μL omits the רביע of רביע מוגרש, which is expected, since μL’s habit is to omit the רביע in cases like this, where the רביע and the גרש מוקדם would be cramped together on the same letter. So, while μL doesn’t literally match the consensus we have presented, we can say that it implies that consensus, that consensus being merely the explicit notation of what μL implies.

In μL, there is some extra ink on the right side of the גרש מוקדם, which could, perhaps, be a misplaced רביע, but I find this unlikely.

Here μY matches μL, with the exception of two dots roughly between the ב and the מ. These dots are of unequal size, which is odd. They are likely a Masorah parva “callout”—note that instead of a masorah circle, μY uses a pair of above-dots as a “callout” for a Masorah parva note. See 22:21 for another example of this two-dot callout notation.

U — M — μL (page 402B, col 1, line 8):

μA (Aleppo) (page 275r, col 1, line 12, word 2):

μY (Cambridge 1753) (page 78A, col 1, line 17, word 3):

[p] ← prev   next → [n]