Nusach Ashkenaz in the Center of Chasidic Davening: The Interesting Cases of Belz, Sanz, and Berdichev

Avodah
1

Conclusion

The adoption by the Chasidism of a new ðåñç äúôìä, in place of the traditional ðåñç àùëðæ, was apparently a later development in the movement, said to be from the time of the Maggid of Mezrich, rather than from R. Israel Baal Shem Tov, who is called its founder.

There is much difference of opinion and variation among Chasidim as to what the exact text of this nusach should be. Among many Chasidim, including very large and significant Chasidic groups, to this very day, important segments and elements of ðåñç àùëðæ surprisingly still persist, even at the heart of their úôéìåú.

Fro more please see

https://treasuresofashkenaz.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/nusach-ashkenaz-in-the-center-of-chasidic-davening-the-interesting-cases-of-belz-sanz-and-berdichev-נוסח-אשכנז-במרכז-ת/

<https://treasuresofashkenaz.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/nusach-ashkenaz-in-the-center-of-chasidic-davening-the-interesting-cases-of-belz-sanz-and-berdichev-נוסח-אשכנז-במרכז-ת/&gt;Let me add that I was told that a siddur that the BESHT used is in the Chabad library in Crown Heights and it is Nusach Ashkenaz.

YL

2

[Edited RYL's post to be more readable in digest format. I therefore
left the quote in, in full. -micha]

*Conclusion*

The adoption by the Chasidism of a new nusach hatefillah, in place of the
traditional Nusach Ashkenaz, was apparently a later development in the
movement, said to be from the time of the Maggid of Mezrich, rather than
from R. Israel Baal Shem Tov, who is called its founder.

There is much difference of opinion and variation among Chasidim as
to what the exact text of this nusach should be. Among many Chasidim,
including very large and significant Chasidic groups, to this very day,
important segments and elements of Nusach Ashkenaz surprisingly still persist,
even at the heart of their tefillos.

For more please see <http://bit.ly/2QHFjZc&gt;
https://treasuresofashkenaz.wordpress.com/…

Let me add that I was told that a siddur that the BESHT used is in the
Chabad library in Crown Heights and it is Nusach Ashkenaz.

All you write is true but Sefard was the nusach with Lurianic kavanoth
Even kabbalistic people and groups like Reb Noson Adler of FFMand the
Broder kluiz used the sefatd nusach

While the Besht was alive chasidim were not organizationally a movement the
concept of tishen,Rebbe,yerusha zaddik were all not really fully developed
The Magid gave the movement some org uniformity and he AUTHORIZED RABBI
SCHNEUR ZALMAN TO EDIT A NEW PRAYER BOOK according to Sefard Lurianic
nusach and this was before RSZstarted Chabad,so Im not certain what your
driving at Sandz and other groups started in the mid 19th cen as as counter
reformation

Look at the sidurim of old groups like Stolin,Slonim Koidenov and you see
sefarad and many Galician Hu(ngarian rebbes like Munkatcher davened Ari
sefarad

In recent yrs even greater changes have been made to siddur ck out Lelever
and Bialer siddurim

Chechenov was to my knowledge the only group that davened Ashkenaz,

The time of the Magid is not a later period of chassidus

3

Let me add that I was told that a siddur that the BESHT used is in the
Chabad library in Crown Heights and it is Nusach Ashkenaz.

To echo R' Zalman and add, I have [a copy of] the Toldos' son's siddur,
written during the Besht's lifetime, and the Sidur R Shabsai [shliach
tsibbur of the Baal Shem]: they both are nusach Ashkenaz except where
the Ari specified otherwise: e.g. boruch she'omar after hodu, kesser in
kedushas musaf etc

What the Maggid did institute was the use of 'ksav Ari' for all stam.

4

There is a hava mina in this statement that the Maggid was unauthorized to make these changes, a claim which I find dubious.
Ben

5

: There is a hava mina in this statement that the Maggid was
: unauthorized to make these changes, a claim which I find dubious.

Why? The whole idea could have been launched after the Baal Shem Tov's
petirah.

I am not saying that /is/ what happened, just that it's a possibility
I wouldn't find dubious.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

6

I am not disputing that. My point was that the author seems to be arguing that since the Baal Shem Tov didn't make this change, no one else had the right to do so. That point is what I find dubious, the questioning of the Maggid's right to make changes.