not have an unsplit hoof” but “they must have a cloven hoof” -in other words, the mobius furby’s absence of feet does not make it more kosher. 

If they are land-dwelling, we must consider their means of locomotion. The mobius furby appears to have no choice about crawling on its belly, and is thus inherently treyf, however the classic furby, having feet, may conceivably walk upright like a penguin, in which case we must again revisit the question as to whether they are birds. Physiologically, I see nothing in the case of the classic longfurby not addressed in the original discussion about whether furbies are kosher birds, however the mobius furby, lacking feet, is a few too many signs away, and should therefore be considered not kosher due to a lack of an established tradition to the contrary. 

Now, what if either of these classes of furby is aquatic? A primarily aquatic animal is generally, for religious-culinary purposes, considered to be a fish-thing. So we must now ask ourselves: can these categories of longfurby be considered to be fish, and if so, are they kosher? 

Well, what makes a fish kosher? The literal translation of the verse is “all that has fins and scales in the water”. In practice, we generally consider scales to be scales if they are visible to the naked eye (not catfish), and easy to remove -either by hand or with a knife -but not with scalding water (not sturgeon). If a fish has scales as an adult, the young that have not yet grown or finished growing their scales are still kosher; if they are born with scales but lose them as adults (swordfish) or when caught (certain kinds of mackerel), there is a debate. (I was raised conservative. I view the latter categories as kosher. I am aware that in general in Orthodox communities, they are not.) Furthermore, we hold that any fish with scales automatically has fins, and that a fish need not be completely covered in scales to be considered scaled. 

So what does this mean for our furby friends? I was able to find the following image of a furby that appears to have fur in a scale pattern, but I was unable to discern whether the furby in question is truly meant to be scaled and is merely plush because it is a toy, or if that is simply plush fabric representing unusual fur. I was also able to find the subsequent image of a dragon furby that is more clearly intended to have scales, but the same question remains, and neither is a longfurb. 

And then I found them. Merbies. A classic longfurb with defined scales that clearly has fins, if oddly-shaped ones. And from this, we can conclude that the classic longfurbs have the potential to be kosher fish, if they are aquatic and scaled. By classical standards, the face should be flattish, and there should be a spinal column, both of which are true of the below furby. 

As for the mobius furby, we are prohibited from eating most unhealthy animals. If the furby is of a species that is meant to have two heads on different ends like that, and it is otherwise healthy and otherwise fits the standards of a kosher fish, I believe we can consider it to be kosher. 

Widefurbs, of course, are or aren’t kosher the same way shortfurbs are; they are not sufficiently physiologically distinct from them to merit a different analysis.

I’m sorry this is just impressive

Also there are a couple different merbies out there, and I have found a long (as in 3 or more ft in length) merby @terulakimban