I apologize if this doesn't seem like a real question to others on this site.

If you already know it is a legend, how will someone else having heard the legend help? I too heard the legend. From a user named ezra.

@mevaqesh Perhaps someone might have heard it from a more reliable source (such as a person who was there, or someone who was on the team for the original print of the Tehilas Hashem, for example).

Well consider editing your question to clarify that. In your comment you indicate that you are looking for a source, albeit, not necessarily a written one. In your post, however, you state: I'm not necessarily looking for a source (because I doubt it's been written down) but maybe someone has heard this legend as well? Which indicates that anyone who heard it constitutes an answer; even if they contribute nothing.

If he could add to the yud why can't he erase the chirik?

Why is this case different than this? Maybe he wanted to follow the Hanau opinion? judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/84204/…

@Kazibácsi That's not the point of my question. :-/

It is quite possible that this is mentioned Siddur Rabbeinu HaZaken which explains a lot of the why behind the Chabad siddur. Bli neder, I'll look it up later and report back if I find something.

@DanF The difference is nusach. I've asked that question here: judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/84204/…

@larry909 Because how do you erase ink?

Am I correct in understanding that, per this "legend", subsequent to the Rebbe editing in an elongated vav all newer editions of the siddur Tehilas Hashem made a peculiar vav to indicate the Rebbe's edit?

@Oliver Yes that is exactly my question. Of course, the newest prints of the Siddur TH do not have this "edit".

Are we sure this happened with the original Siddur TH? Perhaps it happened in a siddur without nekudos, which would make it easier to understand (no chirik to erase)? Or maybe it was in a siddur where it was written chaser, and the rebbe added 2 dots to the chirik to make a kubutz? (I realize that they are both highly unlikely, but just some thoughts...)

@רבותמחשבות It's possible

@ezra So since my answer was deleted by someone, am I to understand that your question is about the action of the typesetter of the Siddur Torah Ohr and not the source of the actual content? The version of the Alter Rebbe is יצור and not יציר like was common in his generation.

@YaacovDeane Yup that's the question. It has nothing to do with the reason why Chabad nusach has יצור or יציר, that has already been asked (by me) here. And it's the original Siddur Tehilas Hashem, not Torah Ohr.

@ezra I’ve never heard any story about the typesetting of Siddur Torah Ohr, but it has plenty of typesetting errors even today, like any hand typeset book. I’m in the business and can tell you that in print shops they would on occasion run short of a particular letter and would cannibalize another letter of similar shape. When the pressing would be finished, that modified lead letter would be returned to the tray it had been changed into. It is possible that particular letter you are asking about is one of those cannibalized letters.

@YaacovDeane Maybe, but it's not the Torah Ohr it's the Tehilas Hashem

@ezra I see. And why do the newest prints not copy this "edit"?

@ezra My point was, when Kehos or anyone else reprinted the siddur (lazer print or whatever) why wasn't that specific "legendary" edit retained? Wouldn't this demonstrate that publishers did not think there was any legend behind this edit?

@ezra Tehillat HaShem used lithography to reproduce the typesetting from Siddur Torah Ohr. They didn’t reset the text until very recently. If you are hearing stories about Tehillat HaShem, they are just that. Stories!

@YaacovDeane I don't have a copy of the Torah Ohr but to my knowledge they look very much different on the inside. Are you sure they used lithography to create the Siddur TH?

@ezra Yes, offset printing, which uses photolithography was the standard in the 50s and later. That’s how they were able to scale all those different editions. If you look closely, you will see on different pages that certain small characters plug in detail. That is because the camera used to shoot the original wasn’t in focus.

The original Tehillias Hashem (IIRC) was a printed by modifiying a different non-Chabad siddur, since the non-Chabad siddur most likely had yitzir, it makes sense that the printers changed it and that is why it looks "crooked"

@Efraim Yaacov Deane seems to think that the TH was modified off the Torah Ohr, which is another Lubavitch siddur. See comments above.

no source, but I've seen this in other places as well: he.wikipedia.org/wiki/…;

@Efraim Oh my gosh that looks just like the Chabad siddur on the inside!

yep, another source that says the same thing here: chabadpedia.co.il/index.php/…

@Efraim OK but the question still remains because that siddur (which is nusach Ashkenaz) has יציר so the legend is still up for grabs