Satmar & Chabad Relations (cont'd)

A story is told, when the pamphlet "Neturei Karta", once published in Jerusalem, reached the desk of the Previous Rebbe, he handed it to his son-in-law (the Rebbe) and said, "Take your newspaper".

He said this because the Rebbe supported Satmar chassidim, and it's known he sent them funds as well.

Also well known is what the Rebbe said about Satmar's activities in Israel, that "if the 'Neturei Karta' would not be doing the 'dirty work', then we would have to do it instead." (eg, the protests against building on graveyards, protests against Shabbat desecrations, and many more protests against the many forms of Zionist sacrilege.)

After Zalman Shazar, the 3rd president of Israel, had a private audience with the Rebbe, one of many, Shazar said he felt as if the Rebbe was much more aggressively overzealous for strict orthodoxy than the Previous Rebbe; Furthermore, he said, had the Previous Rebbe not established a Chabad community in Israel (Kfar Chabad), he doubted whether the Rebbe would ever have taken such a step.

Rabbi Geldzeiler, from Lakewood, confided to Rabbi Rapp of Brooklyn that he once showed the Rebbe a booklet he composed of his Torah findings. Passing by the Rebbe, he told him that the Satmar Rebbe had also reviewed it. He said it and tried to swallow his words. The Rebbe then said to him, "You don't have to mention the Satmar Rebbe with a frown. You should know he's a friend of mine and I'm a friend of his. As for our differences, these were caused by 'Datan and Aviram'".

Neturei Karta Revisited

A Brooklyn rabbi told over a story he heard 2 weeks ago from a Satmar Chassid:

"It happened back then, when some took the name of 'Neturei Karta', and spoke in favor of the Arabs who were fighting in Eretz Yisrael and against the Jews. In response to this the Satmar Rebbe (זצ‫'‬ל) [Rabbi Yoel] delivered a talk before his congregants and said: In the prayer of Shmona Esrei, in the paragraph of ולמלשינים [informers], even before we get to the part that speaks about the "heretics" and the "deniers", we first mention the worst of these, the "informers" - that is, those who talk against Jews with the enemy, י‫'‬ש; They are the first who must be negated, and only thereafter do we request renunciation of heretics and deniers.

"Included in this negativity is the disgrace that so small a faction can bring to the Neturei Karta."

(We spoke earlier of the Neturei Karta, and if any one is under the impression they are a multitude, I want to correct the impression. This bunch that seeks audience with the likes of Arafat or Ahmedinajhad, even hugging and kissing them, comprise no more than a dozen or two chassidim. Most Neturei Karta chassidim disapprove of this shameful behavior.

But don't expect the vermin in the Western liberal press to forego this photo opportunity to belittle the Jews when it presents itself.)

Neturei Karta & Chabad - A Reason for Conciliation

Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum, of blessed memory, the illustrious Satmar Rebbe, opposed the Zionist movement and its exploits. He based his opposition on three Halachic prohibitions derived from the gemora (Ksuvos 111a), expressed in Shir HaShirim (2:7) as oaths taken by God, namely:
1) Jews musn't go to the Holy Land en masse, in a forceful way;
2) Jews musn't rebel against their government while in exile; and
3) Jews musn't further distance the redemptive era.

These "3 oaths" characterize for the Neturei Karta their vigorous arguments vis-a-vis the present Israeli situation. (They comprise an offshoot of the Satmar Chassidim. In fact, they themselves comprise two schools of thought - whether or not to embrace the haters of Israel).

The first oath relates to Jews having purposefully gone to Israel en masse to set up a government and nation. I, for one, don't quite understand where else the remnant Jewry of Europe could all have gone. Most doors were bolted shut. Perhaps the oath meant to stay in Europe, or go elsewhere, or go to Israel in small groups; I don't know what alternative plans this Rebbe had for his followers and for Jewry at large. I only know that my parents, a"h, who survived the holocaust, could not remain in Europe because despite the war coming to an end, the hatred for Jews remained palpable nevertheless. But so be it, let's say there was another route to take instead of going en masse up to Israel.

The second oath, which prohibits rebellion against the foreign element, also was breached, in that they set up a nation, set up a military to fight and kill the enemy. The oath implied Gentiles were meant to control the Jews, and not have a Jewish nation of self-rule that automatically entails opposing the Gentiles on the land.

The 3rd oath, not to forestall the redemptive era, also was violated because Jews did not wait for Moshiach. They took matters into their own hands by saying, "We'll set up an army, we'll guard the Jewish people, we don't have to wait for Moshiach because, in fact, we have our own Messianic agenda." In fact, Herzl was often referred to as "King of the Jews". And in fact, they took the verse, "And let our eyes behold Your return to Zion", which orthodox Jews say during prayers thrice a day, and plastered it next to a picture of Herzl, making it clear their vision of Zionism meant to supplant the orthodox portents of Moshiach.

On 4 Tammuz 5740 (June 18 1980), when asked by the Admor of Sadigora (Rabbi Avraham Yakov Friedman) about these "3 oaths", the Lubavitcher Rebbe answered in words different than I bring here, but the idea is the same. You can find his answer in the book, "שיח שרפי קודש", recently published (p. 280); The book transcribes the conversations the Lubavitcher Rebbe had with rabbinic giants. As I understood it, there is a situation wherein you musn't, at first, do something, and then there is another situation where, if you already did do it, other laws apply. In other words, the new circumstances call for a different approach. For example, on Shabbos you must not pick up "Muktzeh". But if you happened to pick it up anyway, you now have other laws that apply; You now needn't drop it immediately. These relate to cases or laws of "לכתחילה" and "בדיעבד".

It may well be the 3 oaths applied originally, before the Zionists did what they did. Whether or not Chabad held these three oaths as binding I'm not sure, because in his authoritative book of the Jewish Code of Law, Maimonides makes no mention of them - but I doubt they would have disagreed with the Satmar Rav's ruling. But, explains the Rebbe, the matter is an altogether different matter today, where the 3 oaths are no longer a concern, because now another major factor supercedes them - that of "פיקוח נפש" - saving lives, and that today becomes the paramount issue! Today, because we find ourselves in Israel surrounded by enemies, the laws that come to bear, at the forefront, must take "saving lives" into foremost consideration, leaving the others irrelevant.