The Inexcusable Character Assasination Of A Gadol B”Yisroel

When discussing Gedolei Yisroel, one may disagree with their conclusions or even disregard what they say, but one may never disrespect them, especially in public. Today, Rabbi Harry Maryles has crossed a red line, one that may very well be in the territory of Mevazeh Talmid Chochom Berabim.

Reb Harry:

People that have survived some of the worst tortures by man imaginable have been struck in their collective hearts by a giant dagger that was forged in the Satmar Rebbe’s cauldron of anti Zionist hatred… I want to be absolutely clear about this. The Satmar Rebbe, had he been alive would have been one of the first to condemn this act.

And yet I blame him for the philosophy that generated this violence…. (ea – HAP)

But their philosophy of hatred against Zionism stands as a pillar of faith among them all. It does not take all that much to convert some of that hatred into action. From simple anti Zionist rhetoric at one end all the way to the kind of thing that happened here….

Although I believe in individual responsibility and these disgusting pieces of trash are indeed responsible for their own actions, one cannot ignore where they are coming from. To say that the Satmar Rebbe does not share of the blame for generating the type of hatred that desecrated Yad VaShem would be the same as saying that Pope Urban the 2nd does not share the blame for the atrocities of the Crusaders.

When first reading this post, I did a double take. Is this R’ Harry or did I mistakenly wander over to Dovbear or The Successful Bigot? Alas, it is indeed R’ Harry. Leaving aside for the moment the linkage that Harry creates, tenuous at best and defamatory at worst, let us instead adopt Harry’s formula and see where it leads us. We’ll call it Harry’s Law. Harry’s Law states: Every ideology is responsible for what kooks do in it’s name, regardless of how strenuous they object to it or even if said kooks renounce said ideology. Let’s see what comes up.

Ahh, here we go.

The Rav

Rabbi J.B Soloveitchik was known for his openness toward secular culture and for his attempts toward synthesizing modernity and Torah. Therefore, using Harry’s Law, it is well within bounds that the Rav’s approach of parting with tradition is the source of the following:

Rabbah Hurwitz

Morethodoxy In General

This farce

Rabbi Steven Greenberg

YU Symposium on Gays

Noah Feldman

There is little doubt that were the Rav alive he would strongly condemn most if not all, of the above. But there is also no denying that there is a direct correlation between the philosophy he espoused and the direction some have taken it. Again, Harry’s Law.

Therefore, I blame him for the philosophy that generated this continued Churban Hadas and Chillul Hashem.

Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook.

Rav Kook was well known for his extremist positions regarding the mitzvah of settling the Land of Israel. Among his more famous statements is the following:

During the first attempt at illegal settlement, Rabbi Kook joined his pupils. When soldiers came to evacuate the group, Rabbi Kook yelled at them, “take out your machine gun; we’re not going anywhere.” (ea=hap)

While Rav Kook backed off the implementation of his fiery rhetoric, it seems that some of his followers didn’t. Using Harry’s Law as our guide, this is the result of Rav Kook’s extremist pronouncements:

Baruch Goldstein

Jewish Settler Kills Four Israeli Arabs In Attack on Bus

Price Tag Violence

Yigal Amir

Yakov Teitel

We can also blame the rabbis who wrote this book for any future violence directed by Jews at non-Jews.

Logic Gone Astray

Now on to Harry’s Law itself. In truth, I’m not being fair to Harry, he is hardly originator of this type of demagoguery. This disingenuous attempt at blaming one’s ideological opposition for the acts of extremists is part and parcel of the American scene nowadays, albeit the very dregs of it. Liberals blame conservatives for the Oklahoma City bombing and the shooting of Congresswoman Giffords, conservatives hold liberals responsible for the crazies carrying Bush=Hitler signs and round and round she goes. Bernie Madoff is capitalism’s fault, the Norwegian murderer a result of extreme nationalism.

This kind of thinking has been rightfully rejected by balanced and sane people on either side of the ideological divide. It doesn’t take much to recognize the shoddy thinking and faulty reasoning underlying linkage of this nature. An ideology bears responsibility solely for what it advocates, not for loonies acting out their sick desires in its’ name. Were we to match crazy actions to the ideology closest to it, disregarding the order of magnitude separating the two, we would condemn Mother Theresa for the actions of Code Pink, Quakers for the cover-up of abuse, as well as the phenomenon of women who look to marry serial killers as an indictment of “kindness”.

Furthermore, were we to adopt this poor excuse for reason, wouldn’t Harry himself be liable should anything happen to the perpetrators of this crime (once they are caught)? Isn’t he fomenting hate toward them? Indeed, isn’t he fomenting hate toward Satmar in general with the tone and the tenor of his remarks about them? Is he prepared to take responsibility for his words, regardless of the extremes they may be taken?


There a number of other curiosities and inaccuracies that Harry feels free to share with us.

1) The perpetrators have yet to be caught. Shouldn’t Harry hold off passing such harsh judgement until we know that those he thinks committed this crime actually did?

2) Anyone who follows Neturei Karta closely knows two things 1) They have long been disavowed by Satmar 2) They themselves have repudiated Satmar, doing so when the Satmar Rav was still alive!

3) The “hatred” evinced by the Satmar Rav was directed toward Zionism as an ideology, not at people. He would (and did) give the shirt off his back to ANY Jew even while condemning his beliefs. King David had hatred as well, Ohavei hashem Sinu R’ah, (Lovers of G-d hate evil). To the Satmar Rav, Zionism was responsible for removing millions of Jews from their religion, thereby qualifying it as “evil”. One may disagree but to parlay his stance as one “responsible” for the actions of sickos is ludicrous.

4) The coup de grace is Harry’s apples to oranges comparison of the Satmar Rav to Pope Urban II. This is insane. Pope Urban II  called for the violent actions of the Crusades, explicitly. OF COURSE he bears responsibility for what happened afterward. The Satmar Rav recoiled from physical violence against anyone (he even refused to demonstrate against a visiting Israeli PM because the Arabs would be demonstrating as well). His tactics bear closer resemblance to those of Gandhi than those of Urban II.

5) More than being “angry and hateful”, any student of the Satmar Rav will tell you that he was sad and hearbroken, totally tzebrachen (broken) over the millions of Jewish children led away from their God and their people. Listen to tapes of his Shovavim Torah as he beseeches his fellow Jews to do Teshuva.

I am far from being a Satmar Chassid. In fact, I can’t think of even one instance that I and my family follow the Satmar derech. However it is an undeniable fact that the Satmar Rav was from the greatest Gaonim, Tzadikim and Kedoshim of his generation. This was acknowledged by R’ Moshe Feinstein, R’ Aharon Kotler and many others who were often the target of his ire. The closest comparison I can think of is to Shammai Hazaken. The Halacha may not be like him, but he was one of the greatest and a national treasure. The words written today against him, by a man who should know better, are hurtful, disappointing and a disgrace.

In the interest of being charitable I will judge R’ Harry Lkaf Zechus and assume that he was so shaken up by the vile desecration at Yad Vashem that he said things he now regrets. I will also attribute his harsh words toward Satmar in general as coming from his innate Ahahvas Yisroel and what he perceives as Satmar “hating” other Jews. It is my fervent hope that he will retract his post and issue a proper apology.

P.S. Reb Harry, where were you condemning secular society and it’s leadership when this happened just last week? And this?


63 thoughts on “The Inexcusable Character Assasination Of A Gadol B”Yisroel

  1. The best anecdote about the Satmar was when he showed his V’Yoel Moshe to Rav Hutner and said “See? I must be right because no one has come up with an argument against me!”
    After he left one of Rav Hutner’s talmidim said to him “But you’re always telling us that the book is full of mistakes and logical errors.”
    “But I’m not going to tell him” said Rav Hutner. “I don’t need him to start screaming at me!”

    The best legacy of the Satmar is the how his two sons live like royalty and make their lawyers rich fighting with each other while most of their followers live in poverty. A perfect legacy.

    • Garnel, I’m disappointed.

      1) They’re his great nephews
      2) What does one have to do with the other
      3) Most of their followers etc? Where’d you get that narishkiet from?
      4) The Rabbis get rich off the backs of their followers. Really? You got nothing better then that? What was YU’s endowment fund last time I checked in the billions.

      • 1) Pretty sure they’re the sons. Each claims dear Reb Yoilish told HIM that he’d be the next Rebbe. As the old Dire Straits song goes, “Two men claim they’re Je–s, one of them gotta be wrong.”
        2) Well considering they’re constantly suing each other…
        3) Most Satmars generally live quite humbly and on minimum income. Are you disputing this?
        4) Oh please, they’ve been doing that since Chasidus was invented and they figured out people would pay for berachos.

  2. Is the Lubavitcher Rebbe responsible for whats going on in Lubavitch? (I know thats a loaded question and 10 ppl will portray the Rebbes personal opinion in 10 dif ways) What about the Baal Hatanya? What about consistency? We blame mendelsohn (perhaps rightfully so) for reform despite the fact that his written works say very little that would be considered outside the pail of at least centrist orthodoxy if not right rwmo. We do “blame” R yakkov pollack for the focus of learning being sidetracked by pilpul, and we credit Rchaim brisker for righting the ship. Are innovators and hard-liners that get taken out of context, responsible for where their ideas develop? even when they aren’t the ones developing the ideas? whats the answer? if i would do a days research i could bring you half a dozen proofs in either direction.

    • Apples and oranges.

      Everything is a matter of degree at some point. Then there are things that would be clearly condemned. Those Harry was attributing to the S”R, which is ridiculous and universally acknowledged as such.

      No connection whatsoever to what you say.

      • See, there’s an important point you’re missing. One of the roles of a commander, especially in the military or other authoritarian systems, is to take responsibility for bad things that happen under his command. The ultimate responsibility is his since he is in control of the system. If a junior office on a naval ship screws up, the captain has to take the blame because he’s the captain. And somehow this doesn’t translate into Judaism. When Meir Kahane’s followers do something stupid his legacy has to take responsibility. And when people who claim they are simply taking the V’Yoel Moshe to its logical conclusion then the author has to take responsibility.

  3. but you do blame that which is ridiculous and clearly in need of condemnation in reform, on moses mendelsohn. Im not comparing the Satmar Rebbe who was a tzaddik to mendelsohn on a personal level. I don’t know much about his personal life. I only know what he wrote. Fundamentally whats the difference. not on an emotional level, on a logical level. Do you blame meshichistism on the lubavitcher Rebbes writings about the concept of a rebbe, and mashiach.

    • Like I said, everything in life is at some point a matter of degree, but we cannot disregard the order of magnitute. Mendelsohn’s own grandchildren were goyim and he is widely considered the ideological father of Haskala. Lubavitch is a different matter.

      To blame the S”R for the graffiti is way, way too far, especially when refusing to place blame in other circumstances, as I cite in the OP.

  4. R’ Harry has crossed that red line many times in the past. I don’t think he has ever read a word the Satmar Rebbe wrote, or has an idea of the great ahavas yisroel which personified the man. As someone not from a Satmar background – who saw and davened with the Rebbe many times in my teens and early twenties – I to this day stand in awe of him – he personifies the heights to which one can rise through a life of Torah and kedusha. R’ Harry is an example of what the Rebbe meant when he wrote that the Zionist idea has blinded the eyes even of many shomrei torah u’mitzvos. Thank you for your site.

  5. Garnel… I’m very close to RYH close students , talked on this subject for hours and never heard this alledged story.. Admit yiu made it up…

  6. After all this sound and thunder, does anyone actually have any proof it was Neturei Karta who did this? Because it occurs to me that if I was an extreme leftist and I wanted to harm the frum community in Israel, this is exactly what I’d do, then sit back and watch the fireworks.

  7. garnel, I doubt you ever learned the sefer vayoel moshe from cover to cover, the sefer is solid.

      • garnel, till YOU learn this sefer you cant comment on this. And the sefer is great and logical despite Rabbi aviners quip.

      • LOLLLLLL

        Hey Garnel!

        FIrst you made up a story already about Rav Hutner.

        Now you have another story.

        Do you think your credibility is intact?

        I asked where you got that false Rav Hutner story. So far no answer. I’m waiting.

        And then … … and then you write – no, you instsed! – that Aron and ZL are the SONS of Rav Yoel! ROFL!

        Please keep it up, Garn. You’re really entertaining.

        You’re showing us what you people (yes, I said it – you people) are really made of.

        Harry is no more learned than you are. Please let Harry come here and talk to us. I’d be so entertained. Why should you be the only Korbon?

        C’mon Garnel, bring your friends. I’d love to see what they know.

        (I havent had such fun in ages. ….. sons????????? lol)

  8. Hareidi,

    I understand perfectly what you are trying to accomplish with this blog, and you do it well. But you need to take into account the harm that you are doing as well as the good.

    Legitimizing Harry Maryles by giving him the time of day on this and other posts is an ideological compromise that has its side effects. אל תען כסיל כאולתו פן תשוה לו גם אתה. By answering him you tacitly announce that he is a worthy adversary, of intellectual and scholarly muster that we should engage, as opposed to a raving cartoon character that lacks the knowledge and common sense to be taken seriously.

    For example, someone asked Rav Aaron Schachter yesterday about the story Garnel posted, having to do with Rav Hutner and the Satmar Rav. Rav Aaron categorically denied it, emphatically stated that Rav Hutner neve said that, and that his position on the Satmar Rav’s shita was just the opposite of what the story indicates, and his opinion on the Satmar Rav was that he was Godol Hador. Rav Aaron was very passionate and upset about it. Then he asked if the story was seen on the internet. When the answer came back in the affirmative, he said this is why we have to get rid of the internet.

    Hareidi, you allowed this story on your blog without any denials. If someone reads it you are responsible. Your approach is well meaning but I beg you to consider that in your attempt to rebut the MO while maintaining a civil relationship with them, you are making allowances that you are not allowed to make. You claimed that Harry’s post surprised you, which is a haskama of sorts, relatively speaking. You called him the exception that proves the rule, but Harry is no exception. I was not surprised when I read his post, it was far from his worst.

    I beg you to bear in mind the damage you are doing while trying to do good. A Godol already said that because of what you have on your site we should forgo the internet. You are trying to do good, but the side effects are to be considered seriously as well.

    • HaP is simply showing hakaras hatov to Rav Maryles. After all, if it wasn’t for the free publicity that he gave him, most of us wouldn’t even know he’s exists.

      • > When the answer came back in the affirmative, he said this is why we have to get rid of the internet.

        Oh, oh, and since I saw the story in a Religious Zionist sefer, we should get rid of Religious Zionist seforim. And Religious Zionists while we’re at it. And the printing press. Because that’s where the book came from. Why not?

          • “Oh, oh, and since I saw the story in a Religious Zionist sefer, we should get rid of Religious Zionist seforim”

            If they fabricate stories about Gedolim such as the one you mentioned, of course we should get rid of them. People like you who blindly believe whatever they read (as you did in this case) need to be protected. Perhaps if you wouldn’t have read such material you would not be full of ridiculous ideas like you are today.

    • What you say has much validity. The thing is that this stuff, unanswered, flies around the internet as it is. Isn’t it better that the casual surfer should at least see some semblance of the other side of the story?

      My experience is that ignoring blogs may grant them even greater legitimacy then pointing out their follies.

      We’ve done the “ignoring” for a while and look at the damage that’s been done. If my blog is deemed to cause more people to read blogs or go on the internet, I will shut it down today. I am targeting those who will read and be influenced by the blogosphere regardless, let them at least see how narish some of this stuff is.

      Does this make sense to you, Mayer?

      • It makes sense but to be honest, but should “your experience” pasken this question? Or should Daas Torah? Did the Gedolim say we should open up more blogs to counter the bad influence or that we should not bother?

        And especially since you say ignoring them “may” (not fur sure) do more damage? Perhaps שב ואל תעשה עדיף?

        I hear both sides, but I am not Daas Torah but I would not do what you are doing because it is a tremendous responsibility. If you close this down, then if someone believes Garnel’s hotas shem rah on Rav Hutner, it’s Garnel’s aveira. Now it is yours, as well.

        And let’s talk about someone who wants to know the truth, who would never believe a word that an ignoramus and vile human being like Harry Maryles has to say. So he reads your blog, not his. And then he reads that story and believes it. Do you want the responsibility?

        Every day, on this blog, you are paskening dinei nefashos. Sure, you help some people, and maybe you even help more than you harm, but does helping 20 people justify proactively harming even 5? Is that your call to make? Do we play G-d’s investment banker? You are knowledgeable. I know you are aware of the concept I am invoking.

        ” If my blog is deemed to cause more people to read blogs or go on the internet,”

        Deemed? By who? How will you know? How will you know if even one more person goes on the internet because of you? Or if one more person thinks that Harry is deserving of the respect you give him (even by calling him R’ Harry)?

        And if you are doing this already, why don’t you make a collection of all of Harry’s errors, misquotes, illogical statements, his degradation of Gedolim and Rabbonim and list it for all to see? But instead, you are playing patty-cake with him, giving him the respect that you know he does not deserve but you feel you have to in order to fulfill your mission.

        Remember what the Chofetz Chaim said. “Even if there is a heter not to fight the kofrim, there is definitely no heter to give them kovod.” How close are you to doing that?

        I truly understand what you are trying to do. There are so many other ways you can do it, even if you insist on making a blog, with much less risk. I am not saying you need to come off as a kanoi, but you do need to come off as a Jew who is disgusted by the likes of Garnel Ironheart and Harry Maryles. Just as they are repulsed (correctly) by the people who spray painted Yad Vashem. You are not giving that impression now. You are giving the impression that “there are two sides to every story.” Your masthead even says that.

        That is very wrong. There are not two sides to every story. Live and let live or eilu v’eilu does not apply to many of the ideas you are countering. Yet that is the impression your politeness (and your masthead) gives.

        If you were a rebbi in a Yeshiva, would you handle Harry’s posts the way you do here? I think not. And yet, the reasons you would tell it like it is in a classroom, or to your children, apply to many readers here too. Your approach, besides your very being here, is a compromise and an allowance that comes with a high price. I hope you have a way of telling whether it is worth it, cuz I don’t.

  9. What harry wrote in this post is NOTHING in comparison to what he wrote here:

    “One of the most damaging figures of the 20th century happens to be a man who is considered the Gadol HaDor of the 20th century to great multitudes of observant Jewry. That man is the Satmar Rebbe, Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum.

    I was very happy to see Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer saying that he cannot respect the Satmar Rebbe. I have to agree.

    I have long ago lost my respect for the Rebbe. But after reading Rabbi Bechhofer’s post which excerpts the Rebbe’s published words my antipathy towards him is stronger than ever”

    “I think Klal Yisroel ought to follow the lead of Rabbi Bechhofer and not grant any respect to him. He does not deserve that nor does he deserve any honored place in Jewish history.”

    Mayer is correct. You should just ignore this old fool. He thinks because he has smicha and learnt daf yomi several times he is a maven on yiddishkeit, but in essence he’s a massive am haaretz

    • People often equate godlus in Torah with tzidkus. Well they are not equivalent. No one would question the depth of the Satmar’s knowledge of Torah but to say he was a tzadik because he was so learned does not logically follow. After all, Doeg HaEdomi was also a gadol in Torah.

        • When you ask your shailah, please make sure to mention the fact that fools like Garnel often get the last word in even if they are wrong (such as the above nonsensical comment about the commander in an army) and that you allowed the fake story of Rav Hutner to remain uncontested. And that you refer to Harry as the exception that proves the rule (almost) and you clearly give the impression that he is an honorable fellow and a worthy opponent. Also mention that the masthead of your blog says there are two sides to every story.

          And et cetera.

    • A tzadik spreads ahavas Yisrael, not sinas chinam. A tzadik reaches out to all Jews with love, not disdain and insults for those who disagree with him. A tzadik tries to increase the numbers of yirei shamayim and shomrei mitzvos, not rapidly whittle down to create an exclusive community of “ideals”. And a tzadik always tries to see another’s point of view instead of dismissing it or ordering it to be changed because it disagrees with his own.

  10. I’ve always wondered looking back in history we find many great men where they instituted some novel idea, but years later it seemed to backfire. Do we blame them, or do we say, their followers didn’t apply it properly. There are just to many examples, both in the litveshe and chassidic velt. I have no answer except I have no respect for ones who do not follow shulchan aruch. והמבין יבין.

    • There has been no Gadol who has not followed the Shulchan Aruch. Period. There are times that eis lasos applies, but that is also part of the Shulchan Aruch.

      • Without mentioning names, there are many great leaders that have gone to secular court ,some have ignored hazmana to Beis din, or simply shown disdain for Beis din psak. No I won’t mention any, and they are considered our leaders. Unless all these cases are es laasos.

        • I would need to hear both sides of the story. Most of these controversies are not as simple as they appear to be. However, I agree, no need to dredge up names.

  11. one may disagree with their conclusions or even disregard what they say,

    Not so sure about this. is this not, in and of itself, ביזוי תלמידי חכמים ?

  12. “Rabbi Harry Maryles has crossed a red line”

    Harry has crossed that red line dozens if not hundreds of times on his obsessively anti-chareidi blog. He’s a bore and shouldn’t be quoted anywhere, by anyone.

  13. I posted this on Harry’s blog and feel itwill also be of interest to some here:

    A friend has forwarded the following relevant responses to harry’s similar post on the Areivim forum:

    # 1

    From: Micha Berger

    Harry Maryles wrote:
    : The people who did this are disgusting excuses for humanity. Although he would be the first to condemn such acts,?
    : one cannot ignore the source of their hatred…a hatred based on the philosophy of the Satmar Rebbe…

    Tarta desasrei… If he would be “the first to condemn such acts” then the hatred isn’t based on his philosophy.
    I would want to know what you would have expected from the SR… Not to speak the emes as he saw it because it would be too easily misunderstood

    I suppose one should be grateful that the SR isn’t blamed for the philosophy and actions of Yigal Amir and Baruch Goldstein..

    And BTW, the author of ‘Srufei Hakavshanim’ was no Satmar chasid AFAIK.


    # 2

    From: “Prof. Levine”

    Harry Maryles wrote:
    >The people who did this are disgusting excuses for humanity.
    >Although he would be the first to condemn such acts, one cannot ignore
    >the source of their hatred…a hatred based on the philosophy of the
    >Satmar Rebbe… who sees the founding and continued existence of the
    >State of Israel as a Maaseh Satan!

    Although I am not a Satmar Chosid and never met the Satmar rebbe, I am sure that he would condemn all acts such as these.

    Of course. He publicly attacked the NK for doing far far less. (And this was published in his Divrei Torah at the time).
    FACT: He cancelled an anti Israeli-PM protest (I can’t recall which one) because he heard that there may be Arabs protesting as well.

    What the Harrys (or should that be “Harries”?) of the world don’t understand is that there are many and varied Kanoi groups – some who have absolutely no connection to Satmar.
    In fact there was once a case bayomim haheim (no idea why) that one of these groups posted pashkevilen agains him! – [Headlined “Rabeinu sar min haderech”]

    Personally I will be very satisfied when the perpetuator(s) of this latest outrage get(s) caught.
    Then we will be able to make a decision 1) If he (or they) have any Satmar connections, 2) If he (or they) are mentally stable.
    I won’t be surprised to learn that the answer to both is NO.

    Remember Satmar chassidim in general are from families who endured the nazi hell. OTOH, there are plenty of Jerusalem kanoim whose families did not go through that nightmare.

    OTOH, I would suggest that many if not most Chareidim (and others) have always accepted and believed the testimony of that tzadik Reb MB WEissmandl zt’l [see and about his efforts that were stymied who documents the culpability of many zionist leaders in far more than simply ‘not doing enough’ to save European Jewry.
    “Rak bedam tihyeh lanu haaretz” seemed to be their motto.

    As I previously posted – read more about this go to for Moshe Schonfeld’s booklet “Srufei Hakavshanim Maashimim”.

    And here is an English translations of the 10 questions RMBW asked the Zionists to answer to after the war

    So however repulsive and nauseating the actions of those Yad Vashem daubers are, who can disagree that the actions of to what they are referring is a hundred million times worse?


    After writing all the above, I found an on-line English translation of Moshe Shonfeld’s “The Holocaust Victims Accuse”.
    I dare anyone to read it (it’s not too long) and then worry about graffiti of a few meshugoim.

  14. Sorry for the delay. Apparently those who have nothing better to do have been waiting with bated breath by their computers (in violation of the orders of their “Gedolim”, no less) while I was doing what normal people do: spending time with my family, getting a good night’s sleep, etc.
    So first of all, now that I’ve got the book in front of me, mea culpa, or as the kids say, “My bad”. It’s not Rav Hutner (my memory isn’t what it used to be, but then my memory was never what it should have been) but rather Rav Shraga Feivel Mendelovich who is the subject of the quote. I certainly meant no disrespect to Rav Hutner, z”l. In my view, attributing that quote to him would be increasing my respect for him.
    Anyway, the story brought in the introduction to volume 1 of Alo Na’alah, p. 9. The intro is written by Rav Mordechai Tzion who brings many anecdotes and instances of how the Satmar’s work was questioned or disputed by many of his confederates. Rav Tzion brings his quote from the English book “Reb Shraga Feivel – The Life and Times of Rabbi Shraga Feivel” and the specific line is: “I could have replied to him about Chazal with Chazal and about Midrash with Mirash but I didn’t want to him to preach with anger because he is great and righteous… and besides, he’s also a short-tempered.”
    Rav Tzion also brings multiple examples of the Satmar’s abusive language towards Rav Avraham Yitzchak Kook, ztk”l and how he refused to show proper respect to other Rabbonim who disagreed with his position, all while noting repeatedly how Chazal frown on Talmidei Chachamim showing disrespect to other Talmidei Chachamim, even when they disagree with him.

      • I don’t think that when Chazal said that one who gets angry is like one who worships idols that they were excluding talmidei chachamim. Furthermore, they were clear that while a talmid chacham can act mad he cannot really be mad inside. Finally they insisted that “wars in Torah” never become personal. So no, there was still no valid excuse for many of the things the Satmar said.

        • 1) Who said he was mad internally?
          2) It was never personal, as evidenced by his willingness to help RZ Jews in any way when they came to him for personal help.

          BTW if you beleive in Chazal and believe that Gadol Hamachtio Yoser Mehhargo then how can you NOT hate the Zionists?

          • Our local Rav likes to point out that every blade of grass has an angel watching over it and telling it to grow but then the State of Israel comes along and, oh that just happened without any help from Heaven?
            There’s a problem with black and white thinking. Little kids cannot differentiate between hatred and anger. If a parent yells at them or punishes them they think the parent hates them.
            Chareidi thinking for the last several generations has been quite similar. You’re angry at the Zionists and therefore you hate them.
            I am no secular Zionist and when I learned history I was quite angry at many of the things they did but on the other hand I recognize that God moves history whether or not it goes the way I think it should and I can also differentiate between anger and hatred. Jews trying to build up Israel are performing a mitzvah whether or not they do it the way we think they should. By deciding to hate them we are saying we know God’s mind and what He wants. Are we really that clever?

            • Sure, He hates evil. Removing people from Yiddishkiet is evil. Therefore he hates Zionism. Why is that a large leap for logic?

              As for G-d’s Hashgacha Pratis, of course he created Israel. He also allows evil to prosper in this world, do we hate it any less as a result?

              C’mon man, I’m losing you here.

              • You didn’t lose him. He is saying nothing more than you think he is. He has nothing better to offer. And the rest of the arguments “defending” the MO version of Judaism are no better.

    • Yes, and WE ARE STILL WAITING.

      We knew you couldn’t find that story anywhere. Not Rav Hutner nor any other noraml person, all the more so a godol, would ever say what you quted about the SR’s Sefer:

      “the book is full of mistakes and logical errors.”

      And of course you didn’t. Do you see ANYONE saying that the SR’s Sefer is “is full of mistakes and logical errors.”?

      No. You made that up.

      RSFM said that he could respond in kind. Like all Talmidei Chachamim who disagree.

      Mistakes? Logical errors? Full? Garn, don’t you understand now why we cannot take you or people like you seriously? It’s your dishonesty and lack of knowledge.

      And did you find that the SR said to ANYONE “See? I must be right because no one has come up with an argument against me!”.”?


      Garn, we are not Harry or Natan Slifkin. You make up a story, you will be called on it. You make up a derogatory story about a Godol, you will be mocked.

      You do realize we have been mocking you don’t you?

      You serve as testimony as to why we Hareidim laugh at you and your kind. In all seriousness, any 12 year old could have told you that your story was a fabrication.

      And it was only exposed as such because we pushed you to the wall demanding a source for a story we know has no source.

      Hareidiandproud – now that you see the story is a lie, what heter is there for allowing it up on top of this comment section? What if someone does not read every single comment? This is what I mean t yesterday. You will have the הוצאת שם רע on your חשבון.

      And regarding the “avusive” talk on Rav Kook. Was Rav Yosef Chaim SOnnenfeld alive when the SR wrote that? Did he ever find out about it? I would imagine (wouldn’t you) that RYCS would be up in arms about that? I would imagine that RYCS’s followers would be about as angry at the SR as you are, right?

      Do you know of any response from RYCS or any other Godol at that time defending RAYK against what the SR wrote?

      • > Do you see ANYONE saying that the SR’s Sefer is “is full of mistakes and logical errors

        Well there is the reference to a certain Satmar Dayan being asked what he thought of the book. The quote from him was “If it’s based on Gemaras, I can’t understand the book. If it’s ruach hakodesh, well that’s better.”

        And Alo Naaleh is two volumes refuting what the Satmar said.

        I also doubt Rav Sonnenfeld, z”l, had anything to say about VaYoel Moshe since he died in 1932, long before the book came out. I do know that unlike the Satmar he was friends with Rav Kook, ztk”l, and could disagree with him while recognizing his Godlus. Just like the Chofetz Chayim and the Netziv. Just not you and the Satmar.

        As for you Mayer, boy you’re an intolerant and abusive git, the very stereotype of what people dislike about Chareidism. Yes, of course I realize you’ve been mocking me but I haven’t responded because unlike you I don’t think that’s appropriate religious behaviour. Your poor temper betrays you.

        • In other words, you have nobody that said what you quoted.

          In other words, you make up a libelous slander against a Godol B’Yisroel.

          And, Garn, you’ve done it again. You’ve shown your ignorance. Just so you know, I set you up. I knew you’d take the bait, just like you did when we demanded a source for your fake story. Please pay attention:

          That “abusive” language that the SR writes about RAYK is NOT in Vayoel Moshe. It was a letter. TO RAV YOSEF CHAIM SONNEFELD. Yes, it was. Perhaps you should look at some of the material you say you know so much about.

          The SR was responding to a request from RYCS and the EIdah Hachareidis to assit them in their battle against the Rabbanut. And that abusive letter is what the SR wrote in response. I repeat: It was writte to Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld and the EIdah. It is addressed to them on the top of the letter.


          This is quite entertaining, 🙂

          And what was the Eidah’s reaction? Were they as distured by it as you were? I don’t think so because when RYCS was niftar shortly after that letter was written, THEY OFFERED THE SATMAR RAV THE POSITION AS HEAD OF THE EIDAH FORMERLY HELD BY RAV YOSEF CHAIM!

          Yes, and at that point he declined (he wrote a letter explaining his reason) but years later he accepted.

          So, Garn, your ignorance shows again. Apparently the Eidah and RYCS did not see the same problems with the SR as you did.

          I’m intolerant and abusive? Ha. You’re the one with the fabrications, the ignorance, and … oh my, well, look at it this way … if you want to know more about what the SR was like why don’t you ask his two sons that you claim exist??


          Please come back when you get a clue.

  15. Another forward by my friend who subscribes to Areivim:

    Despite what harry may write on his blog or post on Areivim, one cannot accuse him of see the worst in everyone.. When we were discussing Madonna a couple of weeks ago, he had this to say:

    From: Harry Maryles
    Subject: Re: Madonna desecrating holy sites –

    What ever you say about her, “the material girl” is not a prostitute, which is what the euphemism “a woman of ill repute” means.
    Yep, Satmar rebbe – no but Madonna – Yes!

  16. “””””Well there is the reference to a certain Satmar Dayan being asked what he thought of the book. The quote from him was “If it’s based on Gemaras, I can’t understand the book. If it’s ruach hakodesh, well that’s better.”””””

    Of course no Satmar Dayan ever said such a thing. Documentation please?

    Never mind – I don’t need it. Can’t you see what happened? Your friend obviously distorted the truth again. This Dayan said something to the effect of: I cannot understand how someone could write such an amazing sefer just based on learning. It must have been written with Ruach Hakodesh.

    If you would contest that, I’d ask you for some source.



    Haven’t you had enough?

    And can’t you please bring along Harry so we can have some fun here?

    See, you quoted Shlomo Aviner as saying (which I know he did) that people should learn to have “fun” disproving it.

    I am merely dealing with you as you and your people deal with Gedolim. As a matter of fact, I am treating you better than you treat them – I am not making up stories about you as you. Please bring Harry and all your pals here so we can have some “fun” shredding them as well.

    And if you have any more “stories” please share them. It’s wonderful for people to see how uneducated, ignorant, and dishonest you and your friends are.

  17. I would suggest that all commentators here who share my outrage over Harry’s bizayon of a Talmid Chochom and Kadosh go over to his blog and tell him so. The reason is because he is convinced that mainstream charedi thought is closer to him than to me and he bases alot of that mistaken belief on the supposedly charedi comments he gets.

    Respectfully, but strongly, make your case and let him begin to realize that mainstream charedim disagree vehemently with much of what he writes and those charedim that he speaks to are on the left fringe, if charedim at all.

Comments are closed.