[Mesorah] FWD: Re: Q re Masoretic note on "quMAH | H'" (Num 10:35)

[Poppers, Michael]

FWDing to the list at RDB's request....
-- Michael Poppers via BB pager

________________________________
From: dov bloom <dovb at netvision.net.il>
To: Poppers, Michael
Sent: Sat Jun 16 15:49:31 2012
Subject: Re: [Mesorah] Q re Masoretic note on "quMAH | H'" (Num 10:35)

My messora ktana and messora gedola say "bet b'taam milra" and the MG lists Bamidbar 10:35 and Divre Hayamim Bet 6:41 and adds "vechol tehilot decavvate bar min chad (tehillim 35:2) which is mileil]

Ginsburg lists this in letter kuf number 119 as not "bet"[two] but "gimmel" [three], " which is what you asked about.
The list given  by Ginsburg is still exactly the same: Bemidbar 10:35, DHB 6:41 and all of thillim.

For what it is worth, Frensdorf also has the count as 2 and not 3, but adds the same "vechol tehilot....", there is a messora sofit also on KufMem which in my copy also says 2 and not three with the addition of tehillim. The MF also has a "kumah 5 mileil" [penultimate and not ultimate syllable accented] but those are haser and not maleh ....

Minhat Shai Tehillim 3:8 and 44:27 brings down our Messora to verify a milra kuMAH. He quote our Messora "veChen kol 'kumah' asher baze hasefer zulati vekumah le'ezrati (35:2) shehu mileil {Radak UMassoret}".

This form of of an item in a Massora list being "kol [a certain book or part of tanach] "  is well known and not uncommon, but tricky to decifer if you dont have the list because there are obviously a lot more than three haserim in tanach, - I think 9 in Tehillim alone. So you have to work on it and hope you find a list somewhere.

Breuer mentions these kinds of Massora lists in his intro to his Keter book (p 10 in the Hebrew intro and p XV in the English intro):
He brings the example of " betulot dalet haser" but there are really 3 and the fourth is "kol megilla" - this type of comment as I said is especially difficult if you only have a Massora ktana without a list in the MG.

Summary: The Massora of 3 means:  the 2 cases I listed and the third is "kol tehillim bar min chad" -

Interestingly [or not], the Minhat Shai is silent on the kuMAH question in Bamidbat 10:35. Probably because on that pasuk he has a really long comment on the "nunim hafuchim" issue, where he mentions in his long discussion of the subject that "OR TORAH he'erich yoter mimenni" and he says [in my paraphrase] " Be glad I am giving you the concise version" which is not so concise at all.

Michael, you can send this answer to the other list too.

DB the younger (Dov Bloom)
Shavua Tov
---- Original Message ----
From: "Poppers, Michael" <MPoppers at kayescholer.com>
To: "mesorah at aishdas.org" <mesorah at aishdas.org>
Sent: שיש, יונ 15, 2012, 20:50 PM
Subject: [Mesorah] Q re Masoretic note on "quMAH | H'" (Num 10:35)

The Masoretic note on "quMAH | H'" is "gimel b'ta'am mil'ra umalei up'siq," and I asked on another forum many days ago what the other two instances of “quMAH |” (frankly, with or without the vav, although I didn’t say that there) were; no one answered.  Anyone here know?  Thanks.

A gut'n Shabbos/Shabbas Shalom
and all the best from
Michael Poppers * Elizabeth, NJ, USA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120617/5da65408/attachment-0004.htm>