[Mesorah] a kleinigkeit

[Mandel, Seth]

excellent. my thanks.


Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel
Rabbinic Coordinator
The Orthodox Union

Voice (212) 613-8330     Fax (212) 613-0718     e-mail mandels at ou.org


________________________________
From: Mesorah <mesorah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org> on behalf of Dov Bloom via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2018 7:14 PM
To: Yitzchak M. Gottlieb
Cc: mesorah at aishdas.org
Subject: Re: [Mesorah] a kleinigkeit

Thank you all for the excellent discussion so far.
I think it is important to expand the discussion to the other occurrences of haMibeli.

Massoretic notes:   [Attesting that the Massoretes treated the 4 cases as a unit]
The Massora Gedola of the Mikraot Gedolot notes on Shmot 14:11 that there are 4 occurrences of this word: Shmot 14:11, Melachim Bet 1:3,6 and 16.
Likewise in Melachim there are notes in the Massora Gedola of 4 cases, and in the Massora Ktana stating  4 or 4 (3 here in Melachim plus ein kvarim). Also in the Final Massora.
Ginsburg (letter Bet sigla 316 ) notes that he found this Massora rubric in 4 manuscripts plus the printed MkGd.
The Keter doesnt show any Massora Ktana or Gedola that I found.
Leningrad has Massoretic notes, more on that at the end.

The Text:
An examination of my Leningrad facsimile edition shows all 4 cases of haMibeli are pointed with a plain patach + a ga'aya.  This has been noted in our discussion, and fits in with the opinion R Seth quoted from the Minhat Shai Shmot 14:11 who says this is R Yonah's opinion. For those of you who don't have the excellent Betzer edition of the Minhat Shai, or may not be acquainted with R Yona, that was R Yonah Ibn Janach in his Sefer HaRiqma, page 373.
In the Keter (Allepo Codex) Shmot is of course missing, however the 3 occurrences in Melachim are existant. In all 3 cases in Melachim, I see in the excellent Keter-on-line, a hataf-patach plus a ga'aya. This correlates with the second opinion R Seth quoted from the Minchat Shai, that of Radak in his Michlol page 46 amud bet.

This would be good reason for saying, in the absence of any really strong contrary proofs, that the Keter had in Shmot 14:11, our pasuk, a hataf-patach plus a meteg also.

I want to add that seems what is probably Breuer's justification for the hataf-patach + gaaya . It is not due, with all due respect to R Seth, to Breuer's unique shita as to the ga'ayot (about which I am certainly no expert ) but due to hard Keter text evidence from 3 places in Melachim.

On the mistaken MG in Leningrad on this word, and on the words of Eliyahu HaBachur quoted by R Seth from the Minhat Shai, that will have to wait for another night, it is already 2 AM.

Dov Bloom

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 11:37 PM, Yitzchak M. Gottlieb via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>> wrote:
Before commenting on the topic itself, I would like to thank all of you for the wonderful discussion.

On Jan 28, 2018, at 15:34, Danny Levy via Mesorah <mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>> wrote:

> I looked in R. Breuer's book - he does not mention this case.

In טעמי המקרא, pg. 195, Brueur lists המבלי as an example of געית שוא.  In that same section, he gives other examples of געיות שוא on חטפים.

Zuki

--
Yitzchak M. Gottlieb
zukigottlieb at gmail.com<mailto:zukigottlieb at gmail.com>

_______________________________________________
Mesorah mailing list
Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org<mailto:Mesorah at lists.aishdas.org>
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/mesorah-aishdas.org



--
Dov A Bloom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/mesorah-aishdas.org/attachments/20180129/266e38ef/attachment-0002.htm>