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

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

דף כה,א גמרא

the case is that of a sin-offering, we say it. Ravina he said And this is what the tanna means to teach: something ??? a thing food he ??? son of food he No. The tanna teaches: Consider this case: that which was sanctified for Temple use ??? also ??? and stones except And this is what the tanna means to teach: ??? for there is of it ??? since it has no value, For example, ??? or in the case that one is not shall sleep No. The tanna teaches:

דף כה,א משנה

one items of himself and one items of others and one items in which there is of them actually and really and one items that do not have in them actually and really How so? he said ??? so-and-so or in the case that one is not ??? or in the case that one is not I have given ??? or in the case that one is not shall sleep ??? or in the case that one is not ??? to the sea or in the case that one is not ??? or in the case that one is not ??? R' Yishmael says he is not liable except on the future in going as it is said (Lev. 5) ??? or ??? He said to him: Rabbi Akiva If so, yes. for me except items in which there is of them the evil ??? items that do not have in them the evil ??? from where do we learn He said to him: ??? the scripture He said to him: if ??? the scripture ??? the scripture ???

דף כה,א גמרא

The Rabbis taught ??? ??? that nedarim-vows ??? on a thing a commandment ??? freedom Just as that do not thus ??? on a thing in which is not actually and really ??? in which there is in it actually and really Just as that do not thus ??? How so? he said ??? or in the case that one is not ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? Shall I say justice ??? he as it is said (Deut. 15) ??? to him except gifts ??? or in the case that one is not ??? Really? ??? Yochanan One who says ??? that did not have shall sleep three days ??? that specific sleeping ??? there i.e., in another mishna for he said: three Here in this case, that is not he said ??? to the sea or in the case that one is not ??? it was said: ??? so-and-so ??? to the sea or in the case that one is not In a case where he sprinkled the blood --- Rav said: he is liable And Shmuel said is exempt Rav said: he is liable ??? there are. And Shmuel said is exempt ??? Let us say, ??? For R' Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva ??? For it was taught in a baraita R' Yishmael says he is not liable except on the future in going as it is said ??? or ??? He said to him: Rabbi Akiva If so, yes. for me except items in which there is of them the evil ??? items that do not have in them the evil ??? from where do we learn He said to him: ??? the scripture He said to him: if ??? the scripture ??? the scripture ??? Rav for he said: like Rabbi Akiva. And for Shmuel for he said: ??? Yishmael who follow the reasoning ??? For R' Yishmael the whole world does not disagree now the validity ??? No. he is obligated He ascended Rabbi Yishmael on that which was in the past the validity ??? Because specifically, where they disagree is this: who follow the reasoning ??? ??? Rav like Rabbi Akiva. And Shmuel said Up to this point, No. he is obligated Rabbi Akiva there i.e., in another mishna on that which was in the past except a saying ??? he is obligated Rabbi Akiva on that which was in the past but: something ??? No. Let us say, ???

דף כה,ב גמרא

of Rabbi Yehudah en Beteira And the rabbbis what they disagree about For it was taught in a baraita "to nullify has sworn the Commandment and not he nullifies is exempt to establish the Commandment and not stood i.e., as long as he lived is exempt that he was In justice, that it should be he is liable in accordance with the words of R' Yehudah en Beteira for he said: Rabbi Yehudah en Beteira for just as if freedom that is not ??? upon it ??? Behold! he he is liable upon it a commandment ??? upon it ??? is it not logical that it should be he is liable upon it They said to him: No. if is what you say? Do you really mean that? ??? freedom which provides One who acts of it Is this not a priest shall you say ??? a commandment which provides No. One who acts of it Is this not a priest Let him say Rav for he said: like R' Yehudah en Beteira And for Shmuel for he said: ??? who follow the reasoning ??? of Rabbi Yehudah en Beteira the whole world does not disagree now Is this not there are. it does not require ??? and on that which was in the past he is required Because specifically, where they disagree is this: who follow the reasoning ??? is a law established by the Rabbis Shmuel ??? Rav For No. ??? rabbis ??? there are. As it is written (Lev. 5) ??? or ??? clearly and explicitly but: ??? and on that which was in the past ??? they came ??? He challenged this "He" meaning... av Hamnunah No. ??? the day and not ??? tefillin the day ??? I and he said "Amen" he is liable This is satisfactory No. ??? without he eats except No. ??? who ??? without shall grant rest he ??? to it This is only in the case ??? to it to the side The tanna teaches: No. ??? No. ??? He challenged this "He" meaning... Raba What is an example of one ??? without worth "to learn Mishna has sworn ??? to a person and he said on ??? of the stone ??? in a place ??? that he was of gold Ulla said This is only in the case ??? people The reason is ??? this one No. ??? transgresses It is because of this: ??? But why? this one he does not ??? of gold he ??? to it This is only in the case ??? to it ??? transgresses It is because of this: ??? without worth No. ??? transgresses It is because of this: ??? that is false Abayye said: give thanks Rav in the case of one who says to his fellow ??? that I know to you giving witness ??? that is not know for him this he is exempt from punishment although his action was improper Because ??? are in the general category ??? know to you giving witness ??? and not ??? It is a disagreement ??? and not ??? It is a disagreement This is satisfactory ??? for he said: the validity ??? No. he is obligated upon it on that which was in the past ??? the Merciful One ??? giving witness from this general principle it would follow ??? except for Rav, for what Watch out for leading vav And the halacha is according to the opinion ??? the Merciful One ??? rabbis in front ??? upon it both He said to them both No. ??? as it is taught: (Lev. 5) ??? you ??? and if you ??? two ??? for what Watch out for leading vav And the halacha is according to the opinion ??? the Merciful One to account for that which was taught in all of them it is said ??? here, It is not said ??? on ??? And they said to him rabbis ??? I would say with intent ??? one in error ??? both He said to them Is this not we were that they said ??? One you ??? and if you ??? two and if with intent who that it is possible both Rava said: It is because of this: ??? a thing ??? and went out ??? In the matter ??? yes. to you in it except ??? only. from this general principle it would follow ??? reasoned ??? in the world" For thus said Abaye: give thanks Rav in the case of one who says to his fellow ??? that I know to you giving witness ??? that is not know for him this he is exempt from punishment although his action was improper Because ??? know to you giving witness he returns of him. Abaye ??? And if you wish, I would say