[Avodah] 10 Dibrot

[Sholom Simon]

 On 7/2/19 3:38 am, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote:
>>
>> Very simple, so that each dibbera is one passuk. Which is why those who
>> want to accentuate that Anokhi is a separate dibbera (actually a
>> machloket) do not use ta'am elyon for the first passuk.

RSZ writes:
>Taam Elyon combines the first two dibros because they were heard mipi
>haGevurah.

My limited understanding is that some view that reason as an after-the-fact
justification for the fact that they _should_ be two psukim.  IIRC, Rav
Breuer has them as two psukim.

The problem arose because these psukim used to be printed with both sets of
ta'amim.  (A lot of them were above the letter -- thus ta'am "elyon",
etc.).  When they were disentangled into ta'am elyon and ta'am tachton, R
Breuer contends, a mistake was made.

One piece of circumstantial evidence:  there is a rule that a segol has to
be the first melech-type trop of a pasuk, and that it must appear before
the esnachta -- but the versions that present the dibros as nine psukim
violate both of those rules.

(Granted, one could argue that this is a special circumstance and thus an
exception)

Might there be another piece of circumstantial evidence?  I always
wondered: in what year/decade/century do we see the first suggestion that:
"it's nine psukim because ..."

Thoughts?

-- Sholom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20190211/0366024e/attachment-0003.htm>