It's a start Dafcast Draft
ברכות
שבת
עירובין
פסחים
ראש השנה
יומא
סוכה
ביצה
תענית
מגילה
מועד קטן
חגיגה
יבמות
כתובות
נדרים
נזיר
סוטה
גיטין
קידושין
בבא קמא
בבא מציעא
בבא בתרא
סנהדרין
מכות
שבועות
עבודה זרה
הוריות
זבחים
מנחות
חולין
בכורות
ערכין
תמורה
כריתות
מעילה
תמיד
נידה

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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122
Or set your preferences to change how Hebrew/Aramaic is displayed.

דף פב,א גמרא

Rabbi Yehudah with his reasoning for he said: ??? No. ??? but not ??? What then does it mean when it says No. ??? but: ??? of A sin-offering that is tahor ??? in a case where there are one hundred cuts of Those who are ill ??? No. ??? In what matters are we saying this? ??? but not ??? No. ??? is preferable for him ??? What is different about the beginning of the teaching, and What is the difference at the end of the teaching, Thus said Rabbi ??? the son of of Rav This But the beginning of the teaching, ??? is a law established by the Rabbis at the end of the teaching, a law established by the Torah but: ??? What then does it mean when it says No. ??? at the end of the teaching, but: ??? of A sin-offering that is tahor ??? in a case where there are one hundred cuts of Those who are ill ??? No. ??? ??? ??? Regarding what matters are we speaking? ??? but: ??? No. that is tahor ??? is preferable for him Rava said: But the beginning of the teaching, prohibits Is this not at the end of the teaching, prohibits he is spiritually cut off Hey, isn't it the case that Rabbah he for he said: all ??? there is no difference prohibits Is this not and there is no difference prohibits he is spiritually cut off it is a problem Rav Ashi said: at the end of the teaching, It is because of this: that there is for him a thing in which there is to him permit and any thing thing in which there is to him permit even in a case where there are one thousand No. ??? Hey, isn't it the case that of Rav ??? She for one If it was ??? Sarai If it was to Israel In reality lit: In the world is forbidden but how do you reconcile that with this teaching of Rav ??? She reasoned R' Yochanan terumah in these times (nowadays) a law established by the Torah For it was taught: two ??? One of Those who are ill and one of terumah and before them two ??? One of Those who are ill and one of terumah ??? these in the midst of these Behold! these ??? for I say terumah ??? terumah "She has fallen and Those who are ill in the midst of Those who are ill ??? and Raysh Lakish said This is only in the case ??? Those who are ill on ??? And R' Yochanan said: despite the fact that did not have his rabbi; Those who are ill on ??? This is satisfactory ??? his reasoning is ??? also ??? he ??? except to Rabbi Yochanan it is a problem So, with whom does it agree? It is the rabbis' position

דף פב,ב גמרא

and I that they said like Rabbi Yosi as it is taught: ??? the world (Deut. 30) who ??? the first and the second there is regarding them and the third Watch out for leading vav And they do not have And R' Yochanan said Which Tanna taught: order of the world Rabbi Yosei reasoned Rabbi Yochanan ??? No. in the case of ??? Hey, isn't it the case that We have learnt in a Mishna: ??? in which there is in it forty ??? he gave ??? and he took ??? is valid and R' Yehudah said: son of ??? he said ssi that R' Yochanan said until the majority of his body Is this not ??? the majority of his body No. that is not ??? the majority of his body And if you wish, I would say that I Here in this case, That there are to say for I say We have learnt in a Mishna: ??? It was taught by if exalted. Hey, isn't it the case that ??? The tanna teaches: ??? What then does it mean when it says but not ??? Rather, what can we conclude? ??? once it has been done ??? also once it has been done They said: No. ??? initially ??? but not ??? in the case where it has already been done, also, it is not valid. Hey, isn't it the case that When the baraita teaches at the end of the teaching, Rabbi Eliezer says: ??? we are guilty on its account stoning ??? from this general principle it would follow of the first tanna? ??? from doubt for him between for Master between for Master ??? This is obvious to him. There is this difference between them: stoning ??? reasoned we are guilty on its account stoning ??? and one master reasons that ??? Rav said

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.