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

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

דף ב,א משנה

How so? the witnesses ??? acting as witnesses do we ??? so-and-so that he was son of a divorcee or son of Watch out for leading vav or a chalutzah They do not say may he do it? this son of a divorcee or son of Watch out for leading vav or a chalutzah beneath it except ??? forty acting as witnesses do we ??? so-and-so that he was he is liable ??? They do not say ??? this beneath it except ??? forty

דף ב,א גמרא

How so? yes. the witnesses ??? should bring himself And furthermore, When the baraita teaches ??? instead, they said to them how "You acting as witnesses for behold! ??? the day "You ??? in a place so-and-so Behold! these ??? yes. ??? It was taught there i.e., in another mishna he arises all ??? advance it ??? death except ??? the daughter of a priest ??? that do not advance it ??? death except ??? and there are witnesses ??? others that are not used judgement ??? all the essence except ??? forty How so? acting as witnesses do we ??? so-and-so that he was son of a divorcee or son of Watch out for leading vav or a chalutzah They do not say may he do it? this son of a divorcee or son of Watch out for leading vav or a chalutzah beneath it except ??? ??? words R' Yehoshua ben Levi said: ??? Rabbi Shimon son of ??? For scripture said: (Deut. 19) ??? to him as it was ??? to him and not ??? for him and not ??? in the case of as it was ??? to do there is not in this case. son of ??? says is a kal vachomer for just as ??? he does not ??? that comes ??? and not ??? is it not logical that did not have ??? He disagreed with this Ravina If so, ??? witnesses ???

דף ב,ב גמרא

for just as ??? he does not ??? that comes ??? and not ??? is it not logical that did not have ??? except ??? acting as witnesses do we ??? so-and-so that he was he is liable exile ??? From where do we derive this? he said Reish Lakish: For scripture said: (Deut. 19) he ??? to One ??? he and not ??? R' Yochanan says is a kal vachomer for just as he the one who did It once happened with intent he does not ??? there are. that did not have they make It once happened with intent is it not logical that did not have ??? but it ??? judgement ??? he the one who did It once happened with intent No. ??? so that thus it will be that is not ??? for him atonement there are. that did not have they make It once happened with intent also ??? so that thus it will be ??? them atonement except ??? Ulla said ??? from the Torah from where do we learn ??? Hey, isn't it the case that it is written (Deut. 19) ??? to him as it was ??? except ??? from the Torah from where do we learn As it is written (Deut. 25) ??? ??? the wicked, (Deut. 25) and it was the case that if son of ??? the wicked, It is because of this: ??? ??? the wicked, and it was the case that if son of ??? the wicked, except witnesses ??? ??? and they came witnesses ??? ??? originally ??? the wicked ones and it was the case that if son of ??? the wicked, Is it not enough for him (Ex. 20) fill ??? It is because of this: that there is Is this not in which is not It once happened and all Is this not in which is not It once happened yes. ??? upon it The Rabbis taught four items ??? yes. ??? son of a divorcee son of Watch out for leading vav or a chalutzah And there is no meaning to the word ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? It is because of this: Rabbi Akiva And they said Even yes. ??? yes. ??? son of a divorcee son of Watch out for leading vav or a chalutzah ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? ??? They reason ??? atonement and Behold! Is this not My son, atonement ??? Which Tanna taught: ??? atonement Rav Chisdah said R' Yishmael his son of R' Yochanan son of ??? She as it is taught: (Ex. 21) and gave redemption your soul he is equivalent. one who has suffered damage Rabbi Yishmael his son of R' Yochanan son of ??? says he is equivalent. one who caused damage Is this not In this case, ??? reasoned ??? and one master reasons that ??? atonement Rav Pappa said: No. everyone agrees lit: according to the whole world ??? atonement and here in this other case, In this case, ??? one master reasons that ??? and one master reasons that ??? What is the reasoning is a law established by the Rabbis it is said ??? to the bottom and it is said ??? is more Just as there ??? Even here, ??? and Rabbi Yishmael and gave redemption your soul it is written And the rabbbis yes. redemption your soul it is written ??? For ??? And there is no meaning to the word ??? reasoned av Hamnunah to say that is only in the case lit., "these words" הני מילי in a case is what he has for him ??? No. ??? we do not have also No. ??? but: in a case the one who does not have for him even though for there is them ??? and let them say for him If it was ??? it was. to you who it was. ??? We also No. ??? except reasoned av Hamnunah to say that is only in the case lit., "these words" הני מילי in a case is what he has or for him or ??? but: in a case the one who does not have No. for him and not ??? Raba said to him (Ex. 22) ??? the Merciful One in the Torah says ??? and not ??? It is because of this: Rabbi Akiva And they said ??? What is the reason? ??? his reasoning is ??? he ??? yes. must make restitution ??? himself Rabbah said Know ye that the following proof is conclusively true: for behold! No. they make It once happened ??? Rav Nachman said Know ye that the following proof is conclusively true: for behold! money or property in the hand of ???