|'Rashbam's commentary to Psalms' - which may not have been written by Rashbam.|
BETWEEN RESPONSA AND RIDICULE:
|The old Synagogue in Satanow (Picture from 1910)|
|Picture taken ninety-nine years later in 2009|
|R.Tzvi Hirsch Berlin's glosses to the Vilna Shas (mentioning in parenthesis that he was a grandchild of the Chacham Tzvi).|
|R. Isaac Satanow's Siddur, Vayetar Yitzchak, published by Chevrat Chinuch Ne'arim 1785|
|1795 Berlin KUZARI with commentary by R. Isaac Satanov.|
Then, in another work, R. Satanow is also referenced as advocating 'gashem', except that in this instance, his name is not mentioned. He is simply referred to as 'someone from Berlin, who published a siddur called Vayetar Yitzchak.'
|From Tzlotah deAvraham, by R. Avraham Landau, 1789-1875.|
[I don't know if I'm imagining it but when I looked at the online version of his Siddur, the page referring to 'gashem' was missing and all I could see was the next page beginning with:
It was one word out. Perhaps it was just an incomplete text?]
|R. Saul Berlin's allegedly fraudulent Besamim Rosh, with his own commentary Kasa deHarsena.|
(It would be fascinating to understand why R. Saul Berlin 'got away' with his alleged forgery of Besamim Rosh, whereas R. Isaac Satanow was treated much harsher by history for effectively the same thing.)
Another point that must be made in the interest of fairness is that R. Satanow openly acknowledged in his publication of Rambam's Commentary to Psalms that:
"I advise that the manuscript from which I copied was eaten through, at timed half leaves, other times entire leaves. Therefore the reader should be aware that most of the commentary is mine. And the rule is that if the reader sees something good, he should attribute it to the rabbi (Rashbam), - and if an error, it is my error."
In light of this clear acknowledgement, it does seem unfair to label him as a forger.