0

In מסכת ברכות , on the top line of דף ל,ב, the text reads "בנהרדעא לבר מההוא יומא " [it continues the quote from Shmuel that he never davened mussaf privately in Neharde'a...]

According to the English explanation in the Schottenstein edition, 30b1, the next phrase is "except for that day." The word "except" is indicated through the word printed in the Hebrew on the page of explanation as לבד, even though the text on the Vilna layout side reads לבר ! The e-daf page's image also shows their Vilna layout as לבר and strangest of all, the Mechon-Mamre text which is not in the Vilna layout also reads לבר (as does kodesh.snunit which uses the Mechon text). I don't have a Shteinzaltz to check their text so I don't know if this repeats there.

Two gemaras (both Vilna) on Hebrew Books concur. The Firenze edition page doesn't seem to match up as the new perek which begins follows a "hadran" for the third perek, omitting the fourth! The Paris edition reads "לחוד" (15 lines up) and I can't get the Berlin manuscript to open. The Sefaria text also has לבר with no explanation.

Does לבר also mean "except"? Or is this an error found in all Vilna editions (and Mechon Mamre and Sefaria were just copying an error)?

----------edit -- adding Schttenstein image ------- Levad

  • לבר is the aramaic of לבד. Or really of חוץ ל. – Y     e     z Mar 13 '15 at 3:05
  • I can confirm that Sefaria follows the Vilna edition. If there's a mistake there, it will be repeated on Sefaria. You can find the provenance of any text on Sefaria by clicking on the "about text" button at the bottom of the page. In terms of other editions, Both Steinsaltz and Oz V'Hadar also have לבר. – Popular Isn't Right Mar 15 '15 at 5:39
4

The word לבר means "except for" in Aramaic.

בר means outside of, or other than. A ברייתא is an "outside teaching" - those teachings which were not canonized into the Mishna. בר מין דין (of Berachos 38b) means "aside from that" (see Rashi there if you don't believe me).

לבר means חוץ ל, outside of (or, in normal English, except for). So, no, it is not an error.

  • Any insight, then, into why the Schottenstein, in the explanatory side (which has the gemara text word for word and then explanation) would change it to "לבד" (I just uploaded the image) -- might it have to do with an assumption that the dalet is proven via the Paris edition? – rosends Mar 13 '15 at 10:45
  • I checked the Hebrew Schottenstein edition and it has לבר on the explanatory side so I am really confused now. – rosends Mar 15 '15 at 0:28
  • 1
    @Danno Seems like a typo in the English Schottenstein edition. – Y     e     z Mar 15 '15 at 1:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .