User:Dovi/Miqra according to the Masorah/Information about this Edition/Chapter 3

A Concise Explanation of the Text of the Torah
'The letter-text and the division of parashot'' in this edition are based upon Torah scrolls (the spelling of Yemenite scrolls in the main text and alternate spellings in the notes). The basis for vowel-points, accents and metegs is the Leningrad Codex. Using it as a base we have made corrections and modifications in order to match its anomalous readings to the text of the Masorah according to the method of the Aleppo Codex. In places where the Aleppo Codex exists or there is evidence about what it contained, the text is based upon it. After establishing the text, minor adjustments have been made according to the stylistic principles of this edition.'''

For detailed information about the methodology used to determine the text of the Torah, see the following sections.

Text of the Letters in the Torah
Text of the letters in the Masoretic period: the text of the letters according to the Masorah is reflected well as an accurate ideal from the Masoretic notes. However, in the Tiberian manuscripts closest to the Aleppo Codex, this ideal is not realized with perfect execution. The manuscripts went through processes of proofreading and corrections in this direction, yet in every one of them there remain mistakes in the written text. Mistakes of this sort are generally peculiar to a single manuscript, in which the spelling in some particular word will vary from the rest of the manuscripts. This being so, it is possible to determine the spelling of the Masoretic text anywhere – either according to the Masoretic notes, or according to the text of the majority of manuscripts, or according to both together. And, as it happens, an eclectic text compiled from the majority of the manuscripts is exactly the same as the text documented in the Masoretic notes in almost every place. All this was demonstrated by the Rabbi Mordechai Breuer for the first time in his important book, The Aleppo Codex and the Received Text of the Bible.

After the Masoretic period: In addition, Breuer showed that the text which emerges from the combination of the Masoretic together with most of the traditions in the manuscripts close to the Aleppo Codex is completely in line with the Yemenite text, and in almost all places is in line with the text of the Torah scrolls in Sepharad and Ashkenaz. The text of the spelling in the Torah scrolls (outside Yemen) is determined after the age of the Tiberian Masoretes through the writings of later scholars of Masorah: in the books Masoret Seyag la-Torah of Rabbi Meir Halevi Abulafia, Or Torah of Rabbi Menachem Di Lonzano, and Minḥat Shai of Rabbi Yedidya Shlomo Raphael Norzi. The scholars of the Masorah in these generations worked according to a distinctly electic method, using to the best of their ability those Masoretic notes which were available to them, and those manuscripts which seemed accurate to them. It happens that their work has been accomplished so beautifully that it is almost perfect (and almost identical to the Yemenite text). On the other hand, the Yemenite version itself seems to be based not on an eclectic method but on a perfect job of copying the Aleppo Codex. And if so, it follows that in the Yemenite text we have clear and precise testimony to the text that was in the Aleppo Codex. And we also find that the Aleppo Codex itself constitutes a uniquely perfect execution of the text of the letters in the Torah according to the Masorah (in contrast to the rest of the manuscripts close to it). This determination is also confirmed by the precise spelling of the letters in the books of the Neviim and Ketuvim, where it has a remarkable accuracy unlike any other manuscript.

It seems, then, that there is not to be found definite testimony to the wording of the letters of the Masorah in any one manuscript close to the crown alone, and it is not appropriate to establish an edition of the Bible on such a text.

The Letter Text of the Leningrad Codex
Level of accuracy of the Leningrad Codex: Our edition is based, as said before, on the Westminster transcript of the Leningrad Codex. The accuracy of the letter-text of the Leningrad Codex is good enough to be considered one important witness among others, but its level of accuracy is lower than the other manuscripts close to the Aleppo Codex. According to Yeivin’s appraisal, “The text of the letters deviates chapter by chapter from the Aleppo Codex in plene and defective spelling. The Masorah of the Leningrad Codex … at times contradicts the biblical text.” And according to Breuer, it has a deviation from the wording of the Masorah “in close to 120 places in the Torah”. And therefore the text of the letters in the Torah in our edition will be corrected as stated according to the scrolls of Yemen, and will not be left following the Leningrad Codex (which is the base text of the transcription).

Below is a list of all the places where the text in the Leningrad Codex (the base text of the transcription in our edition) differs from the written text of the Yemenite scrolls.

The list is necessary to allow a thorough proofreading of the spelling in our edition, vis-a-vis the Westminster transcription on the one hand, and the text of the Yemenite scrolls on the other. The first item on each line of the list is the spelling that appears in the Yemenite scrolls and corresponds to the Masorah, and is followed by an asterisk (*). The second item is the spelling of the Leningrad Codex, followed by an exclamation mark (!) in places where the spelling of the Leningrad Codex contradicts the Masoretic notes within the Leningrad Codex itself.

Book of Genesis
In all 20 words with anomalous spelling; one of them (#19) is uncertain.


 * 1) Noaḥ (8:20): [הַטְּהֹרָ֗ה]* / L=[הַטְּהוֹרָ֗ה]!
 * 2) Noaḥ (8:20): [הַטָּה֔וֹר]* / L=[הַטָּהֹ֔ר]!
 * 3) Lekh-Lekha (13:8): [וּבֵינֶ֔ךָ]* / L=[וּבֵינֶ֔יךָ]
 * 4) Lekh-Lekha (14:22): [הֲרִמֹ֨תִי]* / L=[הֲרִימֹ֨תִי]
 * 5) Vayeira (19:16): [וַיַּחֲזִ֨יקוּ]* / L=[וַיַּחֲזִ֨קוּ]!
 * 6) Vayeira (19:20): [וְהִ֣וא]* / L=[וְהִ֣יא]!
 * 7) Ḥayyei Sarah (25:3): [וּלְטוּשִׁ֖ם]* / L=[וּלְטוּשִׁ֖ים]
 * 8) Toldot (26:7, 2nd instance): [הִֽוא]* / L=[הִֽיא]!
 * 9) Toldot (27:30): [בַּעֲבֻ֖ר]* / L=[בַּעֲב֖וּר]!
 * 10) Vayishlaḥ (35:5): [סְבִיב֣וֹתֵיהֶ֔ם]* / L=[סְבִיבֹ֣תֵיהֶ֔ם]!
 * 11) Vayishlaḥ (35:23): [וּזְבֻלֽוּן]* / L=[וּזְבוּלֻֽן]!
 * 12) Vayeishev (40:10): [וְהִ֤וא]* / L=[וְהִ֤יא]!
 * 13) Mikeitz (41:35): [הַטֹּב֔וֹת]* / L=[הַטֹּבֹ֔ת]!
 * 14) Vayigash (45:15): [עֲלֵהֶ֑ם]* / L=[עֲלֵיהֶ֑ם]!
 * 15) Vayigash (46:9): [וְחֶצְרֹ֥ן]* / L=[וְחֶצְר֥וֹן]
 * 16) Vayigash (46:12): [חֶצְרֹ֥ן]* / L=[חֶצְר֥וֹן]
 * 17) Vayigash (46:13): [וְשִׁמְרֹֽן]* / L=[וְשִׁמְרֽוֹן]
 * 18) Vayigash (46:14): [זְבֻל֑וּן]* / L=[זְבוּלֻ֑ן]!
 * 19) Vayigash (47:24): [חֲמִישִׁ֖ית]* / L?=[חֲמִישִׁ֖ת]!?
 * 20) Vayḥi (49:13): [אֳנִיֹּ֔ת]* / L=[אֳנִיּ֔וֹת]!

Book of Exodus
In all 25 words with anomalous spelling:


 * 1) Shemot (1:16): [הִ֖וא]* / L=[הִ֖יא]!
 * 2) Shemot (4:3): [וַיַּשְׁלִכֵ֥הוּ]* / L = [וַיַּשְׁלִיכֵ֥הוּ] (= the Masorah parva of the Leningrad Codex[!], against most Masorahs and manuscripts)
 * 3) Vaʾeira (5:14): [חֶצְרֹ֣ן]* / L=[חֶצְר֣וֹן]
 * 4) Vaʾeira (8:15): [הַֽחַרְטֻמִּם֙]* / L=[הַֽחַרְטֻמִּים֙]!
 * 5) Bo (10:25): [וְעֹלֹ֑ת] / L=[וְעֹל֑וֹת]!
 * 6) Bo (12:4): [מִהְי֣וֹת]* / L=[מִהְיֹ֣ת]!
 * 7) Beshallaḥ (14:13): [תֹסִ֛פוּ]* / L=[תֹסִ֛יפוּ]!
 * 8) Beshallaḥ (14:14): [תַּחֲרִשֽׁוּן]* / L=[תַּחֲרִישֽׁוּן]!
 * 9) Beshallaḥ (14:22): [חוֹמָ֔ה]* / L=[חֹמָ֔ה]!
 * 10) Yitro (19:11, 2nd instance): [הַשְּׁלִשִׁ֗י]* / L=[הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֗י]!
 * 11) Yitro (19:19): [הַשֹּׁפָ֔ר]* / L=[הַשּׁוֹפָ֔ר]!
 * 12) Mishpaṭim (23:22): [שָׁמ֤וֹעַ]* / L=[שָׁמֹ֤עַ]! (= the Masorah parva of the Leningrad Codex[!], against the Masorah magna and against the Masorahs and manuscripts)
 * 13) Terumah (25:22): [אֲר֣וֹן]* / L=[אֲרֹ֣ן]!
 * 14) Terumah (26:24): [תֹֽאֲמִם֮]* / L=[תֹֽאֲמִים֮]
 * 15) Tetzaveh (28:28, 1st instance): [הָאֵפוֹד֙]* / [הָאֵפֹד֙]!
 * 16) Tetzaveh (29:22): [עֲלֵיהֶ֔ן]* / L=[עֲלֵהֶ֔ן]!
 * 17) Tetzaveh (29:40): [רְבִיעִ֥ת]* / [רְבִעִ֥ית]
 * 18) Ki Tissa (32:34): [עֲלֵהֶ֖ם]* / L=[עֲלֵיהֶ֖ם]!
 * 19) Ki Tissa (34:24): [גְּבֻלֶ֑ךָ]* / L=[גְּבוּלֶ֑ךָ]!
 * 20) Vayaqhel (36:13): [הַיְרִיעֹ֜ת]* / L=[הַיְרִעֹ֜ת]
 * 21) Vayaqhel (36:19): [אֵילִ֖ם]* / L=[אֵלִ֖ים]!
 * 22) Vayaqhel (37:3, 3rd instance): [טַבָּעֹ֔ת]* / L=[טַבָּע֔וֹת]
 * 23) Vayaqhel (38:10): [הָעַמּוּדִ֛ים]* / L=[הָעַמֻּדִ֛ים]! (= Masorah parva of the Leningrad Codex [!], against the Masorah magna of the Leningrad Codex and against the manuscripts)
 * 24) Pequdei (39:13): [מִשְׁבְּצֹ֥ת]* / L=[מִשְׁבְּצ֥וֹת]!
 * 25) Pequdei (39:35): [אֲר֥וֹן]* / L=[אֲרֹ֥ן]!

Book of Leviticus
In all 14 words with anomalous spelling.


 * 1) Vayiqra (5:11): [הִֽוא]* / L=[הִֽיא]!
 * 2) Shemini (10:1): [וַיַּקְרִ֜יבוּ]* / L=[וַיַּקְרִ֜בוּ]!
 * 3) Shemini (10:13): [קָד֔וֹשׁ]* / L=[קָדֹ֔שׁ]!
 * 4) Shemini (11:4): [וּמִמַּפְרִסֵ֖י]* / L=[וּמִמַּפְרִיסֵ֖י]
 * 5) Tazria (13:6): [הִ֔וא]* / L=[הִ֔יא]!
 * 6) Metzora (14:10): [תְּמִימִ֔ם]* / L=[תְּמִימִ֔ים]
 * 7) Aḥarei Mot (16:8): [גֹּרָל֑וֹת]* / L=[גּוֹרָל֑וֹת]!
 * 8) Aḥarei Mot (18:29): [הַתּוֹעֵבֹ֖ת]* / L=[הַתּוֹעֵב֖וֹת]!
 * 9) Qedoshim (19:4): [הָ֣אֱלִילִ֔ם]* / L=[הָ֣אֱלִילִ֔ים]!
 * 10) Qedoshim (20:6): [לִזְנֹ֖ת]* / L=[לִזְנ֖וֹת]!
 * 11) Qedoshim (20:18): [וְהִ֕וא]* / L=[וְהִ֕יא]!
 * 12) Emor (23:20):  [הַבִּכֻּרִ֤ים]* / L=[הַבִּכּוּרִ֤ים]!
 * 13) Emor (23:48): [נִדְבֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם]* / L=[נִדְב֣וֹתֵיכֶ֔ם]!
 * 14) Beḥuqotai (26:35): [לִהְי֥וֹת]* / L=[לִהְיֹ֥ת]!

Book of Numbers
In all 30 words with anomalous spelling.


 * 1) Bemidbar (1:17): [בְּשֵׁמֹֽת]* (= the Yeminite scrolls) / L=[בְּשֵׁמֽוֹת]! (= the scrolls of Sepharad and Ashkenaz)
 * 2) Bemidbar (3:2): [הַבְּכֹ֣ר]* / L=[הַבְּכ֣וֹר]!
 * 3) Bemidbar (3:42): [בְּכ֖וֹר]* / L=[בְּכֹ֖ר]!
 * 4) Bemidbar (3:43): [שֵׁמֹ֛ת]* / L=[שֵׁמ֛וֹת]!
 * 5) Naso (7:7): [הָעֲגָל֗וֹת]* / L=[הָעֲגָלֹ֗ת]!
 * 6) Naso (7:23): [עַתֻּדִ֣ים]* / L=[עַתּוּדִ֣ים]!
 * 7) Behaʿalotekha (9:3): [בְּמֹעֲד֑וֹ]* / L=[בְּמוֹעֲד֑וֹ]!
 * 8) Behaʿalotekha (9:7): [הַקְרִ֜יב]* / L=[הַקְרִ֜ב]!
 * 9) Behaʿalotekha (9:17): [הֵעָל֤וֹת]* / L=[הֵעָלֹ֤ת]!
 * 10) Behaʿalotekha (10:9): [בַּחֲצֹצְרֹ֑ת]* / L=[בַּחֲצֹצְר֑וֹת]!
 * 11) Behaʿalotekha (10:16): [חֵלֹֽן]* / L=[חֵלֽוֹן]
 * 12) Behaʿalotekha (11:26): [עֲלֵהֶ֣ם]* / L=[עֲלֵיהֶ֣ם]!
 * 13) Shelaḥ (13:26): [אֹתָ֤ם]* / L=[אוֹתָ֤ם]!
 * 14) Shelah (13:29, 3rd instance): [יוֹשֵׁ֣ב]* / L=[יֹשֵׁ֣ב]!
 * 15) Shelaḥ (13:32): [וַיֹּצִ֜יאוּ]* / L=[וַיּוֹצִ֜יאוּ]!
 * 16) Shelaḥ (15:39): [תָת֜וּרוּ]* / [תָתֻ֜רוּ]
 * 17) Ḥuqqat (19:7): [יָבֹ֣א]* / L=[יָב֣וֹא]! (= the Masorah parva of the Leningrad Codex [!] against the Masorah magna of the Leningrad Codex and the majority of the manuscripts)
 * 18) Ḥuqqat (20:17): [גְּבֻלֶֽךָ]* / L=[גְּבוּלֶֽךָ]!
 * 19) Ḥuqqat (21:13): [מִגְּבֻ֣ל]* / L=[מִגְּב֣וּל]
 * 20) Ḥuqqat (21:30): [דִּיבֹ֑ן]* / L=[דִּיב֑וֹן]!
 * 21) Balaq (22:5): [בְּעֹ֗ר]* (=the Yemenite manuscripts) / L=[בְּע֗וֹר] (the scrolls of Sepharad and Ashkenaz)
 * 22) Balaq (22:38):  [הֲיָכֹ֥ל]* / L=[הֲיָכ֥וֹל]!
 * 23) Balaq (23:29): [אֵילִֽם]* / L=[אֵילִֽים]!
 * 24) Pinḥas (26:24): [הַיָּשֻׁבִ֑י]* / L=[הַיָּשׁוּבִ֑י]!
 * 25) Maṭṭot (32:22): [נְקִיִּ֛ם]* / L=[נְקִיִּ֛ים]!
 * 26) Masʿei (33:35): [בְּעֶצְיֹ֥ן]* / L=[בְּעֶצְי֥וֹן]
 * 27) Masʿei (33:52): [בָּמוֹתָ֖ם]* / L=[בָּמֹתָ֖ם] (=the majority of manuscripts, but not the Masorah!)
 * 28) Masʿei (34:12, 2nd instance): [הַגְּבֻ֔ל]* / L=[הַגְּב֔וּל]
 * 29) Masʿei (35:19): [יְמִתֶֽנּוּ]* / L=[יְמִיתֶֽנּוּ]!

Book of Deuteronomy
In all 38 words with anomalous spelling.


 * 1) Devarim (1:15): [אוֹתָ֛ם]* / L=[אֹתָ֛ם]!
 * 2) Devarim (2:23): [מִכַּפְתֹּ֔ר]* / L=[מִכַּפְתּ֔וֹר]
 * 3) Devarim (3:5): [בְּצֻרֹ֛ת]* / L=[בְּצֻר֛וֹת]!
 * 4) Vaʾetḥanan (3:25):  [וְהַלְּבָנֹֽן]* / L=[וְהַלְּבָנֽוֹן]!
 * 5) Vaʾetḥanan (4:3): [הָֽרֹא֔וֹת]* / L=[הָֽרֹאֹ֔ת]
 * 6) Vaʾetḥanan (4:42): [מִתְּמֹ֣ל]* / L=[מִתְּמ֣וֹל]!
 * 7) Vaʾetḥanan (4:42): [שִׁלְשֹׁ֑ם]* / L=[שִׁלְשׁ֑וֹם]!
 * 8) Vaʾetḥanan (6:9): [מְזֻז֥וֹת]* / L=[מְזוּזֹ֥ת]
 * 9) Vaʾetḥanan (6:21): [וַיֹּצִיאֵ֧נוּ]* / L=[וַיּוֹצִיאֵ֧נוּ]!
 * 10) Eiqev (7:16): [תָח֥וֹס]* / L=[תָחֹ֥ס]!
 * 11) Eiqev (8:2): [הוֹלִֽיכְךָ֜]* / L=[הֹלִֽיכֲךָ֜]
 * 12) Eiqev (8:3): [הוֹדִֽיעֲךָ֗]* / L=[הוֹדִֽעֲךָ֗]
 * 13) Eiqev (8:12): [טֹבִ֛ים]* / L=[טוֹבִ֛ים]!
 * 14) Eiqev (9:15): [לוּחֹ֣ת]* / L=[לֻחֹ֣ת]
 * 15) Eiqev (10:11): [וְיִֽירְשׁ֣וּ]* / L=[וְיִֽרְשׁ֣וּ]!
 * 16) Reʾeh (12:2): [גְּבֻֽלְךָ֮]* / L=[גְּבֽוּלְךָ֮]!
 * 17) Shophtim (18:22) [יָבֹ֔א]* / L=[יָב֔וֹא]!
 * 18) Shophtim (20:1): [אֹיְבֶ֗ךָ]* / L=[אֹיְבֶ֗יךָ]!
 * 19) Ki-Teitzei (21:15): [הַבְּכֹ֖ר]* / L=[הַבְּכ֖וֹר]!
 * 20) Ki-Teitzei (22:14): [וְהוֹצִ֥א]* / L=[וְהוֹצִ֥יא]!
 * 21) Ki-Teitzei (24:13): [כְּב֣וֹא]* / L=[כְּבֹ֣א]!
 * 22) Ki-Teitzei (25:7): [מֵאֵ֨ן]* / L=[מֵאֵ֨ין]
 * 23) Ki-Tavo (28:18): [וְעַשְׁתְּרֹ֥ת]* / L=[וְעַשְׁתְּר֥וֹת]!
 * 24) Ki-Tavo (28:49): [מֵרָחֹק֙]* / L=[מֵרָחוֹק֙]!
 * 25) Ki-Tavo (28:52): [הַגְּבֹהֹ֣ת]* / L=[הַגְּבֹה֣וֹת]
 * 26) Ki-Tavo (28:58): [הַכְּתֻבִ֖ים]* / L=[הַכְּתוּבִ֖ים]!
 * 27) Ki-Tavo (28:59): [גְּדֹלֹת֙]* / L=[גְּדֹלוֹת֙]!
 * 28) Nitzavim (40:9): [לְטֹבָ֑ה]* / L=[לְטוֹבָ֑ה]!
 * 29) Nitzavim (40:18): [לָב֥וֹא]* / L=[לָבֹ֥א]!
 * 30) Nitzavim (40:19): [הַעִדֹ֨תִי]* / L=[הַעִידֹ֨תִי]!
 * 31) Haʾazinu (42:7): [דֹּר־וָדֹ֑ר]* / L=[דּוֹר־וָד֑וֹר]
 * 32) Haʾazinu (42:24): [בְּהֵמֹת֙]* / L=[בְּהֵמוֹת֙]
 * 33) Haʾazinu (42:27): [יָדֵ֣נוּ]* / L=[יָדֵ֣ינוּ]!
 * 34) Haʾazinu (42:44): [חָת֖וּם]* / L=[חָתֻ֖ם]!
 * 35) Ve-Zot ha-Berakhah (43:12): [כְּתֵפָ֖יו]* / L=[כְּתֵיפָ֖יו]
 * 36) Ve-Zot ha-Berakhah (43:19): [וּשְׂפֻנֵ֖י]* / L=[וּשְׂפוּנֵ֖י]
 * 37) Ve-Zot ha-Berakhah (43:25): [מִנְעָלֶ֑ךָ]* / L=[מִנְעָלֶ֑יךָ]
 * 38) Ve-Zot ha-Berakhah (44:11): [הָ֨אֹתֹ֜ת]* / L=[הָ֨אֹת֜וֹת]!

Summary of Results
The main text of the Leningrad Codex versus the Masorahs and the מסירות: There are about 127 places in the Torah (one of them uncertain) in which the spelling of the Leningrad Codex disagrees with the Yemenite scrolls (which agree in their letters with the Masoretic notes and the majority of the מסירות). In a clear majority of these places, the spelling in the main text of the Leningrad Codex disagrees the Masoretic notes within the Leningrad Codex itself (all items that have an exclamation mark [!]). In 4 places there is support for the unusual spelling of the Leningrad Codex in its own Masorah parva, while in 3 of them there is an internal contradiction within the Leningrad Codex itself between the Masorah parva and the Masorah magna. It transpires that in addition to the many mistakes in the spelling of the letters of the Leningrad Codex, there are also some errors even in its Masorah parva. Generally speaking, the Masoretic material in the Leningrad Codex (both magna and parva) are an important witness to the Masoretic Text, and it is often more accurate than the main text of the manuscript.

The Leningrad Codex as compared to the scrolls of Sepharad and Ashkenaz, and as compared to the Yemenite scrolls: In 2 places (Numbers 1:17; 22:5) out of 9, the main text of the Leningrad Codex agrees with the Torah scrolls of Sepharad and Ashkenaz against the Yemenite text. In the other 7 places where where there are spelling differences between the Sephardi and Ashkenazi text as opposed to the Yemenite text (for full details see below in the list of special notes in red), the Leningrad Codex agrees with the Yemenite text.

The Leningrad Codex in a few places which remain uncertain: According to Breuer's method in his book (the method of the Masoretic notes together with the majority of the מסירות), there remain only six letters in all the Torah where the general method cannot produce a decisive conclusion, and the spelling of the Masorah remains uncertain (if the Yemenite scrolls are not taken into account):


 * 1) Genesis, Vayigash (46:12): [חֶצְרֹ֥ן]* (= scrolls of all witnesses) / L=[חֶצְר֥וֹן]
 * 2) Exodus, Beshallaḥ (14:22): [חוֹמָ֔ה]* (=the scrolls of all witnesses) / L=[חֹמָ֔ה]!
 * 3) Numbers, Bemidbar (1:17): [בְּשֵׁמֹֽת]* (=Yemenite scrolls) / L=[בְּשֵׁמֽוֹת]! (=scrolls of Sepharad and Ashkenaz)
 * 4) Numbers, Behaʿalotekha (10:10): L=[חׇדְשֵׁיכֶם֒]* (=Yemenite scrolls) / [חָדְשֵׁכֶם֒] (=Sephardi and Ashkanazi scrolls)
 * 5) Numbers, Balaq (22:5): [בְּעֹ֗ר]* (=Yemenite scrolls) / L=[בְּע֗וֹר] (=Sephardi and Ashkanazi scrolls)
 * 6) Numbers, Masʿei (33:52): [בָּמוֹתָ֖ם]* (=the scrolls of all witnesses) / L=[בָּמֹתָ֖ם] (=the majority of manuscripts but not the Masorah!)

From this is follows that 3 of the spelling difference between the Torah scrolls are also in the list of remaining questionable places according to Breuer's method (in the remaining six spelling differences there is a decided advantage to the Yemenite text). In two of these three places (Numbers 1:17; 22:5), the Leningrad Codex presents the text which is found in Ashkenazi and Sephardi scrolls, while in one place (Numbers 10:10) the text of the Leningrad Codex is supported by the Yemenite text. It seems that in all 3 of these words, and even in all six of the remaining questionable places, it is not simply a matter of a scribe's absent-minded mistake, but rather of words where the scribes found it hard to make a conscious decision. That is to say: this is not a division between מסירות but between traditions.

How the Letter-Text is Documented
The documentation of the text can be found on the 'edit' pages within the parameters of the template entitled 'נוסח'. Wherever the text of the letters in the Leningrad Codex differs from the Yemenite text, we indicate in the template the evidence supporting the Yemenite wording. If it is, for example, MS S or MS S1, we specify the manuscript by its abbreviation. In the case of a Masoretic note, we relay the information as follows:


 * Regarding the Masoretic Notes in the Aleppo Codex or the Leningrad Codex (or the two together), we refer to them as מסורת-א (Masorah of the Aleppo Codex) or מסורת-ל (Masorah of the Leningrad Codex) or מסורות-אל (for both in agreement). We did not specify whether it was the Masorah magna or the Masorah parva (unless there was a special need to do so). Nor have we usually given the full references to the Masoretic notes, nor their wording, and whoever wants to examine them must turn to the literature intended for this.


 * Regarding the Masoretic notes in the rest of the Tiberian manuscripts, we specify only "מסורת טברנית" (for one note) or "מסורות טברניות" (for two or more notes).


 * Regarding the Masoretic notes in the printed editions (those based in large part on the Mikraot Gedolot of the Venetian edition), we did not present them at all except in places where there was no clear decision according to the Tiberian manuscripts; and then we referred to them simply by the term "מסורה" (Masorah) alone.


 * The decisions of Rabbi Meir Abulafia, or in some cases of the "Torah Letter" and Minḥat Shai, we specified after the manuscript and the Masoretic notes.


 * In the documentation of the letters of the Torah, we did not mention the common printed edition, because they all correspond to the wording of the Torah scrolls according to Abulafia and Or Torah and Minḥat Shai. We also did not usually include the spelling of Mikraot Gedolot (2d ed., Venice; called ד in Breuer) in the documentation, because it is almost completely irrelevant for deciding the spelling according to the Yemenite scrolls.

Conjoined Words in the Torah
In the following list we have presented all the conjoined words in the Torah (totalling 11 words), for which there are differences of spelling in the following sources: Sephardi and Ashkenazi books, Yemenite books, the Aleppo Codex (or testimonies about it), the Leningrad Codex.


 * 1) Genesis, Lekh-Lekha (14:17): [כְּדׇרְלָעֹ֔מֶר]* / L=[כְּדָר־לָעֹ֔מֶר]
 * 2) Genesis, Miqqeitz (41:45): [פּ֥וֹטִי פֶ֛רַע]*=L / [פּֽוֹטִיפֶ֛רַע] (=Yemenite books; and see the special notes on the Torah.)
 * 3) Genesis, Miqqeitz (41:50): [פּ֥וֹטִי פֶ֖רַע]*=L / [פּֽוֹטִיפֶ֖רַע] (=Yemenite books; and see the special notes on the Torah)
 * 4) Genesis, Vayigash (46:20): [פּ֥וֹטִי פֶ֖רַע]*=L / [פּֽוֹטִיפֶ֖רַע] (=Yemenite books; and see in the special notes on the Torah)
 * 5) Exodus, Beshellaḥ (17:16): [כֵּ֣ס יָ֔הּ]*=L (=Yemenite, Sephardi, and Ashkenazi) / [כֵּ֣סְיָ֔הּ] (=A(S); and see in the special notes on the Torah)
 * 6) Numbers, Bemidbar (1:10): [פְּדָהצֽוּר]*=L? / L=[פְּדָה צֽוּר]?
 * 7) Numbers, Bemidbar (2:12):  [צוּרִֽישַׁדָּֽי]* / L=[צוּרִֽי־שַׁדָּֽי]
 * 8) Numbers, Naso (7:54):  [פְּדָהצֽוּר]* / L=[פְּדָה־צֽוּר]
 * 9) Numbers, Behaʿalotekha (10:19): [צוּרִֽישַׁדָּֽי]*=L? / L=[צוּרִֽי שַׁדָּֽי]?
 * 10) Numbers, Behaʿalotekha (10:23): [פְּדָהצֽוּר]* / L=[פְּדָה־צֽוּר]
 * 11) Deuteronomy, Haʾazinu (42:6): [לְיְהֹוָה֙]* / A=[הַ לְיְהוָה֙] / L=[הֲ־לַיהוָה֙] / Yemenite scrolls=[לְיהֹוָה֙] (and see also in the special notes on the Torah and in the list of large letters)

From the two words "כס[ ]יה" and "ה[ ]ליהוה" it becomes clear that there is no definite evidence in the Yemenite scrolls regarding the text of the Aleppo Codex specifically in the matter of the conjoined words. It would appear, then, that the same is true when it comes to the word "פוטי[]פרע" (in 3 places). In all these places we have presented the customary text in the Sephardi and Ashkenazi scrolls in the main text of this edition, while the text in the books of Yemen ("פוטיפרע" and "הליהוה"), or of the Aleppo Codex as compared to the Torah scrolls in all witnesses ("כסיה"), we have placed in special notes.

In all other places, where the text of the Leningrad Codex various from the Torah scrolls in all witnesses and from the Aleppo Codex (even when uncertain), we documented the data regarding the word in question within the notes of the 'edit' pages.

Scribal Tradition in the Torah: Division of the Parashot
The gaps which divide the parashot are prominent in the Masoretic Text, and this division constitutes an essential component of it. However, not every one of the following gaps which indicate the beginning of a new parasha appears uniformly in all the Tiberian manuscripts, and it seems that no authoritative determination has been made on this issue. This broad characterization is only in a generalization: most of the time there is a parasha space in the same places in the various manuscripts and of the same type, although there are many tens of differences in the parashot divisions between the manuscripts related to the Aleppo Codex and the Leningrad Codex in particular.

The situation since the end of the Middle Ages has been entirely different: since then, and to the present day, there has prevailed an almost complete uniformity in the divisions of the parashot in the Torah scrolls of all witnesses. This uniformity is the direct result of the ruling of Maimonides on the halakhot of Torah scrolls (chapter 8). Because Maimonides fixed the divisions of the parashot on the basis of the Aleppo Codex, his ruling brought almost all Torah scrolls closer to the Aleppo Codex in their divisions.

The division of the parashot in the Westminster transcription is according to the Leningrad Codex, and, and said before, this division differs in tens of places from what is accepted in Torah scrolls, and from what was decided as halakha by Maimonides according to the Aleppo Codex. Therefore, the division of the parashot in the Leningrad Codex has undergone a careful proofreading in our edition in order to match the division accepted in Torah scrolls, and we have recorded all the changes in the textual documentation.

In addition, regarding one parashah which is marked in two different places (Leviticus 7:22; 7:28; and in the Aleppo Codex there was probably a gap in both places), and likewise regarding two anomalous places (Exodus 14:1; Deuteronomy 27:20) where the type of parashah in the Aleppo Codex was different from our Torah scrolls (or even where there is uncertainty about it) there will be a special note in our edition, and they are:


 * 1) In the book of Exodus, Parashat Ki Tissa (34:1), in the verse, "וַיֹּ֤אמֶר... פְּסׇל־לְךָ֛", we note: "A closed section break is supplied by the Aleppo Codex" (in the Torah scrolls there is an open section break according to Maimonides).
 * 2) In the book of Leviticus, Parashat Tsav (7:22), in the verse "וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר... דַּבֵּ֛ר... כׇּל־חֵ֜לֶב", we note: "There is no parashah in the Sephardi and Ashkenazi scrolls" (in Yemenite scrolls there is a parashah on account of one possible interpretation of a statement by Maimonides, and it would appear that in the Aleppo Codex there was also a parashah here).
 * 3) In the book of Leviticus, Parashat Tsav (7:28), in the verse "וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר... דַּבֵּ֛ר... הַמַּקְרִ֞יב", we note: "There is no parashah in the Yemenite scrolls" (in the Ashkenazi and Sephardi scrolls there is a parashah on account of one possible interpretation of a statement by Maimonides, and the Aleppo Codex also had a parashah here).
 * 4) In the book of Deuteronomy, Parashat Ki Tavo (27:20), in the verses "אָר֗וּר שֹׁכֵב֙ עִם־אֵ֣שֶׁת אָבִ֔יו", we note: "A closed section break is supplied in the Aleppo Codex" (in the Torah scrolls there is no parashah, due to Maimonides).

For more information on the divisions of parashot throughout the Bible, see here (in English); this information will serve as a basis for our edition.

For information about the division of the parashot in our edition in the Neviim and Ketuvim, see here (for the places missing in the Aleppo Codex) and here (for places existing in the Aleppo Codex).

Scribal Tradition in the Torah: Anomalous Letters






[To be continued.]

Large and Small Letters
The phenomenon of larger and small letters is more common in the Pentateuch than in the books of the Neviim and Ketuvim. But most of the larger letters in the Torah and in the rest of the Bible, and also a significant number of the small ones -- do not appear at all in the biblical text of the Tiberian manuscripts, and only some are set out in the ancient Masoretic lists. This is despite the fact that in later generations their appearance has generally been considered a prominent component of "the Masoretic Text" (even if there are different traditions as to which letters are considered large or small). In this respect, the strict writing of the larger and smaller letters is similar to the strict and standardized division of the parashot: the carefully defined execution of both phenomena is the result of the work of Masoretic scholars and halakhic jurists who lived after Tiberian Masoretic period.

In our edition -- which is intended to be a tikkun kore'im (a a corrective guide for readers), and it is true that it will set forth the traditional of scribes in our own day -- we will note the large and the small letters according to the maximalist custom as accepted in the majority of Torah scrolls and printed editions of the Bible (and that usually in accordance with the Minchat Shai). In cases of doubt we will decide according to the Koren edition, which almost always reflects the tradition accepted in the printed editions. In the textual documentation we will note the sources that support the display of the anomalous letter.

In the five books of the Pentateuch we will add comments on the difference that exist between the Torah scrolls in our day (according to the Sephardi, Ashkenazi, and Yemenite traditions) and the text of the Aleppo Codex (according to witnesses) concerning the large and the small letters. For the list of comments on this topic see | here (in green).

Below is a list of all the large and small letters that appear in the body of the text in our edition (or in | the special notes):


 * 1) (Large) Bereshit, Bereshit (1:1): [בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית]
 * 2) (Small) Bereshit, Bereshit (2:4): [בְּהִבָּֽרְאָ֑ם]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[בְּהִבָּֽרְאָ֑ם]
 * 3) (Large) Bereshit, Bereshit (5:1): [סֵ֔פֶר]* (with an ordinary samekh) is found in the Leningrad Codex, while [סֵ֔פֶר] (with an enlarged samekh) is found in Yemenite scrolls. See also in the special notes on the Torah.
 * 4) (Small) Bereshit, Ḥayyei Sarah (23:2): [וְלִבְכֹּתָֽהּ]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[וְלִבְכֹּתָֽהּ]
 * 5) (Small) Bereshit, Toldot (27:46): [קַ֣צְתִּי]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[קַ֣צְתִּי]
 * 6) (Large) Shemot, Ki Tissa (34:7): [נֹצֵ֥ר]* / The Leningrad Codex reads [נֹצֵ֥ר] (without an enlarged nun). Also lacking the enlarged nun are the Yemenite scrolls; see also the special notes on the Torah.
 * 7) (Large) Shemot, Ki Tissa (34:14): [אַחֵ֑ר]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[אַחֵ֑ר]
 * 8) (Small) Vayiqra, Vayiqra (1:1): [וַיִּקְרָ֖א]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[וַיִּקְרָ֖א]
 * 9) (Small) Vayikra, Tsav (6:2): [מוֹקְדָ֨ה]* / The Leningrad Codex has [מוֹקְדָ֨ה] without the smaller mem, and likewise the Yemenite scrolls. See also the special notes on the Torah)
 * 10) (Large) Vayiqra, Shemini (11:42): [עַל־גָּח֜וֹן]*=L (=מ"ס-ל)
 * 11) (Large) Vayiqra, Tazria (13:33): [וְהִ֨תְגַּלָּ֔ח]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[וְהִ֨תְגַּלָּ֔ח]
 * 12) (Large) Bamidbar, Shelaḥ (14:17): [יִגְדַּל]* (=מ"ס-ל) / L=[יִגְדַּל]
 * 13) (Small) Bamidbar, Pinḥas (25:11): [פִּֽינְחָ֨ס]* without a small yod appears in the Leningrad Codex, while [פִּֽינְחָ֨ס] with the yod small appears in the custom accepted in the Sephardi and Ashkenazi scrolls; and see also in the special notes on the Torah.)
 * 14) (small or broken vav) Bamidbar, Pinḥas (25:12): [שָׁלֽוֹם]* appears without an unusual vav in the Leningrad Codex, but [שָׁלֽוֹם] (וי"ו קטנה, or broken in the scrolls of Sepharad and Ashkenaz; and see in the special notes on the Torah.)
 * 15) (Large) Bamidbar, Pinḥas (27:5): [מִשְׁפָּטָ֖ן|]*=L (=מ"ס-ל)
 * 16) (Large) Devarim, Vaetḥanan (6:4): [שְׁמַ֖ע]*=L (=מ"ס-ל)
 * 17) (Large) Devarim, Vaetḥanan (6:4): [אֶחָֽד]*=L (=מ"ס-ל)
 * 18) (Large) Devarim, Eikev (11:21): [עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ]*=L / [עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ] (=Yemenite scrolls; and see in the special notes on the Torah)
 * 19) (Small) Devarim, Ki Teitzei (22:6): [קַן־צִפּ֣וֹר]*=L / [קַן־צִפּ֣וֹר] (=ספרי תימן ומ"ס-ל!); and see also in the special notes on the Torah.)
 * 20) (Large) Devarim, Nitzavim (29:27): [וַיַּשְׁלִכֵ֛ם]* (=מ"ס-ל) / אל=[וַיַּשְׁלִכֵ֛ם]
 * 21) (Large) Devarim, Ha-Azinu (32:6): [הַ' לְיְהֹוָה֙]* with a large he appears in the final Masorah of the Leningrad Codex, while it is possible that no enlarged he appears in the Aleppo Codex. In the body of the Leningrad Codex itself, the he is not enlarged. In Yemenite scrols, and in the final Masorah of the Leningrad Codex, the he is enlarged. And see also the special notes on the Torah.
 * 22) (Small) Devarim, Ha-Azinu (32:18): [תֶּ֑שִׁי]* (=מ"ס-ל) / אל=[תֶּ֑שִׁי]
 * 23) (Large) Devarim, Vezot Ha-Berakhah (33:29) [אַשְׁרֶ֨יךָ]* with an ordinary aleph appears in the Aleppo Codex and Leningrad Codex, while [אַשְׁרֶ֨יךָ] with an enlarged aleph in the Yemenite scrolls and the final Masorah of the Leningrad Codex); and see in the special notes on the Torah.)

Below is a list of additional anomalous letters in the Torah


 * 1) (Large) Bereshit, Vayetzei (30:42): [וּבְהַעֲטִ֥יף]
 * 2) (Large) Bereshit, Vayishlaḥ (34:31): [הַכְזוֹנָ֕ה]
 * 3) (Large) Bereshit, Vayeḥi (49:12): [חַכְלִילִ֥י]
 * 4) (Large) Bereshit, Vayeḥi (50:23): [שִׁלֵּשִׁ֑ים]
 * 5) (Large) Shemot, Shemot (2:2): [כִּי־ט֣וֹב]
 * 6) (Large) Shemot, Bo (11:8): [צֵ֤א]
 * 7) (Large) Shemot, תצוה 28:35): [צִּ֖יץ]
 * 8) (Small or "joined" qof) Shemot, Ki Tissa (32:25) [בְּקָמֵיהֶֽם] (with a small qof or a "joined" qof; and see below in parashat Nasso [Numbers 7:2])
 * 9) (Large) Shemot, Ki Tissa (34:11): [שְׁמׇ֨ר־לְךָ֔]
 * 10) (Large) Vayiqra, Tsav (8:16 or 8:23):
 * 11) [וַיִּשְׁחָ֗ט]with a large het (8:16); and according to Masekhet Soferim [וַיִּשְׁחָ֗ט] (all letters enlarged)
 * 12) [וַיִּשְׁחָ֓ט] (8:23); and according to Masekhet Soferim ['''וַיִּשְׁחָ֓ט}}] (all the letters)
 * 13) (Large) Vayiqra, Shemini (11:30): [וְהַלְּטָאָ֑ה]
 * 14) (Large) Bamidbar, Bamidbar (1:18): [לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָֽם] (=ל?מ"ס-ל)
 * 15) (Large) Bamidbar, Bamidbar (3:16): [עַל־פִּ֣י]
 * 16) ("joined" qof) Bamidbar, Nasso (7:2): [עַל־הַפְּקֻדִֽים׃] (קו"ף דבוקה, and see above in parashat Ki Tissa [32:24])
 * 17) (Large) Bamidbar, Shelaḥ (13:30): [וַיַּ֧הַס]
 * 18) (Large) Bamidbar, Balaq (24:5): [מַה־טֹּ֥בוּ]
 * 19) (Large) Devarim, Devarim (2:33): [וַנַּ֥ךְ]
 * 20) (Large) Devarim, Devarim (3:11): [עֶ֣רֶשׂ]
 * 21) (Small) Devarim, Eikev (9:24): [מַמְרִ֥ים]
 * 22) (Large) Devarim, Shoftim (18:13): [תָּמִ֣ים]
 * 23) (Large) Devarim, Ki Tavo (28:58): [וְהִתְמַכַּרְתֶּ֨ם]
 * 24) (Large) Devarim, Ha-Azinu (32:4): [הַצּוּר֙]
 * 25) (Large) Devarim, Ha-Azinu (32:5): [וּפְתַלְתֹּֽל׃]
 * 26) (Large) Devarim, Vezot Ha-Berakhah (34:12): [כׇּל־יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃]

Dotted letters
Unlike the large and small letters, the marking of the dotted letters has been consistently executed in the manuscripts, in agreement with the Masoretic lists. Nevertheless, there is still disagreement about certain details. Below is a list of the dotted letters in the Torah in our edition and in the most important manuscripts:


 * 1) Bereshit, Lekh-lekha (16:5): [וּבֵינֶֽיׄךָ]*=L
 * 2) Bereshit, Vayera (18:9): [אֵׄלָ֔יׄוׄ]* / ל=[אֵׄלָׄ֔יׄוׄ] (=מ"ס-ל <ד' [נקודות]>)
 * 3) Bereshit, Vayera (19:33): [וּבְקוּׄמָֽהּ]*=L
 * 4) Bereshit, Vayishlaḥ (33:4): [וַׄיִּׄשָּׁׄקֵ֑ׄהׄוּׄ]*=L
 * 5) Bereshit, Vayeshev (37:12): [אֶׄתׄ־צֹ֥אן]*=L
 * 6) Bamidbar, Bamidbar (3:39): [וְׄאַׄהֲׄרֹ֛ׄןׄ]*=L
 * 7) Bamidbar, Behaʿalotkha (9:10): [רְחֹקָ֜הׄ]*=L
 * 8) Bamidbar, Ḥuqqat (21:30): [אֲשֶׁ֖רׄ]*=L
 * 9) Bamidbar, Pinḥas (29:15): [וְעִשָּׂרוֹׄן֙]* / L=[וְעִשָּׂרׄוֹן֙] (הנקודה ברי"ש!)
 * 10) Devarim, Nitzavim (29:28): [לָ֤ׄנׄוּׄ וּׄלְׄבָׄנֵׄ֙יׄנׄוּׄ֙ עַׄד־עוֹלָ֔ם]*=א / L=[לָ֤ׄנׄוּׄ וּׄלְׄבָׄנֵׄ֙יׄנׄוּׄ֙ עַד־עוֹלָ֔ם] (=מ"ס-ל)

Inverted nun
The phenomenon of the inverted nun or isolated nun (׆) is found around one parashah in the Torah (at the beginning and at the end, a total of twice), while in the Neviim and Ketuvim it is found 7 times in Psalm 107 (23-28, 40). Their location and shape in the Torah are determined in our edition according to what is known to us about the phenomenon in the Aleppo Codex and in the manuscripts close to it.

The appearance of the inverted nun in our edition and in the textual sources:

1. In our edition: Bamidbar, Beha'alotkha (10:34-36).

2. (the Westminster transcription)

3. In MS S: |

4. In MS B (see there page 129, 81 and 82 (?))

5. In.

6. In ("ב׆סע", "כמתא׆נים"!)

7. In

8. In

The Writers' Tradition in the Torah: Special Notes
Our edition is intended, as said before, to present the tradition of scribes in the Torah according to the Tiberian tradition, and according to Torah scrolls in our day. One can approach the text of the letters in the Torah that was in the Aleppo Codex by means of reliable reconstruction (according to the Breuer method and according to clear evidence), and it becomes evident that this is identical to the text of the letters in Yemenite Torah scrolls (which fully represents the Masoretic method) although on rare occasions (8-9 letters only in the entire Torah) there is a difference between the Yemenite scrolls on the one hand and the Ashkenazi and Sephardi scrolls on the other in the clear (?) spelling. In our edition a special note will appear in every place where the Ashkenazi and/or Sephardi scrolls differ from the Yemenite text. The text of the brief comment will first of all make note of the Sephardi scrolls before the Ashkenazi ("In the scrolls of Sepharad and Ashkenaz"), because in the few places where there are differences of this type (in all 8-9 places in all the Torah), the source of them all is rulings of Rabbi Moses Isserles according to the "according scrolls of Sepharad." In a later era, the rulings of Rabbi Moses Isserles were applied in the Torah scrolls of the Ashkenazim. Today, most Ashkenazi scrolls are almost identical to the Sephardi scrolls (except one hundred times (?) in the word דַּכָּ֛א/דַּכָּ֛ה), and the both of them differ from Yemenite scrolls in their letters in eight places (Sephardi) or nine places (Ashkenazi), where only the Yemenite scrolls are perfectly according to the Masorah. But there are places where for many years the old printed editions have specified the proper text of the Masorah as according to "Ashkenazi Text" (?), and especially in Deuteronomy 23:2 they specified "דכא" instead of "דכה" with the aleph (the first as according to the Ashkenazi text and the second according to the Sephardi scrolls in according with the determination of Rabbi Moses Isserles, although there is no such practice today in the Sephardi scrolls). To this very day, "דכא" is still written with aleph in the Torah scrolls of Chabad. Therefore, the wording of the note in Deuteronomy 23:2 will be: "In most of the Ashkenazi scrolls ...", and in the other places, "In the Sephardi and Ashkenazi scrolls...". For more details on the old Ashkenazi wording and its adaptation to the Masorah, see the article by Mordechai (?) Glatzer, "The Masorah Between East and West."

Apart from explicit [differences in?] wording, that is, the wording of the letters, a special note will also appear in all the places in which the text of the scrolls differs among Torah scrolls, or between them and the Aleppo Codex (in its [surviving] body or according to testimony). This refers to the conjoined words and to special letters (such as larger letters and small and truncated letters), and likewise to differences in the divisions of the parashot. In all of these places, we also note the difference in a visible way through a note in the body of the text (and not only by documenting the text in the scarcely-visible (?) edit page).

'''The following table lists all the places where a comment will appear in our edition. The types of differences are highlighted by colors:'''


 * Red=clear differences in the wording of the letters (9 places in the Torah)
 * Orange=conjoined words (3 appearances in the Torah, one of them in 3 places)
 * Gold=differences in the divisions of the parashot: type of parashah (open or closed) or the absence of a parashah (4 places in the Torah)
 * Green=unusual letters: large or small or truncated (8 places in the Torah)

There are 24 differences of all these types in the Torah (distinct letter wording, conjoined words, unusual (?) letters, passage division). One difference ("פוטי[ ]פרע") is found in 3 places, and in each place there is a comment, and therefore there are in all 26 notes on the wording of the Torah. One can see all the notes in one place, together with direct links into the body of the text, on the page which displays the Torah according to the tradition of the scribes (letters only).

Tradition of the Scribes in the Torah: Ktiv Edition (Letters Only)
See: The Torah according to the Scribal Tradition (Letters of the Ktiv Only).

Wording of the Vowels and the Accents Vis-a-Vis the Letters
There is a fundamental difference the tradition of reading (that is, pronunciation and cantillation) reflected in the manuscripts and the writing tradition found in them: the wording of the letters in the manuscripts is not uniform at all, but the vowels of the words and the accents are uniform in nearly every place. Breuer's findings show that the wording of the accents in the manuscripts is surprisingly stable, and even in the received text of the printed editions we do not find many variants of importance; the wording of the printed editions is even more accurate than some of the manuscripts in its accents. Something similar is true of the accents: the wording in the manuscripts is stable and uniform, and contains no fundamental divisions (?). While in the received wording of the printed editions there are a number of is indeed noticeable, but not particularly large.

This is how Rabbi Breuer described and explained the historical development that emerges from comparison between the two different domains (the letters as opposed to the vowels and accents in the wonderful (and revolutionary for its time) summary that he wrote based on his findings:


 * It was found that the wording of the Torah in the period before the Masorah should be described thusly. How the words were to be read was clear and obvious (?) to all. Whereas the text of the letters -- in terms of omissions and additions (?) -- was considered a broken valley (?). The sages of the Masorah found this valley and built a fence around it. And this, then, was their role in relation to their ktiv and qere: they did not rule on how to read the accepted letters -- rather the opposite: they ruled on how to write the accepted reading tradition.


 * In this respect, then, the oral Torah preceded the written. The sages of the Masorah received from their predecessors the recitation as oral Torah -- and prescribed for it the symbols of vowels and accents. It was for this text of the oral Torah that they afterward determined the final version of the written Torah.


 * Therefore you will find that the great majority of the regularity of the Masorah to the words as read (?) -- and not to the words as spelled. The tradition does not make reference to a particular combination of letters -- in order to determine the different ways of reading them; but rather it refers to particular combinations of sounds (?) and vowels -- in order to determine the different ways of writing them. Thus the words as read (?) of the Bible are the foundation which precedes the Masoretes; this foundation was given the written words and the final wording was determined


 * It is therefore only natural that the vowel pointing is uniform in the manuscripts, while the spelling of the words varies in places (?). These two phenomena are simply an extension of the state of things before the Masorah. The accepted oral Torah has not been forgotten, while the parent (?) who wrote "the renewed" still has not spread (?) throughout Israel. And also in the era leading up to the Masoretes, they were still not proficient as to shorter and fuller spellings -- much as in the Talmudic era.

[More to be added.]