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 טז,א משנה

??? regarding the handful of meal-offering and not ??? and not regarding the handful of meal-offering R' Meir says an invalidating act nevertheless but we become liable to excision on its account. But the sages say: Watch out for leading vav And there is not the penalty of excision, until ??? in all the releasing "We thank..." the sages to R' ??? a sinner ??? regarding the handful of meal-offering that he was an invalidating act nevertheless but we become liable to excision on its account. ??? he the releasing ??? one from ??? to eat two ??? tomorrow ??? one from ??? to eat two ??? tomorrow Rabbi Meir says: an invalidating act nevertheless but we become liable to excision on its account. But the sages say: Watch out for leading vav And there is not the penalty of excision, until ??? in all the releasing ??? one from ??? to eat from him tomorrow he an invalidating act nevertheless and his fellow is valid to eat from his fellow tomorrow both are proper

דף טז,א גמרא

Rav said It is a disagreement ??? The fistful of a meal-offering ??? and Watch out for leading vav the frankincense ??? but: he gave The fistful of a meal-offering ??? and Watch out for leading vav the frankincense ??? the words of all are an invalidating act nevertheless for all of One who makes on the understanding of the first he makes And Shmuel said ??? he It is a disagreement ??? Raba and he said to it about this teaching ??? Rav Acha son of Rav Huna to Raba In what matters are we saying this? ??? implements of ??? he came ??? he gave The fistful of a meal-offering ??? and Watch out for leading vav the frankincense ??? The fistful of a meal-offering ??? and Watch out for leading vav the frankincense ??? Rabbi Meir says: an invalidating act nevertheless but we become liable to excision on its account. But the sages say: Watch out for leading vav And there is not the penalty of excision, until ??? in all the releasing The tanna teaches: from this he gave The fistful of a meal-offering ??? and Watch out for leading vav the frankincense ??? I would say and Already he gave Watch out for leading vav the frankincense ??? from the beginning two ??? In the matter one ??? the first And furthermore, Watch out for leading vav !! For it was taught: Watch out for leading vav !! and after this ??? Rav ??? Come and hear: In what matters are we saying this? with its monetary value? ??? on the outside altar but: ??? on An altar of ??? For example, ??? of Yom Kippur and one ten of A bull a priest who has been anointed and one ten of A bull ??? a thing of ??? between in the first, between in the second or whether ??? Rabbi Meir says: an invalidating act nevertheless but we become liable to excision on its account. but the sages say Watch out for leading vav And there is not the penalty of excision, until ??? in all the releasing The tanna teaches: from this ??? between in the first, between in the second or whether ??? And if you say So, here, ??? This is satistfactory for one for he said: ??? And even if ??? of A bull except ??? and not ??? of A bull What is there to say? Rabba said: Here in this case, in what way ??? For example, ??? in the first, ??? in the second ??? Watch out for leading vav !! And if it enters your mind to argue that Anyone who does on the understanding of the first he makes ??? why do I have He disagreed with this Rav Ashi something ??? The tanna teaches: except Rav Ashi said Here in this case, in what way ??? For example, ??? in the first, and in the second ??? Watch out for leading vav !! And if it enters your mind to argue that Anyone who does on the understanding of the first he makes ??? in the second ??? why do I have

דף טז,ב גמרא

Hey, isn't it the case that between between The tanna teaches: ??? Mar said: Rabbi Meir says: ??? but we become liable to excision on its account. ??? he is spiritually cut off No. ??? until ??? all ??? As Mar said: ??? is valid thus in the same way ??? is invalid, Just as ??? is valid until ??? all ??? Even ??? is invalid, until ??? all ??? and that one immediately ??? of it inside ??? For ??? in reality he that he came ??? Rabbah said It concerns itself ??? and four ??? Rava said: even you say A bull one and a male goat one ??? forty and three For it was taught: forty "satisfied" There is no difficulty. this one ??? we make an eruv ??? Hey, isn't it the case that ??? yes. we make an eruv For it was taught: forty ??? There is no difficulty. this one ??? this one ??? No. ??? They posed this difficulty: ??? What then? R' Yochanan said: ??? he said ??? This is satisfactory ??? that it is possible also ??? except to Rabbi Yochanan What is the reason מאי טעמא Rabba said: his reasoning is Rabbi Yochanan all the blessing of the Service that is not is permitted the blessing of the Service ??? She ??? upon it in its own right He said to him Abaye Behold! ??? one from ??? that is not ??? For it was taught in a baraita ??? one from ??? to eat two ??? tomorrow ??? one from ??? to eat two ??? tomorrow Rabbi Meir says: ??? but we become liable to excision on its account. but the sages say Watch out for leading vav And there is not the penalty of excision, until ??? in all the releasing He said to him Who deduces bread ??? for him and that comes ??? he is equivalent. He challenged this "He" meaning... Rav ??? son of ??? others say ??? is valid ??? is invalid, ??? permits ??? He said to him Who deduces blood ??? livestock ??? blood ??? for him and that comes ??? he is equivalent. Come and hear: In what matters are we saying this? ??? implements of ??? Is this not ??? No. ??? implements of If so, ??? implements of ??? implements of should bring himself This does not present any difficulty because there is no contradiction It was taught by thus he came ??? he came ??? should bring himself This does not present any difficulty because there is no contradiction immediately ??? She a seminal emission to it ??? except he gave The fistful of a meal-offering ??? should bring himself ??? to eat ??? until ??? the accompanying handful of flour all of it Rav Chisda and Rav Hamnunah and Rav Sheishet One says an invalidating act nevertheless and one says is invalid, and one says is valid Let us say, ??? an invalidating act nevertheless like Rabbi Meir ??? is invalid, ??? is valid like Rabbi From where can you derive Perhaps Up to this point, he does not come to say i.e., what he really means is not: R' Meir there i.e., in another mishna except ??? But here, in this case, that is not ??? No. and Up to this point, No. ??? They said: rabbis there i.e., in another mishna except that is not ??? of him. ??? permits But here, in this case, ??? of him. ??? permits So, here, ??? and Up to this point, No. ??? he said Rabbi there i.e., in another mishna except that is not he returns ??? the blessing of the Service But here, in this case, ??? the blessing of the Service Here, too, ??? except ??? an invalidating act nevertheless the words of all are The one who said is invalid, the words of all are The one who said is valid the words of all are The one who said an invalidating act nevertheless the words of all are his reasoning is a way food objection a way ??? objection ??? is invalid, the words of all are his reasoning is ??? a way food objection And there is no meaning to the word a way ??? objection ??? to it ??? that did not have ??? and the one who said is valid the words of all are his reasoning is a way ??? objection And there is no meaning to the word a way food ??? They said:

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.