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 צ,א גמרא

Abayye said: If it was Is this not ??? Rabbi ??? on ??? And Rabbi She it was. ??? to it ??? in the case of simple-holiness offerings. and who follow the reasoning ??? of R' Yosi the Gallilean for he said: simple offerings money or property ??? he but: on Passover No. ??? certainly ??? originally For ??? them with the intent ??? them Hey, isn't it the case that Rabbi She but on account of thus coins ??? Those who are ill ??? No. ??? certainly ??? and this particular that he came ??? to it Rabbi ??? like Rabbi No. ??? for him I like Rabbi ??? No. ??? originally For ??? them with the intent ??? And that is absent here ??? like Rabbi Yosi for it is the case that It was taught by of it ??? he did not do anything at all. and now ??? Rabbi ??? on ??? And Rabbi She Learn from this ??? even ??? Who is it of Rabbi ??? For it was taught in a baraita he gave to it ??? Behold! these are permitted ??? Behold! these are forbidden that he was In justice, for just as if ??? invalidates it of them yes. ??? about them ??? that do not ??? invalidates it of them is it not logical that do not ??? about them Scripture states: (Deut. 23) for all ??? ??? is a kal vachomer ??? From here, Just as ??? that do not ??? invalidates it of them ??? about them ??? invalidates it of them is it not logical ??? about them Scripture states: for all ??? creates an exclusion ??? except The reason is ??? the Merciful One ??? this one Is this not thus then I might incorrectly say: ??? prohibits ??? about them Hey, isn't it the case that yes. a person ??? a thing that is not are his R' Osha'ya said ??? on ??? And Rabbi She What then does it mean when it says Rabbi as it is taught: (Ex. 12) if ??? the house ??? Moses ??? Moses ??? food and not ??? a purchase Rabbi says Even ??? a purchase ??? he (from it) does not have after with it on ??? and on ??? and coins ??? Those who are ill for upon ??? thus ??? Israel ??? Rabbah And Rabbi Zeira One says ??? the whole world does not disagree ??? he ??? he is equivalent. Because specifically, where they disagree is this: ??? rabbis reason that this one food ??? She And Rabbi reasoned immediately ??? he ??? he is equivalent. and one says ??? also the whole world does not disagree As it is written (Ex. 12) on the commandments ??? ??? he is equivalent. Because specifically, where they disagree is this: ??? in it ??? in it ??? rabbis reason that ??? Moses the Merciful One in the Torah says ??? And Rabbi reasoned ??? Moses ??? for he said: If it was Is this not ??? Rabbi ??? on ??? And Rabbi She you shall ??? to it in the case of simple-holiness offerings. and who follow the reasoning ??? ??? the Gallilean for he said: holy offerings ??? money or property ??? he but: on Passover No. ??? this one The tanna teaches: clearly and explicitly for upon ??? thus ??? Israel ??? I would say for upon ??? thus ??? Israel coins ???

דף צ,א משנה

One suffering from gonorrhea who saw two appearances ??? upon it ??? he saw three ??? upon it ??? are his ??? day opposite day ??? upon it with two of it she saw two days ??? upon it on the third ??? upon it ???

דף צ,א גמרא

Rav Yehudah said Rav said ??? on A tevul yom ???

דף צ,ב גמרא

And there is no meaning to the word ??? on tamei ??? he said Even ??? on tamei ??? for Rav, what is the difference here, A tevul yom ??? tamei ??? also Look, ??? immersion A tevul yom also ??? the evening sun ??? ipso facto ??? also this one ??? atonement ??? in his hand tamei ??? also Behold! ??? before him perhaps, ??? If so, ??? also perhaps, ??? For example, ??? to the court bet din And it is like Rav for he said: heard him ??? yes. a court בית דין of priests they stand From here until ??? coins ??? and for Rav, according to Torah law, ??? Look, And the rabbbis he ??? of him. Why is it that Rav said impart tumah one from them ??? except for Rav, according to Torah law, also No. Look, As it is written (Num. 9) a man a man For it shall be tamei ??? Are we are not dealing that falls ??? are his to be On the eve of Pesach ??? and the Merciful One in the Torah says ??? And if you say From where can you derive ??? derive it like Rabbi Isaac for he said: ??? did he die a commandment they were that falls ??? that are theirs to be On the eve of Pesach as it is said (Num. 9) and not shall be consumed"? ??? the Paschal offering by day This certain individual by day This certain individual he ??? it is possible for them to do but: tomorrow it is possible for them to do and the Merciful One in the Torah says ??? We have learnt in a Mishna: One suffering from gonorrhea who saw two appearances ??? upon it ??? Is this not that is not ??? And learn from this ??? on tamei ??? No. ??? If it was ??? And what can we come and learn from this? Thus can we come and learn from this. ??? the evening the sun Come and learn from this. ??? ipso facto ??? Here, too, ??? When the baraita teaches at the end of the teaching, he saw three appearances ??? upon it ??? If you say, This is satisfactory One suffering from gonorrhea who saw two appearances ??? upon it ??? It is necessary to teach this ??? I thought to say he saw two appearances ??? he that is not ??? It once happened but: he saw three ??? It once happened ??? atonement No. Come and learn from this. ??? atonement ??? except If you say, he saw two appearances ??? that is not ??? he saw three ??? why do I have now there are to say he saw two appearances ??? that is not ??? he ??? he saw three ??? for him ??? not all the more so? ??? except Is this not Learn from this he saw two appearances ??? No. In reality lit: In the world I would say to you that is not ??? and It is necessary to teach this ??? I thought to say ??? he ??? but: ??? in his hand ??? sacrifice I would say ??? of him. priests Come and learn from this. Watch out for leading vav And it is like Rav ??? It was taught by a Tanna taught: in front of Rav ??? son of love ??? upon it ??? of it He said to him: ??? of it who ??? even for one for he said: ??? on tamei ??? that is only in the case lit., "these words" הני מילי tamei ??? this one until tomorrow ??? atonement No. ??? I would say ??? This is obvious! What would you have said? immediately ??? atonement No. Come and learn from this. Watch out for leading vav And it is like Rav Ravina heard him he said a menstruant a Tanna taught: in front ??? upon it ??? He said to him a menstruant ??? who ??? Even if for one for he said: ??? on tamei ??? a menstruant ??? he ??? until ??? the evening sun No. ??? except I would say ??? This is obvious! now for just as ??? atonement ??? upon it ??? a menstruant that is not ??? atonement it requires to say ??? He ascended a menstruant ??? for him It is to learn from this ??? yes. ??? No. As it is taught: all ??? by day a menstruant and she will give birth ??? by night as it is taught: It is possible shall be ??? while it is still day Therefore, scripture states: (Lev. 15) seven days ??? shall be ??? all seven and she will give birth ???

דף צ,ב משנה

???