BHQ: מֻאֽוּם׃

The consensus has סילוק under מ and nothing (אפס (zero)) under vav.

The two dots above the מ in the μY image are the pair of above-dots that is μY’s equivalent of a masorah circle. See 19:16 for another example of this two-dot callout notation.

BHQ reflects neither μL nor the consensus expectation here. It reflects μL except it places the סילוק under the א instead of the vav. This not only contradicts μL, but also makes no sense given the רפה on the א. (Admittedly, the actual location in μL, under the vav, doesn’t make any sense either.)

I would also argue that this particular רפה should have been shown, despite the general policy of BHQ to ignore רפה marks in μL. In such a confusing word, the reader needs all the detail and context possible, such as this רפה mark. See also 19:2 for another case where רפה is important.

BHQ notes that here μL disagrees with μA and μY. But BHQ gives the מ in μA and μY a מרכא rather than a סילוק, which seems more likely a typo than a deliberate choice.

U — M — μL (page 405B, col 1, line -6 (6 counting from bottom of column) (including 1 blank line in the count)):

μA (Aleppo) (page 278r, col 1, line 2, word 5):

μY (Cambridge 1753) (page 81A, col 2, line 11, word 1):

[p] ← prev   next → [n]