Torah scroll (Yemenite)

Yemenite scrolls of the Law containing the Five Books of Moses (the Torah) represent one of three authoritative scribal traditions for the transmission of the Torah, the other two being the Ashkenazi and Sephardic traditions that slightly differ.[1] While all three traditions purport to follow the Masoretic traditions of Aaron ben Asher, slight differences between the three major traditions have developed over the years. Biblical texts proofread by ben Asher survive in two extant codices (the Aleppo Codex and the Leningrad Codex), the latter said to have only been patterned after texts proofread by Ben Asher. The former work, although more precise, was partially lost following its removal from Aleppo in 1947.

Yemenite Torah scrolls

The Yemenite Torah scroll is unique in that it contains many of the oddly-formed letters, such as the "overlapping" pe (פ) and the "crooked" lamed (ל), etc., mentioned in Sefer Tagae,[2] as also by Menachem Meiri[3] and by Maimonides,[4] although not found in ben Asher's orthography. The old line arrangements employed by the early Yemenite scribes in their Torah scrolls are nearly the same as prescribed by ben Asher. Like ben Asher's Masoretic tradition, it also contains nearly all the plene and defective scriptum, as well as the large and small letters employed in the writing of the Torah, a work held by medieval scribes in Israel to be the most accurate of all Masoretic traditions.

The disputes between ben Asher and Ben Naphtali are well-known to Hebrew grammarians. Maimonides' verdict in that dispute is in accordance with ben Asher.[5]

The codex that we have relied upon in these matters is the well-known codex in Egypt, comprising twenty-four canonical books, [and] which was in Jerusalem for several years to proof-read the scrolls there from, and all [of Israel] used to rely upon it, since Ben-Asher had proof-read it and scrutinized it for many years, and proof-read it many times, just as they had copied down. Now, upon it, I relied with regard to the book of the Law that I wrote, according to the rules which govern its proper writing.

Maimonides' ruling in this regard eventually caused the Jews of Yemen to abandon their former system of orthography, and during his lifetime most scribes in Yemen had already begun to replace their former system of orthography for that of Ben-Asher.[6] Scribes in Yemen, especially the illustrious Benayah family of scribes[7] of the 15th and 16th centuries, patterned their own codices containing the proper orthography, vocalization and accentuation after Maimonides' accepted practice in his Sefer Torah, who, in turn, had based his Torah-scroll on Ben-Asher's orthography,[8] with especial attention given to the line arrangements of the two Prosaic Songs mentioned by him, the Open and Closed sections of the Torah, and plene and defective scriptum.[6] Such codices were disseminated all throughout Yemen. The tījān (codices) were copied with particular care, since they were intended as model texts from which scribes would copy Torah scrolls, with the one exception that in the Torah scrolls themselves they contained no vocalization and accentuations. In most of these tījān, every three pages equalled one column in the Sefer Torah.[9] A recurring avowal appears in nearly all copies of codices penned by the Benayah family, namely, that the codex which lay before the reader was written "completely according to the arrangement of the book that was in Egypt, which was edited by Ben Asher...."[10] Based on the preceding lines of this avowal, the reference is to the Open and Closed sections that were copied from the section on orthography in the Yemenite MS. of Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, a work which Maimonides himself claims to have been based on Ben-Asher (i.e. the Aleppo Codex), universally recognized since the time of Maimonides as the most accurate recension of the Hebrew Bible. Benayah’s use of this avowal simply mirrors the words of Maimonides in his Hilkhot Sefer Torah, while most scholars doubt if he had actually seen a codex proofread by Ben-Asher.[11] Others say that the avowal merely refers to the Tiberian masoretic tradition (vowels and accentuations) adopted by the Benayah family in their codices.[12]

Yemenite Torah case with finials

Layout

The Yemenite scroll of the Torah is traditionally written on 51 lines to each column, for a total of 226 columns (רכ"ו דפים),[13] a tradition that differs from Ashkenazi and Sephardic scrolls which are almost exclusively made of 42 lines to each column. Unique to Yemenite scrolls, based on what is prescribed in their codices, is that each column concludes with the end of a particular verse and begins with the start of a new verse; never broken in the middle.[14] Each column starts with the opening lines of a new verse, excepting in only six designated places, whose mnemonics are בי"ה שמ"ו (see infra), and excepting in the two prosaic songs (the Song of the Sea and Ha'azinu), where the columns in these places begin in the middle of a verse.[15] These six places (five places when בראשית of Gen. 1:1 is excluded, since it is only used to form the mnemonic) are the only exceptions to the rule, and which practice is intended to ensure uniformity and exactness in the scribal practice and layout in the Sefer Torah throughout all generations. The average width of each column is approximately four finger-breadths, usually 9.3 centimetres (3.7 in), with a space of 3.7 centimetres (1.5 in) between columns. Columns containing the Prosaic Songs are considerably wider to facilitate the writing of the song in its usual format. For the Prosaic Song Ha'azinu, the first column which contains the song is made ca. 14 centimetres (5.5 in) in width, while the second column that concludes the song is made ca. 14.9 centimetres (5.9 in) in width. For the Prosaic Song of the Sea the column measures approximately 14 centimetres (5.5 in) in width. The sheets of parchment used in making the scroll measure approximately 54.7 centimetres (21.5 in) in length (from top to bottom), although varying in width, with at least three columns to each sheet. Most are made with full-grain leather (Heb. ğawīl),[16] that is, leather where the "split" layer has not been removed from it. In Yemen, the custom was to treat the raw hide with a tannin-solution made from the leaves of Acacia etbaica (Arabic: qarāḍ) to ensure the leather's lasting durability. This also gave to the leather a reddish-brown luster. The sheets of parchment were traditionally sewn together with sinews (tendons) taken from the animal's loins (flanks), rather than from the animal's heels (the latter being prescribed by Maimonides).[17]

Plene and defective scriptum

There are thirteen orthographic traditions in the first category which are peculiar to the Yemenite tradition and which differ from the traditions borne by other groups. The Yemenite arrangement has been published in many sources, the most notable of which being that of the last Chief Rabbi of Yemen, Rabbi Amram Qorah.[18] By a comparative study, the Yemenite tradition in plene and defective scriptum is nearly in complete harmony with that of the Aleppo Codex which was proofread by the masorete, Ben-Asher.[19]

200 year old gevil Yemenite Torah scroll housed at the Rambam Synagogue in Nahalat Ahim, Jerusalem.

Verses	Content	Change
	Genesis (בראשית)
4:13	גדול עוני מנשא[20][21]	The word מנשא is written without a "waw" (defective scriptum)
7:11	נבקעו כל מעינת[21][22][23]	The word מעינת is written without a "waw" (defective scriptum)
9:29	ויהיו כל ימי נח[21][22][24]	The word ויהיו is written as a plural with a final "waw"
41:45	פוטיפרע[25]	Every פוטיפרע is written as one word
	Exodus (שמות)
25:31	תעשה המנורה[21][26]	The word תעשה is written without a "yod" (defective scriptum)
28:26	אל עבר האפד[21][27][28]	The word האפד is written without a "waw" (defective scriptum)
	Leviticus (ויקרא)
7:22–23	פרשת כל חלב[27][29]	This section is written as an "Open Section"[30]
7:28–29	פרשת המקריב[27]	This is neither a "Closed" nor an "Open" Section[31]
	Numbers (במדבר)
1:17	אשר נקבו בשמת[21][27][32]	The word בשמת is written without a "waw" (defective scriptum)
10:10	ובראשי חדשיכם[21][27][33]	The word חדשיכם is written with a "yod" (plene scriptum)
22:5	בלעם בן בער[27]	The word בער is written without a "waw" (defective scriptum)
25:12	בריתי שלום[27][34][35]	The letter "waw" in שלום is written as all other "waws" (without shortening)
	Deuteronomy (דברים)
23:2	פצוע דכא[21][27][36]	The word דכא is written with an "aleph", instead of "he."

The prevailing view is that if there is found a Torah scroll that has not been written as prescribed in all of the above (as bequeathed by the ancients) then that same scroll is invalid (lowered in sanctity) and is considered as merely one of the codices (Heb. ḥūmashin).[37]

Irregular letters

Rabbi Yitzhak Razhabi has noted that in the Yemenite Jewish tradition there are over 400 peculiar types of letters (special forms of certain characters) in the Torah and which have been largely adhered to by Yemenite scribes.[38] While these irregular letters do not invalidate a Torah scroll if they had been neglected,[39] the scribes in Yemen still strictly adhered to its practice.

The Large Letters

The Yemenite tradition of writing the Otiyyot Gedolot (Large Letters) in the Torah differs in some respects from other communities, and follows the traditions as they received them from the scribes of old. The following is a list of all the Large Letters found in the Yemenite scroll of the Pentateuch (Five Books of Moses), as published by 17th century Yemenite scribe, Rabbi Yihye Bashiri, in his book, Havatzelet Hasharon:[40]

A sheet of leather parchment (Torah)

Verses	Content	Change
	Genesis (בראשית)
1:1	בראשית[41][42]	The letter "bet" (ב) of "breishit" (בראשית) is written in large script
5:1	זה ספר תולדת אדם[43][44][35]	The letter "semakh"[45] (ס) of "sefer" (ספר) is written in large script
	Exodus (שמות)
34:14	לא תשתחוה לאל אחר[41][46]	The letter "resh" (ר) of "aḥer" (אחר) is written in large script
	Leviticus (ויקרא)
11:42	כל הולך על גחון[41][47]	The letter "waw" (ו) of "ğaḥon" (גחון) is written in large script
13:33	והתגלח ואת הנתק[41][48]	The letter "ğimel" (ג) of "wehithğalaḥ" (והתגלח) is written in large script
	Numbers (במדבר)
14:17	ועתה יגדל נא כח אדני [41][49]	The letter "yod" (י) of "yigdal" (יגדל) is written in large script
27:5	ויקרב משה את משפטן[41][50]	The letter "nun" (נ) of "mishpaṭan" (משפטן) is written in large script
	Deuteronomy (דברים)
6:4	שמע ישראל יי' אלהינו[41]	The letter "ayin" (ע) of "shǝma" (שמע) is written in large script
6:4	יי' אלהינו יי' אחד[41]	The letter "daleth" (ד) of "eḥad" (אחד) is written in large script
11:21	כימי השמים על הארץ[41][44][51]	The letter "ṣadi" (ץ) of "ha'areṣ" (הארץ) is written in large script
22:6	קן צפור[41][44][52][35]	The letter "qof" (ק) of "qen" (קן) is written in large script
29:27	וישלכם אל ארץ אחרת[41][53]	The letter "lamed" (ל) of "wayashlikhem" (וישלכם) is written in large script
32:6	הליי' תגמלו זאת[41][54]	The letter "he" (ה) of "haladonai" (הליי) is written in large script
33:29	אשריך ישראל מי כמוך[41][44][55]	The letter "aleph" (א) of "ashrekha" (אשריך) is written in large script

Unlike the scribal tradition of Ashkenaz and Sepharad which is to make the nun (נ) of נצר חסד לאלפים in Exodus 34:7 of large size, in the Yemenite Jewish tradition the nun is of regular size.[56][35] Rabbi Yihye Bashiri, in his Havatzelet HaSharon, brings down other traditions concerning the writing of large and small letters in the Torah scroll, but which traditions were not practised in Yemen, and therefore ought to be reckoned as his sole opinion (since they are not mentioned by the renowned Yemenite scribe David Benayah, neither are they written in the Hibshoosh Codex, nor mentioned by the last Chief Rabbi of Yemen, Rabbi Amram Qorah, or in the vast majority of Yemenite codices. Rabbi Yihye Bashiri had, apparently, culled these other traditions from the writings of the kabbalists and other rabbinic scholars outside of Yemen, and wished to incorporate them in the Yemenite tradition, but which practices had never taken hold in Yemen.[57][58]

The Small Letters

Verses	Content	Change
	Genesis (בראשית)
2:4	אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם[59][60]	The letter "he" (ה) of "behibar'am" (בהבראם) is written in small script
23:2	ובא אברהם לספד לשרה ולבכתה[59][61]	The letter "kaph" (כ) of "walivkothah" (ולבכתה) is written in small script
27:46	קצתי בחיי מפני בנות חת[59][62]	The letter "qof" (ק) of "qaṣti" (קצתי) is written in small script
	Leviticus (ויקרא)
1:1	ויקרא אל משה וידבר[59][63]	The letter "aleph" (א) of "wayiqra" (ויקרא) is written in small script
	Deuteronomy (דברים)
32:18	צור ילדך תשי[59][64]	The letter "yod" (י) of "teshi" (תשי) is written in small script

Unlike the scribal tradition of Ashkenaz and Sepharad which is to make the mim (מ) of על מוקדה in Leviticus 6:2 of small size, in the Yemenite Jewish tradition the mim is of regular size.[65][35] Likewise, the letter "yod" in the word פינחס (Numbers 25:10) is written in regular size in the Yemenite tradition, unlike the tradition of other communities who make it small.[66][35]

Oddly-shaped letters

According to Rashi, the final nun (ן) in וימת תרח בחרן (Gen. 11:32) is to be written upside down, although this was never a practice in the Yemenite Jewish tradition.[67] Instead, the final nun here was written in its ordinary fashion. In other places, however, the Yemenites have preserved the practice of making oddly-shaped letters, where the tradition called for doing so. The Yemenite tradition calls for making 154 overlapping pe`s (פ) in their designated places, with the mouth recoiling inwards upon itself (made by a very thin nib of the pen).[68] The following is an abridged list of some of the common usages in Yemenite Torah scrolls.

Verses	Content	Change
	Genesis (בראשית)
3:14	על גחנך תלך[69]	The left leg of the "ḥet" (ח) in גחנך is widely spread out
3:18	וקוץ ודרדר תצמיח לך[70]	The left leg of the "ḥet" (ח) is widely spread out
3:21	כתנות עור וילבשם[71]	The head of the "lamed" (ל) (not to be confused with the neck) is extended with zig-zag strokes to the left[72]
3:23	וישלחהו יי' אלהים[71]	The head of the "lamed" (ל) in וישלחהו is extended with zig-zag strokes to the left
3:24	ואת להט החרב המתהפכת[71]	The head of the "lamed" (ל) in להט is extended with zig-zag strokes to the left
4:11	את דמי אחיך מידך[70]	The left leg of the "ḥet" (ח) in אחיך is widely spread out
7:22	רוח חיים באפיו[70]	The "pe" (פ) in באפיו is made to recoil inwards (overlapping)
27:46	קצתי בחיי מפני בנות חת[73]	The left leg of the "ḥet" (ח) in חת is widely spread out, and the "pe" (פ) of מפני is overlapping
41:45	שם יוסף צפנת פענח[74]	The "pe" (פ) in צפנת and in פענח are each overlapping (recoiling inwards)
41:45	אסנת בת פוטיפרע[74]	The two "pe"s (פ) in פוטיפרע are each overlapping (recoiling inwards)
42:12	לא כי ערות הארץ באתם לראות[75][76]	The bottom left leg of the "aleph" in the word לא is written with a slight inversion upwards
	Leviticus (ויקרא)
23:28	יום כפרים הוא לכפר[77]	The letter "pe" (פ) in כפרים and in לכפר are made overlapping
	Numbers (במדבר)
10:35	ויהי בנסע הארן[78]	Before and after the verse, there are two characters resembling an inverted nun
14:41	והוא לא תצלח[79]	The left leg of the "ḥet" (ח) in תצלח is widely spread out
	Deuteronomy (דברים)
23:21	לנכרי תשיך[59][80]	The head of the letter "lamed" (ל) is inverted backwards
32:42	מראש פרעות אויב[81]	The "pe" (פ) in פרעות is overlapping

Prosaic Song Ha'azinu

Jewish scribes have preserved a carefully guarded tradition regarding the line arrangements of certain verses, namely, which words are to be written at the forefront of a line, and which words are to be written at the end of the same. The line arrangements of Shirat Ha'azinu (Deut. 32:1–43) in the Yemenite Torah scrolls follow closely that of Ben Asher as conveyed by Maimonides' Mishne Torah, and, unlike the Sephardic tradition of writing the song in seventy lines (based on the Shulhan Arukh),[82] the Yemenite tradition is to write the song in only sixty-seven lines.[83]

The column on the sheet of parchment containing the prosaic song Ha'azinu is made wider than other columns, so as to make room for the poem's layout, written in the format of sixty-seven double half-columns, meaning to say, spaces are made between the verses which appear to descend in two columns. The prosaic song itself is preceded by a blank space, above which are six lines that are written in a format fixed by tradition, with the following words at the head of each line: the 1st line starting with ואעידה and ending with ידעתי; the 2nd line starting with אחרי and ending with מן; the 3rd line starting with הדרך and ending with הרעה; the 4th line starting with באחרית and ending with God's divine name, יהוה; the 5th line starting with להכעיסו and ending with כל; and the 6th line starting with קהל and ending with תמם.[84] The original Yemenite practice was to write these six short lines with indentations before and after the text of each line, rather than draw-out the lines unto the margins by stretching certain letters within the text.[85] The scribal practice of indenting these six lines was also the widespread practice used in Turkey, in very old and exquisite Torah scrolls during the time of Rabbi Chaim Benveniste (1603–1673).[86] After these six lines there is a space followed by the Prosaic Song, written in the format of a song. The Yemenite tradition follows the Aleppo Codex's layout of the Prosaic Song, excepting lines 38 and 39, being the only deviation in word sequence, now believed by most scholars to be an anomaly, by way of confusing the double usage of the Hebrew word גם (q.v. Deut. 32:25) and not knowing which word Maimonides actually had in mind when bringing down the condensed layout for the song.[87] A Sephardic codex written between the 11th–12th century (now Vat. ebr. 448) shows a tradition that is identical to that of the Yemenite tradition with respect to the line arrangements in the poetic song Ha'azinu.[88]

Arrangement of Lines in *Shirat Ha'azinu* (Deut. 32:25)
Lines	Aleppo Codex (written in 67 lines)[89]
Line no. 38	עם חמת זחלי עפר .............מחוץ תשכל חרב ומחדרים אימה גם בחור
Line no. 39	גם בתולה יונק עם איש שיבה ............. אמרתי אפאיהם
Lines	Yemenite Tradition (written in 67 lines)[90][35]
Line no. 38	עם חמת זחלי עפר ............. מחוץ תשכל חרב ומחדרים אימה
Line no. 39	גם בחור גם בתולה יונק עם איש שיבה ............. אמרתי אפאיהם

Prosaic Song of the Sea

The "Song of the Sea" (Shirat ha-Yam) is traditionally made on lines appearing as half-bricks set over whole bricks. Rabbi Meir ben Todros Halevi (ca. 1170–1244), when trying to ascertain the correct scribal tradition, mentions his having written to Shemuel ibn Tibbon the physician of Marseilles, inquiring about the scroll of the Torah that was with him and which was copied from Maimonides’ scroll of the Torah. Ibn Tibbon replied, sending to him an accurate copy of the arranged lines of the Song of the Sea (Hebrew: שירת הים‎) in Exodus 15:1–19 as found in the scroll that was copied from Maimonides’ Torah scroll. He writes that he found the three words, את מי הים (= "the waters of the sea"), written at the beginning of the last line.[91] Notwithstanding, Rabbi Meir ben Todros admitted to having deviated from this tradition, having decided against its orthography, seeing that in the Song of the Sea all of the previous lines had thus far ended in one word, and it seemed fitting to him that the second to the last line should also end in one word. He therefore changed its order, by his own admittance. The author of Minḥat Shai followed in suit and also changed the original order of the last two lines in the Song of the Sea. The Yemenite Jews still maintain the old tradition in the line arrangements of the Song of the Sea, following Ben Asher's format in the words that are to begin each line, as well as in the words which are to conclude each line.[35] Their fidelity to tradition has been praised by Dr. Penkower, a specialist of Textual Transmission of the Bible and the Masorah at the Department of the Bible in Bar-Ilan University, who wrote: "It's worthy of adding that in the Yemenite manuscripts of the Torah the arrangement of lines in the Prosaic Song of the Sea is exactly like the arrangement found in the Aleppo Codex, including the last two lines and the lines that are before the Song and that are after it."[92]

While all communities will write the Song of the Sea (Shirat ha-Yam) on thirty lines, the format which concludes the song has been slightly altered in some communities due to the doubt raised by Rabbi Meir Abulafia ben Todros of Spain.[93] In the old Sephardic codex (now Vat. ebr. 448), written between the 11th–12th century, it shows the arrangement of lines in the Prosaic "Song of the Sea" (Shirat ha-Yam) just as prescribed by Ben-Asher and as found in the Yemenite tradition, before Rabbi Meir b. Todros Halevi's emendation.[94]

Layout of the Song of the Sea (last three lines)

Comparative Texts[95]
	Line 28	Aleppo Codex
Yemenite scroll	כי (space) יהוה ימלך לעלם ועד (space) ידיך	same
Sephardic scroll	כי (space) יהוה ימלך לעלם ועד (space) ידיך	same
	Line 29	Aleppo Codex
Yemenite scroll	וישב יהוה עליהם (space) בא סוס פרעה ברכבו ובפרשיו בים	same
Sephardic scroll	וישב יהוה עליהם את מי (space) בא סוס פרעה ברכבו ובפרשיו בים	different
	Line 30	Aleppo Codex
Yemenite scroll	ובני ישראל הלכו ביבשה בתוך הים (space) את מי הים	same
Sephardic scroll[96]	הים (space) ובני ישראל הלכו ביבשה בתוך (space) הים	different

Testimonies from travelers and emissaries who had seen the Aleppo Codex have concurred, unequivocally, that the words, כס יה in Exodus 17:16, were written as one word, (e.g. כי יד על כסיה).[97][98] However, in the Yemenite tradition, the words are not joined together, but are written as two words,[99] just as the words appear in the Leningrad Codex and in the Damascus Pentateuch. This anomaly may be attributed to the fact that the Yemenite copyists in their transmission of the masorah made use of several ancient works, and perhaps even their own ancient Torah scrolls, just as they did when conveying the plene and defective scripta of the textus receptus (which almost completely agreed with that of masorete, Ben-Asher) – yet, without the aid or assistance of Maimonides who left no indication on how these words should be written, or just as they did also with the irregular letters written in the Torah, although here, too, Maimonides gave no indication about which of these letters should be made differently.[100] While Ben Asher was the arbiter in cases of vocalization in the Aleppo Codex, he was not, admittedly, the scribe who wrote the text, which scribe was rather Shlomo ben Buya'a. Since the Leningrad Codex, a codex also proofread by Ben-Asher, stands at variance here with the Aleppo Codex's entry, one might only speculate if Ben-Asher ever totally agreed with everything written in those codices. Yishai ben Amram ha-Cohen Amadi (late 16th century), a man who had actually seen the Aleppo Codex and noted its rendition of כסיה as one word, continued to write in his own papers the word as being made-up of two words. Moreover, the Treatise Sofrim[101] which brings down a list of words in the Torah that are written as one word, but read as two words (e.g. בגד in Gen. 30:11 which is read as בא גד, and אשדת in Deut. 33:3 which is read as אש דת) does not list כסיה as one of these words.

Mordechai Breuer makes note of the fact that "versions in the Talmud differ in many instances from the versions of the Masoretes (see, for example, Gilyon ha-Shas, the comments of R. Aqiba Eiger on the margin of the Talmud, Shabbat 55b). Accordingly, Talmudic versions are of no relevance here; perhaps they reflect the 'correct' or 'original' text of the Bible, but they are non-Masoretic by definition, and they have nothing to do with the uniform version which was accepted by the Tiberian Masoretes."[102]

Similarly, according to Rashi, the verse ויהי ביום כלות משה (in Numbers 7:1) is written with כלת in defective scriptum. This, however, is not the case in the Masoretic Texts, nor in the Yemenite Jewish tradition, where the word כלות is written in plene scriptum. Elsewhere, according to Rashi, the word פילגשים in (Genesis 25:6) is also written in defective scriptum, and which is not the case in either the Masoretic texts or in the Yemenite Jewish tradition.

Other line arrangements

A famous rabbinic dictum states that scribes are to be careful to have certain columns begin with fixed words, known by their mnemonics, בי"ה שמ"ו (an allusion to Psalm 68:5).[103] These, too, can be found in their designated places, each letter commencing the word of that column. Such was also the practice in Yemen.[104] For example: The Hebrew character bet (ב) represents the first word in the Torah, בראשית (Gen. 1:1);[103] the Hebrew character yod (י) represents יהודה אתה יודוך (Gen. 49:8);[103] the Hebrew character he (ה) represents הבאים אחריהם בים (Exo. 14:28);[103] the Hebrew character shin (ש) represents שמר ושמעת (Deut. 12:28);[103] the Hebrew character mim (מ) represents מוצא שפתיך תשמר (Deut. 23:24);[103][105] and, finally, the Hebrew character waw (ו) represents ואעידה בם (Deut. 31:28).[103] Different traditions abound for other communities who traditionally make use of a 42-line column. In the Yemenite tradition, the six-letters of the mnemonic device account for only two verses in the entire Torah where the column begins in the middle of a verse (Exo. 14:28 and Deut. 31:28),[103] whereas in all other columns, the start of a new verse always commences a new column. Likewise, in Parashat Shemini (Leviticus 10:16), a tradition passed down by the scribes was to ensure that each scribe when copying from a master text is careful to write the first דרש (derosh) at the very end of the line, while the second דרש (derash) be written at the forefront of the next line.[106] In the Yemenite Torah scroll brought out from Yemen, now belonging to Azriel ben Saadia Tzadok (Saleh) of Benei Barak, from which a Tikkun Soferim was made in five small pocket volumes to facilitate the accurate transmission of the same masorah by scribes, the first word דרש is, indeed, found at the very end of line no. 14, whereas the second word דרש is found written at the forefront of line no. 15.[107]

There are yet other places in the Torah scroll where Masoretic scribes used key words to determine the layout of each column, and where these same words were traditionally written in specific places in their respective columns, such as in Numbers 31:5 (Hebrew: וימסרו מאלפי ישראל), and where the lamed of ישראל is written at the end of one line, above the ʾalef of צבא at the end of the following line, said to suggest that, from that time forward, Israel was placed above all other nations.[108] Likewise, the verse in Deuteronomy 28:36 (Hebrew: יולך ה' אתך ואת מלכך) is traditionally placed at the start of a new column in Yemenite Torah scrolls, a practice alluded to in 2 Kings 22:13, said to be the place where Josiah opened-up to in the newly discovered Temple scroll.[109]

Places in the Yemenite scrolls which differ from the Aleppo Codex

Maimonides, summarizing the different orthographic traditions, wrote: "Authorities on the Masora... differ according to the variations in the scrolls on which they rely."[110] The oldest manuscripts containing the Masora of the early masoretes, such as the London Codex (British Library Or. 4445) and the Leningrad Codex, the Damascus Crown and the Aleppo Codex (based on various testimonies), were all written with a Closed section in pericope Ki Tisa (Exo. 34:1), in the verse פסל לך, while in pericope Ṣav (Lev. 7:28–29) there was written an Open section in the verse המקריב.[111] Neither one of these sections reflect the custom of Yemen today, which points to the assumption that, apparently, they changed their ancient practice in this matter to conform with that of Maimonides, as stated by the late chief Yemenite Rabbi, Yosef Qafih.[6] Scholars have pointed out eight differences between the Aleppo Codex and the Yemenite tradition of orthography.[112] At least in one reference it is believed to be an error by the copyist of the Aleppo Codex, and is not generally practised by any community in Israel, namely, that of writing היא in Leviticus 25:10–12 (יובל היא) with a yod (י) instead of a waw (ו).[113] It is not immediately clear if the Yemenites retained portions of their old tradition when incorporating in their writings the masorah of Ben-Asher.

Comparative study of codices
Source	Sephardic tradition[114]	Yemenite tradition	London Codex[115]	Leningrad Codex[116]	Damascus Codex[117]	Aleppo Codex[118]
Gen. 4:13	גדול עוני מנשוא	גדול עוני מנשא	xxx[119]	גדול עוני מנשא[120]	xxx[121]	גדול עוני מנשא[122]
Gen. 7:11	נבקעו כל מעינות	נבקעו כל מעינת	xxx[123]	נבקעו כל מעינת[124]	xxx[121]	נבקעו כל מעינת[122]
Gen. 9:29	ויהי כל ימי נח	ויהיו כל ימי נח[125]	xxx[126]	ויהיו כל ימי נח[127]	ויהיו כל ימי נח[128]	ויהיו כל ימי נח[122]
Gen. 41:45	פוטי פרע[129]	פוטיפרע[130]	פוטי פרע[131]	פוטיפרע[132]	פוטיפרע[133]	פוטי פרע[134]
Exo. 1:19	בטרם תבוא אלהן	בטרם תבוא אלהן	בטרם תבוא אלהן[135]	בטרם תבוא אלהן[136]	בטרם תבוא אלהן[137]	בטרם תבוא אליהן[122]
Exo. 17:16	כי יד על כס יה	כי יד על כס יה	כי יד על כסיה[138]	כי יד על כס יה[139]	כי יד על כס יה[140]	כי יד על כסיה[141]
Exo. 20:14	פר' סתומה לא תחמד אשת רעך	פר' סתומה לא תחמד אשת רעך	פר' סתומה לא תחמד אשת רעך[142]	פר' סתומה לא תחמד אשת רעך[143]	xxx[144]	פר' סתומה לא תחמד אשת רעך[145]
Exo. 25:31	תיעשה המנורה	תעשה המנורה	תעשה המנורה[146]	תעשה המנורה[147]	תעשה המנורה[148]	תעשה המנורה[149]
Exo. 28:26	אל עבר האפוד	אל עבר האפד	אל עבר האפד[150]	אל עבר האפד[151]	אל עבר האפד[152]	אל עבר האפד[122]
Exo. 34:1	פר' פתוחה פסל לך	(פר' פתוחה (פסל לך	(פר' סתומה (פסל לך[153]	(פר' סתומה (פסל לך[154]	(פר' סתומה (פסל לך[155]	(פר' סתומה (פסל לך[156]
Lev. 7:22–23	אין פרשה	(פר' פתוחה (כל חלב[157]	(פר' פתוחה (כל חלב[158]	(פר' פתוחה (כל חלב[159]	(פר' פתוחה (כל חלב[160]	(פר' פתוחה (כל חלב[161]
Lev. 7:28–29	פר' פתוחה המקריב	אין פרשה	(פר' פתוחה (המקריב[158]	(פר' פתוחה (המקריב[162]	(פר' פתוחה (המקריב[160]	(פר' פתוחה (המקריב[161]
Lev. 19:16	לא תעמד על דם רעך	לא תעמד על דם רעך	לא תעמד על דם רעך[163]	לא תעמד על דם רעך[164]	לא תעמד על דם רעך[165]	לא תעמד על דם רעיך
Lev. 25:10–12	יובל הוא	יובל הוא	יובל הוא[166]	יובל הוא[167]	יובל הוא[168]	יובל היא[169]
Num. 1:17	אשר נקבו בשמות	אשר נקבו בשמת	אשר נקבו בשמת[170]	אשר נקבו בשמות[171]	אשר נקבו בשמות[172]	אשר נקבו בשמת[173]
Num. 10:10	ובראשי חדשכם	ובראשי חדשיכם	xxx[174]	ובראשי חדשיכם[175]	ובראשי חדשכם[176]	ובראשי חדשיכם[122]
Num. 22:5	בלעם בן בעור	בלעם בן בער	בלעם בן בעור[177]	בלעם בן בעור[178]	בלעם בן בעור[179]	בלעם בן בעור[180]
Num. 25:12	בריתי של:ם[181]	בריתי שלום	בריתי שלום[182]	בריתי שלום[183]	בריתי שלום[184]	בריתי שלום[185]
Deut. 23:2	פצוע דכה[186]	פצוע דכא	xxx[187]	פצוע דכא[188]	פצוע דכא[189]	פצוע דכא[190]

In the days of Abraham ben Moses ben Maimon (1186–1237), the Jews of Yemen addressed thirteen questions unto him, one of which concerning the interstices --- the Open and Closed sections of the Torah as prescribed by his father, Maimonides, and what to do with a tradition that differs, to which he replied: "We see that there are many differences between the scribes in the matter of the Open and Closed sections, while the books that are in Israel greatly differ in this matter, and we have already seen the exponents of our laws, of blessed memory, who have taken positions in each of these works, which thing has its rightful place, since we do not possess the Book of the Temple court, which [if we had] we could meticulously learn from it about the matter, nor is there regarding this matter a tradition whereupon everyone agrees, to the extent that we could actually disqualify whatsoever contradicts it. Nevertheless, the right thing is to scrupulously attend to the matter, just as it appears in the Composition (i.e. Mishne Torah), in the Book of Ahavah, but whatsoever is found to be different from it, no one is to give judgment concerning it that it is invalid, unless it is different from all the books that are in existence."[191] The essence of the question implies that the Yemenites formerly had a different practice than that mentioned by Maimonides.

Treating of leather and ink used in Torah scroll

In Yemen, large goats (2 yrs. old) were used in making the parchment for Torah scrolls, as opposed to tefillin (phylacteries) in which only small kids of the goats (appx. 2 months old) were used for the vellum.[192] In Torah scrolls, the principal tannin substance was derived from the leaves of the salam-tree (Acacia etbaica; A. nilotica kraussiana), a tree known locally by the name qaraḍ (garadh). The same tannin substance and its use in treating leather for sacred scrolls is mentioned by Maimonides (1989:298). These leaves, being astringent, have the same function as gall.[193] A bath solution of the crushed leaves of this tree, into which raw leather had been inserted for prolonged soaking, would take only 15 days for curing. The water and leaves, however, required changing after seven or eight days, and the leather needed to be turned over daily. Usually such treatment would suffice, without the need of spreading any other salve onto the leather,[194] but only in cases where there was an erasure and the newly applied ink would spread would scribes in Yemen practise "sizing" of the leather, a process so-called by treating the leather parchment with a paste of Tragacanth gum (Arabic: كثيراء‎) or Gum arabic, and allowing the place to dry before applying ink. In some places, the fleshy-side of the leather (being the side that is written upon) was treated with a fine application of castor oil, taken directly from the bean of the castor oil plant (Ricinus communis), and which application is known to give added elasticity and durability to the leather.

According to Amram Qorah, the way in which leather was prepared in Yemen for use in writing a Torah scroll was as follows:

If it were whole leather (Heb. ğawīl) that the scribe wanted to write a Torah scroll upon, he would go to the tanner, select for himself sheep hides that had been treated (cured) to his satisfaction, and the tanner would sell them to him in their imperfect state, without trimming and without modification. The scribe then brings them to his house, softens them by sprinkling water upon them, and then spreads them out and stretches them, and then smooths the face of the leather on its flesh side, by scraping it with an instrument called a rasp (Arabic: mibshara). Afterwards, he cuts away the excessive edges and the outer corners, until he is left with a square sheet of leather. He then stains the sheet [of leather] with a dye solution made of turmeric, which resembles the colour of saffron, and then marks on the two ends of the sheet of parchment with the aid of a tool called a ruler the number of lines that are customarily made, and thus he delineates lines after he had rubbed the face of the leather on the side facing the hairs, with a smooth stone, in a scrupulous manner, so that it will be fitting and make writing easier. He then divides the columns[195] and, forthwith, begins his task [of writing].

[As for the parchment known as q'laf] (the leather that is not whole, and used mainly for writing the portions contained in the Tefillin), most scribes were skilled in treating leather for use as q'laf. The scribe does all those steps mentioned in the working of ğawīl, and smooths the face of the leather on its flesh side, for the space of what is needed to write upon [and no more], leaving it white, without dyeing it any colour."[196]

In Yemen, scribes prepared their own ink concoction, usually made from soaking copper sulphate crystals (copper vitriol) in water, known locally as zāğ (Arabic: زاج‎), but more often by mixing in the water al-ḥura (Litharge of alum),[197] qishr rumān (Pomegranate rinds), ʿafaṣ (Gall), ground to a powder and steeped in water and exposed to the sun's rays for two or three days, sifted of its residue and its yellowish liquid added to the ink concoction only near the time of writing, and after the ink had once again been allowed to sit in the sun for more than a day in order to receive its luster. An excessive amount of gall was seen as detrimental to the ink, therefore, used sparingly, as also too many pomegranate rinds will cause the ink to fade. A little sugar was also added to the ink concoction, as well as soot from the flame of burnt oils held against glass and ṣameġ (Gum Arabic).[198] In some places, wormwood (Artemisia absinthium), or what is called in Arabic shiba, was added to the ink to preserve the leather from mold and mildew. The traditional writing instrument in Yemen was the cane reed (calamus), rather than the feathered quill.[199]

Forms of the letters and special techniques

Just as there is a unique style of writing associated with Ashkenazi scrolls, and another style for Sephardic scrolls, so too is there a style of writing that is peculiar to Yemenite scribes of the previous centuries. Each community, however, makes use of the square Hebrew script. In the older Torah scrolls of Yemenite provenance, there was not a practice among scribes to write the Hebrew letters with their Tagim, since the accurate tradition of doing so had long been lost.[200] The ancient practice in Yemen when writing the letter ḥet (ח) is to make its roof flat, and not a "gable-roof," as prescribed by Rabbeinu Tam (Yaakov Meir), although more modern scrolls have adopted Rabbeinu Tam's method. The difference stems from one's understanding of the word חטרי in Tractate Menaḥoth.[201] In Yemenite scrolls, the Hebrew letters are made to suspend a fraction below the ruled lines, rather than hang directly from the ruled lines.

The manner in which Jewish scribes made certain Hebrew characters has evolved throughout the years in Yemen. Rabbi David ben Zimra (1479–1573) mentions the practice of the Jews of Aden, where in all their Torah scrolls the left leg of the Hebrew character he (ה) was slightly joined to the roof of the letter, a practice which he disqualifies, although admitting that such was also the practice that he found in old scrolls written in Egypt, and which practice had been rendered valid by Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet and Rabbi Joseph Colon.[202] Nevertheless, the old practice in Yemen of slightly joining the leg of the Hebrew character he (ה) to its roof, or the leg of the qof (ק) to its roof, eventually evolved to conform with the custom that is practised in other communities in Israel. Rabbi Yosef Qafih, commenting on Maimonides' Mishne Torah, responds to the old practice and goes to great lengths to show that such letters, had they been written in such a way, should not be disqualified, although the custom in Israel has now changed.[203]

One of the unique features found in scrolls penned in Yemen is the practice of marking the end of the biblical verse, not with ink, but by stamping the leather with a round-tipped metal instrument at the end of the verse, in order to assist the baal qoré when reading and knowing when he is to come to a full-stop. These dot-like impressions in the leather were made so as to resemble an inverted segol (one dot on top of two dots). Where the reading was to produce the sound made by the trope symbol etnaḥa (brief pause), it too was marked with only one dot by the same instrument beneath the word whose reading is to be read as such. Two diagonal stamp marks were made above the word whose reading called for it to be read with a zarqa. Some have questioned the validity of marking a Torah scroll in this way, but the sages of Yemen have explained its validity by saying that extraneous markings that are made in the leather without ink are permitted.[204][205]

Yemenite Torah scrolls traditionally had also the additional feature where the top corners of each leather sheet of parchment were folded backwards, immediately following the leather's treatment and before the actual writing.[206] This was done to distinguish between each sheet, as also to give the reader the ability to grasp with his two hands the sheet of parchment by the folds, without touching the letters themselves. The left and right margins of each sheet of parchment were made to a standard width of one-fingerbreadth (ca. 2.5 cm.), and when coupled together with other sheets, the margins came to two fingerbreadths.[207] The stitching of the sheets of parchment together was made differently from the practices found among other groups, in that the stitching made with ligaments was made closer together (appx. one centimeter between stitches) and more tightly fitting in Yemenite scrolls.[208] As required in Jewish law, and as found among all other groups, they did not sew the sheets together at the upper and lower ends of the margins, but left a space there unstitched.

Torah cases

The Torah case (Heb. tiq) traditionally used in Yemen was either a seven faceted or octagonal wooden box, typically made of a light wood, such as Sudanese teak (Cordia abyssinica), equipped with a pair of brass clasps cut in ornamental floral shapes for closing. The entire wooden box was fitted tightly with a thickly woven decorative cloth, replete with 3 to 5 buttons with matching loops. The top of the box was made with slits wherein they inserted protruding staves for carrying the decorative silver finials (Heb. rimmonim).[209]

Testimonials

Yaakov Sapir (1822–1886), a Lithuanian Jewish scholar from Jerusalem, was commissioned by the Jerusalem Rabbinate and traveled to Egypt, to Yemen and to India between the years 1857 to 1863. In 1859, he visited the Jewish community in Yemen, publishing an account of his travels soon thereafter in a book entitled, Iben Sapir, perhaps one of the most momentous travelogues ever to have been written in that century, and where he describes the life of the Jewish community there. He also described the Torah scrolls and codices had in Yemen and their peculiar tradition of orthography, an excerpt of which follows.[210]

Yaakov Sapir on the Tradition of Orthography in Yemen

And lo, in their books of the Torah there are to be found several differences in defective and plene letters, for example: minnaso (Gen. 4:13), [in the verse, "My iniquity is greater than I can bear,"] lacks a waw; [or] maʻayanoth (Gen. 7:11) [in the verse, "All of the fountains of the deep were opened,"] lacks a waw; [as well as] wiyiheyu kol yamei noaḥ (Gen. 9:28), [in the verse, "And all of the days of Noah were," etc., is written] with the addition of a waw at its end; teʻaseh (Exo. 25:31), [in the verse, "Of beaten work shall the candlestick be made,"] lacks a yod; ḥodsheikhem (Num.10:10), [in the verse, "Your new moons," etc., is written] with the addition of a yod; as also in the lay-out of the Song of the Sea (Exo.15: 1-ff.) and in certain closed sections [of the Law]. And I saw that all their ancient books were [written] in this way.

(A note appended later by R. Yaakov Sapir to the above section reads as follows:)

I do recall my faults this day. When I had taken with me a scroll of the Torah [written] in the handwriting of the scriveners of Yemen, and when I had proofread it, I found in it the differences that I formerly mentioned, as well as other [changes] – besides that which can be attributed to scribal error, and I corrected it after the manner of our own books. Then when I happened to be, afterwards, in Paris during [the month of] Tishri, 5625 anno mundi (1865 CE), I saw a book in the library of that great personage, the savant and honorable teacher and Rabbi, Rabbi Hertz Ginsburg (may his light shine), which [library] stood under the supervision of my beloved friend, the wise and illustrious Rabbi, [even] our teacher the Rabbi, S. Zacks (may his light shine), a most dear manuscript made by the Rabbi [who is known as] the Meiri, of blessed memory, [and which book was entitled], Kiryat Sefer.[lower-alpha 1]

Its name is derived from [its content, which treats on] all the laws governing the scroll of the Law, how it ought to be written, and how read, therein showing all of the defective [letters], and plene [letters],[lower-alpha 2] open sections and closed sections, [etc., which scribes are wont to make in a scroll of the Law] – nothing being left undone, whether small or great, which he did not bring out in that book. He has withal done far more than what could ever have been expected, whether it were of any man who came before him, or who should come after him. Now I shall copy here, in short, an outline of the matters from one of the chapters, being useful for the purport [of our discourse], and whose words are as follows:

"Now behold, herein, do I make a copy[lower-alpha 3] of the writing which the forenamed Rabbi (i.e. the Ramah,[lower-alpha 4] of blessed memory) sent to the sages of Burgos [in Spain] who had belabored themselves on this point (i.e. over the subject of proofreading the scroll of the Law) with a well-known book [of the Law] attributed to Hillel the elder, [and] which was called by them Halleujah."[lower-alpha 5]

The [author of the book] Yuchasin[lower-alpha 6] wrote these words: "Now in the year 4956 anno mundi (1196 CE), on the 8th of Menaḥem Av, there fell out a great religious persecution in the kingdom of León,[lower-alpha 7] to the extent that they carried away from there a Codex containing the 24 canonical books of the Bible, called the Biblia, which R. Hillel[lower-alpha 8] had written, and from which they would proofread the texts of all the scrolls. Now I saw some of them (i.e. scrolls) that were sold in Africa, and at my time, they were nine-hundred years old since the time they were first written."[lower-alpha 9] The [same author of the book] Yuchasin, on the year 5250 anno mundi (1490 CE), wrote: ha-Qimḥi[lower-alpha 10] (c. 1160–c. 1235) said in his Piece on Grammar, in the chapter lemaʻan tizkaru, that the Codex was in Toledo [of Spain], and [that it was found written after its prescription] in the books [of the Law] left by the early Geonim, [particularly] by Rav Sherira [Gaon] and Rabbeinu Hai [Gaon]. And when the books of Rabbeinu Moshe (i.e. Maimonides, of blessed memory) came amongst them and they saw his tradition of orthography[lower-alpha 11] in this regard, they sent to him (i.e. to the Ramah) and he answered them after [much] flowery speech and many praises, whose words were these: 'But presently I shall tell you the truth, that all the books that have reached us of those books written by Rabbeinu Moshe (Maimonides), may peace rest on him, with regard to open sections and closed sections, all of them were engrossed with different errors one from the other, since the words of the book were concealed [from understanding], and those copyists who copied from it made rash decisions on their own, and each one added [what he pleased], and diminished [from the true text] according to his own understanding, thus defacing the books with things that they imagined in their heart to be true, and which they gave their opinion to, but which I was compelled to investigate and make inquiry into, etc., etc. And so, I sent to Marseilles, to the most erudite man [there], Samuel Ibn Tibbon,[lower-alpha 12] the physician, and I asked him to send me an [accurate] account of the closed and open sections from the book [of the Law] that was copied from the book [of the Law] belonging to that Rabbi (i.e. Maimonides) that came with him to Marseilles, and which said Rabbi (may his memory be blessed) had signed in his own handwriting; as also that which I, myself, had written down from the book (that was no longer before me), I am Moshe, the son of Rabbi Maimon the Sepharadi. And so did he do, sending them to me with due speed, and I found in the copy of the writing, etc. all the things that you brought to my attention for a decision [as touching the writings of Maimonides] that they were [indeed] true, etc. and that the other matters that were concealed [therein from our understanding] were not made clear unto me by that book until I was compelled to once again search and inquire [into them], etc., and it was revealed unto me their import[lower-alpha 13] by the help of Him who favors man with understanding. Now, behold! They are written in this [leafed] booklet which is being sent to you, etc., [both] open and closed [sections], [and] that which is neither an open [section] nor a closed [section], but rather an arranged [section],[lower-alpha 14] in my own handwriting. Likewise, I have written for you the lay-out of the [prosaic] song Ha'azinu[lower-alpha 15] in two categories: one, containing the names of words that come at the beginning of each line; the other, containing the names of words that come at the end of each line. (Now there are altogether sixty-seven lines [in the prosaic song Ha'azinu], just as it is found in my handwritten Bible Codex, and in [copies of] Maimonides of [those made by the] early exponents of our laws…) … [Signed]: From him that has been afflicted with reproof of instruction, not with whips, per se, but with scorpions, until he was compelled to confess his sorrow unto many – perchance they will seek mercy upon him from Him who has mercy; [I], who writes to his friends and companions, Meir Halevi, the son of R. Todros.' "

And, there, the Rabbi who is the Meiri, of blessed memory, writes more, [viz.], that in Toledo [of Spain] there was a book [of the Law] called the Book of Ezra,[lower-alpha 16] and a certain Codex that was copied from the Codex belonging to the Ramah (i.e. Meir ha-Levi b. Todros Abulafia, c. 1165–1244), whom we mentioned, which [latter] was proofread many times with utmost diligence by several scribes and wise men, in the forenamed city, with painstaking care and great expense, and came afterwards into his hand[lower-alpha 17] with all the testimonies of the proofreaders and scribes, and, based on it, he wrote in this, his own book Kiryat Sefer, every word which is either defective or plene, open and closed sections, in the year of the exile of France, which corresponds to the year 5066 anno mundi (1306 CE). Unto here we have brought down his words. Now, behold! I have found [and] seen in this [book], Kiryat Sefer, exactly as it is found written in the scrolls of Yemen! (q.v. supra, the treatise on Egypt, where I have elaborated in great length about all their details.) And so, in vain have I erased and made corrections. Now if I had seen it beforehand, I would not have touched it [with my own] hand! But He is merciful [and] atones for iniquity… END

Original:

והנה בס"ת שלהם נמצא כמה שנויים בחסר ויתר כמו מנשא (בראשית ד' י"ג) ח"ו מעינת (נח ז' י"א) ח"ו ויהיו כל ימי נח (נח ט' כ"ח) בואו לאחרונה תעשה (תרומה כ"ה ל"א) ח"י חדשיכם (בהעלותך י' י') מ"י וכן בצורת שירת הים ובאיזה סתומות * וראיתי שכל ספריהם הקודמים כן הוא

(המחבר הוסיף הערה זו בעת הדפוס)

את חטאי אני מזכיר היום כי הבאתי עמי ס"ת מכתיבת סופרי תימן וכאשר הגהתיה מצאתי בה השנויים הנז' ועוד (לבד איזה טעות סופר) ותיקנתיה עפ"י ספרים שלנו. ובהיותי אח"כ תשרי תרכ"ה בפאריז ראיתי בבית עקד הספרים של הגביר האדיר החכם הנכבד מו"ה הירץ גינצבורג נ"י העומדת תחת יד ידי"נ הרב החכם המפואר מוהר"ש זאקש נ"י ספר כ"י יקר להרב המאירי ז"ל קרית ספר. שמו על כל דיני ס"ת כתיבתו וקריאתו ומצויין בו כל החסרות ויתרות ופתוחות וסתומות לא הניח דבר קטון וגדול שלא העלה בספר הזה והוא מפליא לעשות מכל אשר לפניו ולאחריו. ואעתיק בזה בקיצור ריש מילין מפרק אחד הנצרך לענינינו וז"ל: "והריני כותב כאן כתב שלחו הרב הנזכר (הרמ"ה ז"ל) לחכמי בורגיש שטרחו על זה (בהגהת ס"ת) עם ספר הידוע להלל הזקן שנקרא ביניהם הללויה. [היוחסין כ' וז"ל: "ובשנה ד"א תתקנ"ו בח' למנחם הי' שמד גדול במלכות ליאון ואז הוציאו משם ספר הארבע ועשרים נקרא הביבליא שכתב אותם ר' הלל ומשם היו מגיהים כל הספרים ואני ראיתי חלק מהם שנמכרו באפריקא ובזמני הי' תשעה מאות שנה שנכתבו. (והיוחסין ה"א ר"נ) והקמחי אמר בחלק הדקדוק בפ' למען תזכרו שהחומש היה בטוליטולא.] ובספרים ישנים לגאונים הראשונים של רב שרירא ורבינו האיי וכשבאו ספרי רבינו משה (הרמב"ם ז"ל) אצלם וראו סדריו בענין זה שלחו לו (להרמ"ה) והשיב להם אחרי המליצית והשבחים כו' כו' וז"ל: "ועתה אמת אגיד לכם כי כל הספרים אשר הגיעו לידינו מספרי רבינו משה ע"ה בענין הפתוחות והסתומות כולם היו מוטעים טעיות משונות זה מזה מפני דברי הספר שהיו מסותמים והמעתיקים ממנו באו להכריע מדעתם והוסיף כל אחד וגרע כפי הכרע דעתו והשחיתו את הספרים בדברים אשר בדו מלבם ואשר הכריעו מדעתם ואני הוצרכתי לחקור ולדרוש כו' וכו' ושלחתי למארסילי' לחכם המובהק שמואל אבן תיבון הרופא ובקשתי ממנו לשלוח לי נוסח הפרשיות הסתומות והפתוחות מן הספר המועתק מספר הרב שבא עמו למארשילי' ושהרב זכרונו לברכה חתם עליו בחתימת ידו וגם זה מן הספר שכתבתי אני שלא בפני אני משה בר' מיימון הספרדי וכן עשה ושלחם אלי בזריזות ומצאתי בפתשגן הכתב כו' את כל הדברים אשר הכרעת דעתי כי אמת הי' כו' ושארי הדברים המסותמים לא נתבררו לי מן הספר ההוא עד אשר הוצרכתי לשוב ולחקור ולדרוש כו' ונתגלו לי שאריתם בעזרת החונן לאדם דעת והנם כתובים בקונטירס הזה השלוח אליכם כו' פתוחות וסתומות לא פתוחה ולא סתומה אלא סדורה כ"י וכן כתבתי לכם צורת שירת האזינו בשני סימנים אחד בשמות התיבות שבראש כל שטה ואחד בשמות התיבות שבראש כל שטה האחרון [א"ס והם בששים ושבע שיטין כמו בהתנ"ך כ"י שלי וברמב"ם כ"י הראשונים והארכתי בזה במ"א.] ... מאת המיוסר בתוכחת מוסר לא בשוטים כי אם בעקרבים עד שהוצרך להודיע צערו לרבים אולי יבקשו עליו רחמים מאת בעל הרחמים כותב לידידיו ורעיו מאיר הלוי בר' טודרוס

וכותב עוד שם הרב המאירי ז"ל שבטולטילא הי' ספר נקרא ספר עזרא וספר אחד שנעתק מספר הרמ"ה הנז' והוגה פעמים רבות בחריצות נפלא ע"י כמה סופרים וחכמים בעיר הנז' בטרחה והוצאה מרובה והגיע אח"כ לידו עם כל העדיות של המגיהים והסופרים ועל פיו כתב בספרו זה קרית ספר כל מלה חסרה ויתרה פתוחות וסתומות בשנת גלות צרפת היא שנת חמשת אלפים וששים ושש לבריאת העולם עכ"ל. והנה מצאתי ראיתי בזה הקרית ספר כפי הכתוב בספרי תימן (ראה למעלה במצרים שהארכתי בכל פרטיהם.) ובחנם מחקתי ותקנתי ואם ראיתיו קודם לא נגעתי בה יד והוא רחום יכפר עון

Notes:

Rabbi Menaḥem Ha-Meiri wrote his Kiryat Sefer shortly after the year 1306 CE, which work quickly gave him high acclaim. It is quoted by R. Yoseph Karo.
The sense here is to superfluous letters.
Literally, "write."
Rabbi Meir Halevi, the son of R. Todros. He came from Burgos, in Spain, but moved to Toledo (Ṭulayṭulah) where he taught the Torah among many, and raised up many disciples. He wrote several commentaries on the different tractates of the Talmud. He died in 1244 CE.
In the book, Sefer Yuchasin, the title of this book of the Law, or else Codex, is given as Hilleli, rather than Hallelujah, but in Rabbi Meir’s account in his Kiryat Sefer the Codex was called Halleliyya. The ancient Codex is allegedly referenced in the colophon of Jewish Theological Seminary MS. JTS 44a, where it claims that the said Spanish Codex was proofread by using Sefer Halleli as its master text.
Rabbi Abraham Zacuto.
A place in NW Spain.
In the book, Sefer Yuchasin, his name is given as Rabbi Moshe ben Hillel.
Meaning, during the time of Abraham Zakuto, the Codex was aged nine-hundred years, since it was compiled in circa 596 CE.
Rabbi Qimḥi.
Literally, "his orders."
He is the great philosopher and scholar who translated Maimonides' "Guide to the Perplexed" into the Hebrew language during Maimonides' lifetime.
Literally, "those things that remained of them."
The arranged section (Heb. parashah sedurah) is to be found also in the Yemenite tradition of orthography, said to be those indentations that do not comprise in length the space made by nine letters, but somewhat shorter, such as when a scribe concludes the writing of a section near the left margin, without extending the words unto the margin.
This is in complete harmony and agreement with the Yemenite tradition of orthography.
A scroll of the Torah believed to have been written by Ezra the scribe, and which, based on the testimony of Rabbi Obadiah of Bertinoro, was once kept in Old Cairo, in Egypt. The ancient scroll is said to have been taken out from there, and during a voyage at sea, the ship which transported it sank and the scroll was lost forever. Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1975), p. 32, has pointed out that in the "Book of Ezra" mentioned above there was found written in it like the Yemenite tradition, namely: גדול עוני מנשא (without a waw in the word מנשא), and in the verse, נבקעו על מעינת (without a waw in the word מעינת).
i.e. into the hand of Rabbi Menahem Hameiri, author of Kiryat Sefer.

References

Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), p. 68. According to Penkower, the Ashkenazi tradition– with respect to plene and defective scriptum in their Torah scrolls – follows more closely the teachings of Rabbi Meir Halevi Abulafia (author of Masoret Seyag La-Torah), Rabbi Menahem Lonzano (author of Or Torah) and Rabbi Jedidiah Norzi (the author of the seminal work, Minḥat Shai). Their accepted orthography for the Hebrew Bible was published in the Tartaz Codex, printed in Amsterdam in 1666. Excluding the irregular letters in the Torah, the Ashkenazi tradition differs from the Yemenite tradition in some thirteen places. Penkower goes on to say that the Yemenite tradition, in terms of plene and defective scriptum, is nearly identical to the Aleppo Codex; see also Breuer, M. (1976), English Introduction (p. xxvii).
An ancient Tannaic manuscript that was first printed in Paris in 1866 under the title Sefer Tagin, although believed to be defected in parts by its copyists, and which was also copied in Mahzor Vitri, top of Parashat Vayishlaḥ (pp. 674–ff.), with slight variations. The entire work has been reprinted by Kasher, M. (1978), pp. 87–90.
Meiri (1956)
Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 7:8)
Maimonides, Hil. Sefer Torah 8:4
Qafih, Y. (1989), p. 934
Benayah ben Sa'adyah has long been acknowledged as the greatest scribe of Yemenite Jewry and as patriarch of an entire family of Yemenite scribes which flourished beginning in the latter half of the fifteenth century, in and around the capital, Sana'a. In addition to Benaya himself, at least four of his children (three sons and a daughter) and two of his grandsons followed in his footsteps and penned Hebrew manuscripts. According to Yemenite tradition, the Benayah family is said to have copied some 400 volumes. Out of this great number, only about 36 codices have survived.
Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), p. 63 (top)
See the Yemenite Codex (Tāj) now at the British Library, Or. 2350, written in 1408, showing the beginning of the column used in the Torah for Shirat ha-Yam (the Song of the Sea), and which single column is continued in the following two pages of the codex.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), Foreword by Shelomo Morag; Taj Benaya (copied in the 1846th year of the Seleucid era/1535 CE); British Museum, Or. 2364; British Museum, Or. 2349; British Museum, Or. 2350; British Museum, Or. 2365; British Museum, Or. 1379, et al.
Bin-Nun, Adam (2016)
Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 338 [62], note 10.
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p. 172 (§ 165:23)
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1975), p. 33.
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), pp.174–175 (§ 165:23)
Shulhan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah (Hil. Sefer Torah § 271:3).
Qafih, Y. (1985), chapter 3, p. 334 (note 20). The advantage of taking the tendons from the flanks (Heb. כסלים) is that they were naturally long, unlike those taken from the heel, and they did not require softening by working them with a stone, nor was it necessary to twine the tendons before making use of them (ibid.).
Qorah, A. (1987), pp. 103–105.
Offer, Joseph (1989), 309 [33]
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103 (Hebrew). Cf. Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 160, where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Genesis 4:13 the word מנשא was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a waw. The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word מנשא written without a waw, in defective scriptum.
Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103.
The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word מעינת written without a waw, in defective scriptum. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, מעינת, was indeed written in defective scriptum.
The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word ויהיו written with a final waw. In Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 9:29, the word is written with a final waw. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same final waw in ויהיו כל ימי נח; see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 33v. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sethon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, ויהיו, was indeed written in plene scriptum.
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103. Likewise, Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 41:45, where the word פוטיפרע ("Potifera") is written as one word. So, too, in the Damascus Pentateuch the name is written as one word. However, the Aleppo Codex, based on the testimony passed down by Yaakov Sapir (Me'oroth Nathan), had the name פוטי פרע written in two words.
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 104. Cf. Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 166, where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Exodus 25:31 the word תעשה was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a yod. The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word תעשה written without a yod, in defective scriptum. Concerning this word in Exodus 25:31, Avraham ibn Ezra has written: "I have seen books [of the Torah] that were checked by the sages of Tiberias, and fifteen of their elders have sworn that they have looked three times upon every word and every point, and [upon] every word written in plene and defective scriptum, and lo! There was written a yod in the word תֵּיעֲשֶׂה. But I haven’t found so in the books [of the Torah] in Spain and in France, and beyond the sea. Moreover, the ancients have expounded that the addition of a yod (i.e. numerical value of ten) alludes to the ten candelabrums that Solomon would make, although the general rule states that if there were there a yod it is a foreign word. By way of an exegesis [they have said] that it was made by itself (i.e. because of its passive-perfect tense). The reason being is that all those who saw it were astonished how a man could make it, etc." It is to be noted that the Spanish Jewish community has since abandoned its old tradition in this regard.
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 104.
The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word האפד written without a waw, in defective scriptum. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, האפד, was indeed written in defective scriptum.
The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also an Open Section for this reading. So, too, the Yemenite MS. of Maimonides' Mishne Torah has this section listed as an Open Section; see: Qafih, Y. (1985), chapter 8, p. 402 note 19.
In Maimonides' own handwritten Ms. of Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah, ch. 8:4, Sefer Vayiqra), now at the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England (Ms. Huntington 80), p. 133b (top), which same is identical with the Yemenite Ms. of Maimonides' Mishne Torah, there is some ambiguity in the wording used by Maimonides when describing this section of the Torah. There, Maimonides writes: `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `This is the offering, [etc.]`(Lev. 6:12); "`And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs [to the verse], `Speak unto Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 6:17); `And this is the law of the guilt-offering, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:1); `And this is the law of the sacrifice, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:11); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Speak unto the children of Israel, [etc.] [all suet, etc.]` (Lev. 7:22); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Take Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 8:1) – all of them are Open sections, and they are [altogether] six." In the highlighted text, the Leningrad Codex (a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work) renders this passage of scripture an Open section. (Original Hebrew: וידבר דזה קרבן, וידבר דדבר אל אהרן, וזאת תורת האשם, וזאת תורת זבח, וידבר דדבר אל בני ישראל, וידבר דקח את אהרן, כולן פתוחות, והן שש). See also Meiri (1881), Parashat Ṣau, # 7, who lists this section as an "Open Section" (Hebrew). However, in the modern printed texts of Maimonides, the reading differs greatly: "`And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `This is the offering, [etc.]` (Lev. 6:12); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Speak unto Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 6:17); `And this is the law of the guilt-offering, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:1); `And this is the law of the sacrifice, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:11); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Speak unto the children of Israel, [etc.] He that offers, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:28); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Take Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 8:1) – all of them are Open sections, and they are [altogether] six." (Hebrew: ). Rabbi Yehudah Attiya, a rabbi of Aleppo who had seen the Aleppo Codex and copied-down its Open and Closed sections, made a comparison between the same and Maimonides' list of Open and Closed sections. This list was sent to Jerusalem, and was later reviewed by M.D. Cassuto, who, in turn, disclosed that the section known as ha-maqrīv (Lev. 7:28), though not listed as a section in Maimonides, was listed as an Open section in the Aleppo Codex.
This section is listed as an Open section in the Aleppo Codex. See: Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 339 [63].
Although the Leningrad Codex and the Damascus Pentateuch both have the word בשמות in Numbers 1:17 as containing a waw (i.e. in plene scriptum), Rabbi Jacob Saphir (Sapir, Y. 1986) brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and writes that in Numbers 1:17 the word בשמת was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a waw. In this case, the Yemenite Jewish tradition still finds solid ground and support on which to base its own scribal traditions. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, בשמת, was indeed written in defective scriptum.
M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, חדשיכם, was indeed written in plene scriptum, with a yod.
Cf. Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 171, where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Numbers 25:12 the waw (ו) of the word שלום was written complete, and without being broken in the Aleppo Codex.
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p.168 (§ 165:21)
In the Torah codex (Pentateuch) copied by David ben Benaya in 1490, now at British Museum (Or. 2349), the word דכא is written with an "aleph." See: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 136r. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, דכא, was written with an aleph (א).
Maimonides, Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 7:11), who writes: "...If he wrote plene defective, or defective plene, or if he wrote an open section closed or a closed section open... then it is invalid and it has no sanctity of a Torah scroll at all." See also Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103; Yihye Saleh (Maharitz), Ḥeleq ha-Diqdūq, Parashat Noaḥ, s.v. ויהיו כל ימי נח (Hebrew). Rabbi Menachem Meiri objects, saying in the Preface to his Kiryat Sefer, Jerusalem 1956, that where there is a variant tradition in the plene and defective scriptum, or in the Open and Closed sections, and they are supported by the writings of the early exponents of the Torah, even though the tradition has not been accepted by other scribes, we do not invalidate such a Torah scroll. However, where no support can be found in the writings of Israel's early sages or exponents, we invalidate such a Torah scroll.
Kasher, M. (1978), p. 228
Maimonides, Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 7:8–9)
Gaimani, Aharon (2008), p. 163, note 873, who points out that in a Taj (Codex) written by Rabbi Yihye Bashiri (now in the possession of the heirs of Zechariah Saminah of Moshav Eliakhin, in Israel) he brings down the number of large and small letters in the Torah, and that there is to be found differences between the list found there and the list that he brings down in his book Havatzelet Hasharon.
Gaimani, Aharon (2008), pp. 163–165
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 1:1, where all of the letters of "breishit" are written larger than usual, but the "bet" is written larger than all of them.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 5:1, where the "semakh" is also made large, as is also the case in a private Codex (Taj) written by a scribe of the Benaya family in the year 1535 CE (1846 of the Seleucid Era).
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 105.
Spelling follows the Yemenite pronunciation of "samech," which by them is pronounced "semakh."
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Exo. 34:14, where the resh of "aḥer" is of large size.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 11:42, where the waw of "ğaḥon" is of large size.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 13:33, where the gimel of "wehithğalaḥ" is of large size.
The Yemenite tradition of making an oversized yod is supported by the Hibshoosh Family Pentateuch, copied in 1485, as also by the Damascus Pentateuch (vol. 2, p. 308).
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Num. 27:5, where the nun of "mishpaṭan" is of large size.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 11:21, where the ṣadi of "ha'areṣ" is of large size. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same large letter ṣadi; see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 130r
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 22:6, where the qof of "qen" is of large size.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 29:27, where the lamed of "wayashlikhem" is of large size.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 32:6, where the he of "haladonai" is of large size.
The Yemenite tradition of making an oversized aleph is supported by the Hibshoosh Family Pentateuch, copied in 1485, by the scribe David ben Benaya.
Qorah, A. (1988), p. 105. So, too, in Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Exo. 34:7, where the nun here is of regular size.
Gaimani, Aharon (2008), English Abstract, pp. xii–xiii; xv.
Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby alludes to these lesser accepted Yemenite references to irregular letters in Kasher, M. (1978), p. 228.
Gaimani, Aharon (2008), pp. 165–167
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 2:4, where the he of "behibar'am" is written small. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same small letter he; see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 30r
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 23:2, where the word ולבכתה is written with a small "kaph". A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same small letter kaph as written small, with a note in the Masora Parva saying כף זעיר (small kaph); see: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 39v
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 27:46, where there is a note in the margin for the word קצתי, saying that the "qof" is to be made small. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same marginal note in the Masora Parva, saying that the "qof" of קצתי is made small; see: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 43v
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 1:1, where there is a note in the margin which says the word ויקרא is written in small script. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the letter aleph is written in a regular size, although a note in the margin (Masora Parva) there also says אלף זעיר (small aleph); see: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 82v
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 32:18, where the word תשי is written with a small "yod". A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same small letter yod as written small, with a note in the Masora Parva saying יוד זעיר (small yod); see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 142r
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 105. So, too, in Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 6:2, the mim here is of regular size.
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1975), p. 33
Kasher, M. (1978), p. 230, where Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby cites Rabbi Yihye Saleh (Maharitz) in his Ḥeleq ha-Diqdūq, end of Parashat Noaḥ.
Ratzaby, Yitzhak (2000), p.168 (Section # 165:22)
Tikkun Soferim (1993); Kasher, M. (1978), p. 231; et al. See also the Yemenite codex from the British Library, Or. 2349, frame 30v.
Tikkun Soferim (1993); Kasher, M. (1978), p. 231; et al.
Tikkun Soferim (1993); Midrash ha-Ḥefeṣ (ed. Meir Havatzelet), vol. i), Mossad Harav Kook: Jerusalem 1990, p. 98 on Gen. 7:2; Kasher, M. (1978), p. 231; et al.
These extensions are made very thinly, by using a very small and nearly pointed nib.
Yehudah Levy Nahum, Mi-Yetzirot Sifrutiyyot Mi-Teman (Fragments of Literary Works from Yemen), Holon 1981, p. 164.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 41:45.
Nathanel ben Yisha'yah (1983), p. 167 (note 8) on Gen. 42:12; Kasher, M. (1978), p. 232; et al.
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 42:12, where the bottom left leg of the aleph in the word "lo" (לא) is written with a slight inversion upwards.
Kasher, M. (1978), p. 233; A comparison made with the Codex written by the scribe Benayah in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349), reveals that both pes ('פ) are made overlapping (recoiling inwards). See: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 96r.
So, too, in all traditions.
Kasher, M. (1978), p. 233; A comparison made with the Codex written by the scribe Benayah in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349), reveals the same small letter ḥet with an outstretched left leg. See: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 109r.
In the Benayah codex written in 1535, now in the possession of Rabbi Hayyim Kessar's daughter and son-in-law in Jerusalem, as in all other Yemenite codices, the head of the lamed (ל) is inverted backwards.
Kasher, M. (1978), p. 234.
Shulhan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah § 275:5). The Sephardic tradition is also consonant with the practice found in the Minor Tractate, Treatise Sofrim 12:9.
The Yemenite tradition, in terms of number of lines in Shirat Ha'azinu, follows the ruling of Maimonides, in his handwritten Ms. of Mishne Torah, now at the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England (Ms. Huntington 80), pp. 135b–136a. In the printed texts, however, the text of Maimonides' Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 8:4) has been altered to read "seventy lines" (rather than 67). A comparison with the partially extant Book of Deuteronomy in the Aleppo Codex reveals that it, too, was written in only 67 lines. See: The Aleppo Codex Online (select Book of Deuteronomy from list, starting with chapter 32_28).
See the 15th century Yemenite Codex at the British Library, Or. 2350, showing the six lines with their proper indentations. Every three pages in the codex equals one column in the Sefer Torah.
Saleh Y. (1979), vol. 2, responsum # 22. Although Maharitz suggested a compromise of sorts out of respect to those exponents of the law who objected to this practice of making indentations in these six lines, the original Yemenite tradition viewed the practice as valid, and Yemenite scribes continued to make use of this practice, without change.
Benveniste, C. (n.d.), s.v. Yoreh De'ah responsum # 234
Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), p. 25.
Macho, A. Díez (1977), folio 343r, s.v. where the words גם בחור גם בתולה are grouped together on one line, in spite of the verse being interspersed with Targum Onkelos.
See Aleppo Codex, Deuteronomy 32:14–32:33, for the layout of the Prosaic song Ha'azinu.
Amar, Z. (2017), p. 46 (§ 143). See also Codex (Tāj) written in Yemen in 1408 CE, now at the British Library, Or. 2350, showing the section of the Prosaic song Ha'azinu, with traditional word layout in double columns; Codex at the British Library, Or. 2349; The Jewish Theological Seminary's Hebrew Pentateuch (JTS L64a), copied in Yemen and containing the spurious date of 1206 CE, showing the same lines and word arrangements; et al.
Meiri (1956), p. 47, who mentions this invaluable account, wherein he copies down a letter written by Rabbi Meir b. Todros Halevi where he states explicitly that he found the words as written above, but decided against its orthography because of the way the previous lines had been made.
Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), pp. 40–41
This may have also been the result of the variant readings found in the works of the masoretes. The Damascus Codex (10th cent.), as well as a beautifully written Spanish codex of the 11th or 12th century (now Vatican ebr. 448, frame 102r) and the London Codex (Or. 4445) all show differing orthographic renditions for the last two lines in the Song of the Sea.
Macho, A. Díez (1977), folio 102r
The lines of the Song of the Sea in the Sephardic scroll are based on the Tikkun Soferim, "Ish Matzliach," by Rabbi Matzliach Mazuz, which, in turn, are founded upon Rabbi Jedidiah Norzi's Minḥat Shai. The Yemenite tradition is well-known, and follows the pattern found in the Leningrad Codex (B19a), p. 85 in pdf. Although the Book of Exodus in the Aleppo Codex is no longer extant, the arrangement of lines in the Prosaic Song of the Sea is attested to have been identical to the Yemenite tradition of today. See: Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), pp. 40–41. The arrangement of lines is also identical with Shirat ha-Yam in Maimonides' own hand-written copy of the Mishne Torah, now at the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England (Ms. Huntington 80), p. 137a – chapter 9 (top).
The sense here is to the modern-day Sephardic scrolls, although in the old Sephardic scroll (Vatican Library, Vat. ebr. 448), folio 102r, it shows a line arrangement similar to the Aleppo Codex.
The Hebrew verse is expressed by an idiom, literally: "The hand of the Lord upon the throne, the Lord shall be at war with Amalek from generation to generation." Meaning, God has sworn by His throne that he will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.
Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 165 (entry # 137). The Damascus Pentateuch of the 10th century, which incorporates both the Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali traditions, also writes these words as one word (see ibid., p. 140 in vol. 1).
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), Preface, s.v. Exodus 17:16
Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), pp. 69–70, esp. note 190.
Treatise Sofrim 7:3
Breuer, M. (1976), pp. xiv; 88
Meiri (1956), p. 38; Tikkunei Soferim compiled by R. David ben Benaya (15th-century).
See Tikkun Soferim (1993), based on an old Torah scroll brought out from Yemen, and patterned after R. David ben Benaya's Tikkunei Soferim of the 15th-century.
Jedidiah Norzi, in his Minḥat Shai, brings down a different tradition, writing that the verse in "Numbers 24:5, מה טבו אהליך יעקב, must be written at the top of the column in accordance with halacha, since it is the mim of בי"ה שמ"ו, and thus did write Baal Haturim." The Sephardim who make use of a 42-line column follow Norzi in their practice, and which in this regard differs from the Yemenite tradition.
Meiri (1956), p. 38, citing Treatise Sofrim 9:2.
Tikkun Soferim (1993), s.v. Leviticus 10:16. The Torah scroll and the printed Tikkun Soferim are based after the Benaya family Codex.
Ben Isaiah, N. (1983), p. 454, s.v. Numbers 31:5; Al-Dhamari, Sa'adyah ben David (1999), p. 430, s.v. Numbers 31:5; Wertheimer, Abraham Joseph, ed. (1988), p. 99, s.v. Numbers 31:5
Rashi's commentary on II Kings 22:13; R. David Altshuler's commentary Metzudat David on II Kings 22:8. Cf. Babylonian Talmud (Yoma 52b).
Maimonides, Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 8:4)
Rabbi Judah Attiya of Aleppo, at the behest of M.D. Cassuto, copied down the Open and Closed sections of the Aleppo Codex for the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, and presented these to Cassuto. The Open and Closed sections for the book of Genesis were checked by Cassuto himself. In these findings, there emerged differences between the Aleppo Codex and the Yemenite tradition (based on Maimonides) in three different sections. See: Offer, Joseph (1989), pp. 325 [49]–326 [50]).
These being: Gen. 41:45; Exo. 1:19; Exo. 17:16; Exo. 34:1; Lev. 7:28–29; Lev. 19:16; Lev. 25:10–12 and Num. 22:5.
Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 312 [36]. Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby, citing Menashe Sathon, claims that the Aleppo Codex had erred in three places: בטרם תבוא אליהן (Exo. 1:19), לא תעמד על דם רעיך (Lev. 19:16) and יובל היא תהיה לכם (Lev. 25:10). See Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1992), responsum # 146, s.v. ועתה בחדש תמוז (p. 251).
Aside from the shapes of the letters, the Sephardic tradition of today (e.g. plene and defective scriptum, the Open and Closed sections, etc.) is the same as that of the Ashkenazi tradition. Among Ashkenazi Jews, Tikkun Soferim Dovidovitch is now the standard text used for copying modern Ashkenazi writing. Among Sephardic Jews, the Tikkun Soferim, Ish Matzliach, by Rabbi Matzliach Mazuz, is now used as a model text for copying modern Sephardic scrolls.
Known also as the Codex Orientales 4445, which Ch. D. Ginsburg dated to 820–850 CE, and which Kahle dated to the 10th-century CE. The current manuscript was written by two different scribes, the older square script believed to be from the 9th century, whereas the newer Yemenite square script was written in the 16th century (1539 CE). Today, the Codex is held at the British Library (The London Codex (Or. 4445) and other MSS.)
Composed in 1008–1009 CE. See Leningrad Codex.
Composed in circa 1000 CE (Formerly called Sassoon Ms. 507). See Damascus Codex.
Composed in Egypt in 1009–1010 CE. See Aleppo Codex.
This section of the Pentateuch (frame 3v) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 10 (center column).
This section is missing in the Damascus Codex.
Based on Cassuto's copy of the Aleppo Codex. See Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]).
This section of the Pentateuch (frame 5r) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 13 (center column).
Cf. Maharitz's Ḥeleq ha-Diqdūq (Piece on Grammar), on the biblical pericope, Noah (Genesis 9:29), concerning the last waw in the word ויהיו, of ויהיו כל ימי נח (Published by Shelomo Qareh in a facsimile edition, Jerusalem 1982), where he emphatically stresses the adherence to this custom, and rules as invalid all Torah scrolls that are written differently.
This section of the Pentateuch (frame 6v) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 15 (left column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 1.
Such is the modern Sephardic tradition, although in some 14th century Bible codices of Sephardic provenance the spelling of Potiphera was written as one word, פוטיפרע, as in Bibliotèque Nationale, Paris – Hebreu 1314, p. 39a.
Such is the spelling also in Genesis 41:50 and in Genesis 46:20 (in pericope Vayigash), פוטיפרע.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 31v
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 55 (center column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 76.
Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 163 [13], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Gen. 41:45 the word פוטי פרע was written in the Aleppo Codex as two words.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 42v.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 68 (right column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 101.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 59v.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 88 (right column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 140.
Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 165 [15], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Exo. 17:16 the word כסיה was written in the Aleppo Codex as one word.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 62r.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 91 (right column).
This section is entirely missing in the Damascus Codex.
Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 326 [50]
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 66v.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 96 (left column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 155.
Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 166 [16], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Exo. 25:31 the word תעשה was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a yod. Cf. Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]).
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 70r.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 100 (left column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 163.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 76v
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 108 (right column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 177.
Thus testified Rabbi Attiya concerning the section as he found it in the Aleppo Codex. See: Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 328 [52]
Cf. Saleh, Y. (1979a), vol. 1, responsum # 24, where he wrote a protracted response in which he cites Menahem Lonzano's work, Or Torah, and where he notes that in pericope Ṣav (Leviticus 7:22–23) he found in the renowned Halleli Codex an Open Section for Parashat Kol Ḥelev, as also in the old codices from the Land of Israel and from Egypt, as well as in handwritten manuscripts of Maimonides' Mishne Torah. Such findings agree with the Yemenite tradition.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 90v.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 124 (center column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 211.
Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 328 [52]
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 124 (left column).
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 105r.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 140 (right column).
Damascus Codex, vol. […] p. 243
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 111r.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 147 (right column).
Damascus Codex, vol. [...], pp. 257–258.
Based on Cassuto's copy of the Aleppo Codex. See: Joseph Offer, M.D. Cassuto's Notes on the Aleppo Codex, Sefunot: Studies and Sources on the History of the Jewish Communities in the East, Jerusalem 1989, p. 312 [36] (Hebrew).
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 115v.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 152 (right column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 268.
Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 169 [19], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Num. 1:17 the word בשמת was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a waw. Cf. Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]), note 6.
This section of the Pentateuch (frame 128v) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 166 (center column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 298.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 141v.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 182 (right column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 330.
Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 311 [35]
Here, the waw of שלום is broken.
British Library, Or. 4445, frame 145r (the waw is not broken).
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), pdf p. 186 (right column), the waw is not broken.
Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 338 (the waw is not broken).
Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 171 [21], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Num. 25:12 the word שלום was written in the Aleppo Codex without the waw (ו) being broken.
For a discussion of this word and its spelling in Hebrew scrolls, see Sclar (2019), pp. 393–413
This section of the Pentateuch (frame 176r) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.
Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 229 (center column).
Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 426.
Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 174 [24], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Deut. 23:2 the word דכא was written in the Aleppo Codex with an aleph (א). Cf. Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]).
Abraham Maimuni (1937), responsum # 91 (pp. 134–135)
In Yemen, small kids of the goats, approximately two months old, were used for vellum (kalaf) in making Tefillin. It was not necessary to split the leather, in this case, since it was already very thin. The custom in treating leather hides that were to be used for the books of the Law and for the scroll of Esther was, indeed, to put them into an astringent solution of a gall-like substance extracted from the leaves of acacia (Arabic: qaradh). However, the vellum (kalaf) used in writing the Tefillin was never treated with any gall-like substance. (The reason being that leather, when treated with gall or similar substances, constricts and usually takes on a darker colour. Although this treatment gives the leather its durability , it makes writing on such parchment very difficult, as the ink tends to glide on the parchment and is not absorbed so readily into the leather. This makes writing the four portions of scripture in the Tefillin all the more difficult, since the strips of parchment were very small in order that they might be inserted within the phylactery boxes. For this reason, in Yemen as in other places of world Jewry, the leather used in writing the four portions of scripture for the Tefillin went without the treatment of gall, and was subsequently white.)
Gall substances used in tanning leather is a requisite according to many exponents of Jewish law, such as the author of the lexicon, Sefer Ha-Arukh, and Maimonides, and Rabbeinu Hananel, and Rabbi Hai Gaon, and the Sheëltot of Rabbi Achai of Shibha. The gall gives the leather its lasting durability. The Shulhan Arukh of Maran, on the other hand, writes that it is sufficient to treat leather with lime alone. Leaves from the salam-tree (Ar. qarat) were crushed and put within a bath of water. The untreated leather was added to this solution for a period of 15 days, the time allotted for its preparation. After the first 8 days of soaking, the leaves are changed with a batch of fresh leaves. After another 7–8 days, the leather was ready for use. The salam-tree leaves give the leather a reddish-tinge. The tree, known locally as qarāḍ, grows plenteous in the coastal areas of Arabia and Oman.
Qafih, Y. (1989), p. 962
As a first resort, no sheet of parchment has less than three columns, and no more than eight columns. See: Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p.148 (§ 165:9)
Qorah, A. (1987), p. 99
A yellowish-white mineral having the same property as vitriol, and which turns the water black. It was derived from a saline earth found in the ravines and gulches of Yemen. The same earth, when extracted, was usually mixed with alum. The alum was then cleansed of its litharge until it became white. The litharge was then taken up and mixed with water to produce a black dye. In this, the Yemenites did not follow the teaching of Maimonides who wrote that the ink must not be indelible. The use of vitriol made the ink indelible.
Qafih, Y. (1989), p. 965
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), pp. 150–151; cf. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 106a
Subeiri, Yosef (1964), "Massoret Meduyeket", section 9
Babylonian Talmud (Menaḥot 29b), Tosafot, s.v. דחטריה.
Ibn Abi-Zimra, David (1749), vol. 1, s.v. Part II, responsum # 596
Qafih, Y. (1985), Hil. Sefer Torah 10:1 (note 8). Qafih wrote: "...If a letter touched itself in a place where its shape is not made entirely corrupt thereby, and [if] it does not resemble a different letter, it is [still] valid... And if it is a questionable matter, they bring a young child who is neither wise, nor unintelligent, just as it is explained in the Gemara (Menahoth 29b). So it is our custom to render valid anything similar to these cases, and even as a first resort they are [permitted] to read in a scroll of the Law that has in it such joining, and it is not necessary to amend it. Look at Saleh, Y. (1979b), vol. 3, responsum # 213, who wrote in the name of Rabbi Levi, the son of Habib (HaRalbach), who quotes in turn from the Meiri in Qiryat Sefer. And even if the left leg of the letter he (ה) was found clinging to its rooftop, with [only] a slight joining and not a considerable one, so long as the shape of the [Hebrew] letter he (ה) is [still] recognizable and a young child reads it as the letter he, it is valid. So did Rabbi Shimon Bar Tzemach (the Tashbetz) write in the second volume [of his Questions & Responsa], section # 73. Moreover, even if the entire scroll was written from the start in this way, it is valid and does not require being amended. And he brings down proof from that which is written in [Tractate] Menahoth [29b], that the more meticulous scribes would hang the [left] leg of the letter he. By this wording we learn that only as a first rule of thumb, being of a more superlative nature, was it stated, and not that it is indispensable... Be apprised, [moreover], that in the ancient Torah scrolls of Yemen the leg of the letter qof (ק) was joined to its roof, and in this manner was [written] the scroll of the Law known as "Tam," which was in the village Qaryat al-Qabil. All of the legs of the letter qof were joined to their roof. And so were the ancient scrolls of the Law in Tunis and Tripoli made, just as Rabbi Shimon Bar Tzemach (the Tashbetz) wrote in a responsum, vol. I, [responsum] # 50. Look there, for he went to great lengths to prove that it is valid. And there, in responsum # 51, he brought evidence from the words of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra that in this manner were [written] the scrolls of the Law in Spain. Wherefore, [such a scroll] is valid as a first resort."
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1989), responsa # 126 and 127, pp. 301–303; The Validity of Torah Scrolls that are Stamped with Dots (Hebrew), being a review of the subject by Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby; Qorah, Shelomoh (2012), pp. 130–ff.
Cf. Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah §274:7 [6]): "A book [of the Law] that is punctuated is invalid, and even if they had removed from it the punctuation symbols; so, too, a division of verses [in the Torah] is invalid." Addenda (Moses Isserles): "And this refers, specifically, to when he made the biblical cantillation symbol with ink, etc."
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p. 148 (§ 165:9 - note 30)
Amar, Z. (2017), p. 45; cf. Qafih, Y. (1985), chapter 9:2, note 4, who cites the Babylonian Talmud (Menaḥot 30a) for the basis of this ancient practice.
Amar, Z. (2017), p. 45
Muchawsky-Schnapper, Ester (1999), pp. 122–123
Sapir, J. (1866), chapter Ḥadrei Teman

Bibliography

Abraham Maimuni (1937). Avraham H. Freimann; Shelomo Dov Goitein (eds.). Abraham Maimuni Responsa (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim.
Al-Dhamari, Sa'adyah ben David (1999). Midrash ha-Beʼur (in Hebrew). 2. Translated by Yosef Qafih. Kiryat Ono: Mekhon Mishnat ha-Rambam. OCLC 40260458.
Amar, Z. (2017). Differing Halachic Customs between 'Baladi' Yemenite and Other Jewish Communities (in Hebrew). Neve-Tzuf (Halamish). ISBN 978-965-90891-2-3. – (OCLC 992702131
Ben Isaiah, N. (1983). Sefer Me'or ha-Afelah (in Hebrew). Translated by Yosef Qafih. Kiryat Ono: Mechon Moshe. OCLC 970925649.
Benveniste, C. (n.d.). Questions & Responsa 'Ba'ei Chayei' (in Hebrew). 2.
Bin-Nun, Adam (2016). The Yemenite Manuscripts of the Pentateuch and the Linguistic Tradition Reflected in Them in Comparison with the Orthography, Vocalization and Accentuation in the Ben-Asher Codex and with R. Yaḥya Ṣālaḥ’s Ḥeleq Ha-Diqdūq, Thesis in fulfillment of the requirements for "Doctor of Philosophy (in Hebrew). Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University (The Department of Hebrew and Semitic Languages). (Hebrew title:כתבי היד התימניים של התורה והמסורת המשתקפת מהם בהשוואה למסורת הכתיב הניקוד והטעמים שבכתר בן-אשר ול"חלק הדקדוק" של מהרי"ץ)
Breuer, M. (1976). The Aleppo Codex and the Accepted Text of the Bible. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook. OCLC 246075750.
Gaimani, Aharon (2008). Havatzelet Hasharon by Rabbi Yihye Bashiri (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Yad Harav Nissim Publishing House. ISBN 978-965-555-318-5. – (OCLC 609226613
Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985). The Hibshoosh Family Pentateuch (Facsimile Edition of an Exquisite Yemenite Manuscript copied in the year 1485 by the illustrious scribe, David ben Benaya) (in Hebrew). Jerusalem/Tel-Aviv: Jewish National and University Library. OCLC 173752358.
Ibn Abi-Zimra, David (1749). David Ashkenazi (ed.). The Responsa of the Radbaz (in Hebrew). 1. Venice., s.v. Part II, responsum # 596 (reprinted in Israel, n.d.) (OCLC 233235313)
Kasher, M. (1978), "The Script of the Torah and its Characters", Chomash 'Torah Sheleimah' (in Hebrew), 29, Jerusalem: Beit Torah Sheleimah
Macho, A. Díez, ed. (1977). Facsimile edition of Ms. Vat. Heb. 448 (The Pentateuch with the Masorah Parva and the Masorah Magna and with Targum Onkelos) (in Hebrew). 1–5. Jerusalem: Makor Publishing Ltd. (original: Vatican Library). OCLC 862568143.
Maimonides (n.d.), "Hil. Sefer Torah", Mishne Torah (in Hebrew)
Maimonides (1989). Jehoshua Blau (ed.). R. Moses b. Maimon Responsa (in Hebrew). 2. Jerusalem: Meḳitse nirdamim / Rubin Mass Ltd. p. 298 (responsum # 153). OCLC 78411726.
Meiri (1956). Moshe Hirschler (ed.). Kiryat Sefer (in Hebrew). 1. Jerusalem: HaMasorah. OCLC 233177823.
Meiri (1881). Kiryat Sefer (in Hebrew). 2. Izmir. (reprinted in Jerusalem 1969 by Makor Ltd.)
Muchawsky-Schnapper, Ester (1999). "Ceremonial Objects in Yemenite Synagogues". Judaeo-Yemenite Studies – Proceedings of the Second International Congress. Princeton.
Nathanel ben Yisha'yah (1983). Yosef Qafih (ed.). Meor ha-Afelah (in Hebrew) (2nd ed.). Kiryat Ono.
Offer, Joseph (1989). "M.D. Cassuto's Notes on the Aleppo Codex". Sefunot: Studies and Sources on the History of the Jewish Communities in the East (in Hebrew). Ben-Zvi Institute. 4: 277–344. JSTOR 23414876=.
Penkower, Jordan S. (1992). New Evidence for the Pentateuch Text in the Aleppo Codex (in Hebrew). Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University. ISBN 965-226-129-7. – OCLC 41651578
Qafih, Y. (1985), "Hil. Tefillin, u'Mezuzzah weSefer Torah", Mishne Torah (in Hebrew), 2, Kiryat-Ono: Mekhon mishnat ha-Rambam, OCLC 19158717
Qafih, Y. (1989). Yosef Tobi (ed.). Rabbi Yosef Qafih - Collected Papers (in Hebrew). 2. Jerusalem: E'ele BeTamar. OCLC 61623627.
Qorah, A. (1987). Shimon Greidi (ed.). Sa'arat Teiman (in Hebrew) (2nd ed.). Jerusalem. OCLC 233096108.
Qorah, Shelomoh (2012). Arikhat Shulḥan – Yilqut Ḥayyim (in Hebrew). 13. Benei Barak. OCLC 62528741.
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1975), "Ḳunṭris Taga deOraitha", Sefer Toldot Yitzhaq (in Hebrew), Benei Barak
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1989). Questions & Responsa ʻOlat Yitzḥak (in Hebrew). 1. Benei Barak: Mechon Peʻulath Ṣadīq.
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1992). Questions & Responsa ʻOlat Yitzḥak (in Hebrew). 2. Benei Barak: Mechon Peʻulath Ṣadīq.
Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000). Shulhan Arukh ha-Mekutzar (Yoreh De'ah) (in Hebrew). 5 (part ii). Benei Barak.
Saleh, Y. (1979a). Questions & Responsa 'Pe'ulath Ṣadīq' (in Hebrew). 1–2 (2nd ed.). Jerusalem. OCLC 122773689.
Saleh, Y. (1979b). Questions & Responsa 'Pe'ulath Ṣadīq' (in Hebrew). 3 (2nd ed.). Jerusalem. OCLC 122773689.
Sapir, J. (1866). Iben Safir (chapter Ḥadrei Teman) (in Hebrew). 2. Lyck: L. Silbermann. OCLC 192076334.
Sapir, Y. (1986). Rafi Zer (ed.). "Meorot Nathan by Rabbi Ya'aqov Sapir (Ms JTS L 729)". Lĕšonénu: A Journal for the Study of the Hebrew Language and Cognate Subjects (in Hebrew). 50: 151–213. JSTOR 24359260.
Sclar, David (2019), "A Letter's Importance: The Spelling of Daka(h) (Deut. 23:2) and the Broadening of Western Sephardic Rabbinic Culture", in Yosef Kaplan (ed.), Religious Changes and Cultural Transformations in the Early Modern Western Sephardic Communities, Leiden: Brill, pp. 393–413, JSTOR 10.1163/j.ctvrzgvqk.21, OCLC 1057731121
Subeiri, Yosef (1964), "Massoret Meduyeket", in Hasid, Yosef (ed.), Sefer Torah Tāj: Hamargalit, Jerusalem: Yosef Hasid, OCLC 233101579
Tīkkūn Soferīm (1993). Azriel ben Saadia Tzadok (ed.). The Pentateuch: Five Books of the Torah (Tīkkūn Soferīm) (in Hebrew). 1–5. Benei Barak. (in five pocket volumes)
Wertheimer, Abraham Joseph, ed. (1988). Yalkut Midreshey Teiman - A Collection of Yemenite Midrashim on the Pentateuch (in Hebrew). 2. Jerusalem: Ktav-Yad Vesefer. OCLC 924293889.

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.

[a-211] Rabbi Menaḥem Ha-Meiri wrote his Kiryat Sefer shortly after the year 1306 CE, which work quickly gave him high acclaim. It is quoted by R. Yoseph Karo.

[b-212] The sense here is to superfluous letters.

[c-213] Literally, "write."

[d-214] Rabbi Meir Halevi, the son of R. Todros. He came from Burgos, in Spain, but moved to Toledo (Ṭulayṭulah) where he taught the Torah among many, and raised up many disciples. He wrote several commentaries on the different tractates of the Talmud. He died in 1244 CE.

[e-215] In the book, Sefer Yuchasin, the title of this book of the Law, or else Codex, is given as Hilleli, rather than Hallelujah, but in Rabbi Meir’s account in his Kiryat Sefer the Codex was called Halleliyya. The ancient Codex is allegedly referenced in the colophon of Jewish Theological Seminary MS. JTS 44a, where it claims that the said Spanish Codex was proofread by using Sefer Halleli as its master text.

[f-216] Rabbi Abraham Zacuto.

[g-217] A place in NW Spain.

[h-218] In the book, Sefer Yuchasin, his name is given as Rabbi Moshe ben Hillel.

[i-219] Meaning, during the time of Abraham Zakuto, the Codex was aged nine-hundred years, since it was compiled in circa 596 CE.

[j-220] Rabbi Qimḥi.

[k-221] Literally, "his orders."

[l-222] He is the great philosopher and scholar who translated Maimonides' "Guide to the Perplexed" into the Hebrew language during Maimonides' lifetime.

[m-223] Literally, "those things that remained of them."

[n-224] The arranged section (Heb. parashah sedurah) is to be found also in the Yemenite tradition of orthography, said to be those indentations that do not comprise in length the space made by nine letters, but somewhat shorter, such as when a scribe concludes the writing of a section near the left margin, without extending the words unto the margin.

[o-225] This is in complete harmony and agreement with the Yemenite tradition of orthography.

[p-226] A scroll of the Torah believed to have been written by Ezra the scribe, and which, based on the testimony of Rabbi Obadiah of Bertinoro, was once kept in Old Cairo, in Egypt. The ancient scroll is said to have been taken out from there, and during a voyage at sea, the ship which transported it sank and the scroll was lost forever. Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1975), p. 32, has pointed out that in the "Book of Ezra" mentioned above there was found written in it like the Yemenite tradition, namely: גדול עוני מנשא (without a waw in the word מנשא), and in the verse, נבקעו על מעינת (without a waw in the word מעינת).

[q-227] .e. into the hand of Rabbi Menahem Hameiri, author of Kiryat Sefer.

[1] Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), p. 68. According to Penkower, the Ashkenazi tradition– with respect to plene and defective scriptum in their Torah scrolls – follows more closely the teachings of Rabbi Meir Halevi Abulafia (author of Masoret Seyag La-Torah), Rabbi Menahem Lonzano (author of Or Torah) and Rabbi Jedidiah Norzi (the author of the seminal work, Minḥat Shai). Their accepted orthography for the Hebrew Bible was published in the Tartaz Codex, printed in Amsterdam in 1666. Excluding the irregular letters in the Torah, the Ashkenazi tradition differs from the Yemenite tradition in some thirteen places. Penkower goes on to say that the Yemenite tradition, in terms of plene and defective scriptum, is nearly identical to the Aleppo Codex; see also Breuer, M. (1976), English Introduction (p. xxvii).

[2] An ancient Tannaic manuscript that was first printed in Paris in 1866 under the title Sefer Tagin, although believed to be defected in parts by its copyists, and which was also copied in Mahzor Vitri, top of Parashat Vayishlaḥ (pp. 674–ff.), with slight variations. The entire work has been reprinted by Kasher, M. (1978), pp. 87–90.

[3] Meiri (1956)

[4] Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 7:8)

[5] Maimonides, Hil. Sefer Torah 8:4

[jerusalem1989-6] Qafih, Y. (1989), p. 934

[7] Benayah ben Sa'adyah has long been acknowledged as the greatest scribe of Yemenite Jewry and as patriarch of an entire family of Yemenite scribes which flourished beginning in the latter half of the fifteenth century, in and around the capital, Sana'a. In addition to Benaya himself, at least four of his children (three sons and a daughter) and two of his grandsons followed in his footsteps and penned Hebrew manuscripts. According to Yemenite tradition, the Benayah family is said to have copied some 400 volumes. Out of this great number, only about 36 codices have survived.

[8] Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), p. 63 (top)

[9] See the Yemenite Codex (Tāj) now at the British Library, Or. 2350, written in 1408, showing the beginning of the column used in the Torah for Shirat ha-Yam (the Song of the Sea), and which single column is continued in the following two pages of the codex.

[10] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), Foreword by Shelomo Morag; Taj Benaya (copied in the 1846th year of the Seleucid era/1535 CE); British Museum, Or. 2364; British Museum, Or. 2349; British Museum, Or. 2350; British Museum, Or. 2365; British Museum, Or. 1379, et al.

[11] Bin-Nun, Adam (2016)

[12] Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 338 [62], note 10.

[beneibarak2000-13] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p. 172 (§ 165:23)

[14] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1975), p. 33.

[15] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), pp.174–175 (§ 165:23)

[16] Shulhan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah (Hil. Sefer Torah § 271:3).

[17] Qafih, Y. (1985), chapter 3, p. 334 (note 20). The advantage of taking the tendons from the flanks (Heb. כסלים) is that they were naturally long, unlike those taken from the heel, and they did not require softening by working them with a stone, nor was it necessary to twine the tendons before making use of them (ibid.).

[18] Qorah, A. (1987), pp. 103–105.

[19] Offer, Joseph (1989), 309 [33]

[20] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103 (Hebrew). Cf. Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 160, where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Genesis 4:13 the word מנשא was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a waw. The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word מנשא written without a waw, in defective scriptum.

[Offer-21] Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]

[jerusalem1988-22] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103.

[23] The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word מעינת written without a waw, in defective scriptum. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, מעינת, was indeed written in defective scriptum.

[24] The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word ויהיו written with a final waw. In Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 9:29, the word is written with a final waw. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same final waw in ויהיו כל ימי נח; see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 33v. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sethon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, ויהיו, was indeed written in plene scriptum.

[25] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103. Likewise, Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 41:45, where the word פוטיפרע ("Potifera") is written as one word. So, too, in the Damascus Pentateuch the name is written as one word. However, the Aleppo Codex, based on the testimony passed down by Yaakov Sapir (Me'oroth Nathan), had the name פוטי פרע written in two words.

[26] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 104. Cf. Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 166, where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Exodus 25:31 the word תעשה was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a yod. The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word תעשה written without a yod, in defective scriptum. Concerning this word in Exodus 25:31, Avraham ibn Ezra has written: "I have seen books [of the Torah] that were checked by the sages of Tiberias, and fifteen of their elders have sworn that they have looked three times upon every word and every point, and [upon] every word written in plene and defective scriptum, and lo! There was written a yod in the word תֵּיעֲשֶׂה. But I haven’t found so in the books [of the Torah] in Spain and in France, and beyond the sea. Moreover, the ancients have expounded that the addition of a yod (i.e. numerical value of ten) alludes to the ten candelabrums that Solomon would make, although the general rule states that if there were there a yod it is a foreign word. By way of an exegesis [they have said] that it was made by itself (i.e. because of its passive-perfect tense). The reason being is that all those who saw it were astonished how a man could make it, etc." It is to be noted that the Spanish Jewish community has since abandoned its old tradition in this regard.

[jerusalem1987-27] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 104.

[28] The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also the word האפד written without a waw, in defective scriptum. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, האפד, was indeed written in defective scriptum.

[29] The Leningrad Codex, a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work, has also an Open Section for this reading. So, too, the Yemenite MS. of Maimonides' Mishne Torah has this section listed as an Open Section; see: Qafih, Y. (1985), chapter 8, p. 402 note 19.

[30] In Maimonides' own handwritten Ms. of Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah, ch. 8:4, Sefer Vayiqra), now at the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England (Ms. Huntington 80), p. 133b (top), which same is identical with the Yemenite Ms. of Maimonides' Mishne Torah, there is some ambiguity in the wording used by Maimonides when describing this section of the Torah. There, Maimonides writes: `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `This is the offering, [etc.]`(Lev. 6:12); "`And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs [to the verse], `Speak unto Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 6:17); `And this is the law of the guilt-offering, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:1); `And this is the law of the sacrifice, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:11); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Speak unto the children of Israel, [etc.] [all suet, etc.]` (Lev. 7:22); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Take Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 8:1) – all of them are Open sections, and they are [altogether] six." In the highlighted text, the Leningrad Codex (a text whose scribe made use of texts proofread by Ben-Asher when editing his own work) renders this passage of scripture an Open section. (Original Hebrew: וידבר דזה קרבן, וידבר דדבר אל אהרן, וזאת תורת האשם, וזאת תורת זבח, וידבר דדבר אל בני ישראל, וידבר דקח את אהרן, כולן פתוחות, והן שש). See also Meiri (1881), Parashat Ṣau, # 7, who lists this section as an "Open Section" (Hebrew). However, in the modern printed texts of Maimonides, the reading differs greatly: "`And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `This is the offering, [etc.]` (Lev. 6:12); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Speak unto Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 6:17); `And this is the law of the guilt-offering, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:1); `And this is the law of the sacrifice, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:11); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Speak unto the children of Israel, [etc.] He that offers, [etc.]` (Lev. 7:28); `And the LORD spake, [etc.]` which belongs to [the verse], `Take Aaron, [etc.]` (Lev. 8:1) – all of them are Open sections, and they are [altogether] six." (Hebrew: ). Rabbi Yehudah Attiya, a rabbi of Aleppo who had seen the Aleppo Codex and copied-down its Open and Closed sections, made a comparison between the same and Maimonides' list of Open and Closed sections. This list was sent to Jerusalem, and was later reviewed by M.D. Cassuto, who, in turn, disclosed that the section known as ha-maqrīv (Lev. 7:28), though not listed as a section in Maimonides, was listed as an Open section in the Aleppo Codex.

[31] This section is listed as an Open section in the Aleppo Codex. See: Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 339 [63].

[32] Although the Leningrad Codex and the Damascus Pentateuch both have the word בשמות in Numbers 1:17 as containing a waw (i.e. in plene scriptum), Rabbi Jacob Saphir (Sapir, Y. 1986) brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and writes that in Numbers 1:17 the word בשמת was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a waw. In this case, the Yemenite Jewish tradition still finds solid ground and support on which to base its own scribal traditions. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, בשמת, was indeed written in defective scriptum.

[33] M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, חדשיכם, was indeed written in plene scriptum, with a yod.

[34] Cf. Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 171, where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Numbers 25:12 the waw (ו) of the word שלום was written complete, and without being broken in the Aleppo Codex.

[bneibrak2000c-35] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p.168 (§ 165:21)

[36] In the Torah codex (Pentateuch) copied by David ben Benaya in 1490, now at British Museum (Or. 2349), the word דכא is written with an "aleph." See: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 136r. M.D. Cassuto, a man who made a copy of Menashe Sathon's list of plene and defective scriptum in the Aleppo Codex, has attested that this word, דכא, was written with an aleph (א).

[37] Maimonides, Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 7:11), who writes: "...If he wrote plene defective, or defective plene, or if he wrote an open section closed or a closed section open... then it is invalid and it has no sanctity of a Torah scroll at all." See also Qorah, A. (1987), p. 103; Yihye Saleh (Maharitz), Ḥeleq ha-Diqdūq, Parashat Noaḥ, s.v. ויהיו כל ימי נח (Hebrew). Rabbi Menachem Meiri objects, saying in the Preface to his Kiryat Sefer, Jerusalem 1956, that where there is a variant tradition in the plene and defective scriptum, or in the Open and Closed sections, and they are supported by the writings of the early exponents of the Torah, even though the tradition has not been accepted by other scribes, we do not invalidate such a Torah scroll. However, where no support can be found in the writings of Israel's early sages or exponents, we invalidate such a Torah scroll.

[38] Kasher, M. (1978), p. 228

[39] Maimonides, Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 7:8–9)

[40] Gaimani, Aharon (2008), p. 163, note 873, who points out that in a Taj (Codex) written by Rabbi Yihye Bashiri (now in the possession of the heirs of Zechariah Saminah of Moshav Eliakhin, in Israel) he brings down the number of large and small letters in the Torah, and that there is to be found differences between the list found there and the list that he brings down in his book Havatzelet Hasharon.

[jerusalem2008-41] Gaimani, Aharon (2008), pp. 163–165

[42] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 1:1, where all of the letters of "breishit" are written larger than usual, but the "bet" is written larger than all of them.

[43] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 5:1, where the "semakh" is also made large, as is also the case in a private Codex (Taj) written by a scribe of the Benaya family in the year 1535 CE (1846 of the Seleucid Era).

[jerusalem1987c-44] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 105.

[45] Spelling follows the Yemenite pronunciation of "samech," which by them is pronounced "semakh."

[46] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Exo. 34:14, where the resh of "aḥer" is of large size.

[47] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 11:42, where the waw of "ğaḥon" is of large size.

[48] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 13:33, where the gimel of "wehithğalaḥ" is of large size.

[49] The Yemenite tradition of making an oversized yod is supported by the Hibshoosh Family Pentateuch, copied in 1485, as also by the Damascus Pentateuch (vol. 2, p. 308).

[50] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Num. 27:5, where the nun of "mishpaṭan" is of large size.

[51] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 11:21, where the ṣadi of "ha'areṣ" is of large size. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same large letter ṣadi; see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 130r

[52] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 22:6, where the qof of "qen" is of large size.

[53] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 29:27, where the lamed of "wayashlikhem" is of large size.

[54] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 32:6, where the he of "haladonai" is of large size.

[55] The Yemenite tradition of making an oversized aleph is supported by the Hibshoosh Family Pentateuch, copied in 1485, by the scribe David ben Benaya.

[56] Qorah, A. (1988), p. 105. So, too, in Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Exo. 34:7, where the nun here is of regular size.

[57] Gaimani, Aharon (2008), English Abstract, pp. xii–xiii; xv.

[58] Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby alludes to these lesser accepted Yemenite references to irregular letters in Kasher, M. (1978), p. 228.

[jerusalem2008b-59] Gaimani, Aharon (2008), pp. 165–167

[60] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 2:4, where the he of "behibar'am" is written small. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same small letter he; see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 30r

[61] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 23:2, where the word ולבכתה is written with a small "kaph". A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same small letter kaph as written small, with a note in the Masora Parva saying כף זעיר (small kaph); see: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 39v

[62] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 27:46, where there is a note in the margin for the word קצתי, saying that the "qof" is to be made small. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same marginal note in the Masora Parva, saying that the "qof" of קצתי is made small; see: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 43v

[63] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 1:1, where there is a note in the margin which says the word ויקרא is written in small script. A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the letter aleph is written in a regular size, although a note in the margin (Masora Parva) there also says אלף זעיר (small aleph); see: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 82v

[64] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Deut. 32:18, where the word תשי is written with a small "yod". A comparison made with another Codex written by the same scribe in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349) reveals the same small letter yod as written small, with a note in the Masora Parva saying יוד זעיר (small yod); see: The British Library MS Viewer, frame 142r

[65] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 105. So, too, in Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Lev. 6:2, the mim here is of regular size.

[66] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1975), p. 33

[67] Kasher, M. (1978), p. 230, where Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby cites Rabbi Yihye Saleh (Maharitz) in his Ḥeleq ha-Diqdūq, end of Parashat Noaḥ.

[68] Ratzaby, Yitzhak (2000), p.168 (Section # 165:22)

[69] Tikkun Soferim (1993); Kasher, M. (1978), p. 231; et al. See also the Yemenite codex from the British Library, Or. 2349, frame 30v.

[Tikkun_1978,_p._231-70] Tikkun Soferim (1993); Kasher, M. (1978), p. 231; et al.

[Tikkun_1990,_p._98-71] Tikkun Soferim (1993); Midrash ha-Ḥefeṣ (ed. Meir Havatzelet), vol. i), Mossad Harav Kook: Jerusalem 1990, p. 98 on Gen. 7:2; Kasher, M. (1978), p. 231; et al.

[72] These extensions are made very thinly, by using a very small and nearly pointed nib.

[73] Yehudah Levy Nahum, Mi-Yetzirot Sifrutiyyot Mi-Teman (Fragments of Literary Works from Yemen), Holon 1981, p. 164.

[Yehiel_Hibshoosh_1485-74] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 41:45.

[75] Nathanel ben Yisha'yah (1983), p. 167 (note 8) on Gen. 42:12; Kasher, M. (1978), p. 232; et al.

[76] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), s.v. Gen. 42:12, where the bottom left leg of the aleph in the word "lo" (לא) is written with a slight inversion upwards.

[77] Kasher, M. (1978), p. 233; A comparison made with the Codex written by the scribe Benayah in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349), reveals that both pes ('פ) are made overlapping (recoiling inwards). See: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 96r.

[78] So, too, in all traditions.

[79] Kasher, M. (1978), p. 233; A comparison made with the Codex written by the scribe Benayah in 1490, now at the British Museum (Or. 2349), reveals the same small letter ḥet with an outstretched left leg. See: British Library, Or. 2349, frame 109r.

[80] In the Benayah codex written in 1535, now in the possession of Rabbi Hayyim Kessar's daughter and son-in-law in Jerusalem, as in all other Yemenite codices, the head of the lamed (ל) is inverted backwards.

[81] Kasher, M. (1978), p. 234.

[82] Shulhan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah § 275:5). The Sephardic tradition is also consonant with the practice found in the Minor Tractate, Treatise Sofrim 12:9.

[83] The Yemenite tradition, in terms of number of lines in Shirat Ha'azinu, follows the ruling of Maimonides, in his handwritten Ms. of Mishne Torah, now at the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England (Ms. Huntington 80), pp. 135b–136a. In the printed texts, however, the text of Maimonides' Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 8:4) has been altered to read "seventy lines" (rather than 67). A comparison with the partially extant Book of Deuteronomy in the Aleppo Codex reveals that it, too, was written in only 67 lines. See: The Aleppo Codex Online (select Book of Deuteronomy from list, starting with chapter 32_28).

[84] See the 15th century Yemenite Codex at the British Library, Or. 2350, showing the six lines with their proper indentations. Every three pages in the codex equals one column in the Sefer Torah.

[85] Saleh Y. (1979), vol. 2, responsum # 22. Although Maharitz suggested a compromise of sorts out of respect to those exponents of the law who objected to this practice of making indentations in these six lines, the original Yemenite tradition viewed the practice as valid, and Yemenite scribes continued to make use of this practice, without change.

[86] Benveniste, C. (n.d.), s.v. Yoreh De'ah responsum # 234

[87] Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), p. 25.

[88] Macho, A. Díez (1977), folio 343r, s.v. where the words גם בחור גם בתולה are grouped together on one line, in spite of the verse being interspersed with Targum Onkelos.

[89] See Aleppo Codex, Deuteronomy 32:14–32:33, for the layout of the Prosaic song Ha'azinu.

[90] Amar, Z. (2017), p. 46 (§ 143). See also Codex (Tāj) written in Yemen in 1408 CE, now at the British Library, Or. 2350, showing the section of the Prosaic song Ha'azinu, with traditional word layout in double columns; Codex at the British Library, Or. 2349; The Jewish Theological Seminary's Hebrew Pentateuch (JTS L64a), copied in Yemen and containing the spurious date of 1206 CE, showing the same lines and word arrangements; et al.

[91] Meiri (1956), p. 47, who mentions this invaluable account, wherein he copies down a letter written by Rabbi Meir b. Todros Halevi where he states explicitly that he found the words as written above, but decided against its orthography because of the way the previous lines had been made.

[92] Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), pp. 40–41

[93] This may have also been the result of the variant readings found in the works of the masoretes. The Damascus Codex (10th cent.), as well as a beautifully written Spanish codex of the 11th or 12th century (now Vatican ebr. 448, frame 102r) and the London Codex (Or. 4445) all show differing orthographic renditions for the last two lines in the Song of the Sea.

[94] Macho, A. Díez (1977), folio 102r

[95] The lines of the Song of the Sea in the Sephardic scroll are based on the Tikkun Soferim, "Ish Matzliach," by Rabbi Matzliach Mazuz, which, in turn, are founded upon Rabbi Jedidiah Norzi's Minḥat Shai. The Yemenite tradition is well-known, and follows the pattern found in the Leningrad Codex (B19a), p. 85 in pdf. Although the Book of Exodus in the Aleppo Codex is no longer extant, the arrangement of lines in the Prosaic Song of the Sea is attested to have been identical to the Yemenite tradition of today. See: Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), pp. 40–41. The arrangement of lines is also identical with Shirat ha-Yam in Maimonides' own hand-written copy of the Mishne Torah, now at the Bodleian Library in Oxford, England (Ms. Huntington 80), p. 137a – chapter 9 (top).

[96] The sense here is to the modern-day Sephardic scrolls, although in the old Sephardic scroll (Vatican Library, Vat. ebr. 448), folio 102r, it shows a line arrangement similar to the Aleppo Codex.

[97] The Hebrew verse is expressed by an idiom, literally: "The hand of the Lord upon the throne, the Lord shall be at war with Amalek from generation to generation." Meaning, God has sworn by His throne that he will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.

[98] Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 165 (entry # 137). The Damascus Pentateuch of the 10th century, which incorporates both the Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali traditions, also writes these words as one word (see ibid., p. 140 in vol. 1).

[99] Hibshoosh, Yehiel (1985), Preface, s.v. Exodus 17:16

[100] Penkower, Jordan S. (1992), pp. 69–70, esp. note 190.

[101] Treatise Sofrim 7:3

[102] Breuer, M. (1976), pp. xiv; 88

[MMeiri1956-103] Meiri (1956), p. 38; Tikkunei Soferim compiled by R. David ben Benaya (15th-century).

[104] See Tikkun Soferim (1993), based on an old Torah scroll brought out from Yemen, and patterned after R. David ben Benaya's Tikkunei Soferim of the 15th-century.

[105] Jedidiah Norzi, in his Minḥat Shai, brings down a different tradition, writing that the verse in "Numbers 24:5, מה טבו אהליך יעקב, must be written at the top of the column in accordance with halacha, since it is the mim of בי"ה שמ"ו, and thus did write Baal Haturim." The Sephardim who make use of a 42-line column follow Norzi in their practice, and which in this regard differs from the Yemenite tradition.

[106] Meiri (1956), p. 38, citing Treatise Sofrim 9:2.

[107] Tikkun Soferim (1993), s.v. Leviticus 10:16. The Torah scroll and the printed Tikkun Soferim are based after the Benaya family Codex.

[108] Ben Isaiah, N. (1983), p. 454, s.v. Numbers 31:5; Al-Dhamari, Sa'adyah ben David (1999), p. 430, s.v. Numbers 31:5; Wertheimer, Abraham Joseph, ed. (1988), p. 99, s.v. Numbers 31:5

[109] Rashi's commentary on II Kings 22:13; R. David Altshuler's commentary Metzudat David on II Kings 22:8. Cf. Babylonian Talmud (Yoma 52b).

[110] Maimonides, Mishne Torah (Hil. Sefer Torah 8:4)

[111] Rabbi Judah Attiya of Aleppo, at the behest of M.D. Cassuto, copied down the Open and Closed sections of the Aleppo Codex for the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, and presented these to Cassuto. The Open and Closed sections for the book of Genesis were checked by Cassuto himself. In these findings, there emerged differences between the Aleppo Codex and the Yemenite tradition (based on Maimonides) in three different sections. See: Offer, Joseph (1989), pp. 325 [49]–326 [50]).

[112] These being: Gen. 41:45; Exo. 1:19; Exo. 17:16; Exo. 34:1; Lev. 7:28–29; Lev. 19:16; Lev. 25:10–12 and Num. 22:5.

[113] Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 312 [36]. Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby, citing Menashe Sathon, claims that the Aleppo Codex had erred in three places: בטרם תבוא אליהן (Exo. 1:19), לא תעמד על דם רעיך (Lev. 19:16) and יובל היא תהיה לכם (Lev. 25:10). See Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1992), responsum # 146, s.v. ועתה בחדש תמוז (p. 251).

[114] Aside from the shapes of the letters, the Sephardic tradition of today (e.g. plene and defective scriptum, the Open and Closed sections, etc.) is the same as that of the Ashkenazi tradition. Among Ashkenazi Jews, Tikkun Soferim Dovidovitch is now the standard text used for copying modern Ashkenazi writing. Among Sephardic Jews, the Tikkun Soferim, Ish Matzliach, by Rabbi Matzliach Mazuz, is now used as a model text for copying modern Sephardic scrolls.

[115] Known also as the Codex Orientales 4445, which Ch. D. Ginsburg dated to 820–850 CE, and which Kahle dated to the 10th-century CE. The current manuscript was written by two different scribes, the older square script believed to be from the 9th century, whereas the newer Yemenite square script was written in the 16th century (1539 CE). Today, the Codex is held at the British Library (The London Codex (Or. 4445) and other MSS.)

[116] Composed in 1008–1009 CE. See Leningrad Codex.

[117] Composed in circa 1000 CE (Formerly called Sassoon Ms. 507). See Damascus Codex.

[118] Composed in Egypt in 1009–1010 CE. See Aleppo Codex.

[119] This section of the Pentateuch (frame 3v) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.

[120] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 10 (center column).

[ReferenceA-121] This section is missing in the Damascus Codex.

[Cassuto_1989,_p._309-122] Based on Cassuto's copy of the Aleppo Codex. See Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]).

[123] This section of the Pentateuch (frame 5r) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.

[124] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 13 (center column).

[125] Cf. Maharitz's Ḥeleq ha-Diqdūq (Piece on Grammar), on the biblical pericope, Noah (Genesis 9:29), concerning the last waw in the word ויהיו, of ויהיו כל ימי נח (Published by Shelomo Qareh in a facsimile edition, Jerusalem 1982), where he emphatically stresses the adherence to this custom, and rules as invalid all Torah scrolls that are written differently.

[126] This section of the Pentateuch (frame 6v) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.

[127] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 15 (left column).

[128] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 1.

[129] Such is the modern Sephardic tradition, although in some 14th century Bible codices of Sephardic provenance the spelling of Potiphera was written as one word, פוטיפרע, as in Bibliotèque Nationale, Paris – Hebreu 1314, p. 39a.

[130] Such is the spelling also in Genesis 41:50 and in Genesis 46:20 (in pericope Vayigash), פוטיפרע.

[131] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 31v

[132] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 55 (center column).

[133] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 76.

[134] Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 163 [13], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Gen. 41:45 the word פוטי פרע was written in the Aleppo Codex as two words.

[135] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 42v.

[136] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 68 (right column).

[137] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 101.

[138] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 59v.

[139] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 88 (right column).

[140] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 140.

[141] Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 165 [15], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Exo. 17:16 the word כסיה was written in the Aleppo Codex as one word.

[142] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 62r.

[143] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 91 (right column).

[144] This section is entirely missing in the Damascus Codex.

[145] Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 326 [50]

[146] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 66v.

[147] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 96 (left column).

[148] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 155.

[149] Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 166 [16], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Exo. 25:31 the word תעשה was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a yod. Cf. Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]).

[150] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 70r.

[151] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 100 (left column).

[152] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 163.

[153] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 76v

[154] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 108 (right column).

[155] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 177.

[156] Thus testified Rabbi Attiya concerning the section as he found it in the Aleppo Codex. See: Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 328 [52]

[157] Cf. Saleh, Y. (1979a), vol. 1, responsum # 24, where he wrote a protracted response in which he cites Menahem Lonzano's work, Or Torah, and where he notes that in pericope Ṣav (Leviticus 7:22–23) he found in the renowned Halleli Codex an Open Section for Parashat Kol Ḥelev, as also in the old codices from the Land of Israel and from Egypt, as well as in handwritten manuscripts of Maimonides' Mishne Torah. Such findings agree with the Yemenite tradition.

[ReferenceB-158] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 90v.

[159] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 124 (center column).

[Damascus_Codex,_vol._1,_p._211-160] Damascus Codex, vol. 1, p. 211.

[Joseph_Offer-161] Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 328 [52]

[162] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 124 (left column).

[163] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 105r.

[164] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 140 (right column).

[165] Damascus Codex, vol. […] p. 243

[166] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 111r.

[167] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 147 (right column).

[168] Damascus Codex, vol. [...], pp. 257–258.

[169] Based on Cassuto's copy of the Aleppo Codex. See: Joseph Offer, M.D. Cassuto's Notes on the Aleppo Codex, Sefunot: Studies and Sources on the History of the Jewish Communities in the East, Jerusalem 1989, p. 312 [36] (Hebrew).

[170] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 115v.

[171] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 152 (right column).

[172] Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 268.

[173] Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 169 [19], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Num. 1:17 the word בשמת was written in the Aleppo Codex in defective scriptum – without a waw. Cf. Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]), note 6.

[174] This section of the Pentateuch (frame 128v) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.

[175] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 166 (center column).

[176] Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 298.

[177] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 141v.

[178] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 182 (right column).

[179] Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 330.

[180] Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 311 [35]

[181] Here, the waw of שלום is broken.

[182] British Library, Or. 4445, frame 145r (the waw is not broken).

[183] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), pdf p. 186 (right column), the waw is not broken.

[184] Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 338 (the waw is not broken).

[185] Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 171 [21], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Num. 25:12 the word שלום was written in the Aleppo Codex without the waw (ו) being broken.

[186] For a discussion of this word and its spelling in Hebrew scrolls, see Sclar (2019), pp. 393–413

[187] This section of the Pentateuch (frame 176r) was written by a later Yemenite hand and, therefore, no proof can be had of the more ancient text and what was written there.

[188] Leningrad Codex (Ms. B19a), in pdf p. 229 (center column).

[189] Damascus Codex, vol. 2, p. 426.

[190] Sapir, Y. (1986), p. 174 [24], where he brings down the plene and defective scriptum, inter alia, as relayed to him by the overseers of the Jewish community in Aleppo in the then complete Aleppo Codex, and where he wrote that in Deut. 23:2 the word דכא was written in the Aleppo Codex with an aleph (א). Cf. Offer, Joseph (1989), p. 309 [33]).

[191] Abraham Maimuni (1937), responsum # 91 (pp. 134–135)

[192] In Yemen, small kids of the goats, approximately two months old, were used for vellum (kalaf) in making Tefillin. It was not necessary to split the leather, in this case, since it was already very thin. The custom in treating leather hides that were to be used for the books of the Law and for the scroll of Esther was, indeed, to put them into an astringent solution of a gall-like substance extracted from the leaves of acacia (Arabic: qaradh). However, the vellum (kalaf) used in writing the Tefillin was never treated with any gall-like substance. (The reason being that leather, when treated with gall or similar substances, constricts and usually takes on a darker colour. Although this treatment gives the leather its durability , it makes writing on such parchment very difficult, as the ink tends to glide on the parchment and is not absorbed so readily into the leather. This makes writing the four portions of scripture in the Tefillin all the more difficult, since the strips of parchment were very small in order that they might be inserted within the phylactery boxes. For this reason, in Yemen as in other places of world Jewry, the leather used in writing the four portions of scripture for the Tefillin went without the treatment of gall, and was subsequently white.)

[193] Gall substances used in tanning leather is a requisite according to many exponents of Jewish law, such as the author of the lexicon, Sefer Ha-Arukh, and Maimonides, and Rabbeinu Hananel, and Rabbi Hai Gaon, and the Sheëltot of Rabbi Achai of Shibha. The gall gives the leather its lasting durability. The Shulhan Arukh of Maran, on the other hand, writes that it is sufficient to treat leather with lime alone. Leaves from the salam-tree (Ar. qarat) were crushed and put within a bath of water. The untreated leather was added to this solution for a period of 15 days, the time allotted for its preparation. After the first 8 days of soaking, the leaves are changed with a batch of fresh leaves. After another 7–8 days, the leather was ready for use. The salam-tree leaves give the leather a reddish-tinge. The tree, known locally as qarāḍ, grows plenteous in the coastal areas of Arabia and Oman.

[194] Qafih, Y. (1989), p. 962

[195] As a first resort, no sheet of parchment has less than three columns, and no more than eight columns. See: Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p.148 (§ 165:9)

[196] Qorah, A. (1987), p. 99

[197] A yellowish-white mineral having the same property as vitriol, and which turns the water black. It was derived from a saline earth found in the ravines and gulches of Yemen. The same earth, when extracted, was usually mixed with alum. The alum was then cleansed of its litharge until it became white. The litharge was then taken up and mixed with water to produce a black dye. In this, the Yemenites did not follow the teaching of Maimonides who wrote that the ink must not be indelible. The use of vitriol made the ink indelible.

[198] Qafih, Y. (1989), p. 965

[199] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), pp. 150–151; cf. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 106a

[200] Subeiri, Yosef (1964), "Massoret Meduyeket", section 9

[201] Babylonian Talmud (Menaḥot 29b), Tosafot, s.v. דחטריה.

[202] Ibn Abi-Zimra, David (1749), vol. 1, s.v. Part II, responsum # 596

[203] Qafih, Y. (1985), Hil. Sefer Torah 10:1 (note 8). Qafih wrote: "...If a letter touched itself in a place where its shape is not made entirely corrupt thereby, and [if] it does not resemble a different letter, it is [still] valid... And if it is a questionable matter, they bring a young child who is neither wise, nor unintelligent, just as it is explained in the Gemara (Menahoth 29b). So it is our custom to render valid anything similar to these cases, and even as a first resort they are [permitted] to read in a scroll of the Law that has in it such joining, and it is not necessary to amend it. Look at Saleh, Y. (1979b), vol. 3, responsum # 213, who wrote in the name of Rabbi Levi, the son of Habib (HaRalbach), who quotes in turn from the Meiri in Qiryat Sefer. And even if the left leg of the letter he (ה) was found clinging to its rooftop, with [only] a slight joining and not a considerable one, so long as the shape of the [Hebrew] letter he (ה) is [still] recognizable and a young child reads it as the letter he, it is valid. So did Rabbi Shimon Bar Tzemach (the Tashbetz) write in the second volume [of his Questions & Responsa], section # 73. Moreover, even if the entire scroll was written from the start in this way, it is valid and does not require being amended. And he brings down proof from that which is written in [Tractate] Menahoth [29b], that the more meticulous scribes would hang the [left] leg of the letter he. By this wording we learn that only as a first rule of thumb, being of a more superlative nature, was it stated, and not that it is indispensable... Be apprised, [moreover], that in the ancient Torah scrolls of Yemen the leg of the letter qof (ק) was joined to its roof, and in this manner was [written] the scroll of the Law known as "Tam," which was in the village Qaryat al-Qabil. All of the legs of the letter qof were joined to their roof. And so were the ancient scrolls of the Law in Tunis and Tripoli made, just as Rabbi Shimon Bar Tzemach (the Tashbetz) wrote in a responsum, vol. I, [responsum] # 50. Look there, for he went to great lengths to prove that it is valid. And there, in responsum # 51, he brought evidence from the words of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra that in this manner were [written] the scrolls of the Law in Spain. Wherefore, [such a scroll] is valid as a first resort."

[204] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (1989), responsa # 126 and 127, pp. 301–303; The Validity of Torah Scrolls that are Stamped with Dots (Hebrew), being a review of the subject by Rabbi Yitzhaq Ratzaby; Qorah, Shelomoh (2012), pp. 130–ff.

[205] Cf. Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah §274:7 [6]): "A book [of the Law] that is punctuated is invalid, and even if they had removed from it the punctuation symbols; so, too, a division of verses [in the Torah] is invalid." Addenda (Moses Isserles): "And this refers, specifically, to when he made the biblical cantillation symbol with ink, etc."

[206] Ratzaby, Yitzhaq (2000), p. 148 (§ 165:9 - note 30)

[207] Amar, Z. (2017), p. 45; cf. Qafih, Y. (1985), chapter 9:2, note 4, who cites the Babylonian Talmud (Menaḥot 30a) for the basis of this ancient practice.

[208] Amar, Z. (2017), p. 45

[209] Muchawsky-Schnapper, Ester (1999), pp. 122–123

[210] Sapir, J. (1866), chapter Ḥadrei Teman