““Keser” is mentioned in rishonim. Putting baruch sheamar in the middle [of shabbos psukei dezimra] is brought down in the Tur.”
I never said they had no basis in the rishonim, just that they weren’t the Ashkenazi minhag before. I’d be happy to be proven wrong, but I haven’t seen any evidence of it.
n0m:
” Do you think that the Shelah could change the nusach but not The Baal Hatanya? ”
No, and I made the same point about the Gra’s changes to nusach. Why do you think I’m disagreeing with you on this? Was I really that unclear on this thread, or are you just assuming based on other threads that I always take the anti-Chabad position?
My stance is nuanced because that’s the historical reality. Many people think all Chassidishe minhagim are innovations when they are, in reality, just reflecting regional differences in Europe that would have existed even without Chassidus. This seems to be the point n0mesora is making, and I agree. However, to take it a step further and claim that NO chassidishe minhagim are innovations would be false. It’s very rational to have a problem with some but not with others.
“As far as I know, those minhagim where more regional, and are not specific to Chabad.”
100% agree. This is probably why there’s so much overlap between the stances of the Gra and the Baal Hatanya. I was criticized by Gra-fans for making this point here years ago. This being said, “those minhagim” are not the ones people are criticizing Chabad for.
mdd:
“very many Litvishe ba’alei battim learnt all of Shas — by learning Daf ha’yomi. I hope you understand that it is not worth a lot.”
Sigh, ok, it’s time for us to collectively disavow of mdd’s crazy, unhinged statements again. Yes, it’s a big deal to learn all of shas. It is not the normative stance of the yeshivish world that learning all of shas is “not worth a lot.”