> There are plenty of canon examples 

> which should've alerted you that it's 

> otherwise, e.g., {yIqIm}, {yIbuS}, {pa' 

> yIQam}, etc

Yes, you're right. 

I can't understand how this misconception came to my mind. 

Perhaps in the past I read about the be-verbs needing to bear the {-'eghmoH} in imperatives, however, me then understanding "ok, any intransitive verb takes the {-'eghmoH} in its' imperative form".

Anyway, this proves that we need to reread the relevant Ca'Non from time to time, in order to avoid any misconceptions becoming permanent.

~ Dana'an

I love you maltz