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

דף קב,א גמרא

and if he is required he could sprinkle And we have learned ??? become tamei ??? they eat Is this not ??? Through the sprinkling of blood did the bread become sanctified No. ??? but: ??? Through the sprinkling of blood did the bread become sanctified What about in this case, too, ??? they eat ??? at Minchah become tamei ??? they eat ??? Regarding what matters are we speaking? ??? but: ??? Through the sprinkling of blood did the bread become sanctified become tamei ??? they eat ??? at Minchah ??? for him ??? at Minchah ??? he is equivalent. Even if thus become tamei ??? they eat Because it was to him ??? Rav Ashi said ??? in front of Rav ??? even you say to us actually and really and even you say ??? Through the sprinkling of blood did the bread become sanctified So if he wished, ??? he said If it was he is required it was. he could sprinkle we do not say They challenged him from this teaching: A general principle: Rabbi Yehoshua said: all ??? to him an hour when it is permitted to the priests, we do not apply the laws of misappropriation to it. and all that did not have it was to him an hour when it is permitted to the priests, We do apply the laws of misappropriation to it. and Who is an hour when it is permitted to the priests, That which sat overnight And that which became tamei, ??? And what is meant by this term that did not have it was to him an hour when it is permitted to the priests, one whose slaughter involved the intention to consume its meat outside its designated time or outside its designated place And that whose blood was collected by invalid priests And they sprinkled its blood. The tanna teaches: from this But the beginning of the teaching, That which sat overnight And that which became tamei, ??? Is this not ??? actually and really and here in this other case, So if he wished, it was. he could sprinkle he And we have learned there should not be the laws of misappropriation. No. ??? to go out ??? but: ??? actually and really What about in this case, too, ??? This all that he was to him an hour when it is permitted to the priests, and all that did not have it was to him an hour when it is permitted to the priests, all in which there is to him an hour when it is permitted to the priests, we do not apply the laws of misappropriation to it. and all that it does not have an hour when it is permitted to the priests, We do apply the laws of misappropriation to it. should bring himself except Rav Ashi said the laws of misappropriation of sacred things ??? the laws of misappropriation of sacred things It is because of this: "Kedushah" Is this not "Kedushah" She ??? to it ??? in what way ??? to it ??? It is because of this: eating Is this not ??? eating She all in a case So if he wished, he could sprinkle ??? he could sprinkle ??? for him eating and become tamei ??? they eat in a case So if he wished, ??? he could sprinkle he did not find he could sprinkle No. ??? for him eating ??? become tamei ??? they eat They challenged him from this teaching: ??? a guilt-offering suspended ??? that did not have Watch out for leading vav he sinned if before it was even the case that ??? to him he has fulfilled his obligation ??? these are the words of Rabbi Meir But the sages say:

דף קב,ב גמרא

??? until ??? "and he sold ??? R' Eliezer says: ??? he does not came on Watch out for leading vav he sinned this Behold! he came on Watch out for leading vav he sinned after ??? to him the blood ??? the blood ??? shall eat and Rabbi Yosei says: Even if the blood ??? shall eat Rabba said: Rabbi Yosei following the position of Rabbi Shimon he said for he said: all ??? to throw ??? he is equivalent. something he The reason is In the west, they said in the name of R' Yosi son of ??? we were The reason is of R' Yosi that thus reasoned implements of ??? ??? He said to him: Rav Ashi for Rav, ??? Rabbi Shimon all ??? to throw ??? he is equivalent. all ??? also ??? he is equivalent. notar and a cow why is it that impart tumah ??? they eat ??? in reality ??? He said to him ??? Ravina said to Rav Ashi: ??? them ??? tamei also ??? of him. ??? and a second person ??? who seeks ??? of menuchot offerings: ??? in it ??? and a second person or yes. ??? in it ??? and a second person For ??? for him ??? a law established by the Torah For we say it. is a law established by the Rabbis

דף קב,ב משנה

One who says Behold! by the ??? Just as ??? and the hands of ??? He has not fulfilled his obligation. -- this refers to ??? Behold! This is is invalid One who says Behold! by the two ??? in a vessel one ??? with two vessels with two vessels ??? in a vessel one Just as ??? and the hands of ??? He has not fulfilled his obligation. these in a vessel one ??? with two vessels with two vessels ??? in a vessel one Behold! these ??? Behold! by the two ??? in a vessel one ??? with two vessels They said to him: in a vessel one ??? with two vessels ??? in a vessel one are proper Behold! by the two ??? with two vessels ??? in a vessel one They said to him: with two vessels ??? with two vessels are proper were given ??? one ??? menuchot offerings: ???

דף קב,ב גמרא

And it was necessary to have both statements For if it was we had heard ??? the first It is because of this: for he said: ??? But here, in this case, ??? and this ??? and this and this ??? I would say the hands of ??? also he has fulfilled his obligation and if we had heard ??? It is because of this: that he came ??? them but: there i.e., in another mishna that is not ??? of him. I would say it is not necessary to teach this The Rabbis taught Just as ??? and the hands of ??? He has not fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Shimon says: Even the hands of ??? also ??? -- this refers to ??? and this was taught! No. ??? implements of ??? Abayye said: No. ??? but: ??? Subject to disqualification, And Abaye said They did not teach such a ruling.

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.