5

In the third parashah of Shema' (maftir from P' Shelach) we have a divergence of cantillation on the words ולא תתורו. In R' Wolf Heidenheim (see Koren for a contempary example) these words are cantillated with kadma veazla (ול֨א תת֜ורו) whereas in Breuer (Keter Yerushalayim) they are tied together and vocalised with an azla-geresh (ולא־תת֜ורו).

What is the mesorah of these two variants ?

Improve this question
3
  • 1
    "What is the mesorah of these two variants?" What does this mean? I don't know what you are asking. Please be more precise
    – Double AA ♦
    May 4, 2021 at 2:34
  • 2
    Duplicate? judaism.stackexchange.com/q/111989/15256
    – Kazi bácsi
    May 4, 2021 at 5:00
  • As a Sepharadi who witnesses chazanim read it with a Kadma veAzla daily even though the siddurim we commonly use do not have that, I'm very happy you posed this question.
    – MDjava
    May 5, 2021 at 14:46

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6

All the Tiberian manuscripts (and here, here, here, and here) and the majority of the other (Ashkenazi/Sephardi) old manuscripts* have a maqef, followed by the Venice Mikraot Gedolot and other historically important printed editions.

The testimony to no maqef consists of a handful of old Ashkenazi manuscripts*, followed by some printed editions in the last 150 years or so.

Suffice to say that the weight of evidence is on the side of the maqef.

* See a fuller list of manuscripts here, with the key here (PDF downloads).

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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