Friday, July 20, 2007

Nusach Sudilkov - Changes From The Standard Nusach Sefard Siddur


I recently asked the Sudilkover Rebbe about the nusach of davening in Sudilkov and how it differed from the standard nusach Sefard siddur. He went over some of these differences that immediately came to his mind. These included:

Birkas HaTorah

V'haerev na - v'nihyeh anachnu v'tze'ehtzeinu v'tzetzaei tze'ehtzeinu v'tzetzaei amcha beis yisroel (adds v'tzetzaei tze'ehtzeinu)

Birkas HaShachar

ha'nosein l'secvi binah (instead of asher nosan l'secvi binah)

Yishtabach

Ki l'cho no'eh Hashem Elokeinu v'Elohei Avoseinu l'olam vo'ed (l'olam vo'ed is added)

Melech yachid chei ha'olamim (deletes the word "Keil" in accordance with the minhag of the Baal Shem Tov)

Weekday Amida

Refayenu - v'ha'aleh refuah shleima l'chol makoseinu

Teka b'shofar gadol - v'kabtzeinu yachad m'arba kanfos ha'aretz l'artzeinu (does not include the word m'heira between yachad and m'arba)

Shema koleinu - Shema koleinu Hashem Elokeinu, Av Harachaman chus v'racheim aleinu

Birkas Hamazon

First brocha - hazan b'rachamav es hakol (adds the word b'rachamav)

Fourth brocha - Shelo nevosh v'lo nikaleim v'lo nikashel l'olam vo'ed (adds the words v'lo nikashel)

R'tzei (Shabbos addition) - tzion irach uv'vinyan Yerushalayim ir kodshach (instead of irecha and kodshecha)

The Sudilkover Rebbe noted that there are no siddurim printed in accordance to this nusach, however he dreamed to one day publish such a siddur. He also stated that currently the Vizhnitzer siddur printed in Israel and Chabad's siddur appear to be the closest to the Sudilkov nusach.

Until such time as there is a Sudilkov siddur, I plan to continue using my siddur and make the Sudilkov nusach changes that the Sudilkover Rebbe specified.

38 Comments:

At July 20, 2007 at 10:59:00 AM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Unless you were born a Sudilkover chassid, why would you make these changes to your nussach? What do you do with the issur of changing minhagim, and secondly, why adopt this mussach and not nusach AR"I, nusach haGR"A, nusach Chabad, or any other variation once you are making changes?

 
At July 20, 2007 at 11:12:00 AM EDT, Blogger A Simple Jew said...

Both Rabbi Lazer Brody and the Sudilkover Rebbe agreed that it was not an issue for me as a baal teshuva to adopt the minhagim of the shtetl of my ancestors since I did not receive any minhagim from my family. There is no issur of change when there was nothing to begin with.

 
At July 20, 2007 at 12:38:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

ASJ: Well said. Baal tshuvo has to choose anyway. Many things you brought I use too, because they are either Breslover minhog, or Ari za"l or also like that in Munkatcher sidur which I use as a base (I also make changes). I don't use generic "Nusach Sfarad" sidurim because of many issues with them. Munkatcher sidur is much more accurtately follows Nusach Ari za"l in chasidic way.

How is it known that Melech yachid chei ha'olamim comes from Baal Shem Tov? Are there any sources for that or it is just an oral shmue?

What does Sudilkover Rebe say about the famous Slavita sidur "Seyder Avoydo uMoyre Derech"? What about machzoyrim which were used? May be those from Slavita or some other types?

Are Sudilkover minhogim collected somewhere in written/published from?

Thanks! It might help our Breslover minhogim project a lot.

 
At July 20, 2007 at 12:46:00 PM EDT, Blogger A Simple Jew said...

A Yid: I am not 100% sure how to answer your questions and will need to ask the Sudilkover Rebbe next time I speak with him.

As for the Sudilkover minhagim, they are not collected anywhere and I have been learning them here and there during my discussions with the Sudilkover Rebbe. I will let you know what else I find out.

 
At July 20, 2007 at 1:04:00 PM EDT, Blogger A Talmid said...

The Rebbe Reb Shmelke of Nikolsburg said his Rebbe, the Magid of Mezritch said in the name of the Baal Shem Tov that by the end of Yishtabach to say "Chai" instead of "Chei". It's also said over from the Chozeh of Lublin that "all the tzadikim said it like this"

 
At July 20, 2007 at 1:31:00 PM EDT, Blogger A Talmid said...

Interestingly, the Chida in Avodas HaKodesh says according to the Arizal one should end Yishtabach without the word "Yochid". It should be "Melech El" like Nusach Ashkenaz and not "Melech Yochid El".

 
At July 20, 2007 at 2:25:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

Interestingly, the Chida in Avodas
HaKodesh says according to the Arizal one should end Yishtabach without the word "Yochid"


This is not from Chid"o himself. This is the nusach of Ari za"l brought in Shaar haKavonoys.

Where is it brought from Rebbe Reb Shmelke of Nikolsburg?

 
At July 20, 2007 at 2:26:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

ASJ: Thanks, if he has time I have some more questions to add.

 
At July 20, 2007 at 2:28:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

Talmid: It isn't a secret that "melech yochid chey hooylomim" is not like Ari za"l. However for some reason Baal haTania chosed it. Breslover mesoyro is that the Rebbe used it too. So it is interesting to find out if it really comes form Baal Shem Tov himself. I'm waiting for sources.

 
At July 20, 2007 at 3:21:00 PM EDT, Blogger A Talmid said...

"Where is it brought from Rebbe Reb Shmelke of Nikolsburg?"

I saw it in a Breslover siddur "Eis Ratzon". In that siddur he writes that Reb Nachman (no source given) holds we should end Pesukei Dezimra, meaning Yishtabach, in the same manner we started Pesukei Dizimra, meaning Boruch Sheomar, therefore he says to say "Melech Yochid Chey"

Rav Koppel, who was the chazan by the Baal Shem Tov writes in his siddur "Melech Yochid El Chey". The Berdichiver Siddur (and I believe Reb Koppel's siddur) says "Melech El Chey" - This is also the way Edot HaMizrach says it. There seem to be 3 different versions, all from great tzadikim. I guess each should follow his mesora. I do find it interesting that Breslov and Sudlikov, who were both grandchildren of the Baal Shem Tov, both say "Melech Yochid Chey"

 
At July 20, 2007 at 3:34:00 PM EDT, Blogger A Talmid said...

Correction - I wrote: "(and I believe Reb Koppel's siddur)"

I meant to write: (and I believe Reb Shabsei's siddur)

 
At July 20, 2007 at 3:40:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

I bought a copy of a nusach Munkacs siddur named after the Minchas Elazar ZY"A, around 1993 or 1994, a new edition that had recently been printed in Israel. It was thick and had a mostly red cover.

Going through it, I found a few instances where the text was "generic nusach sfard" and not that of Munkacs. Possibly, there was a nusach sfard starting text in the computer file used for editing, and not all necessary changes were made to adapt it to nusach Munkacs. Some of these anomalies show up in some of the Amidah berachos for other than weekdays.

 
At July 20, 2007 at 4:33:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where did the "standard Nusach sefard" that is in Artscroll, Kol Yaakov and most others. It differs greatly from any of the famous chasidiv sidurs and I have yet to hear a chosid daven that nusach. Everytime I hear a chosid daven it is different from that nusach. the bracha of v'lamalshinim is always different and other parts

 
At July 21, 2007 at 11:55:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

In the interest of mass circulation, the generic editions used to contain a lot of options in parentheses. These caused user confusion that could even lead to combining incompatible phrases.

To avoid parentheses, some recent generic editions try to choose from the variant phrases, based on "popularity" or other criteria, but the results never seem to agree 100% with any one Chassidic group's practice.

 
At July 22, 2007 at 1:51:00 AM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

Bob Miller: That red edition was not edited properly (I have it). Recently newer edition came out called "Tzvi Tiferes". It is nice, however I already found mistaked and differences from old Munkatch sidurim. One is left to wonder either they are mistakes or intentional.

 
At July 22, 2007 at 1:54:00 AM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

A Talmid: Kol Yakov sidur is made by Reb Yakov Kopl, Baal "Shaarey Gan Eden". He is a different person, from Reb Yakov Kopl miKolomeya, who was the chazon of Baal Shem Tov, during his staying there.

Baal "Shaarey Gan Eden" lived in Mezhritch and somewhat earlier.

 
At July 22, 2007 at 4:50:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

A Yid,

I have a sefer which combines (1)Tehillim Chaim VeShalom with commentaries and (2) Siddur Tefillos Chaim VeShalom for weekdays and Shabbos. The siddur is photo-offset from an older Munkacs edition. Do you consider this siddur to be accurate?

Do you know of a more complete siddur by this name? I think I recall seeing one in a Bostoner or Breslover shul.

 
At July 22, 2007 at 5:12:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

A Yid,

Could you also (if these are not many) highlight the nusach changes, possibly mistakes, you found in the Siddur Tzvi Tiferes? I have a copy on order from Eichler's in BP so I could notate it when it comes.

ASJ has my email info if you'd rather reply to me that way. Thanks!

 
At July 23, 2007 at 12:10:00 AM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

The first mistake I saw in weekly Shmoyne Esre in Sim Sholoym it says:

"Sim sholoym toyvo uvrocho, chaim cheyn vechesed..." while in Munkatcher nusach it is "Sim sholoym toyvo uvrocho, cheyn vechesed..." (In the same sidur but in Shabes tfiloys it is already correct).

Another difference is where you say additional tfiloys in "shoymea tfilo" brocho. It is different from older Munkatcher sidurim.

Older copies are more accurate, however even they don't always follow the nusach completely. See a sample in tfiloys of Yomim Noyroim brought in "Darkey Chaim veSholoym", about Ariza"l's nusach that Darkey Tsuvo used to say, however it wasn't printed as supposed to be in the sidur. In general however Tzvi Tiferes looks well done, except technical flaws - paper is too thin, and all tfiloys of yomim toyvim are arranged very uncomforably.

 
At July 23, 2007 at 1:11:00 AM EDT, Anonymous Fredora Black said...

I would just point out that I don't think one should be so hard on "general" nusach sfard siddurim. Looking for a new siddur, for similar reasons as ASJ, I was not able to decide on one, so I simple bought the the Artscroll nusach sfard to give it a try. I found that it had a high degree of correlation to the nusach info that had been printed in The Breslov Center's "Breslov Eikh She-Hu", certainly higher than Chabad's Tehillas Hashem. A few pencil strokes here and there and it had been Breslov-fied.

I am sure a similar situation applies to ASJ's modefication of his siddur to fit Sudilkov minhagim.

 
At July 23, 2007 at 3:43:00 AM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

"Breslov Eikh She-Hu" isn't complete yet, as well as not finalized. It is still has to be fixed here and there. Consider it a draft.

As far as my experience - Munkatcher sidur is quite colse, and more accurately follows Ari za"l than any other Sfarad sidur. Unless you know all those places by heart, this sidur helps a lot.

 
At July 23, 2007 at 11:09:00 AM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

FWIW, the Sudilkover Rebbe was visiting in the BT ghetto in Spring Valley (New York) this past Shabbos. I watched him davening maariv on Motzoei Shabbos.

For the first part of davening, he did not use a siddur. During shmoneh esrei, he had a Kol Yaakov Hechodosh siddur. (The beis medrosh where he davened has a fairly good selection of different siddurim.)

 
At July 23, 2007 at 3:37:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Fedora Black said...

I was not suggesting that "Breslov Eikh She-Hu" was complete, but it still quite suprising that many things in something like the sfrad artscroll fit quite well.

Actually, one wonders what siddurim they based this nusach on, as it does not seem clear from the introduction. Considering how recent the is, they certainly had a wealth of siddurim to choose from, including those of high quality. I'd be surprised if they did NOT consult a siddur like Mukatch's.

Again, I think something can be said for davening for from a general nusach. The Clevelander Rebbe has been quoted as saying so on this blog, and especially for those with a connection to a diverse group like Breslov with people who daven everything from Sfard, to Ashkenaz, to Sefardic.

 
At July 23, 2007 at 4:54:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

Fedora Black: I wouldn't say it fits too well. Quick "quality proof" - check the first brocho in Shmoyne Esre - if it says "Koyney hakoyl" - it fits with Ari za"l, if it says "veKoyney hakoyl" - it doesn't. The rule that is brought in "Breslov Eikh She-Hu", that if we have a special mesoyro from the Rebbe etc. we use it, otherwise we try to use nusach Ari in some chasidic form. Artscroll sidur is not the best candidate to fit this rule.

 
At July 23, 2007 at 6:01:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Fedora Black said...

It actually does say "veKoyney Hakoyl", but nothing that a light slash of pencil lead does not take care of. I recently adopted the info in "Breslov Eikh She-Hu" to the Artscroll sfard. I found it took a minimal amount of time, and was in fact quite educational to see where things differ. In fact some of the variants are at times mentioned in the Artscroll's commentary.

"Fits well" is of course relavtive. Is it 50%, 60%, 75%, 95%? Some would say that a single nekudah that differs from their own prefered nusach is a horror with no room for redemption.

Perhaps I am less sensitive. If Michel Dorffman, zal, could daven form "the chassidic siddur, not the litvish one", a general siddur will be just OK for now. I'll kvetch when I reach a bit higher level.

 
At July 24, 2007 at 4:00:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

"Chasidish sidur" in Ukraine usually meant Slavita Sidur "Seder Avoydo uMoyre Derach" when it was available. It follows the nusach of Reb Pinchos Koritzer zy"o and his talmidim. It is quite particular about many Ari za"l nusachoys. It is very rare nowadays though.

(I don't say that Reb Michel meant exactly it though, I just point out that it was the most polular amongst chasidim in Urkaine when it was available).

 
At July 26, 2007 at 10:39:00 AM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

A Yid said,
""Sim sholoym toyvo uvrocho, chaim cheyn vechesed..." while in Munkatcher nusach it is "Sim sholoym toyvo uvrocho, cheyn vechesed..." (In the same sidur but in Shabes tfiloys it is already correct).
Another difference is where you say additional tfiloys in "shoymea tfilo" brocho. It is different from older Munkatcher sidurim."

Regarding Sim Shalom, I found in Darchei Chaim V'Shalom an interesting footnote that seems to say that Rebbe Chaim Elazar Shapira ZY"A of Munkacs actually did add the word "chaim" before "chein" in his own davening of Sim Shalom but did not recommend this for the kehilla.

To clarify why "chaim" is added only to weekday instances of Sim Shalom in the new edition, I faxed a question to the publishers and am waiting for their reply.

As for where to insert personal prayers into Shomea Tefilla, the new edition appears to agree with older Munkacs editions I have, with the asterisk in the same place.

 
At July 26, 2007 at 10:47:00 AM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

That's interesting. Why would Minchos Elozer say one thing and recommend another for kehilo?? How does it fit with the counting the number of words in every brocho? Which one fits with the counting?

I'll check about personal addons to Shomea Tfilo. It seems that it was said somewhere else, that they should be added in separate place, but older sidurim didn't follow it. I'll try to check how it is in other sidurim anyway, because personally I'm not bound to Munkatcher nusach up to such details. I'm only using it as a base, and what I don't know or didn't research yet - I take from there.

 
At July 26, 2007 at 11:55:00 AM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

A Yid,

Check Darchei Chaim V'Shalom; maybe you'll have a different take on the footnote.

I once bought a Munkacs book of zemiros for the year (these include holiday piyyutim). As I recall, the book disagreed with Darchei Chaim V'Shalom on some point, so it appears that not everything said in the latter is accepted by all as the Munkacs way. The foreword to the new siddur did include Darchei Chaim V'Shalom as one of the nusach-related sources.

 
At July 26, 2007 at 12:14:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

Bob Miller: I personally use Ari za"l's nusachoys in rare cases where Munkatcher sidur doesn't and it is not known that it comes from Baal Shem Tov or the Rebbe, who can overrule Ari za"l's nusach.

There are several places where Munkatcher sidur doesn't follow Ari za"l exactly (such places are few though. I.e. al pi Ari za"l it will be "al divrey Soyro" instead of "laasoyk bedivrey Soyro", ommiting "oyrh chodosh", saying "Borcheynu" in summer and other similar cases).

I'm still trying to get the Slavita Sidur (to make a copy at least). I have a project for all who are interested to join to order a scan from the library. If it is comfortable enought and follows Ari za"l at least as much as Minchos Elozer, I might start using it.

 
At July 26, 2007 at 8:35:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

By the way, the Bostoner Chassidim have published a very nicely produced siddur called Tefilla Yeshara Hechadash, based on older Radvil/Berditchev versions. My copy is from the 5754 edition, and was found at The Israel Book Shop in Brookline, MA.

 
At July 26, 2007 at 8:54:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

Here I'm more interested in the pirush "Keser Nehoyro" than in that nusach (in Bostoner circle that nusach is of the primary interest). For that I like more the sidur "Oyr Leyeshorim" (originally published in Zhitomir). Fortunately clear reprint copies of it are still available around for reasonable prices (I once bought it for 2$ only on some sheymos sale!!).

 
At July 27, 2007 at 9:06:00 AM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

That pirush is in the Bostoner edition! I'm not sure all of it is there, but it's there.

 
At July 27, 2007 at 12:45:00 PM EDT, Anonymous A Yid said...

Oyr leYeshorim you can find here:
http://jnul.huji.ac.il/dl/books/html/bk1856351.htm

 
At July 29, 2007 at 11:53:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I looked over the siddur I use, which is published by Bobov, "צלותיה דשלמה ", and it has most of the changes you mentioned.

In davening the only differences I noticed where not accounted for are

ha'nosein l'secvi binah (instead of asher nosan l'secvi binah)

and


Melech yachid chei ha'olamim (deletes the word "Keil" in accordance with the minhag of the Baal Shem Tov)

In addition, it has koneh ha kol, although the vav (for v'koneh) is added in parenthesis for the Aseres yamei Tshuvah.

As far as "brachamav" at the end of the first b'rachah of bentching...I've seen this one place...in a Breslov bentcher at my friends house. It's a very nice one with English translation. I don't know the name or who puts it out but shouldn't be too hard to track down.

 
At August 27, 2007 at 9:46:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Bob Miller said...

CLARIFICATION OF NUSACH MUNKACS
Please refer to my earlier comment of July 26, 2007 10:39:00 AM EDT and the associated comments by A Yid and by me before and after it.

I received a fax today from R. Yisrael Ze'ev Gutman on behalf of the Munkacs publishing house "EMES" that published the new siddur.

He accepts the understanding of the sefer "Darchei Chaim V'Shalom", adding some details:

1. The original Nusach Munkacs said in each instance of Sim Shalom, near the beginning, "chein vachessed". The Minchas Elazar ZY"A also used this wording, until he began adding "chaim" before "chein" later in life in his own davening. He continued recommending that the tzibbur use the original wording.

2. This split between the wording used by the rebbe and that used by the tzibbur continues, although some of the tzibbur also add "chayim" there.

3. The proper text for Sim Shalom wherever it appears in the siddur is to show "chayim" in brackets, before "chein".
--------------------
I believe the word count of Sim Shalom is "correct" according to the Munkacs understanding when the word "chaim" is not said before "chein".

 
At October 22, 2007 at 2:50:00 PM EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Speaking of the Bostoner Siddur, the siddur brings down from Sefer Chassidim not to have a word in mussaf, other that "mussaf," with a final peih, peish sopfis, but why? Thus, Bostoner Chassidim don't say the possuk in RC Mussaf of "soif v'keitz."
I'd liek to know the inyan of why not - why does the sefer chassidim say not to use the final peih?

 
At November 14, 2007 at 8:18:00 AM EST, Blogger A Simple Jew said...

When I davened with the Sudilkover Rebbe at the Bobover shul in Boro Park I noticed he selected the Kol Yaakov HaChadash siddur.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home