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 נה,א גמרא

??? Just as terumah that is large ??? proper Even terumah of tithe ??? proper ??? R' Elazar said son of Rabbi Yosei Abba he was take ten ??? on ??? This is satisfactory ??? that are ??? then the ruling is acceptable. except If you say, ??? that are ??? them When Rav Dimi came R' Elazar said that I ??? Because It is possible ??? that are The Rabbis taught ??? figs on ??? in a place ??? to do figs ??? and not ??? on figs And even if in a place ??? to do figs ??? Mar said: ??? figs on ??? in a place ??? to do figs ??? in a place ??? yes. in a place that do not ??? No. How so? If it was That there are a priest a place that is not he is regularly accustomed why is it that No. For it was taught in a mishna: a place in which there is a priest separates terumah from ??? except This is obvious! ??? a priest I would say at the end of the teaching, and not ??? on ??? and even in a place ??? to do figs ??? and if ??? a priest why is it that No. For it was taught in a mishna: a place that do not a priest separates terumah from ??? except This is obvious! That there are a priest But the beginning of the teaching, ??? a priest at the end of the teaching, That there are a priest yes. But the beginning of the teaching, ??? a priest at the end of the teaching, That there are a priest Rav Pappa said: Learn from this ??? it is dealing with a case where there are two they would taste and not ??? it is dealing with a case where there are two ???

דף נה,א משנה

all The menuchot offerings: ??? that did not have ??? and if ??? transgresses without shall you do as it is said (Lev. 2) all the Minchah who ??? to Hashem No. shall you do chametz he is liable on ??? and on ??? and on ???

דף נה,א גמרא

From where do we derive this? Raysh Lakish said For scripture said: (Lev. 6) No. ??? chametz ??? Even if ??? No. ??? chametz and that one ??? he who has arrived This should bring himself to account for that which was taught No.

דף נה,ב גמרא

??? chametz Just as Scripture states: Does it not clearly ??? say (Lev. 2) No. shall you do chametz on account of as it is said No. shall you do chametz It is possible No. ??? he is liable except One on all of them Scripture states: (Lev. 6) No. ??? are in the general category it was For what reason was it taken out To make an analogy from it Just as ??? is isolated ??? that it It once happened ??? and we are guilty on its account in its own right Even I ??? and all It once happened ??? that he was It once happened ??? and we are guilty on its account in its own right We ??? we say it. and so go ahead and say completely ??? he who has arrived If so, to write ??? No. ??? chametz What then does it mean when it says No. ??? chametz ??? both and so go ahead and say ??? of it the Merciful One ??? one ??? one ??? It is because of this: ??? a thing that he was are in the general category and went out from the general group to teach No. to teach on himself he has fulfilled his obligation except to teach on the general group all of it he has fulfilled his obligation and so go ahead and say No. shall you do A general principle: No. ??? creates an exclusion A general principle: and creates an exclusion yes. are in the general category except Just as ??? yes. something other than this did not say Rabbi ??? It is because of this: that there is A general principle: and creates an exclusion ??? this from this and all A general principle: and creates an exclusion ??? this from this yes. ??? those particular are in the general category and creates an exclusion He challenged this "He" meaning... Rav Adda bar Ahavah said that ??? And there are those who say it was so that and A general principle: and creates an exclusion ??? this from this yes. ??? those particular are in the general category and creates an exclusion For it was taught: (Lev. 4) ??? that specific in a place who ??? The elevation-offering before Hashem A sin-offering he ??? an elevation-offering ??? in the north Even this in the north And so do we from here ??? Does it not clearly ??? say (Lev. 6) in a place who ??? The elevation-offering ??? this one For what reason this he has fulfilled his obligation ??? No. ??? that specific in the north ??? You say ??? was it taken out Or perhaps, except for this required north And there is no meaning to the word after required north Scripture states: (Lev. 4) ??? ??? in a place ??? The elevation-offering this he built ??? for all sin-offerings ??? north The reason is ??? the Merciful One ??? ??? this one Is this not thus then I might incorrectly say: for this required north And there is no meaning to the word after required north What is the reason מאי טעמא Is this not It is because of this: ??? A general principle: and creates an exclusion and even though ??? this from this ??? those particular are in the general category and creates an exclusion He disagreed with this Rav Ashi This A general principle: and creates an exclusion he creates an exclusion and A general principle: he was it made? A general principle: ??? on ??? them In all things except a Tanna taught: that specific ??? has a problem This is what he means: Or perhaps, except for this required north And there is no meaning to the word after required north ??? the Merciful One that specific and now ??? for him ??? ??? that specific ??? What then does it mean when it says ??? that specific in the north And there is no meaning to the word a male goat ??? in the north For it might have entered your mind that I would say: Because ??? in the matter of ??? also in the matter of north Come and learn from this. ??? From where do we derive this? as it is taught: (Lev. 4) ??? on the tip of ??? a male goat ??? these are the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Shimon says:

Copyright © 2012 Andrew Marc Greene. All rights reserved.