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 עה,א גמרא

that did not have in the house of judgement it was. he arises For it was taught: He said to him: yes. ??? anything immediately ??? Is this not ??? She This a Tanna taught: for he said: immediately yes. to you witnesses reasoned give thanks ??? and after this ??? witnesses he is liable and that one a Tanna taught: for he said: immediately ??? reasoned give thanks ??? and after this ??? witnesses is exempt No. ??? give thanks ??? and after this ??? witnesses is exempt In this case, what they disagree about This a Tanna taught: for he said: immediately yes. to you witnesses reasoned except to the court bet din it was. ??? a Tanna taught: for he said: immediately ??? reasoned in the house of judgement ??? it was said: give thanks ??? and after this ??? witnesses Rav said: is exempt And Shmuel said he is liable Rabba said: son of ??? What is the reason of Rav? (Ex. 22) if ??? creates an exclusion ??? himself why do I have (Ex. 22) ??? except Learn from this give thanks ??? and after this ??? witnesses is exempt And Shmuel said to you This certain individual he had asked for him ??? himself ??? of the academy of ??? Rav ??? he saw witnesses ??? and shall come and he said ??? but not ??? and not ??? he does not must make restitution except the principal amount He said to him: Here in this case, with what are we dealing? For example, ??? witnesses ??? Hey, isn't it the case that ??? at the end of the teaching, Rabbi Eliezer ??? Shimon says ??? witnesses ??? from this general principle it would follow ??? that came first reasoned did not say to him Shmuel Is this not that it is possible R' Elazar ??? Shimon and it was standing ??? I that they said ??? Shimon ??? certainly ??? She for Rav, Who would say ??? She Rav would say to you I that they said Even if to Rabbi ??? Shimon Up to this point, he does not come to say i.e., what he really means is not: R' Elazar ??? Shimon there i.e., in another mishna except It is because of this: that he came he would acknowledge the correct position of ??? But here, in this case, ??? Even if R' Elazar ??? Shimon give thanks Rav Hamnunah said ??? of Rav in the case of one who says ??? witnesses ??? is exempt for behold! he is liable himself ??? but: he said No. ??? witnesses ??? and he returned and he said ??? witnesses ??? he is liable for behold! he exempted himself ??? Rabba said: ??? of the academy of Rav for it is the case that Rabban Gamliel exempts himself ??? it was. and he said for him Rav Chisda to Rav Huna. and not ??? for him it was said: also he said R' Chiyya bar Abba R' Yochanan said: ??? witnesses ??? is exempt for behold! he is liable himself ??? but: he said No. ??? witnesses ??? and he returned and he said ??? witnesses ??? he is liable for behold! he exempted himself ??? Rav Ashi said Our mishna ??? also ??? Our mishna For it was taught in a baraita ??? by the mouth of two ??? a single witness or by the mouth of himself must make restitution restitutions for ??? and does not must make restitution restitutions for four and five why do I have for it teaches: ??? by the mouth of two Let the Tanna teach: ??? by the mouth of a single witness or by the mouth of himself he does not must make restitution except ???

דף עה,ב גמרא

except Is this not Thus can we come and learn from this. ??? by the mouth of two ??? by the mouth of a single witness or by the mouth of himself he that is not he is obligated himself ??? he ??? himself is equivalent ??? a single witness Just as ??? a single witness For will come a single witness ??? he is obligated by the mouth of himself also For they came witnesses he is obligated but: ??? a single witness or ??? himself ??? himself ??? we do not say by the mouth of himself is equivalent ??? the mouth of a single witness ??? as it is taught: he saw witnesses ??? and have come and he said ??? but not ??? and not ??? he does not must make restitution except the principal amount why do I have ??? and he said ??? but not ??? and not ??? or ??? or ??? but how do you reconcile that with this teaching Come and learn from this. The reason is for he said: ??? he ??? himself ??? this he is exempt from punishment although his action was improper but: he said No. ??? witnesses ??? and he returned and he said ??? witnesses ??? that is not he is liable himself ??? he is liable Perhaps, thanks ??? Is this not thanks She They said: No. She ??? Come and learn from this. ??? for he said: ??? even though for he said: No. ??? and not ??? witnesses ??? is exempt What is the reason? restitutions for ??? five the Merciful One in the Torah says and not restitutions for four and not restitutions for three Let us say, ??? they were two acting as witnesses ??? they were two ??? that specific ??? giving witness ??? nullification All of it ??? he must make restitution restitutions for ??? there are. ??? restitutions for three It is because of this: ??? And they said there are. ??? restitutions for ??? This is only in the case must make restitution restitutions for three ??? and two ??? he arises ??? Shall I say He interprets it as referring to the earlier text he does not have ??? giving witness ??? nullification All of it So rather, ??? then the ruling is acceptable. ??? rabbis he must make restitution restitutions for ??? and they ??? restitutions for three except the validity ??? There is this difference between them: For example, ??? among two they said to him ??? He said to them yes. ??? No. ??? and he carried it ??? that is not ??? and he carried it the master of the house ??? of him. ??? what they disagree about is a law established by the Rabbis reason that even though ??? witnesses he that he came give thanks thanks ??? thanks She but exempt him ??? reasoned immediately ??? witnesses he that he came give thanks ??? Is this not thanks ??? witnesses ??? restitutions for ??? This is only in the case must make restitution three ??? and two ??? Rav Acha said the son of of Rav ??? No. everyone agrees lit: according to the whole world thanks ??? Is this not thanks She except ??? you It is possible ??? what they disagree about For example, ??? and there are those who say ??? and he said to them ??? No. ??? except before so-and-so so-and-so and he carried it ??? that is not ??? and they came so-and-so so-and-so ??? of him. ??? In this case, what they disagree about is a law established by the Rabbis reason that ??? to it giving witness ??? you It is possible ??? and all giving witness ??? you It is possible ??? did not occur giving witness ??? reasoned giving witness ??? you It is possible ??? giving witness Hey, isn't it the case that ??? to us ??? you It is possible ??? did not occur giving witness What case is he dealing with? in a case that is not ??? day ??? hour ??? A general principle: But here, in this case, ??? he that he came ??? for him Mar said: there are. ??? restitutions for ??? give thanks ??? the principal amount he is required ??? Rabbi Eliezer said in the name of Rav It was taught by

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.