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

דף י,א גמרא

??? in fire ??? must make restitution ??? he is liable ??? of a slave ??? is forbidden to benefit from it ??? a mute and a child he is liable Just as that do not thus in fire ??? in fire ??? Just as that do not thus ??? in fire ??? ??? a mute and a child he is liable ??? in fire ??? in fire ??? to walk and to cause damage ??? to eat between a thing ??? to it or whether a thing that is not ??? to it Just as that do not thus ??? ??? ??? he is liable in it the vessels Just as that do not thus ??? So, with whom does it agree? it is R' Yehudah ??? on ??? vessels ??? If it was Rabbi Yehudah I would say at the end of the teaching, ??? in fire ??? to walk and to cause damage ??? to eat between a thing ??? to it or whether a thing that is not ??? to it Just as that do not thus ??? a thing ??? to it What then does it mean when it says ??? pieces of wood a thing that do not ??? to it What then does it mean when it says ??? vessels Just as that do not thus ??? If it was R' Yehudah this one is what you say? Do you really mean that? he is obligated he was R' Yehudah on ??? vessels ??? But rather, in reality lit: in the world, It is the rabbis' position and it was taught ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? That this ??? If you wish, I would say In reality lit: In the world R' Yehudah and a thing that do not ??? to it Is this not to include vessels except to include ??? its stones He disagreed with this Rav Ashi Let the Tanna teach: ??? he is liable in it ox invalid as regarding ??? Just as that do not thus ??? If you say, This is satisfactory It is the rabbis' position ??? also ??? except If you say, R' Yehudah What then does it mean when it says ??? That this ??? threshing ??? If it was It is because of this: threshing ??? Is this not ??? he ??? which provides ??? to walk ??? I caused in part ??? The rabbis taught: I caused a small portion of their damage. I am obligated in making whole their damage. as one who caused all their damage. How so? One who digs a pit nine and someone else came ??? that ten ??? he is liable that is not like Rabbi as it is taught: One who digs a pit nine and someone else came ??? that ten the last he is liable Rabbi says after the last ??? after both ??? Rav Papa said, ??? and the words of all are that it is possible that they said Let us say, that is not like Rabbi Rav Pappa said: ??? and the words of all are He disagreed with this Rabbi Zeira And, too, there is not in this case. And this is present here. ??? people ??? in it one from them ??? he is liable How so? Shall I say ??? It was not ??? This is obvious! ??? except ??? also ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? He disagreed with this Rav Sheishet And this is present here. ??? How so?

דף י,ב גמרא

If it was ??? No. ??? This is obvious! except ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? does he act? He disagreed with this Rav ??? And this is present here. this one that teaches Hashem ??? on Watch out for leading vav or a bench one and not ??? came one and he sat upon it ??? he is liable And Rav Pappa said For example, ??? son of Abba How so? Shall I say ??? No. ??? This is obvious! except ??? also ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? the end of the end of ??? in a case ??? it is not necessary to teach this ??? you shall ??? it is dealing with a case where there are two ??? and now ??? hour that they said for him If it was Is this not you shall ??? and let us say, them If it was Is this not You ??? It was not ??? it is not necessary to teach this ??? in them? ??? This is obvious! What would you have said? his strength Is this not ??? he is equivalent. Come and learn from this. ??? he is equivalent. ??? in a case ??? his strength also ??? And, too, there is not in this case. And this is present here. this one that teaches ??? ten people ??? between "At the same time," between "In the case of this one after that one," did he die all of them are exempt Rabbi Yehudah en Beteira says "In the case of this one after that one," ??? he is liable because of ??? ??? No. ??? And if you wish, I would say ??? No. ??? and not Hey, isn't it the case that ??? that is not like Rabbi that is not ??? like R' Yehudah en Beteira and not ??? No. ??? I am obligated in making whole ??? I am obligated ??? No. The tanna teaches: except in making whole their damage. ??? about this teaching For the Rabbis taught restitutions for damage This teaches ??? From where do we derive this? he said R' Ami For scripture said: (Lev. 24) ??? livestock ??? We will suggest an alternate reading of this text: Do not read ??? except ??? Rav Kahana he said from here (Ex. 22) if ??? until ??? No. ??? until ??? herself No. ??? Hezekiyah said: from here (Ex. 21) and the dead it shall be to him ??? and thus was taught of the academy of ??? and the dead it shall be to him ??? You say ??? Or perhaps, except to the one causing damage is what you say? Do you really mean that? It is not thus What then does it mean when it says It is not thus Abayye said: Watch out for leading vav !! And if it enters your mind to argue that roadkill ??? the Merciful One ox under the ox ??? and the dead it shall be to him why do I have Learn from this ??? And it was necessary to have both statements For if it was Therefore, to avoid this incorrect deduction, the Merciful One wrote: ??? livestock ??? It is because of this: that is not found. but: ??? I would say it is not necessary to teach this and if ??? It is because of this: ??? but: ??? livestock ??? I would say No. and if ??? Behold! both this one It is because of this: that is not found. Hey, isn't it the case that It is because of this: ??? but: and the dead it shall be to him ??? I would say No. and if ??? the dead it shall be to him It is because of this: ??? one who caused damage But here, in this case, ??? one who caused damage I would say it is not necessary to teach this He said to him Rav Kahana for Rav, except The reason is ??? the Merciful One and the dead it shall be to him this one Is this not thus then I might incorrectly say: roadkill ??? now If it was it has for him how much ??? he will give for him As Mar said: (Ex. 21) ??? the value of silver and even ??? that are his -- why must that case be taught as well? No. ??? except ??? roadkill Let us say, ??? roadkill ??? She as it is taught: if ??? until

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.