Is וְהֵבֵאתָ to be pronounced mile'eil or milera?

Summary: Shadal points to an interesting comment in sefer Yaar, that good manuscripts and Rashi support it being mile'eil, against our present reading.

Post: In parashat Toledot, consider this pasuk:

י  וַיֹּאמֶר אֲבִימֶלֶךְ, מַה-זֹּאת עָשִׂיתָ לָּנוּ; כִּמְעַט שָׁכַב אַחַד הָעָם, אֶת-אִשְׁתֶּךָ, וְהֵבֵאתָ עָלֵינוּ, אָשָׁם.

10 And Abimelech said: 'What is this thou hast done unto us? one of the people might easily have lain with thy wife, and thou wouldest have brought guiltiness upon us.'

with the Targum of

כו,י וַיֹּאמֶר אֲבִימֶלֶךְ, מַה-זֹּאת עָשִׂיתָ לָּנוּ; כִּמְעַט שָׁכַב אַחַד הָעָם, אֶת-אִשְׁתֶּךָ, וְהֵבֵאתָ עָלֵינוּ, אָשָׁם.

וַאֲמַר אֲבִימֶלֶךְ, מָא דָּא עֲבַדְתְּ לַנָא; כִּזְעֵיר פּוֹן שְׁכֵיב דִּמְיַחַד בְּעַמָּא, עִם אִתְּתָךְ, וְאֵיתִיתָא עֲלַנָא, חוֹבָא.

Shadal, in Ohev Ger, notes as follows:

"And here I see fit to reveal to the public a novel idea that I found in sefer Ya'ar regarding the reading of the word וְהֵבֵאתָ. To cite:

וְהֵבֵאתָ עָלֵינוּ, אָשָׁם -- is milera [with stress on last syllable, which in this case would be future tense], and the Targum of וְאֵיתִיתָא is as if it were written mile'eil [with stress on second to last syllable, which in this case would be past tense]. And Rashi, it seems, had the girsa that it was mile'eil, for he wrote

and you would have brought guilt upon us: Had he had relations, you would have brought guilt upon us.

והבאת עלינו אשם: אם שכב, כבר הבאת עלינו אשם:

and so is it in precise sefarim as mile'eil. 

End quote. And the matter is very true that this word is mile'eil, since the implication of the word is the past tense, and the author of this sefer [Ya'ar] is trustworthy that he saw such in the precise texts in his days, even though in our sefarim it is milera."

The Leningrad Codex has it milera:

I don't know what the precise texts were in the time and place of the author of sefer Ya'ar.