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 פב,א גמרא

he returns ??? before ??? Rav said Chama son of ??? There is no difficulty. here, ??? here, ??? the house Rav Papa said, this one Hey, isn't it the case that ??? here, the one who forcibly took possession on the way here, that did not have forcibly took possession on the way Rav ??? he said In reality lit: In the world Like that which was said by from the beginning here, ??? here, ??? the house And even atop על גבי that is not forcibly took possession on the way ??? immediately the one who does not have ??? For it was taught in a baraita ??? that specific before ??? on account of ??? The Rabbis taught ??? yes. ??? to them before ??? yes. ??? to them This is satisfactory ??? yes. ??? to them perhaps, ??? and they came in them? to suffer lit, to the hands of ??? except before ??? What is the reason מאי טעמא No. Rav Yosef said: that did not have ??? Whoever does not have Rava said: because of ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? There is this difference between them: ??? that is not Look, ??? It was taught there: the tip of ??? he was ??? ??? on the gate in the east What is the reason מאי טעמא Rav Yosef said so that ??? Rava said: because of ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? There is this difference between them: ??? So, too, that he came ???

דף פב,א משנה

the Paschal offering that went out or that became tamei, ??? immediately ??? or ??? ten R' Yochanan son of ??? says Even this ??? immediately on account of that do not to him they eat

דף פב,א גמרא

This is satisfactory tamei it is written (Lev. 7) ??? who ??? in all tamei does not eat in fire ??? except he would exit From where do we derive this? As it is written (Lev. 10) there are. No. ??? of its blood to that which was sanctified for Temple use ??? He said to him: Moses ??? Why No. ??? ??? lest enter of its blood before and inwards He said to him: Is this not He said to him: lest except ??? Came forth He said to him: Is this not ??? it was He said to him: If it was ??? it was there are. No. ??? of its blood to that which was sanctified for Temple use ??? Why No. ??? it from this general principle it would follow For if it was ??? So, too, ??? of its blood within the daughter of burning She This is satisfactory ??? the Merciful One in the case of simple-holiness offerings. how much more so in the case of the holiest of holy offerings except he would exit ??? the Holy of Holies simple offerings From where do we derive this? And, too, this one that teaches If the blood sat overnight,

דף פב,ב גמרא

??? of its blood he has fulfilled his obligation of its blood except ??? to us ??? From where do we derive this? ??? to us ??? as it is taught: Rabbi Shimon says: (Lev. 6) ??? in fire ??? on A sin-offering ??? yes. for me except -- this refers to only. the remainder of invalid as regarding The holiest of holy offerings The offal of simple offerings from where do we learn Scripture states: ??? in fire ??? The holiest of holy offerings simple offerings From where do we derive this? except all ??? there is no difference simple offerings and there is no difference The holiest of holy offerings a tradition has been handed down and A sin-offering ??? It is because of this: It once happened that he was thus in the same way he was and a Tanna of the academy of Rabbah son of Avuah for he said: even an invalidating act nevertheless required ??? an image What is our source for this claim he learns it iniquity iniquity ??? and let a conclusion be drawn by comparing ??? iniquity iniquity ??? He could say to you A sin-offering ??? For This ??? also ??? an image ??? and there in that case ??? hour it was now ??? all invalid as regarding ??? there is no difference ??? holy offerings and there is no difference simple offerings a tradition has been handed down ??? in fire ??? why do I have This certain individual he had asked for him ??? (Lev. 7) ??? who ??? in all tamei does not eat in fire ??? why do I have This certain individual ??? It is necessary to teach this For it might have entered your mind that I would say: all invalid as regarding ??? For example, If the blood sat overnight, ??? of its blood and went out of its blood ??? by night ??? but: ??? also ??? I would say Because ??? of him. serving of weekday I would say No. ??? burning ??? for him ??? or ??? Rav Yosef said It is a disagreement ??? after ??? meat as regard to eating, but: ??? Before the act of sprinkling, that is not ??? meat as regard to eating, the words of all are ??? immediately They challenged him from this teaching: This is the general rule: all ??? immediately with blood ??? and went out ??? The tanna teaches: ??? is equivalent ??? Just as blood Before the act of sprinkling, Even ??? Before the act of sprinkling, except If it was said thus it was said: It is a disagreement ??? Before the act of sprinkling, that is not ??? meat as regard to eating, that he has i.e., that he is expected ??? but: ??? After the act of sprinkling, ??? meat as regard to eating, the words of all are ??? Another thing: ??? an image And Rabbi Yochanan said: Even After the act of sprinkling, also It is a disagreement And he is consistent Rabbi Yehudah with his reasoning for he said: Rabbi Yochanan Rabbi Yehudah son of ??? and R' ??? And they said a thing one R' Yochanan son of ??? this one of which we were speaking? R' ??? Who is it as it is taught: R' ??? says because of ??? -- this refers to ??? it is said (Lev. 10) ??? Hey, isn't it the case that ??? And so ???