PREVIEW OF THE DAFCAST WEBSITE FOR CYCLE 13

Please do not forward this link around yet! This is still in development and will be "released", God willing, on August 1, in time for the thirteenth cycle of Daf Yomi.

Disclaimers, Copyright, and Credits

Disclaimers

This is an early draft. I haven't proofread; there are plenty of typos and probably some more significant errors as well.

Most pages on this site are currently auto-translated. The autotranslations are intended as a starting point for my manual translations. At best, they are awkward stringing-togethers of words and phrases in the corpus database that can benefit from cleaning up. At worst, they are picking the wrong homograph. Auto-translations are indicated by italics.

I am not a rabbi or an expert. These are my translations, and in some cases I am certainly misunderstanding things.

The Talmud is a document of its time. While the Talmud is a foundational document of Judaism, it must be read in its historical context. There are passages that are xenophobic, sexist, and irreconcilable with modern science. Not everything in these pages represents contemporary Judaism.

Copyright

This translation is protected by copyright. I'm putting a lot of effort into this project. Please respect that by only copying with my permission.

I intend to provide free licenses for most uses. I plan to use a Creative Commons CC-NC-BY-SA license, which will allow you to re-use my translations as long as you don't charge money for them (NC), as long as you give me credit (BY), and as long as you make your derived work available under the same terms (SA). But I'm not ready to do that yet because this is still a very rough work-in-progress.

In the meantime, if you want to re-use this, please contact me. I am willing to discuss re-use on an ad hoc basis. Perhaps the one page you want to use is actually ready for re-use. Ask. I'll probably work out a way to say "yes."

Credits

I need to clean up this section. But for now, I'll note that I've made use of the Hebrew/Aramaic text of the Bavli at Mechon Mamre; Jastrow's dictionary; "The Practical Talmud Dictionary" by Yitzchak Frank. I've also used the big three translations of the Talmud --- Soncino (English), Artscroll (English), and Steinsaltz (Hebrew) --- and the Kehati (English) edition of the Mishna, to help me understand passages before translating them.

Go to daf 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121

Or set your preferences to change how Hebrew/Aramaic is displayed.

דף מה,א גמרא

It is because of this: ??? a Nazir and A sin-offering two ??? those who are coming back ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? a Nazir this one of which we were speaking? A sin-offering Who is it as it is taught: (Lev. 7) all who ??? etc. It is possible even No. ??? Scripture states: ??? until ??? in the case of the flesh. ??? to be ??? is invalid She ??? and if ??? She It may be eaten ??? And the rabbbis also ??? a Nazir and A sin-offering two ??? those who are coming back ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? They said: ??? It was necessary to teach both, because otherwise you might err when extending one to the other. and Rabbi Akiva What then does it mean when it says It was necessary to teach both, because otherwise you might err when extending one to the other. This is satisfactory If it was Therefore, to avoid this incorrect deduction, the Merciful One wrote: the case is that of a sin-offering, No. ??? a Nazir ??? No. we complete it except let the Merciful One write in the Torah ??? A sin-offering ??? of him for it is the case that all ??? And the rabbbis say to you ??? It was necessary to teach both, because otherwise you might err when extending one to the other. A sin-offering ??? and Those who are ill ??? No. ??? to give ??? from here you ??? for all the Torah All of it and Rabbi Akiva both of them. ??? are they, them two ??? those who are coming back ??? and all two ??? those who are coming back ??? yes. ??? Rav Ashi said to him for Rav, ??? Watch out for leading vav So rather, how do you explain that which was taught: (Num. 6) from all who may he do it? ??? the wine ??? and until ??? on ??? a Nazir ??? this with that now Rabbi Akivah prohibits and permission combine together prohibits prohibits ??? He said to him: prohibits and permission "At the same time," prohibits prohibits "In the case of this one after that one,"

דף מה,א משנה

??? if there are an olive's volume in one place he is liable ??? and if ??? wasted ??? and thus in the matter of ??? if ??? upon it separating and if he wishes ??? Behold! he ???

דף מה,א גמרא

Rav Yehudah said that Shmuel said They did not teach such a ruling except in a place that do not ??? but: in a place ??? he is not liable ??? from this general principle it would follow ??? an olive's volume Even if in a place that do not ??? he is not liable ??? there is someone who teaches this as referring ??? And if not, wasted ??? Rav Yehudah said that Shmuel said They did not teach such a ruling except in a place ??? but: in a place that do not ??? he is liable ??? from this general principle it would follow ??? even in a place ??? he is liable ??? It was taught: ??? that came first It was taught: ??? that was last It was taught: ??? that came first ??? in a place ??? he does not separating and does not transgresses in a place that do not ??? separating and transgresses Regarding what matters are we speaking? in the amount like an olive but: in less an olive's volume even in a place that do not ??? he does not separating and does not transgresses and it was taught: ??? that was last ??? in a place ???

דף מה,ב גמרא

he does not separating and does not transgresses in a place that do not ??? separating and transgresses Regarding what matters are we speaking? in less an olive's volume but: in the amount like an olive even in a place ??? separating and transgresses ??? Rav Huna said ??? Rav Yosef said: ??? She as it is taught: the bread ??? he is liable ??? because of ??? of it how much ??? Rabbi Shimon ben Eliezer says Regarding what matters are we speaking? ??? as regard to eating, but: ??? sourdough ??? nullification ??? R' Shimon son of ??? nullification from this general principle it would follow ??? that came first reasoned No. nullification Perhaps, his reasoning is all an olive's volume even though ??? No. ??? Abaye said to him: ??? in the amount like an olive less than an olive's volume who ??? but how do you reconcile that with this teaching Hey, isn't it the case that R' Shimon son of ??? She And there is no difficulty. this one in a place ??? this one that did not have in a place ??? Rav Ashi said No. you say that did not have in a place ??? except ??? This is obvious! What would you have said? ??? to that place Come and hear from this Thus said Rabbi ??? Rav said The halacha is like R' Shimon son of ??? Really? For didn't Rav say Isaac son of ??? Rav said if ??? nullification ??? yes. No. ??? No. one ??? this one No. he would say over Watch out for leading vav And this is present here. that they said Rav Nachman said Rav said That is not the halacha like R' Shimon son of ??? for he said: Rav Isaac son of ??? Rav said if ??? nullification and etc. Rav Nachman said Shmuel said two ??? of ??? all ??? with it he is liable ??? And if not, he is not liable ??? Ulla said They did not say that except in a case ??? but: in the house of he is liable ??? What is the reason? ??? them ??? regarding ??? Ulla said They asked in the west the house of ??? What then? the house of ??? What then? two houses this within from this What then? The question remains suspended and cannot be answered. The Rabbis taught the bread ??? to a person ??? It is possible ??? imparts tumah ??? they eat ??? with ??? on Passover It is because of this: R' he gave And they said It is not imparts tumah like who ??? this one For it was taught in a baraita A general principle: And they said ??? all ??? a person tamei until ??? like who that is not ??? he gave The rabbis taught: ??? to its midst ??? three days he is liable ??? before three days he is not liable ??? he said R' he gave Regarding what matters are we speaking? that he did not give to its midst skins but: he gave to its midst skins even ??? three He is not liable ??? Rabba said: The halacha is ??? he gave even one day and even hour ??? and thus in the matter of ??? if ??? upon it separating and if he wishes ??? Behold! he ??? who he is equivalent. there i.e., in another mishna ??? hangs the validity Here in this case, ??? hangs the validity Rav Yehudah said I would say and in the matter of ??? is not thus He said to him Abaye this one and thus in the matter of ??? The tanna teaches: except Abayye said: thus he comes to say i.e., what he really means is: and thus