Above I have asserted that the consensus has געיה here, but this געיה, like most cases of געיה, is optional. Therefore, one could just as easily assert the consensus has no געיה. I have chosen the consensus to be as close as possible to the proposed transcription of μL. I did this in order to make the proposed transcription seem no weirder than it really is. In other words, it is better to frame this as a question of דחי versus געיה than as a question of דחי versus no mark at all. Note that neither μA nor μY has a געיה here. — U — M — μL (page 399A, col 2, line -4 (4 counting from bottom of column)):

μA (Aleppo) (page 272r, col 2, line 17, word 3):

μY (Cambridge 1753) (page 75A, col 1, line 13, word 2):

[p] ← prev   next → [n]