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 לב,א משנה

and if he stood the master of ??? he is liable and if he said ??? is exempt he was the master of ??? and the master of ??? the last ??? he is liable and if he stood the master of ??? is exempt and if he said ??? he is liable and thus this came ??? and this ???

דף לב,א גמרא

Rabbah brought this very question son of he gave ??? the one who caused damage his wife ??? the mattress What then? immediately ??? is exempt or, perhaps, It was necessary for him ??? He said to him ??? is a voluntary act ??? and to this is a voluntary act ??? Rabba said: is a kal vachomer for just as ??? for this ??? enter and this ??? enter was it made? ??? to domain his fellow he is liable this ??? his fellow enter is it not all the more so? but how do you reconcile that with this teaching The tanna teaches: ??? is a voluntary act ??? and to this is a voluntary act ??? there i.e., in another mishna both of them. ??? Here in this case, ??? It once happened but it No. For it is written (Lev. 18) ??? and became close ??? benefit ??? there is for them ??? It once happened he ??? he was the master of ??? Raysh Lakish said two ??? in the public domain One ??? and one ??? ??? Let me say in support of him of R' Gidal: he was the master of ??? and the master of ??? the last ??? is exempt and if he stood the master of ??? he is liable Hey, isn't it the case that Here in this case, ??? he is equivalent. And we have learned he is liable ??? this one ??? No. ??? that is not ??? except ??? also it is a problem The reason is ??? this one ??? ipso facto is exempt Hey, isn't it the case that ??? And we have learned he is liable ??? which was divided by ??? Here in this case, For example, ??? it is dealing with a case where there is only one. side It was necessary to it ??? side except at the end of the teaching, ??? That would be a support to him. To whose position? ??? where he teaches he was the master of ??? and the master of ??? the last ??? he is liable and if he stood the master of ??? is exempt Hey, isn't it the case that Here in this case, ??? he is equivalent. And we have learned is exempt ??? and so when ??? Here in this case, He said to him ??? for there is to you is a voluntary act ??? by the ??? among ??? to you ???

דף לב,א משנה

two that were walking in the public domain one ran and one walking or that were both they were running ??? this one for that one both are exempt

דף לב,א גמרא

??? that is not ??? son of Yehudah as it is taught: ??? son of Yehudah says ran he is liable because it was ??? give thanks ??? on the eve of the Sabbath. between ??? that he was is exempt because of ??? that R' Yochanan said The halacha is ??? son of Yehudah And who said it? Rabbi Yochanan thus For didn't R' Yochanan say The halacha is ??? and we have learnt in a Mishna: one ran and one walking or that were both they were running are exempt ??? on the eve of the Sabbath. between ??? From where can you derive When the baraita teaches or that were both they were running are exempt this one Watch out for leading vav And, too, Why do I need now one ran and one walking is exempt both they were running -- why must that case be taught as well? except thus he comes to say i.e., what he really means is: one ran and one walking is exempt In what matters are we saying this? on the eve of the Sabbath. between ??? but: ??? one ran and one walking he is liable both they were running Even if ??? are exempt Mar said: give thanks ??? on the eve of the Sabbath. between ??? that he was is exempt because of ??? on the eve of the Sabbath. What then does it mean when it says ??? that it is possible It is like that which was said by Rabbi ??? for he said: R' Chaninah

דף לב,ב גמרא

??? to greet a bride ??? And there are those who say it was to greet Sabbath a bride ??? Rabbi ??? and he arises and he said ??? a bride ??? a bride

דף לב,ב משנה

??? in the public domain ??? in a personal domain in a personal domain ??? in the public domain in a personal domain ??? in a personal domain after he is liable

דף לב,ב גמרא

And it was necessary to have both statements For if it was a Tanna taught: ??? in a personal domain ??? in the public domain It is because of this: ??? many but: ??? that is not ??? many I would say No. and if a Tanna taught: ??? It is because of this: originally that did not have ??? does he act? but: for the domain Watch out for leading vav or the individual ??? does he act? I would say No. and if a Tanna taught: ??? both this one It is because of this: ??? many Hey, isn't it the case that It is because of this: ??? but: ??? after that is not ??? many and from the beginning ??? I would say No. ??? The Rabbis taught One who enters ??? of ??? that did not have ??? on his face did he die is exempt and if enter ??? he is liable What then does it mean when it says he is liable R' Yosi said son of ??? he is liable ??? items but exempt him ??? on account of that do not ??? this ??? enter and this ??? enter this to domain his fellow enter Rabba said: is a kal vachomer for just as ??? this ??? enter and this ??? enter was it made? ??? with understanding his fellow ??? this ??? his fellow enter is it not all the more so? except Rabba said: What then does it mean when it says is exempt ??? that is not ??? for him ??? And this is like the position The reason is of R' Yosi son of ??? It is because of this: that there is for him ??? He challenged this "He" meaning... Raba ??? to him ??? One did he die Behold! this ??? on ??? Hey, isn't it the case that Here in this case, ??? he ??? And we have learned Behold! this ??? Rav said ??? for him Raba ??? He said to him: because he with whom does it agree? For it was taught: The greatness ??? reads and the second ??? says ??? except Rav said ??? They challenged him from this teaching: ??? ??? Behold! this ??? Hey, isn't it the case that Here in this case, ??? he ??? for him ??? And we have learned Behold! this ??? Rav said Shmuel son of Isaac ??? ??? It was necessary for him ??? by night by night also It was necessary for him ??? ??? by day ??? This ??? How so? How should we understand this? If it was ??? many ??? he and if No. ??? many ??? he Rav Pappa said: ??? Watch out for leading vav And it was necessary to have both statements ??? in the dunghill ??? by night It is not ??? by day and there are ??? shall not be for it is the case that It is not ??? by day ??? also shall not be for it is the case that that it is possible ??? Rav ??? in the name of Raba he would say over to it He interprets it as referring to the earlier text One who enters ??? of ??? that did not have ??? to him ??? to him on his face did he die is exempt he said Rabbi Yosei son of ??? he is liable ??? items but exempt him ??? one ??? to it ??? how much more so He interprets it as referring to the earlier text and one ??? to it He interprets it as referring to the earlier text but: ??? immediately ??? he is liable exile and who he is liable exile For it was taught: One who enters ??? of ??? to him on his face did he die is exempt and even enter ??? Here in this case, with what are we dealing? ??? he arises ??? in it to go out and does not he would exit but on account of ??? in it to go out ??? he arises ??? he has fulfilled his obligation If so, after also

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.