It's a start Dafcast Draft
ראש השנה
מועד קטן
בבא קמא
בבא מציעא
בבא בתרא
עבודה זרה


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


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.


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."


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 יא,א גמרא

??? a lost object ??? and one master reasons that No. ??? a lost object ??? And if you wish, I would say ??? the whole world does not disagree ??? a lost object ??? and here in this other case, in the case of a child. ??? one master reasons that ??? a child ??? and one master reasons that No. ??? a child ??? And if you wish, I would say Master, he said one Master, he said one and does not disagree

דף יא,א משנה

he saw them they were running after a lost object after a deer that was lame after pigeons that did not have the ability to fly and he said it has taken possession for me -- my field did -- Indeed, it has taken posession for him if it was a case of a deer that ran according to his way or that they were pigeons that were flying and he said "my field has taken possession for me" he did not say anything at all.

דף יא,א גמרא

Rav Yehudah said that Shmuel said This is only in the case ??? beside ??? for him ??? for he said: R' Yosi the son of Rabbi Chanina ??? of a person he acquires to him that did not have ??? What case is he dealing with? ??? but: a courtyward that is not ??? If it was ??? beside ??? yes. If it was No. No. ??? that is not ??? If it was ??? beside ??? yes. If it was No. No. as it is taught: He was standing in the city And it is said: I know ??? in which there is for me in the field workers? ??? No. ??? It is possible No. ??? Therefore, scripture states: (Deut. 24) ??? in the field in the field ??? and not in the city this one Back to the main body of the text: it is a problem is what you say? Do you really mean that? It is possible No. ??? Perhaps, you shall ??? He used the wording to it ??? in the field ??? and not in the city Perhaps, shall not be ??? except Is this not thus he comes to say i.e., what he really means is: in the field ??? you shall ??? and in the end ??? yes. ??? What is the reason? ??? and it was standing ??? for him ??? it has taken possession for him but: in the city even ??? and in the end ??? What is the reason? ??? for him From where can you derive Perhaps ??? the scripture She ??? and in the city No. ??? Scripture states: (Deut. 24) No. ??? the city This should bring himself ??? If so, let scripture say No. ??? What then does it mean when it says No. ??? the city ??? should bring himself ??? yes. ??? there are ??? that he was ??? This is the general rule: Any thing that was ??? all that is not ??? he does not ??? Rav Ashi said Scripture states: (Deut. 24) it shall be ??? the city and thus Ulla said This is only in the case ??? beside ??? and thus Rabbah bar bar Channah said This is only in the case ??? beside ??? Rabbi Abba ??? It once happened ??? and elders that were shall come ??? he said Rabban Gamliel ??? that I future ???

דף יא,ב גמרא

??? to him ??? after that I future ??? son of Joseph so that ??? in it ??? to him And so Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva beside ??? of Rabban Gamliel they were they stand He said to him: he is equivalent. This from the rabbis ??? For he came ??? He said to them Thus said ??? So, too, here, ??? He said to him: one of the rabbis Rabban Gamliel ??? to them Rabbi Zeira ??? Rabbi Abba No. ??? Rabba said: then the ruling is acceptable. does he act? that is not ??? And so No. he was to them ??? from him ??? except ??? benefit It is not money or property ??? from him ??? Here in this case, also, ??? benefit It is not money or property ??? atop ??? and not She presentations the priesthood ??? in them? ??? a way a purchase ??? he ??? She Rav Papa said, the understanding of ??? those particular that I ??? For it was taught in a baraita he saw those particular they were running after a lost object etc. and he said Rabbi ??? Rabbi Yochanan said: This is only in the case ??? he is required Rabbi ??? as a gift how ??? of him Rabbi Abba bar Kahana despite the fact ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? What is the reason? Is this not It is because of this: ??? those particular that I He said to him: Rav ??? for Rav, ??? Behold! writ ??? it Ulla said This is only in the case ??? beside ??? or beside ??? that I writ ??? the master of ??? He disagreed with this Rav Sheishet the son of of Rav This Is this not ??? he for just as writ ??? the master of ??? If it was is standing beside ??? and beside ??? yes. If it was No. No. gifts ??? is it not all the more so? except Rav Ashi said

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.