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 פז,א משנה

the daughter of a priest ??? to Israel It may not be eaten from terumah did he die to it from him son of It may not be eaten from terumah ??? It may be eaten ??? did he die to it from him son of It may be eaten ??? It may be eaten from terumah did he die to it from him son of It may be eaten from terumah did he die he built ??? It may not be eaten from terumah did he die he built ??? It may not be eaten ??? did he die he built from Israel ??? and on -- this refers to it is said (Lev. 22) ??? to the house of ??? It may be eaten

דף פז,א גמרא

did he die he built ??? It may be eaten from terumah ??? It is because of this: he built From where do we derive this? he said R' Abba -- Rav said the daughter of the daughter of like who like Rabbi Akiva. who derives an explanation from ??? even you say rabbis ??? the daughter of he read ??? he The rabbis taught: ??? It is not ??? Rav Chisdah said Ravina said son of ??? What then does it mean when it says he read (Lev. 22) She ??? It may not be eaten ??? from ??? It may not be eaten Rav ??? Rabbah said son of Avuah ??? and not all bread creates an exclusion ??? He disagreed with this pointed out a contradiction. son of Chama I would say creates an exclusion ??? nedarim-vows to bring an offering Rabba said: Already a division from It was taught in the academy of Rabbi Yishmael, ??? of the academy of R' Yishmael (Num. 30) ??? a widow and a divorcee ??? upon it Just as Scripture states: Is it not the case that ??? from this general principle it would follow ??? from this general principle it would follow the master of except Behold! ??? for those who are emissaries of ??? or ??? Emmissaries ??? for those who are emissaries of ??? or ??? on the way how I reads of it the house of ??? of -- this refers to or the house of ??? of -- this refers to except to say to you immediately ??? one hour for the domain ??? for the remainder It is impossible ??? Rav ??? he said ??? It may be eaten bread and not meat Rav Papa said, ??? It may be eaten bread ??? creates an exclusion ??? that is high ??? And Rabba said (Lev. 10) and ??? and ??? you and your sons ??? at a time i.e., in a case ??? Rav Adda bar Ahava said a Tanna taught: ??? It is not ??? on account of he built ??? Even ??? He went Rav ??? he said ??? in front of Rav ??? he said ??? who is preferable, to it ??? there i.e., in another mishna are written ??? Here in this case, No. are written ??? the daughter of a priest ??? to Israel ??? The Rabbis taught ??? to the house of ??? creates an exclusion ??? creates an exclusion ??? Is it not the case that It would be a logical inference for just as in a place that did not have One who acts ??? from ??? from the second ??? from ??? One who acts transgresses ??? a place the one who did ??? from ??? from the second ??? from ??? is it not logical that it was made transgresses ??? No. What do I have to learn from One who acts transgresses ??? in the matter of ??? for behold! One who acts the dead ??? was it made? transgresses ??? in the matter of terumah that did not have One who acts the dead ??? Scripture states: ??? creates an exclusion ??? and It is necessary to teach this ??? preganant and It is necessary to teach this ??? and seed It does not have For if it was Therefore, to avoid this incorrect deduction, the Merciful One wrote: and seed It does not have from the beginning one Back to the main body of the text: and now two ??? but: preganant originally one Back to the main body of the text: and now one Back to the main body of the text: I would say ??? Watch out for leading vav And it was necessary to have both statements and if Therefore, to avoid this incorrect deduction, the Merciful One wrote: preganant originally Back to the main body of the text:

דף פז,ב גמרא

??? and now Back to the main body of the text: ??? but: seed It does not have originally Back to the main body of the text: ??? and now Back to the main body of the text: ??? I would say No. ??? He said to him: No. ??? and not was it made? ??? and terumah ??? and terumah ??? He said to him: Rav Yehudah ??? to Raba No. was it made? the dead ??? in the matter of ??? by a "kal vachomer" for just as in a place the one who did ??? from ??? from the second ??? from ??? No. One who acts the dead ??? a place that did not have One who acts ??? from ??? from the second ??? from ??? is it not logical that did not have was it made? the dead ??? Scripture states: (Prov. 3) ??? and all ??? peace was it made? the dead ??? in the matter of terumah From a "kal vachomer", for just as in a place that did not have One who acts ??? from ??? from the second ??? from ??? One who acts the dead ??? a place the one who did ??? from ??? from the second ??? from ??? is it not logical that it was made the dead ??? Scripture states: (Lev. 22) and seed It does not have Hey, isn't it the case that It does not have was it made? ??? from ??? from the second in the matter of ??? From a "kal vachomer", for just as in a place that did not have One who acts the dead ??? in the matter of terumah One who acts ??? from ??? from the second a place the one who did the dead ??? in the matter of ??? is it not logical that it was made ??? from ??? from the second Scripture states: (Deut. 25) son of he (Hey, isn't it the case that) does not have he (and not) does not have was it made? ??? from ??? from the second ??? From a "kal vachomer", Just as in a place the one who did the dead ??? from ??? No. One who acts ??? from ??? from the second a place that did not have One who acts the dead ??? in the matter of terumah is it not logical that did not have was it made? ??? from ??? from the second Therefore, scripture states: It does not have Hey, isn't it the case that there are to it

דף פז,ב משנה

the his wife ??? the sea ??? And they said to her did he die ??? and after this came ??? from this and from this it requires writ from this and from this and It does not have her ketuba and not fruits and not food and not ??? Not on this and not on this and if raised up i.e., separated from this and from this ??? a mamzer from this and from this and not both this and this become tamei to it and not both this and this ??? No. ??? and not in the works of his hand and not ??? it was A daughter of Israel ??? from ??? the daughter of Levi from the tithe the daughter of a priest from ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? of this ??? of this ??? her ketubah written contract and if Watch out for leading vav !! and they died? ??? of this ??? of this ??? and not ??? R' Yosei says her ketubah written contract on ??? Rabbi Eliezer says ??? and in the works of his hand ??? Rabbi Shimon says: ??? or ??? of ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? from him a mamzer and if ??? that did not have ??? it is permitted. ??? to him ??? by the mouth of a court בית דין ??? from ??? No. ??? by the mouth of a court בית דין ??? proper The strength a court בית דין ??? from ??? a court בית דין ??? and the halacha is and embarrassment ??? that did not have ??? except ???

דף פז,ב גמרא

When the baraita teaches at the end of the teaching, gets married that did not have ??? it is permitted. ??? to him that did not have ??? a court בית דין except ??? from this general principle it would follow that at the beginning of the teaching ??? a court בית דין ??? one Perhaps, a single witness faithfully and we have learnt in a Mishna: also ??? to be marry off their daughters until ??? until and the woman ??? a woman and the woman ??? a slave ??? a maidservant Perhaps, a single witness ??? and we have learnt in a Mishna: also a single witness says Watch out for leading vav "And you shall eat milk and he says No. ??? is exempt The reason is for he said: No. ??? this one He was silent. ??? Perhaps, a single witness ??? according to Torah law, What is our source for this claim as it is taught: (Lev. 4) or ??? and not ??? others It is possible despite the fact that is not ??? is exempt Therefore, scripture states: or ??? In any case, How so? Shall I say ??? two and not ??? them he read why do I have except Is this not one And so No. ??? for him ??? Learn from this a single witness faithfully And from where do you derive ??? Perhaps It is because of this: that he came ??? is comparable Know ye that the following proof is conclusively true: it is taught at the end And they said two Watch out for leading vav "And you shall eat milk and he says No. ??? is exempt Rabbi Meir he is obligated he said R' Meir ??? if ??? two to suffer lit, to the hands of death is stricter No. ??? to suffer lit, to the hands of sacrifice ??? They said to him: Just as if ??? to say ??? I was But the beginning of the teaching,

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.