I was in a Jewish Community Center recently for a meeting, after which a bunch of people wished to say orthodox maariv. Someone went to the JCC's chapel to borrow sidurim (prayer books), and brought back a pile, including some copies of Sim Shalom, the official sidur of the Conservative movement. I pointed out to him (quietly) that it's a Conservative sidur, to which he replied that the text is the same as orthodox sidurim's. Wikipedia disagrees, citing some differences.

  1. Is its text for maariv the same as orthodox sidurim's, though?
  2. If so, is there any problem using it for maariv? (I can't see why there would be.)
  • @Danno "ba'olam" is added to Sim Shalom, but that is at Shaharit and Musaf. At Ma'ariv, the only differance I know of is some of bracha 17 (avodah) being shortened to not ask for restoration of the sacrifices.
    – Mike
    Feb 20, 2014 at 1:25
  • For what it is worth, I was looking at my copy of the 1998 edition. I can find other differences in Brachot HaShachar, Kabbalat Shabbat, Musaf, and Tachanun, but Maariv might actually be the service that is closest to Orthodox. I've used it tons of times, but that is certainly no standard for you to use it. I wonder if anyone can answer #2.
    – Mike
    Feb 20, 2014 at 2:52
  • 1
    Why the downvotes? Feb 21, 2014 at 1:42
  • Shut BeMareh HaBazak 2:3
    – Double AA
    Jun 5, 2017 at 22:09

3 Answers 3


I have just compared the weekday ma'ariv services in the following two books:

  • Siddur Sim Shalom for Weekdays, September 2003 (2nd printing)
  • Expanded Artscroll Siddur, Wasserman Edition, 2010

I found the following differences:

  • Sim Shalom has two versions of the beginning of the t'filah, the usual text (page 142a) and the same text with the imahot inserted and a clear header (page 142b).

  • In re'eh, Sim Shalom inserts "na" ("re'eh na b'onyeinu..."). @msh210 reports in a comment that some other Orthodox siddurim do this too.

  • In 'al hatzaddikim, Sim Shalom has "yehemu na rachamekha" (inserts "na"). @msh210 reports in a comment that some other Orthodox siddurim do this too.

  • Sh'ma koleinu in Sim Shalom has an optional insert for Yom HaShoah.

  • Sh'ma koleinu in ArtScroll has optional inserts for livelihood and forgiveness.

  • R'tzei in Sim Shalom omits "v'ishei Yisrael" (as noted in this answer).

  • Shalom rav in Sim Shalom inserts "v'al kol yoshvei teivel" (after "'al yisrael amcha").

  • After 'Aleinu and before Kaddish ArtScroll has a paragraph marked "in some congregations:" beginning "Al tirah mipachad pitom".

The question asks "if so" (if the texts are the same) is there any problem using Sim Shalom? Technically that question doesn't apply since the texts aren't the same. However, it seems possible that these changes are minor enough that, if the alternative is to not pray with a siddur at all, you might want to use this siddur anyway, especially if you'll recognize and correct for these changes. CYR, of course. See this related question.

  • Sorry for all the transliteration, but it was too much for me to try to type out in Hebrew. If anybody wants to edit to insert Hebrew, please feel free. Feb 21, 2014 at 2:54
  • 1
    Good answer. I like that you had the two texts side-by-side and compared them, instead of trying to remember what was different like some of us were.
    – Mike
    Feb 21, 2014 at 4:25

The text in Siddur Sim Shalom is clearly different by the Amidah, where it includes the names of the Imahos. Perhaps there are other differences too. Per Igros Moshe Orach Chaim 4:91 conservative doctrine is against the Torah.

  • As I noted in the comments on the question, the version in question didn't have the imahos in the amida's first b'racha. Maybe that's only in some versions. +1, though: this answers my question as to whether there's a difference. You may wish to edit it, though, to clarify it's talking about only some versions. (And I don't see the relevance of the last sentence.)
    – msh210
    Feb 20, 2014 at 16:16
  • The relevance of the last sentence is that it makes them suspect, and therefore even if there were no noticeable changes I would feel it is best not to use. So far I have not found a ruling saying such, however I am working on it. Feb 20, 2014 at 16:28
  • 2
    Versions that include the imahot have two versions of avot, one without and one with, and they are clearly labeled. They also use the same page number with "a" and "b" suffixes, which should make it even more clear that these are alternatives and you should do only one. Feb 20, 2014 at 16:51
  • 1
    @C.BenYosef If you are making up your own psakim, you should indicate that clearly in the answer. As it is now the quote from Igrot Moshe is totally irrelevant to this question, which did not ask about doctrines.
    – Double AA
    Feb 20, 2014 at 17:35

I grew up in a Conservative shul and we used the old version of Siddur Sim Shalom (which didn't include the imahot). The only difference in the weekday ma'ariv davening is that the רצה bracha does not include the words ואשי ישראל. Someone who knows that one difference could easily daven with that siddur and make that change on his own.

  • 2
    The first part is correct, regarding the changes in nusach for shemone esrei. Note there are also differences in the nusach of birkas hashachar (not that that was being asked) for example they don't say shelo asani goy, isha, eved, but rather use positive phrasings (I forget what they are, but like sheh asani ben chorin instead of shelo asani eved). The second assertion that one could easily daven with that siddur by making changes, is true from a technical perspective not necessarily halachically as discussed below about whether one may use such a siddur. Feb 20, 2014 at 19:44
  • @SeymoreCohen Where was that discussed below?
    – Double AA
    Feb 20, 2014 at 21:18

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .