out words already appearing in their Vorlage. But this rule does not apply if the shorter reading seems to result from haplography or homoeoteleuton, as described above. Canon 4. The reading that best explains all the variants is most likely the original one. An excellent example of this was discussed above in connection with Psalm 22:16 (Psalm 22:17 Eng.), where we saw that a kāʾrú (“they have pierced”) misread as kāʾrú (at a time when waw and yodh greatly resembled each other) most satisfactorily