Page 1 - [see page image]

Teshome G. Wagaw
FOR OUR SOUL
ETHIOPIAN
IN ISRAEL
V

Page 2 - [see page image]

FOR OUR SOUL

Page 3 - [see page image]

Page 4 - [see page image]

FOR OUR SOUL
ETHIOPIAN JEWS IN ISRAEL
Teshome G. Wagaw
WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS
DETROIT

Page 5 - [see page image]

Copyright © 1993 by Wayne State University Press, Detroit, Michigan 48202.
All material in this work, except as identified below, is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of
this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/.
All material not licensed under a Creative Commons license is all rights reserved.
Permission must be obtained from the copyright owner to use this material.
Humanities
MELLON
FOUNDATION
The publication of this volume in a freely accessible digital format has been made
possible by a major grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities and
the Mellon Foundation through their Humanities Open Book Program.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA
Wagaw, Teshome G., 1930-
Tor our soul : Ethiopian Jews in Israel / Teshome G. Wagaw.
p. cm.—(Jewish folklore and anthropology series)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-8143-4410-1 (paperback), 978-0-8143-4394-5 (ebook)
1. Jews, Ethiopian—Israel—History. 2. Ethiopia—Emigration and Immigration—History.
3. Israel—Emigration and immigration—History. 4. Immigration—Israel—History.
5. Israel—Ethnic relations. I. Title. II. Series.
DS113.8.T34W34 1993
956.94'004924063—dc20 93-7494
DESIGNER | S. R. TENENBAUM
Exhaustive efforts were made to obtain permission for use of material in this text.
Any missed permissions resulted from a lack of information about the material,
copyright holder, or both. If you are a copyright holder of such material, please
contact WSUP at wsupressrights@wayne.edu.
http://wsupress.wayne.edu/

Page 6 - [see page image]

for TSEHAI WOLDE-TSADIK

Page 7 - [see page image]

Jewish Folklore and Anthropology Series
GENERAL EDITOR
Raphael Patai

Page 8 - [see page image]

Contents
Preface ix
1
Introduction and Historical Background 1
2
Israel as an Absorbing State 30
3
The Journey and Settlement 53
4
The Beleaguered Family in Transition 72
5
Setting Up Home 91
6
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity 108
7
Primary Education 130
8
Postprimary Education and Training 154
9
Adult and Continuing Education 191
10
Community, Race, Modernity, and Work 215
11
Epilogue 233
Notes 245 Glossary 272
Bibliography 275 Index 287

Page 9 - [see page image]

Page 10 - [see page image]

IX
Preface
❖
My family and I left our home
land, Ethiopia, in the summer of 1974, just for a year of sabbatical
leave from Addis Ababa University (then known as Haile Selassie I
University), where I had held various positions as professor and ad
ministrator for eight years. We never went back. A week after we left
Addis Ababa, the Emperor was deposed by a military junta, as we had
expected, but that did not matter, we thought. What mattered was
the continued worsening of the political situation under the new mili
tary regime which later declared that it had adopted the Marxist-
Leninist philosophy for the country. Among many other professional
and family affairs, several of my research projects were interrupted.
I have been hoping to return to Ethiopia “next year.” Next year
was to arrive seventeen years later in the summer of 1991.
Deprived of the opportunity to serve the society that has a legiti
mate claim on me directly in the areas of my qualifications, I had felt
on several occasions emotionally, if not professionally, unfulfilled.
When the news of the Beta Israel migration began to filter, I saw an
opportunity to get involved. I had been to Israel in 1969 at the invita
tion of the Government, and I had long standing appreciation for the
unique development efforts exerted by the people of that brave little

Page 11 - [see page image]

PREFACE
country, but I had never seen an opportunity to stay there and work.
That awareness came at the beginning of 1980 with the mass immi
gration of Ethiopians to Israel.
When I first visited the migrants in Israel in the summer of 1985,1
felt I had come home. These were people I could understand and
with whom I felt at home. Although not Beta Israel myself, I am from
the same area and similar rural conditions most of them come from.
Our language and general culture are similar. I grew up knowing some
of the kids in the fields where we played together and tended our cat
tle. Later on, I had taught in a region in which some students were
Beta Israel. At high school some were my classmates, later at college
level I came to know some as my students. The sentiments derived
from such experiences eventually led me to undertake the present in
vestigation. I found the venture very rewarding.
Undertakings such as this require the cooperation and support of
many experts. I was fortunate in having been able to enlist the sup
port of so many talented people from both the United States and Is
rael. An attempt to list them all will, I am certain, remain incomplete.
I will mention only the major ones. I would like to thank the late pro
fessors Wilbur Cohen and William Haber, deans emeriti in the School
of Education and in the College of Literature, Science and the Arts of
the University of Michigan, respectively. They were kind enough to
commend and introduce me enthusiastically to Israeli officials, which
proved to be invaluable. Once in the field, I was lucky to secure the
support and mentorship of Professor Chaim Adler of the Hebrew
University. His active support and encouragement during the field
work and continued interest since proved very valuable for the suc
cess of my work. I’d like to thank Dr. Steve Kaplan, also of the He
brew University, a specialist in the history of Ethiopian religions, for
his support and help in paving the way for my research. Dr. Haim and
Esther Rosen were constant friends and confidants during my long
months of work in Israel. We traveled together to the fields on sev
eral occasions, and their knowledge of the many issues the immi
grants were facing in Israel was invaluable to me. Dr. Zev Klein, then
director of the School of Education of the Hebrew University, was
very helpful. Dr. Shalva Weil, Pnina Golan-Cook, Jemaneh Yosef,
and Joan Chase also were of much help. Ato Rahimim Yitshak, an
educator of long standing in both Ethiopia and Israel, contributed to
my understanding of the issues of the Beta Israel in the area of educa
tion. Ato Akiva Elias, one of the young men who had obtained his

Page 12 - [see page image]

XI
Preface
education in Israel in the 1950s, had returned to Ethiopia to work for
twenty-one years in many capacities, and now was back in Israel
doing valuable work among his own people, was very generous in
putting his deep understanding of the many issues confronting the
migrants at my disposal. Yani Elchanan, director of the Kiryat Arba
group, was both generous with his time and very pleasant as a col
league and friend. Above all, I would like to record my lasting grati
tude to my friend and former colleague, constant adviser, confidant,
and supporter, Dr. R. B. Schmerl, formerly of the University of Mich
igan and now with the University of Hawaii, who generously shared
his vast knowledge of Israel and his editorial skills. Dr. Mary R.
Achatz, then my assistant at the University of Michigan, went beyond
the call of duty by applying her many scholarly talents and technical
skills to stimulate and help refine my thinking regarding methods and
instruments of investigation; at a later stage, she was the first person
who saw the draft pages as they came off my word processor and
gave them acceptable form. I owe her a debt of enduring gratitude.
My wife, Tsehai Wolde-Tsadik, once again bore much of the family
responsibilities during my long absences. I thank her for her forbear
ance and support.
At the institutional level, I am proud to acknowledge the generous
support of my own institution, the University of Michigan, which
provided invaluable support through the Office of the Academic Vice
President for Research. The monies I received at critical times en
abled me to undertake timely fieldwork and raise additional funds to
carry out even bigger projects. The grant of the Senior Faculty Schol
arship I received from the Fulbright program helped me to stay in the
field for a period of one year. The School of Education at the He
brew University of Jerusalem where I was located for most of the year
provided essential office space, supplies, and some funding towards a
student assistantship. I thank the Annenberg Institute of Philadelphia
which afforded excellent opportunity during my fellowship there to
devote considerable time completing the analysis of data. I am in
debted to these institutions. I also thank my editor at Wayne State
University Press, Lynn Trease, for her gentle guidance throughout the
long process of publication.
Finally, my thanks to the Beta Israel immigrants themselves who
graciously admitted me fully into their world. It stands to reason,
however, that any shortcomings found in this volume are the respon
sibilities of none other than myself.

Page 13 - [see page image]

Page 14 - [see page image]

l
CHAPTER ONE
❖
Introduction and Historical Background
❖
In the central part of northern
Ethiopia, mainly around Lake Tana—the source of the Blue Nile—as
well as in the surrounding Semien Mountains and in parts of southern
Tigray and Wollo provinces, live small communities of Jewish people
who throughout history have been known by a variety of names. The
people among whom they have resided have called them kayla (a
Semitic term that is not necessarily derogatory), taib (a name perhaps
derived from the Amharic term tebib, meaning one who is skilled or
clever, but, as we shall see later, associated with another expression,
buda, a person with the “evil eye”), bale-ij (meaning one who is clever
with his or her hands), and, in more recent centuries, Beta Israel (of
the house of Israel). To most outsiders, they are known as the Fa-
lasha, a term derived from the Ge’ez or Amharic (the ancient and
modem languages of Ethiopia) root of meflas, meaning to uproot.
Given their historical claim to descent from King Menelik I, the son
of King Solomon and Queen Makeda, the queen of Ethiopia or Sheba
who came from Jerusalem, the term might be appropriate. But in re
cent years, educated members of the group have rejected it, preferring
to be called either Beta Israel or simply Ethiopian Jews. That prefer-

Page 15 - [see page image]

2
FOR OUR SOUL
ence will be respected in this volume except when historical explana
tion requires other terms.
Over the period of 1977 to 1992, practically all Ethiopian Jews
have migrated to Israel on the basis that they, like all other Jews of
the world, were entitled to take advantage of the Law of Return. 1
This book analyzes their immigration to and absorption into Israel.
The analysis is based on original data collected during fieldwork over
a period of several years, updated to 1992.
FRAMEWORK OF INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS
The definition of migration in
cludes the act of physical transition from one social setting to another
and different setting. For religious, political, economic, or cultural
reasons, an individual, alone or with others such as family members
or people with similar identities or objectives, abandons one society
in favor of another. This transition involves a complete change and
disorganization of the individual’s role system, including his or her
social identity, status, and self-image. 2 In other words, the individual
leaves that which is cognitively, emotionally, and socially familiar for
another setting that is either unknown or vaguely imagined and in
which the psychological realities are markedly different from those
left behind. Migrants face the formidable challenge of unlearning past
roles which the new situation has rendered obsolete; modifying their
self-images, perceptions of their status, and future expectations; and
otherwise learning new sets of attitudes and skills that will enable
them to assume new roles as required by the receiving society. De
pending on what other experiences have preceded migration, such as
some prior knowledge of the language or some other cultural ac
quaintances or affinities with the receiving society, upon arrival mi
grants must begin to reorganize their cognitive as well as emotional
maps and learn new sets of cultural codes, language, and conventions
as though life were beginning for the first time. This is done at a time
when their accustomed circles of contact, and roles (the vehicles of
social interaction that anchor individual and social identity as well as
self-esteem), are shrinking. Their self-images of competence, ability,
and responsibility regarding work, family, and community shrink or
become altered. The degree of disorientation and confusion depends

Page 16 - [see page image]

3
Introduction and Historical Background
on their previous experiences, level of education or skills, age, degree
of aspiration propelling them toward the receiving society, and the
quality of their reception upon arrival in the new setting.
The literature on migration, immigrant absorption, and human ad
justment or transformation suggests a variety of theories and para
digms one might use to structure an inquiry. Most incorporate, with
varying degrees of emphasis, the concepts of role and identity, cogni
tive mapping, learning and unlearning, or socialization and desociali
zation, as well as social transformation. The works of Eisenstadt, 3 Er-
ikson, 4 Merton, 5 Bar-Yosef, 6 and others have some bearing here,
though none is singularly complete with respect to all aspects of mi
gration and absorption. The analytic framework adduced by Eisen
stadt, 7 with modifications as necessary for the specific purposes of
this inquiry, will be adopted to analyze the migration and absorption
processes of the Beta Israel. The variables that may be helpful in the
study of the sociological and psychological nature of the processes of
immigration and absorption include: (1) the nature of the initial crisis
in the society of origin which gave rise to the feelings of inadequacy
or insecurity that precipitated motivation to migrate; (2) the social
structure of the immigration process, the formation of the group in
which that process is realized, and the basic orientation as well as
roles of the members; (3) the process of institutionalization of immi
grant behavior in the new country, including the new roles and values
accepted and performed by the groups and the various degrees to
which they participate in and are identified with in the new social set
ting (attention should also be given to the characteristics and plat
forms of the various leaders who emerge as a result of the transfor
mation of the immigrant groups); (4) institutionalization of the
immigrants as viewed from the vantage point of the absorbing soci
ety, description of the range of possibilities open to the immigrants
and the institutional demands made upon them, and estimation of the
compatibility of these with the immigrants’ role expectations or abili
ties; (5) the extent to which the pluralistic structure of a specific type
of immigrant community or communities emerges—its scope and
direction should be considered and then reviewed from the point of
view of the types of roles (universals, particularisms, and alternatives)
allocated within the absorbing society; and (6) the extent to which
different types of disintegrative behavior or normlessness develop on
the part of both the immigrants and the inhabitants of the absorbing
society, and what the provisions or possibilities are for institutional
reorganization and change in the absorbing society.

Page 17 - [see page image]

4
FOR OUR SOUL
Measures of progress toward successful absorption include the ex
tent to which the immigrants become dispersed in the new setting
along the continuum of social and economic life in the society; the
degree to which they participate in and contribute to the economic,
social, or religious life of the larger society; and the extent to which
they are able to achieve an increasing sense of accomplishment and
self-fulfillment. These do not suggest, however, that the immigrants
will abandon their primary group. Rather, the primary group, while
fulfilling certain expectations, also makes it possible for the immi
grants to reach out and become an integral part of the larger society.
In the course of this process, one can expect that individuals will vac
illate between the primary group for shelter and sustenance, espe
cially in times of personal crisis, and the larger, absorbing society, to
ward which they will continue to move. Note that these premises are
based on the conventions and expectations of the particular society—
in this case, that society is Israel, which as a rule measures absorption
in terms of the unitary or “melting pot” framework as opposed to the
pluralistic framework increasingly accepted in other societies such as
Canada and the United States.
IN THE LAND OF ORIGIN
In the context of Ethiopia, which
is known as a “museum of people,” the existence of any community
of people, exotic or otherwise, large or small, is not unusual. Simply
stated, there are scores of groupings across the land speaking a wide
variety of languages, practicing different religions, worshiping differ
ent gods, and engaging in different occupations. Perhaps for this rea
son, Ethiopian writers have not said much about the Jews in their
country. Most references are to the effective resistance they put up
throughout history to the nation’s central powers as well as to those
occasions when they assumed power over the nation. Their unique
identities in Ethiopia are based first, on the type of religion they had
followed for more than two and a half millennia as Jews (although
this specific appellation is not necessarily known or understood by
most of the local non-Jewish community) who also happened to be
black, and, second, on the kinds of occupations they practiced, al
though they were not alone in those occupations. But it is more logi-

Page 18 - [see page image]

5
Introduction and Historical Background
cal to say that their occupational identities followed the religious one,
since religion (in this case, the practice of non-Christian religion) was
the excuse used for the treatment they received at the hands of the
majority of the society which eventually led to their adoption and
practice of certain occupations. For all practical purposes, except for
their religion, the Beta Israel are indistinguishable from the other peo
ple among whom they live in physical appearance, and the way they
dress, prepare their foods, construct their houses, and otherwise con
duct their daily lives. Ethiopian records document, albeit scantily,
their social, religious, and political history; the battles they fought and
won or lost against various medieval rulers in Ethiopia; and the mili
tary and political techniques they deployed in their efforts to preserve
their identities. Once conquered on the battlefield, however, they
were denied ownership of land, vital in a peasant society. In their ef
forts to survive, they became artisans producing goods and entering
occupations necessary in the community but whose practitioners
were despised. In the course of time, economic circumstances ema
nating from their landlessness forced them to become an occupa
tional caste and outcasts as well. As alluded to above, however, nei
ther the larger Ethiopian community outside the immediate areas
where the Beta Israel lived nor the outside world knew very much
about them. What follows is a brief sketch of their origin, history,
and religious and occupational practices in the context of Ethiopia.
Readers wishing to learn more about the life of the Beta Israel, or
about Ethiopia in general, are referred to the bibliography at the end
of the book.
HISTORY AND ORIGIN
The history of the Beta Israel is
surrounded by controversy and legend. Much of what they claim is
not in accord with historical facts, but those facts themselves are
either inconsistent or unable to elucidate many of the difficult ques
tions. The task here is briefly to review what is known, what is
claimed, and what is uncertain, and to indicate what is perhaps
plausible.
The Beta Israel position regarding their history is in accord with
that recorded in the Kibre Negest (“Glory of the Kings”), which

Page 19 - [see page image]

6
MAP 1. Ethiopia in relation to its African and Middle East neighbors
Ullendorff 8 refers to as the Ethiopian equivalent of the Talmud, the
legendary source that seeks to trace, account for, and legitimize the
history of the Ethiopian version of the Solomonic dynasty. 9 Accord
ing to that account, the legendary Queen Makeda (Sheba), the queen
of Ethiopia, in union with King Solomon, conceived a son who be
came Menelik I, the king of Ethiopia. The young man was raised and

Page 20 - [see page image]

7
Introduction and Historical Background
trained in Jerusalem. When the time arrived for him to return to as
sume the kingship of Ethiopia, his father arranged for some Jewish
nobles, priests, and guards to accompany him. The Ethiopian Jews,
then, are descendants of these people, who presumably intermarried
with indigenous local people. The legend of King Solomon and the
queen of Sheba is, of course, woven into Judaism, Christianity, and Is
lam. The Ethiopian version adds that when the priests were asked to
leave Jerusalem to accompany young Menelik, they stole the original
tablets containing the Ten Commandments (the Ark of the Cove
nant), which they then placed in the holy city of Axum, where, ac
cording to legend, it remains to this day. 10 While most of the Ethio
pian kings and emperors trace their lineage to this source, so do the
Beta Israel. Perhaps it is this belief that led them time and again into
trouble, defeat, and humiliation as they tried to wrest their freedom
from the rulers of highland Ethiopia during the Middle Ages.
The legend goes back to about 900 b.c., when King Solomon was
ruler of Jerusalem. The prophet Zephaniah, a contemporary of the
prophet Jeremiah who lived more than six hundred years before
Christ, refers to Jews living beyond the River Nile and its tributary
the Atbara (the Tekazai River of modem Ethiopia). 11 This description
fits well both the geographical location where the Beta Israel are
found and the historical claim made by them. For the most part, the
main centers of the Beta Israel were around the Semien Mountains,
just south of the Tekazai River. 12 In addition, there are several refer
ences in the Old Testament to the region of Cush, which included
what is today modem Ethiopia. One account describes Miriam, the
wife of Moses, as Ethiopian. The account relates that Moses’ sister
was “angry” that he married. But was she angry simply because he
married, or was she angry because he married an Ethiopian, someone
ethnically different? The story of the Ethiopian official who was bap
tized by the apostle Philip while he was on an official visit to Jerusa
lem also indicates the existence of a Jewish community in Ethiopia
before the Christian era. 13
Documentary and archaeological evidence suggests that before the
Axumite Kingdom accepted Christianity as the religion of the court in
the fourth century, Judaism and heathenism (worship of the serpent)
existed side by side. It seems heathenism was rampant among the up
per classes while Judaism was strong among the agew (indigenous
people) and the lower classes.
Historians are not in agreement about the authenticity of the leg
ends, for there are other possibilities to account for the existence of a

Page 21 - [see page image]

8
FOR OUR SOUL
Jewish community in this part of Africa. One is that the Beta Israel
are descendants of local people who converted when they came into
contact with Jews from southern Arabia, particularly from Yemen,
where there was a thriving community of Jews and where Ethiopia
ruled for some time. Considering the very close proximity of Ethiopia
to Yemen and the similarities in many cultural and physical referents,
this seems very plausible. Some others adduce the existence of Jews in
Elephantine who were either remnants from the old Israelites of
Egypt or latecomers who traveled throughout the Horn of Africa and
converted some Ethiopian agew to Judaism. This, too, is a possibil
ity. 14
RELATIONS WITHIN ETHIOPIA
Ethiopia long has been considered
an anomaly among nations. Along with Japan and Iran, it is one of
the oldest continuous nations in the world. This long and indepen
dent life, however, came with a price which included isolationism—
both forced and self-imposed. Ethiopia is located in northeast Africa
in close proximity to Middle Eastern nations that have contributed to
its culture but in recent centuries also have become increasingly hos
tile because of Ethiopia’s religion and affiliations with Christian pow
ers. It has been subjected to intrigues from European powers during
the scramble for colonies in Africa. Its many internal conflicts and
civil wars kept it busy and alone for a long time. Ethiopian religious
and political institutions tended to become defensive, ossified, con
servative, and unresponsive to emerging realities around them. Ethio
pia’s monotheistic religious institutions—Judaism, Christianity, and
Islam—must be viewed in this light.
Ethiopian calendars often are reckoned in terms of victories and
defeats in war and battles usually associated with the reigning monar
chies. Therefore, Ethiopian chronicles record the existence of the
Beta Israel in the context of the many skirmishes and battles they en
gaged in against the rulers of the day. Seldom have the Beta Israel
been studied by Ethiopians in their own right. This pattern of neglect
also applies to many of the other religious and ethnic or linguistic
groups of the country, including much larger ones.
Ethiopian history relates that during the tenth century, the Jews
under the leadership of Queen Judit (Gudit, or “the monstrous one”)

Page 22 - [see page image]

MAP 2. Villages of Beta Israel origin in Ethiopia

Page 23 - [see page image]

10
FOR OUR SOUL
destroyed Axum and pillaged many of the monasteries and Christian
institutions in other parts of highland Ethiopia. 15 This was not their
only major rebellion, nor was she the only leader of high stature.
During the reign of Amede Tsion (1314-1344), when the kingdom
was involved in a war against a group of Muslim principalities on its
eastern and southern boundaries, a group of Beta Israel who had been
forced to convert to Christianity rebelled and caused trouble for the
king, whereupon he responded with further force and additional con
version. Other Beta Israel groups continued to resist the king and pro
vided sanctuary to dissidents. Thus, during the reign of King Dawit I
(1382-1411), the Beta Israel accepted into their fold a dissenting
monk by the name of Qozmos who abandoned Christianity to adopt
the Jewish faith. Eventually, the apostate monk introduced monasti-
cism, an honored institution among Ethiopian Christians but alien to
the Jews. Difficulties between the emperors and the Beta Israel con
tinued throughout the next two centuries.
It appears that during the reign of Yeshaq (1412-1429), the Beta Is
rael gained control over much of Begemider and Semian (present-day
Gondar region). Following that, during the reign of Zara Yakov
(1434-1468), one of the most learned if not one of the crudest kings,
conflict continued to rage when the Jews gave refuge to one of his
rebellious sons, Abba Tsegga, apparently a monk, as the title Abba
indicates. Zara Yakov was a fanatically religious man who did not
hesitate to put his own children to death for suspicion that they wor
shiped idols. During his reign, many pagans and Jews alike were
forced to convert to Christianity. Apparently many of these
“converts” resorted to their original religions, forcing the king to or
der his armies to march against the Beta Israel of Tselemit, Gondar,
and Semien. 16
During the ensuing years, Ethiopia was embroiled in war against
the lowland Muslims, which eventually led to the Portuguese being
invited to come to the rescue of a Christian monarch. During the wars
against the Muslims, the Beta Israel seem to have played ambiguous
roles—at one time resisting the Muslims, at another time banding to
gether with them to undermine the king. The coming of the Portu
guese, however, seems to have restored the upper hand in favor of the
king. When the king ordered and received cannons from Portugal,
the fate of the Beta Israel was sealed. Some decades later, when King
Minas assumed power (1559-1563), the Beta Israel rebelled once
again. This time, however, they not only successfully defended their
stronghold of Semien but also, for a time, occupied Woggera further

Page 24 - [see page image]

Introduction and Historical Background
south. Mina’s son and successor, Sarsa Dangal (1563-1597), contin
ued the wars against the Beta Israel, who stubbornly fought back and
burned their crops rather than let them fall into enemy hands.
The reign of Sarsa Dangal continued to be problematic. He even
tually ordered and received men and cannons to fight against the in
vading Muslims under the leadership of Ahmad ibn Ibraham el Ghazi
(nicknamed Gran, or the “left-handed one”) from Portugal. Although
the Beta Israel continued to fight with tenacity using the mountain as
their shield, their efforts were increasingly futile. In the meantime, Za
Dangal was killed in a battle against a rival from Dembia and after
some skirmishes was finally succeeded by Emperor Susenyos. In 1615,
Susenyos (1607-1632), who, like his predecessor Za Dangal (1603-
1604), was suspected of having accepted the Roman Catholic faith
under the guidance of the Jesuits who had come in the footsteps of
the Portuguese expeditionary force to fight against the Muslim invad
ers on the side of Ethiopia, was being attacked from several quarters
and was having great difficulty holding the empire together. The be
sieged ruler decided to administer a decisive blow against the Beta Is
rael. This time, the excuse was that the Beta Israel had provided sanc
tuary to one of his rebellious sons. The Beta Israel fought back
against a weakened king and nearly succeeded. Later, the emperor
ordered the extinction of the Beta Israel from Lake Tana to the bor
ders of the Semien. Battles with the Beta Israel continued, off and on,
until the forces of Susenyos finally prevailed and the Beta Israel sur
rendered. There is no way of knowing the extent of the massacre, but
it must have been massive. One wonders how much of this phase of
their persecution was the result of influences from Europe. The Por
tuguese Jesuits surely had brought their views of the proper relation
ship between the Church and the Jews, especially in the Iberian penin
sula, with them to Africa. It is not impossible that this king decided
such measures were what he needed at this juncture, for prior to this
contact there is no information of large-scale massacres against the
Beta Israel. At any rate, although the Jews obviously were not entirely
wiped out, the massacres and defeat led to their dispersion over a
wider area. They spread to Quara, Aramchiho, and Damot, where
hitherto there had been only small communities. Large numbers re
mained in Dembia, Wolqait, and Woggera, and other isolated groups
of Beta Israel were scattered over large areas in the region. Emperor
Yohannis I, who reigned between 1668 and 1678, granted some reli
gious freedom (or at least tolerance) to the Muslims and the Jews and
it is during his reign that members of these two minority religions set-
li

Page 25 - [see page image]

12
FOR OUR SOUL
tied in the newly founded capital city of Gondar. Each religious
group occupied a different part of the city. 17
When the Beta Israel finally lost the fight, they also lost their right
to own land. In Ethiopia, land is considered more than the source of
economic well-being. It is the basis of self-identity, the definition of
one’s roots and essence. But life had to continue, and the Beta Israel
began to learn and perfect other skills. They became artisans in a
country where such skills were needed but the practitioners were de
spised. As Payne rightly observes, “Ethiopians have respect for the
farmer and the priest but not craftsmen nor traders. Most of all they
admire the warrior, and their highest titles are military in origin.” 18 He
could have added that the vocation of priesthood is also respected. At
any rate, the Beta Israel played important roles as artisans in the
building of the new capital city of Gondar and continued to become
potters, blacksmiths, weavers, and the like.
A question must be posed here: Were these struggles between
Ethiopian Christians and Jews based on their religious differences
(which surely played a part in the history of Europe’s treatment of the
Jews among them), or were they just another manifestation of a feu
dal society whose internal upheavals and realignments were assumed
to be religious among many other sources of conflict? It is beyond the
scope of this book to answer such a question in detail. But it can be
said that the usual concept of anti-Semitism or even of anti-Jewish
feeling does not enter here. To begin with, the Beta Israel are similar
in physical characteristics to any other Ethiopians among whom they
live. Second, the Ethiopian Christian tradition is passionately attached
to the traditions of the Old Testament (Orit) and prides itself on this
connection. At the political level, most of Ethiopia’s emperors and
kings have sought to trace their lineage through Jewish lines to the
Solomonic root. Even recent kings such as Emperor Tewodros, who
rose to power during the first half of the nineteenth century, would
not tolerate the notion that they were not connected to the Solo
monic line. Tewodros spent considerable energy and talent in pursuit
of establishing his legitimate claim to the Ethiopian crown, and it is
possible that this search contributed to the untimely conclusion of his
reign in 1868. Menelik and Haile Selassie included in their royal ap
pellations Mo-Anbessa Ze-imnegeda Yihuda (“the Lion of the Tribe
of Judah”). This, of course, does not mean that the anti-Semitism of
Europe might not have crept into the thinking of some rulers in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Jesuits ridiculed the prac
tices of Ethiopian Christianity for being closer to Judaism than to

Page 26 - [see page image]

13
Introduction and Historical Background
Christianity as the latter was practiced by the Catholic church in
southern Europe. Emperor Susenyos, as a suspected convert to Ca
tholicism, may have fallen under their spell when he determinedly
campaigned to “exterminate” the Beta Israel. But on the whole, I be
lieve the Beta Israel suffered severe persecution because they were
stubborn, because they happened to practice a religion that was dif
ferent from others around them, and because they practiced an exclu
sionary life or atinkugtt (“do not touch me”) mentality. This, in turn,
bred suspicion, mistrust, and hatred. The Beta Israel were not the
only ones regarded in this way. 19 There are other religious, ethnic, or
linguistic communities, including Muslim, Kimant (akin to the Beta
Israel yet different from them), Protestant, Catholic, and other small
Christian denominations who practiced exclusion from one another
and who were from time to time subjected to persecution by the
dominant group. One community would not partake of meat slaugh
tered and prepared by the other. Even now, when they come together
at the wedding of a mutual relative or friend, each community keeps
to itself, and food and beverage are served separately. Perhaps be
cause the Beta Israel had lived in Ethiopia longer, were fewer in num
ber, and were more strict in their observances of exclusion, the inten
sity of suspicion and mistrust that led to animosity and persecution
was stronger. For that they suffered much.
CONTACT WITH THE OUTSIDE WORLD
By the seventh century, Islam had
overrun the Middle East, parts of Europe, Iran, Egypt, and the north
ern portion of Africa. Ethiopia, however, was spared the onslaught,
temporarily at least, because the king of Ethiopia had provided sanc
tuary to the persecuted followers of the Prophet. But when the Mus
lims eventually occupied the southern portion of the Red Sea, they
cut off the Axumite Kingdom from the rest of the world, making it
increasingly difficult for Ethiopians to maintain and conduct diplo
matic as well as commercial intercourse with the larger, outside
world. Hence, for some nine hundred years between the ninth and
seventeenth centuries, Ethiopia was almost completely isolated,
prompting English historian Edward Gibbons to declare that Ethiopia
slept for nearly a thousand years, forgetful of the world that had for-

Page 27 - [see page image]

14
FOR OUR SOUL
gotten it. 20 However, these centuries were not uneventful. For one
thing, both Christians and Jews were forced to look inward regarding
the problem of maintaining and advancing their respective religious
principles. The Christians stayed with the many tenets of the teach
ings of the Old Testament, as they also developed their own litera
tures on the interpretation of these and the New Testament teach
ings. The Jews did the same with the Orit (Torah). Also during these
centuries of isolation, it is likely that these two monotheistic religions
continued to borrow many religious conventions from each other.
Outsiders, both Christians and Jews, remarked about the primitive
ness of these religions, meaning that their practices were much closer
to those of earlier times—in the case of the Jews, the Temple period;
in that of the Christians, the practices of the second through fifth
centuries a.d. This certainly could not be denied. But in addition, both
communities did create or adopt works of interpretations and were
involved in theological expansion.
For centuries the Beta Israel thought they were the only Jews in
the world. They yearned for their return to Jerusalem which they
thought would be possible after the coming of the black Messiah,
who would reign in Ethiopia and later establish his kingdom in Jeru
salem, where final fulfillment would be consummated. 21 Likewise, for
centuries, the outside world was hardly aware of the existence of
these Jews in the heart of Africa. The first person from outside Ethio
pia to mention the Beta Israel was a Jewish traveler, Eldad the Danite,
in the ninth century. He thought the Beta Israel were part of the Ten
Lost Tribes of Israel. This report was followed by other travelers such
as Benjamin of Tudela in the twelfth century and Elijah of Ferrara in
the fifteenth. Most of the reports were based on hearsay and lacked
historical bases. 22 Throughout the Middle Ages, Ethiopia was known
as the country of the legendary Prester John and was also where the
Ten Lost Tribes were supposed to be residing.
The Scottish traveler James Bruce interviewed some Beta Israel
during his travels in Gondar between 1770 and 1771. When he re
turned home, he wrote an extensive report concerning what he had
learned about the society in the Gondar region, including the Beta Is
rael whom he identified as black Jews. His report, which was not
published until 1790, aroused the curiosity of many in Europe. But
the next report, that of the Frenchman Antoine d’Abbadie, did not
appear until 1840.
The reports of black Jews generated considerable interest among
the Christians of Europe. In particular, the initiatives of English mis-

Page 28 - [see page image]

15
Introduction and Historical Background
sionaries such as Stem, and Flad energized the study of the Beta Is
rael. The Christian Missionary Society (CMS), organized in England in
1799, had as its sole purpose to energize the Christian churches in the
Middle East in order to evangelize among the Muslims. Its branch,
the Church’s Ministry among the Jews (CMJ), was established in 1809
and was joined by the Basel Missions from Switzerland and Germany,
who had similar objectives. The first man to travel to Ethiopia under
such missionary sponsorship was well-known church leader Samuel
Gobat. He was followed by Flad and then Stem (a Jewish convert to
Christianity and one of the most successful ones in the field). 23 The
English missionaries concluded an agreement with the Ethiopian gov
ernment to be permitted to proselytize among the Beta Israel. The
converts would be taught according to the traditions of the Ethiopian
Orthodox Church and would become part of the membership of that
church. The missionaries established several schools in different parts
of the region and made their first converts—twenty-one Beta Israel—
in 1861. 24 Meanwhile, the reports the missionaries sent to Europe
aroused some concern among European Jews about the survival of
Beta Israel. 25
In 1867, the Alliance Israelite Universelle sent the noted Semitist
Joseph Halevy to study the situation. He reached Ethiopia when that
country was undergoing one of its hard times. The local princes were
rebelling against Emperor Tewodros II, and the British were consider
ing a military expedition to liberate their diplomatic and missionary
citizens who were imprisoned by the emperor following some misun
derstandings with Queen Victoria. Halevy did manage to reach the
Gondar region, where he visited extensively with the local Beta Israel
people. He listened to what they said about their conditions and the
threats presented by the missionaries. He assured the Beta Israel that
their coreligionists in Europe were very concerned about their contin
ued viability as Jews. 26 Although he entered the country incognito and
was at first suspected of being a Christian missionary, a Turk, or an
English spy, he soon was able to win confidence, as he reports the
many pleasant exchanges of religious views he had with the Beta Is
rael. He notes: “I sat all night with my brother Israelites, and we read
the Bible in the Amharic language.” 27 He made notes on their daily
lives and religious activities, including how they prepared their food,
the types of homes they lived in, their literature, forms of local reli
gious and secular governance, and so on. However, his contact with
the non-Jews of the community must have been indirect or very lim
ited, and what he writes is consistently very derogatory or simply

Page 29 - [see page image]

16
FOR OUR SOUL
could not have been true. Nonetheless, his experience was the antith
esis of that of the Christian missionaries, and on balance the informa
tion we get is useful, the assertions of Leslau 28 and Ullendorff 29 to the
contrary. Halevy concludes: “It was a great pity that the Falashas
should have forgotten the use of the Hebrew text, as the Ge’ez is
crowded with errors and mistranslations, disfiguring the sense of the
Scriptures. In order to purify the religious ideas of this sect it is abso
lutely necessary to introduce among them the study of the Hebrew
language, an advantage which they themselves much desire.” 30
This favorable evaluation that the Beta Israel were indeed Jews,
that they did desire to be in close contact with their coreligionists
elsewhere, that their viability was endangered by both the Christian
missionaries and the local conditions, and that European Jewry
should come to their rescue and help them to revive themselves was
received skeptically. As a result, the sponsors decided to send another
group of fact finders headed by a Turkish Rabbi Haim Nahum. This
mission, however, reported that the Beta Israel people were not Jews,
that they were happy the way they were, and that no further concern
was needed from Europe. 31
In 1904, one of Halevy’s disciples, Jacques Faitlovitch, traveled to
Ethiopia. His report of 1905 was similar to that prepared by Halevy
and promoted much interest in the Jewish community, in both Eu
rope and America. Faitlovitch was to play a very important role in the
history of Ethiopian Jewry. He stayed in the country, teaching and
working, and made representations to Emperor Menelik II on behalf
of the Beta Israel. He established schools for them and sponsored a
group of young men to study in the Middle East and Europe. These
young men later became leaders in their own communities and in the
country.
In the years after World War II, one of the first to travel to Ethio
pia for the specific purpose of studying the Beta Israel was Wolf Les
lau of the University of California. He did much to enlarge knowl
edge of Beta Israel people. Based on information collected in the
course of his fieldwork, he published numerous articles and mono
graphs that remain landmarks in the field.
In recent years, since mobility has become relatively easy, Beta Is
rael children and youth have been traveling to other parts of Ethiopia
in search of schooling and employment. They have been exposed to
the larger issues pertaining to the national community as well as to
their own specific identity. I have seen them in school situations at all
levels as both students and teachers. I know of no way that they were

Page 30 - [see page image]

17
Introduction and Historical Background
singled out for discrimination. 32 Both before the revolution that
brought down the Haile Selassie government and since, the Beta Is
rael youth participated in their share of activities together with young
people from other parts of the country. Had they remained in Ethio
pia, it is quite possible that voluntary assimilation on the part of the
Jewish youth would have threatened the survival of the group. Per
haps this would have accomplished the long-held objectives of both
the Christian missionaries and the Ethiopian government.
RELIGION AND CULTURE
Whether they live as a community
by themselves, as most do, or among the majority, Beta Israel are not
distinguished by their physical characteristics, the clothing they wear,
the food and drink they consume, or the style of their houses. Rather,
the differences lie in their religion and specific religious cultures.
The Beta Israel believe in one supreme God, the God of Israel, or
Egziabher (Lord of the Earth or Creation). They accept not only the
Pentateuch (the five books of Moses) but also the entire Old Testa
ment as Orit (Torah). Over the years, they also have developed their
own books and have adopted some from Ge’ez, Amharic, Arabic, or
Greek sources. They are innocent of the Talmud or Mishna (the oral
laws) which are accepted and practiced by most other Jews (the Sa
maritans and Karaites are in a similar position, but for them it is out
of choice), for the Talmud was developed in Babylonia and Palestine
between the second and fifth centuries of the Christian era when the
Beta Israel were cut off from contact with outsiders. They used no
Hebrew until recent years, which also makes them unique among
other communities of Jews. Their Bible and other religious works are
written in Ge’ez or, more recently, in Amharic, as is the case for their
Christian compatriots. Some of their religious works include Tezaz
Sanbat (Commandments of the Sabbath), Book of the Angels, Testa
ment of Abraham, and Death of Abraham. 33
The Beta Israel were until recent years the only Jews who contin
ued to offer animal sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins. The sacri
fices, which are no longer made, included most of those mentioned in
the Old Testament. 34 The Sabbath, which is celebrated on Saturday, is
strictly observed as commanded in the Orit. The people wash and get

Page 31 - [see page image]

18
FOR OUR SOUL
ready by Friday afternoon; special foods are prepared and served
cold, since it is not permitted to make fire on the holy day. All work
ceases from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday. In contrast
to the practice of other Jews, sexual intercourse is forbidden on the
Sabbath. Indeed, the Beta Israel have given the Sabbath a personality
that is actively engaged on their behalf. They have given it the special
attributes of a woman who is crowned by the angels in heaven each
Sabbath, plays major roles in delivering souls from hell, and acts as
chief mediator on behalf of believers. 35
In addition, they celebrate Passover, Day of Atonement (a day of
fasting), the Festival of Booths which lasts for a week (although they
do not live in booths), and the Pentecost or harvest. The commemo
ration of Skewed is purely their own, which they continue to cele
brate, even after their arrival in Israel. The Beta Israel have never
commemorated any of the postexilic Jewish holidays such as the
feasts of Purim or Hanukkah. Nor do they use prayer shawls or wear
the kippa. They do not practice the bar (or bat) mitzvah when a Jew
ish boy of thirteen becomes initiated as a son of the Law. However,
the Beta Israel do have their own traditional initiation of boys. When
a boy reaches the age of fourteen, he offers gifts of money to a priest,
who then becomes ynefis abat, or the boy’s soul father, for life. In
this way, the boy is initiated into adulthood and accountability.
Nearly every village has a mesgid (place of worship) with one or
three compartments, where villagers, led by their kes or kahin (priest)
and debtra (deacon or cantor), come to worship. The priesthood is
not hereditary and is not restricted to a particular family, as was the
case in the days of the Old Testament. Instead, a priest is elected by
the community and appointed by the high priest. Much of the educa
tion for the priesthood is carried out under the supervision of the
monks and the high priest.
Days of fasting occur from morning until night. At the end of the
day, they can eat anything, including animal products, which is con
trary to the practices of the Christians in Ethiopia, who do not touch
milk, butter, or meat during periods of fast. In matters of food, the
Beat Israel strictly follow the teachings of the Orit and do not eat the
meat of animals that do not chew their cud or have a cloven hoof.
However, they do not follow the rules of not mixing meat and dairy
products as other Jews do.
Jews, Christians and Muslims in Ethiopia do not eat the meat of an
animal slaughtered (yetebareke) by a nonmember of their religion.
Like the others, the Beta Israel are very strict about this.

Page 32 - [see page image]

19
Introduction and Historical Background
Ritual purity is of great concern to the Beta Israel, and as a com
munity they are very clean. As documented by Leslau, 36 the Beta Is
rael consider the following people unclean: a woman during the time
of her menstrual period, a mother in childbirth, a midwife, people
who perform circumcision or excision, people who touch or bury a
corpse, people who touch a grave, people who touch a dead animal,
people who come in physical contact with a non-Beta Israel, and a
priest and his wife after sexual intercourse. People considered un
clean must stay outside the community for a specified number of
days, depending on the degree of impurity. When the period of seclu
sion is over, individuals wash themselves, and their clothes and in
some instances shave their heads. For example, during the menstrual
period, a woman is secluded in a special hut known as yemergetn gojo
(hut of curse or malediction) or simply yedern gojo (hut of blood) for
seven days. At the end of the seclusion, she washes her clothes and
herself and shaves her head before rejoining the family. The same is
done following childbirth. For the duration of forty days if the child
is male and eighty days if female, the mother is confined to a special
hut. During the confinement, she is supplied with food and other ne
cessities by members of the family, but no one is allowed to touch
her. If this happens by accident, the affected person is required to
go through a ritual of purification. At the end of the period of con
finement, the woman washes her clothes and body before rejoining
the family.
Regarding marriage, the practices of the Beta Israel are similar to
those of others in surrounding areas. The parents and relatives of the
groom select the prospective bride, usually at a very early age, and the
groom and bride as a rule do not see each other before the wedding
night. Although divorce occurs frequently, there is no special Beta Is
rael law that governs divorce. Divorce for a priest is a sin. When it is
discovered that a bride is not a virgin on the wedding night, divorce is
justified, even for a priest, and is sufficient grounds for excommuni
cation from the community. Virginity is certified either by a group of
elderly women who examine the bride on the night before the wed
ding or by the groom himself on the wedding night.
The Beta Israel practice magic, as do other Ethiopians. They do
not consider it evil or especially improper when it is practiced on
a Gentile.

Page 33 - [see page image]

20
FOR OUR SOUL
HOW NEIGHBORS LOOK AT THE BETA ISRAEL
Since the nineteenth century at
least, much of the suspicion and persecution of the Beta Israel has
come not from the central government (once they were vanquished in
the military field they were not considered a threat) but from the
communities in which they have lived. It seems misgivings arose pri
marily for reasons of (1) secretiveness, (2) absence of communication,
(3) practices of despised occupations, and (4) religion—perhaps in this
order. There was mutual exclusiveness among the communities. The
Beta Israel felt their religious teachings required them to avoid any
contact with non-Jews. The Christians (the Ethiopian Orthodox
Church) and Muslims felt the same way. However, in highland Ethio
pia, where the Orthodox Church has the strongest grip on the popula
tion and where that religion is traditionally associated with national
patriotism, Ethiopians who believed or practiced different religions
were suspect. Intolerance and contempt followed, and persecution
was rampant against the Beta Israel and practitioners of other minor
ity religions in that part of Ethiopia, including the Muslims. In addi
tion, out of necessity, the Beta Israel perfected their skills as artisans
in blacksmithing, weaving, carpentry, masonry, and the like. Al
though these skills were valued in the larger society, the practitioners
were themselves despised. Some scholars believe the term taib is a
corrupted form of tebib (or tebiban, plural), the Amharic word mean
ing skillful or wise. This term when applied to the Beta Israel came to
mean one who is not merely skillful but also possessed of an extraor
dinary power which could be used for evil as well as good.
Another concept further complicates the matter. The term that
explains this concept is buda, meaning one with the “evil eye.” The
taib, then, is one who is a buda or one who could cast an evil eye on
someone who is not a member of that community. It is held that the
taib can change into a hyena at night and, after going through some
rituals, turn back into a human being. The taib also can cause some
one’s death and after the burial can secretly remove the body and
turn it into a slave. That slave is not aware of its original identity and
simply does as it is commanded. If relatives of the slave drop by unex
pectedly, a slave can be turned into a household utensil by the stroke
of a magic rod. Stories such as these are rampant among the non-Beta

Page 34 - [see page image]

21
Introduction and Historical Background
Israel communities and believed by young and old. These beliefs have
prompted terrible mistreatment of the Beta Israel in some communi
ties. It should be noted, however, that the buda concept is not ap
plied to the Beta Israel alone; there are other communities in different
parts of the country whose members are also practitioners of the de
spised vocations and also suspected of being buda.
Because the Beta Israel’s religion forbids them to eat food pre
pared by outsiders, they do not travel far from their home bases.
Some have thought this was because their religion forbade them to
engage in trade, but this is not so. They do go to the local markets to
sell or exchange their products. This inability to travel farther also
might have contributed to the misunderstandings of their true identity
as skillful, religious, and good people.
Since the nineteenth century, the Ethiopian emperors have sought
to discourage prejudices against the Beta Israel. Emperors Tewodros,
Yohannis, Menelik, and Haile Selassie all sought to dispel the notions
held against them. These emperors were aware, for one thing, of the
destructive nature of the attitudes highlanders held toward nonfarm
ing and nonsoldiering vocations. The emperors knew the traditional
attitudes against manual labor and laborers were counterproductive
since the country needed artisans and merchants for modernization.
But they also knew that the Beta Israel were very few and practiced
their religion in a highly prejudiced, intolerant society. They sought to
find some solution. They must have concluded that as long as the
Beta Israel persisted in their practices, the problems would continue.
Therefore, they allowed the missionaries to work among them with
the hope that they would convert to the Orthodox Church. Even
those who sympathized with their situation never saw the community
as anything but part of an expanded, monolithic, national agenda. On
the other hand, Menelik issued a proclamation protecting artisans
and traders and encouraging the practice of these occupations by oth
ers. In the proclamation, he expressed his bitterness against those
who berated artisans who, he thought, were the backbone of his
modernization efforts. 37 The emperor did not mention the Beta Israel
by name, but it was clear that he had them in mind. He was, after all,
fully aware of the tremendous contribution they had made in build
ing his capital city of Addis Ababa, as they had done centuries ago
when they built the beautiful city of Gondar.
After Word War II, with the introduction of an expanded system
of education, things changed rapidly for all segments of the Ethiopian
population, including the Jews. At first cautious but later in droves,

Page 35 - [see page image]

22
FOR OUR SOUL
the children and youth of the Beta Israel began to attend public
school. To attain a high school or college education, most had to
travel away from home. At first, the villagers of Beta Israel tried to
seclude those who had lived away, 38 but later they must have come to
realize that they were fighting a tide that could not be stopped. As
was true for other Ethiopians, the thirst for education was very great
among the Beta Israel children and youth.
As the young people tell it, they were subjected to insults from
some students in the public high schools in Gondar. But, they said,
they were defended by the teachers and as the years passed the insults
subsided. 39 Outside the Gondar region, of course, there were no in
sults of any kind from any quarter. It is therefore not surprising that
within a generation the schools had effected socialization in relation
to the national community to the extent that when Ethiopian stu
dents initiated organized movements against the central government
of Haile Selassie, Beta Israel youth were among the vanguards. Since
the movement was against feudalism and sectarianism and in support
of the common people, the depth of their involvement is not surpris
ing. Later, when the student movement presented an organized and
active resistance against the military regime that replaced Haile Selas
sie, Beta Israel youth were out in force. As a result, when the back
bone of the student movement was broken in 1977, many sought ref
uge in neighboring African countries, from which they were later
taken to Israel. It is now easy to hypothesize that, had the trends of
the 1960s and early 1970s continued for a while longer in Ethiopia,
assimilation among the educated would have become total, which in
the long run might have affected the continued viability of the Beta
Israel community.
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES AMONG THE BETA ISRAEL
The Beta Israel live in communi
ties scattered throughout the Semien mountain regions, around Lake
Tana, Tselemit, Wolqait, Woggera, Shire (southern Tigray), Lasta
(Wollo province), and the northern part of Shoa Province. This latter
settlement must have taken place some time after their final defeat in
the seventeenth century at the hands of Susenyos. The Jews might
have come there in search of better jobs as artisans, or perhaps they

Page 36 - [see page image]

23
Introduction and Historical Background
were brought by some of the rulers to help build their ever changing
headquarters, which was the pattern for a long time. In addition, I
have seen small communities of Beta Israel living in remote, isolated
places in Gondar and Tigray, perhaps unaware of the existence of
larger groups elsewhere. These small isolated groups have no desig
nated places for worship. They lead isolated lives, and their primary
contact with the larger community is for business purposes only. As a
rule, they are the only ones in the community who know how to
make and maintain plowshares, sickles, and other metal parts a peas
ant farmer needs for work in the field. Especially during the sowing
and harvesting seasons, one can see long lines of farmers waiting their
turn to be served by the Beta Israel blacksmith. Payment may include
blocks of salt, raw cotton, and sacks of grain. Although they raise cat
tle, the Beta Israel I am describing here do not typically engage in
farming. In addition, their women seem to attract men from the Gen
tile world. I have seen men traveling considerable distances to visit
them. It is likely that they were aware that the others talked about
them behind their backs, but there is no evidence of open persecution
against the group or any evil intentions toward them. The non-Beta
Israel, however, did suspect them of possessing the powers of the
buda.
Otherwise, the Beta Israel are for the most part indistinguishable
from the others among whom they have lived. There are differences,
however, in the perceptions and social interactions among the Beta
Israel themselves based on their different ethnic backgrounds. Thus,
there are long-standing presumed differences and interests between
the people of Gondar and those of Tigray. As far as language is con
cerned, at one time they spoke one of the variants of the local agew
(indigenous) languages such as Kuarigna or Kemantigna, in addition to
the other languages spoken in the host societies. By now, the old lan
guages have nearly disappeared, and Amharic, the national language
and Tigrigna, another important language, are the languages of com
munication. Many of the Gondar Beta Israel speak only Amharic,
while those living in Tigray speak Tigrigna as their first language and
some Amharic as a second language. Those living in the border areas
between Gondar and Tigray, such as Tselemit, Semien, or Wolqait,
speak both Amharic and Tigrigna. Most of their religious works are
in Ge’ez, the ancient language of Ethiopia from which both Amharic
and Tigrigna are derived. In recent years, however, some works have
been rendered in Amharic.

Page 37 - [see page image]

24
FOR OUR SOUL
The Beta Israel from the Gondar region are more numerous, are
relatively better educated, and also have provided most of the leader
ship for the community. Over the years, this group also has enjoyed
more of the educational, religious, health, and other benefits that
came from overseas Jewish organizations. Reflecting the situation at
the national level, these differences (tribal or class) exist among the
two major Beta Israel groups, the Tigray and the Amhara. Even in Is
rael, friction between the two groups continues to be a problem. 40
The crisis that led to the 1974 revolution in Ethiopia is one of six
or so similar traumatic events that have taken place in this ancient and
still troubled land. But this latest one, the most profound of all, has
fundamentally and irrevocably altered not only the socioeconomic
and political aspects of the society but also its most fundamental val
ues, its psyche, and its consciousness which has defined it for centu
ries. A series of droughts, pestilence (cholera), famine, civil wars, and,
over the last eighteen years, savage, brutal misrule by a clique of in
competent, ill-equipped, ill-trained young military tyrants known as
the Derg (“Committee”) under the leadership of Lieutenant Colonel
Mengistu Hailemariam (who later named himself president) are all re
sponsible for the misfortunes that have befallen this ancient land.
Even after the overthrow of the brutal regime in the spring of 1991,
the country continues to struggle to redefine its new identity and its
ethnic, linguistic, and religious borders. As of late 1992, the political
and social condition of the country could be summed up as in a state
of undefinable flux.
TRADITION OF EMIGRATION IN ETHIOPIAN MILIEU
In Ethiopian history, some individ
ual citizens and communities might have ventured to travel beyond
their borders for purposes of establishing residence. But they are
comparatively rare. One such rare but very significant exception is a
community of monks and nuns of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church
who have continued to live in Jerusalem since the twelfth century.
King Lalibela, of the Agew dynasty who was the force behind the
building of the famous series of rock-hewn churches in Roha which
he renamed Lalibela, was able to persuade the famous Arab general
Saladin, who had expelled the Crusaders from the holy city, to give

Page 38 - [see page image]

25
Introduction and Historical Background
him a portion of the Holy Sepulcher for his church. 41 Since that time,
although they had lost some of their holdings, a community of Ethio
pians have lived in the Holy Land. Later, when Ethiopia was invaded
by Fascist Italy in 1936, many of the Ethiopian notables, including the
late Emperor Haile Selassie and his family, had stayed in Jerusalem.
So when the Beta Israel began to arrive, they were not necessarily
alone or the first Ethiopians to establish permanent residence in the
Holy Land. It should be added here that the two communities, the
Christians and the Jews, have very healthy and supportive relations in
Jerusalem.
Otherwise, in the annals of Ethiopian history, the concept of mi
gration of citizens hardly exists. No convention, no law, and no ex
pectations for it exist. In Ethiopia’s long history, a few individuals
may have wandered from time to time to foreign lands, and some
may have lingered, but these were the exceptions. Even in the post-
World War II era when “brain drain” was a problem for many devel
oping countries, the moment Ethiopians received their diplomas from
colleges and universities overseas, they rushed home. For a long time,
it was believed that Ethiopian nationalism and attachment to the cul
tural milieu were so strong that citizens would not consider making
their homes outside the country. But in the wake of the 1974 revolu
tion, severe economic and political upheavals occurred. The brutality
of the military regime, which later claimed to have converted itself to
Marxism-Leninism, as well as severe drought and famine, compelled
hundreds of thousands of Ethiopians to leave their country for for
eign shores. It is estimated that three and a half million left, though
no one knows for sure. The first wave of migration was drawn pri
marily from among intellectuals and professionals. The younger gen
eration of schooled people followed when they found life untenable
after their attempt to topple the military regime failed. They felt their
own safety and the lives of members of their families were in jeop
ardy. They left in droves for safety and security in other countries.
Soon it became known that there was hardly a country in the world
where an Ethiopian emigre could not be found.
Although there are important qualitative differences, the waves of
migration of the Beta Israel must be considered in this context. In ad
dition to their victimization and persecution as a minority religious
and cultural group prior to the revolution, they also suffered, like
other Ethiopians, as a result of conditions prevailing in postrevolu
tionary Ethiopian society. Unlike other Ethiopians, however, their
migration involved most of the families in their villages and was di-

Page 39 - [see page image]

26
FOR OUR SOUL
rected toward a specific destination ready and waiting to receive
them. That home was Israel. From the mid-1970s onward they jour
neyed to Israel. In the beginning, they were able to travel directly and
secretly from Ethiopia to the Middle East, but later circumstances
demanded that they enter third or fourth countries en route to their
destination.
PERSONAL VIEW
Like many others, I became inter
ested in the whole dramatic episode of the Beta Israel immigration. I
was especially interested to learn how the Ethiopians would fare in
such a profoundly different society as Israel. After all, most of the
Beta Israel came from one of the most conservative, rural regions of
Ethiopia, where modem means of communication and transportation
were undeveloped, illiteracy among the adult population was more
than 90 percent, and isolation has been the norm for centuries. Fur
thermore, for the Beta Israel, the migration process included most of
the families of the community—women and children as well as men.
One’s ability to survive in a foreign land was not the issue. Finally, as
one who was bom and brought up in the region, I was curious to
learn how “we”—meaning rural Gondar-Tigray Ethiopians—behave
or cope with this kind of situation. After all, such a phenomenon on
this scale has never before taken place in Ethiopia. Equally important,
perhaps, as an emigre myself, now living in the United States for near
two decades, and always feeling that I was deprived of the exciting
opportunities of continuing to work, live, and find fulfillment in my
own society, I decided to seize the occasion to study the conditions
of the Beta Israel in the context of Israel. In addition, I was brought
up in religious community, and the Bible in its historical context
holds an abiding emotional and intellectual interest for me. I have al
ways been interested in the traditions of Judaism and later in Israel.
My visit to the land in the 1960s deepened my interest. As it turned
out, and perhaps not surprising, the experiences of living and working
with the immigrants for a total of fifteen months proved rewarding
beyond my expectations.
In 1969, as a guest of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Israeli
government, I had visited Israel for a period of two weeks. At the

Page 40 - [see page image]

27
Introduction and Historical Background
time, I was an officer at Haile Selassie I University in Ethiopia. I en
joyed the experience of visiting Israel’s institutions of education and
research as well as the exchange of ideas with policymakers, academ
ics, and teachers. I was impressed by how the state had organized it
self to achieve its goals and by the dynamism of its institutions and
people. In 1974,1 left Ethiopia on sabbatical for a year. I didn’t return
until the summer of 1991, for a short visit, right after the Mengistu
Hailemariam regime was ousted by the Ethiopian Peoples Democratic
Revolutionary Front.
I have been following the developments in Ethiopia, of course, in
cluding the migration of the people. In the mid-1970s, I was paying
particular attention to the movements of the Beta Israel. However, I
was not able to make the trip to Israel or to the Sudan until the sum
mer of 1985. With some assistance from the Office of the Vice Presi
dent for Research at the University of Michigan, I made an explor
atory visit to Israel to acquaint myself with the issues concerning the
policy, procedure, and patterns of settlement of the Ethiopian Jews in
Israel and to get a general but firsthand impression of the issues from
the perspectives of both the immigrants and the larger Israeli commu
nity. My primary concern was to determine how the phenomenon
could best be studied, analyzed, and documented so that verifiable
knowledge would be available to the scholarly community, policy
makers, and service providers as well as to the olim (immigrants)
themselves. 42
This visit was followed by another in the summer of 1986, when I
returned to discuss some of the logistics, methods, and instruments
with Israeli colleagues and friends (recent Ethiopian immigrants and
veteran Israelis). After returning home and having refined my thinking
on the tools needed for the project, I returned to Israel one more, this
time under the auspices of the Fulbright Senior Scholar Program and
the Hebrew University of Jerusalem for the duration of a ten-month
period between September 1986 and June 1987.1 made my headquar
ters at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem as a visiting professor and
research fellow at the Truman Institute for the Study of Peace. From
there, I traveled at least once, often more, to nearly every place the
Beta Israel were to be found. In collaboration with some colleagues
at the University of Michigan, I had originally developed highly strati
fied and structured instruments for the research. This involved ques
tionnaires and projective techniques which involved a lot of written
responses. But once in the field, I came to learn that the community
to be studied was in a situation of very high flux and that the Ian-

Page 41 - [see page image]

28
FOR OUR SOUL
guage problems were quite involved and perhaps insoluble. Many of
the people were not literate even in their own languages; the children
and young people were in transition between learning the new lan
guage, Hebrew, and forgetting their own native languages, Amharic
and Tigrigna. Although I am a native speaker of Amharic and am con
versant in Tigrigna, I became convinced that methods other than
those I had developed would yield better results. During the year of
fieldwork, the majority of the Beta Israel were in transition from tem
porary absorption centers where they had stayed during the previous
year to permanent apartments; some of the young adults were begin
ning to enter the labor force; and those between twelve and eighteen
years of age were being transferred to boarding schools. In the same
year, those in the age groups spanning four to eleven years were being
“mainstreamed” into regular schools. Given these circumstances, I
decided the best option was to follow the people wherever they went
—to talk with them and listen and to observe what was being said,
done, or considered in the context of the respective locations from
the points of view of the immigrants as well as the agents of the ab
sorbing society. Therefore, participatory observation and interview
methods were utilized. Although the immigrants were scattered in
more than fifty different locations, Israel’s small size made it possible
to travel from one location to another in a matter of a few hours. I
visited, talked with, and observed all kinds of people in schools, train
ing centers, absorbing centers, permanent homes, workshops, em
ployment centers, and wherever else Beta Israel parents, families, and
students could be found. I also observed and talked to many teachers,
social workers, physicians, psychologists, anthropologists, school
administrators (including officials at the Ministry of Education, ab
sorption administrators, and politicians at the highest level), house
mothers, food supervisors, rabbis, administrators, and academics who
had contact with the olim. I sat in classes, conferred with school per
sonnel, participated at playgrounds, and visited workplaces, homes,
dormitories, clinics, and synagogues. The objective was to get as
much information as possible by means of direct observation and in
teraction from as many angles and sources and sources as possible.
To aid my senses, as well as my span of attention, and to capture
some of the finer nuances, such as gestures, tones of voice, mealtime
rituals, and other more subtle but important expressions, I employed
video tapes, tape recorders, and still camera. As a supplement to my
extensive field notes, the information collected with this system of
modem technology proved a boon. The analysis of data incorporates

Page 42 - [see page image]

29
Introduction and Historical Background
information collected and recorded from all these sources. Where I
felt necessary, and in order to protect personal and institutional iden
tities, I have refrained from disclosing full names in all instances.
Initially, it was suggested that I might encounter some difficulties
from the Beta Israel because I am a non-Jewish Ethiopian and the
community, on the whole, might be suspicious regarding meeting and
interacting with outsiders. I gave these suggestions little credence. I
knew that given adequate knowledge of my intentions and my own
personal feelings toward the whole episode that had precipitated their
departure from Ethiopia, they would accept me readily. Outsiders of
ten tend to underestimate the strength of the ties that bind Ethiopians
of all persuasions, in spite of the many differences we may have based
in religion or ethnicity. In addition, when we meet one another out
side our country, special feelings emerge which serve to draw us
closer together. So once the initial formalities were over, the recep
tion I received from all quarters could not have been better. The im
migrants showed tremendous warmth and generosity toward me,
which helped the research to proceed smoothly and made the process
enjoyable. The project demanded long hours of work, but given the
atmosphere that prevailed, it was an experience that made the incon
veniences less important. The veteran Israelis—and this includes all
categories and levels of people who had something to do with the
Beta Israel immigrants—were cooperative and generous. There was
a readiness to facilitate the kind of project I was undertaking. I was
fortunate. I hope they all will be able to see a part of their efforts in
this book.

Page 43 - [see page image]

30
CHAPTER TWO
❖
Israel as an Absorbing State
The purpose of this chapter is to
provide some brief historical background to our main concern, the
absorption of the Ethiopian Jews into Israeli society. It does not aim
at providing an extensive account; there already exists a rich body of
materials on the social, economic, and political history of Israel. Our
intention here is to present a panoramic view of the history and peo
ple of Israel to assist those readers who may not be familiar with Is
rael but are interested in the present topic. The bibliography at the
end of this book will help those readers wishing to pursue the subject
in greater detail.
Modem Israel is truly a land for Jewish immigrants. It was con
ceived and built on the fundamental Zionist principle that ultimately
the Jews, who until recently have been scattered over most of the
face of the globe, are to find a place of “ingathering” in their original
home, the land of Israel. Furthermore, the concepts of ingathering
and settlement were based on the fundamental Zionist and European
socialist ideologies that held that the Jewish people who had so
journed in different parts of the world among strangers, as minorities,
and in the process had acquired modes of behavior and of making a

Page 44 - [see page image]

31
Israel as an Absorbing State
living not always compatible with traditional Jewish ideals, would be
come rehabilitated once in the land of their ancestors, where they
would build an egalitarian, social-democratic state. On the whole, Is
raeli society was built on the quadruple principles of social democ
racy, modernization, integration, and Zionism. But first let us go back
to the pre-state period and examine how these ideas germinated and
developed.
THE YISHUV (JEWISH PALESTINIAN) SOCIETY
Palestine was ruled for some four
hundred years by the Turks until the end of World War I, when, be
cause of their alliance with the Axis powers, they lost control of the
territory. During the period of Turkish rule, no census seems to have
been taken of the population of Palestine or of its composition and
characteristics. However, even from the incomplete records available,
it is possible to gain some idea about the various communities, in
cluding the Jewish one, that inhabited the land. Some historians sup
port the notion that some Jews had continued to live in Palestine
since ancient times, and certainly some Jewish communities have
lived there since Medieval times, side by side with Christians and
Muslims. The estimate is that in 1800, out of a total of 300,000 per
sons, 5,000 were Jews, 25,000 were Christians, and 270,000 were
Muslims. The Jews of the period were mostly of Sephardic (Spanish)
origin and lived in the four holy cities of Jerusalem, Safed, Tiberias,
and Hebron. The Christian community, largely comprised of Greek
Orthodox and Greek and Roman Catholic, lived in Jerusalem, Naza
reth, and Bethlehem. 1 Because of improved health and living condi
tions and a continuing trickle of immigrants, the Jewish population
had grown by 1982 to 24,000. 2 Also by that time, a Jewish commu
nity of considerable size had established itself in the port city of Jaffa,
today a suburb of Tel Aviv. This Jewish community consisted, by and
large, of extremely orthodox people whose lives revolved around
their synagogues, religious schools, and charitable organizations.
Following a series of large-scale pogroms in czarist Russia in 1881
and 1882, mass emigration of European (largely Russian and Polish)
Jewry began. First by the thousands, then by the hundreds of thou
sands, Jews migrated to the United States, to central and western Eu-

Page 45 - [see page image]

32
FOR OUR SOUL
rope, and to Latin America. In 1882, a group of young Russian Jews
calling themselves Bilu, supported by a movement known as Hovevei
Zion (“Lovers of Zion”), emigrated to Palestine and later established
agricultural settlements there. Despite the many hardships they en
countered, this group of young pioneers persisted and later were
joined by other immigrants of similar persuasion. This continued until
1903 and constituted the first of the five waves of aliyot (immigra
tions). During this First aliyah, between twenty thousand and thirty
thousand Jews migrated to Palestine. In the meantime, the Dreyfus
trial in France and the change it helped to bring, about in a young Vi
ennese Jewish journalist—Theodor Herzl—led to a growing interest
of western European Jews in the idea of establishing a Jewish settle
ment in Palestine. Herzl, regarded as the father of modem Zionism,
worked hard and long to marshal the sympathies and support of Eu
rope’s powerful and wealthy for the idea. He organized the first
World Zionist Congress, held in Basel in 1897, at which the World
Zionist Organization (WZO) was founded, with Herzl as president, to
facilitate the immigration and settlement of Jews in Palestine. Be
tween 1904 and 1914, the second aliyah brought between thirty-five
thousand and forty thousand Jewish immigrants to Palestine, largely
from Russia (Poland was, of course, part of Russia until the end of
World War I). These waves of immigrants, consisting of organized
Polish and Russian Jews, arrived in Palestine with new social and po
litical visions which ultimately left an indelible mark on the develop
ment of the state and affected the environment that subsequent
waves of immigrants were to enter. In search of solutions to the eco
nomic, political, and social problems in their countries of origin in
general and to the problems of Jews in particular, many of those who
arrived during the second aliyah had been associated with socialist
movements in eastern Europe prior to their arrival in Palestine. Their
hopes for social change in their lands of origin had failed. The re
newed anti-Jewish pogroms and the failure of the 1905 revolution to
address their many problems must have convinced them that their
best recourse was immigration to Palestine and the hastening of the
organization of the Zionist movement. This group, consisting mostly
of young, unattached, highly motivated people who had rebelled not
only against the conditions of the Jewish people in Europe but against
their own parents and elders as well, brought with them what they
considered the contemporary ideals and sought to fuse them with the
precepts and traditions of a nationalistic Judaism in which religious
orthodoxy played no significant role. As mentioned earlier, their in-

Page 46 - [see page image]

33
Israel as an Absorbing State
fluence on the shaping of the eventual state of Israel was enormous.
As Judah Matras observes: “This wave of immigrants did become the
political, social, economic, and ideological backbone of the Jewish
community in Palestine, and large sectors of life in Israel today are
organized around institutions created by immigrants arriving in the
Second Aliyah.” 3
Then came World War I, which disrupted immigration. The
World Zionist Organization, now led by Chaim Weizmann, a chemist
whose inventions had been of military importance to the British, con
tinued actively to promote the aspirations of the Zionist movement.
Weizmann’s patience, persistence, and usefulness eventually led the
British government to recognize these aspirations in the form of the
Balfour Declaration. The declaration, issued as a letter on November
2,1917, to Lord Rothschild by Arthur Balfour of the Foreign Service,
stated: “His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establish
ment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will
use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it
being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may preju
dice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities
in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any
other community.” 4 The declaration, which was endorsed by Presi
dent Woodrow Wilson of the United States, signaled the beginning of
a British vision of Palestine. Within a month, the British had forced
the Turks to withdraw. In 1922, the declaration was incorporated
into the League of Nations’ Mandate for Palestine. The mandate
identified the WZO as the representative of Jewish interests to advise
and cooperate with the British government in matters pertaining to
the “establishment of the Jewish National Home.”
Soon after the conclusion of the war in 1919, the migration of
Jews to Palestine resumed, now under British supervision. Between
the years 1919 and 1923, the third aliyah, an estimated thirty-five
thousand immigrants, arrived in Palestine. This was made possible by
the favorable climate that prevailed during the first part of the man
date period and by the Bolshevik revolution which exerted pressure
on Zionist Jews to leave Russia. Like the previous two groups of im
migrants, this third group arrived primarily from Russia and Poland.
However, these immigrants were different from the two earlier
groups: prior to their departure from their respective lands of origin,
they had formed groups and had undergone training to prepare them
for life in Palestine.

Page 47 - [see page image]

34
FOR OUR SOUL
The waves of immigration continued. Between 1924 and 1931,
some eighty-two thousand new immigrants arrived in Palestine.
Roughly 86 percent of this fourth aliyah came from Poland. Primar
ily middle class, this group came to Palestine partly to escape the eco
nomic depression. But anti-Semitic sentiment was increasing, partly
because of hard times in Poland, and the United States refused to ac
cept more migrants from eastern Europe regardless of the unique situ
ation of the Jews. Two other characteristics of the people comprising
this aliyah are especially noteworthy. First, some two thousand were
Jews from North America. Though small vis-a-vis other nationalities,
this number represents the first significant wave of migration from
North America. Secondly, ninety-two hundred, or slightly more than
11 percent of the immigrants who arrived between 1924 and 1931,
came from non-European countries such as Yemen, Iraq, Persia, and
Turkey. Compared to their relatively small representation among the
third aliyah, (5 percent), this is a marked increase. But during the
same period, twenty-three thousand people left Palestine primarily
for economic reasons, reducing the total Jewish population to one
hundred seventy-five thousand.
During the fifth aliyah of the pre-state period, yet another group
of immigrants arrived. The years 1932 to 1938 witnessed the rise of
the Nazis to power in Germany, deterioration of economic condi
tions in Europe, and the accompanying search for scapegoats. As this
was happening in Europe, economic conditions also were worsening
in the Middle Eastern countries. The net result was that many Jewish
communities found themselves in very untenable positions which
eventually prompted them to migrate to Palestine. During this period
of the fifth aliyah, more than two hundred seventeen thousand Jew
ish immigrants arrived in Palestine. They came from Germany, Aus
tria, Poland, the Soviet Union, Romania, Greece, Yemen, and Aden.
In addition to the diverse origins, this aliyah was unique in other re
spects. The immigrants were older, relatively fewer were single, and
the ratio between males and females was nearly normal for the first
time, that is, there were proportionally more women in this group
than in earlier ones. This aliyah also brought many people with skills
and capital. There came experienced and well-established business
men and members of the liberal professions. Upon arrival, they estab
lished many businesses and enterprises as well as commercial and cul
tural institutions. By 1938, the Jews in Palestine numbered four
hundred thirteen thousand. These figures probably include illegal as
well as legal immigrants.

Page 48 - [see page image]

35
Israel as an Absorbing State
Toward the end of the pre-state period, and with the onset of
World War II, the rate of immigration slowed down considerably.
Conflicts between Jewish settlers and the indigenous as well as other
Arabs had existed for years, but these conflicts grew in number and
seriousness in the 1920s and 1930s. As the number of Jews in Pales
tine increased, local Arab leaders expressed their opposition. As a re
sult, the British Mandatory Government issued its 1939 White Paper
on Palestine, which restricted the number of Jewish immigrants to a
total of fifteen thousand during the ensuing five-year period. It also
stipulated that at the end of the five years, no more Jewish immi
grants would be allowed to enter without the consent of the Arab
population. The policy was in force throughout World War II, while
millions of Jews were trapped and suffering in Europe. Despite efforts
to control the number of immigrants, some forty-six thousand Euro
pean Jews were permitted legal entry, and another twenty-nine thou
sand entered illegally. In addition, another seventeen thousand ar
rived from non-European countries.
IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE HOLOCAUST
At the close of World War II in
1945, some two hundred thousand Jews from Russia, Poland, Ger
many, and other countries were among the many people classified as
“displaced persons” by the Allied powers. Temporary measures were
taken to shelter and feed them in refugee camps. The Mandatory
Government stood by its decision to restrict the number of Jews al
lowed to enter Palestine legally. Other means were found. One way
or another, most of the immigrants from the refugee camps in Cyprus
and elsewhere eventually found their way to Palestine. The process
was, however, not without intrigue and controversy, involving as it
did the United States, Great Britain, and the Arab governments as
well as Jewish organizations. Altogether, during the period of the
mandate (1919-1948), some four hundred eighty-seven thousand
Jews set up their new homes in Palestine, including some fifty-three
thousand who had arrived initially as visitors but stayed on. Of the
world’s total Jewish emigrants between the years 1919 and 1948,
about 30 percent came to Palestine. Of these, 80 percent came from
Europe, 10 percent from Asia, and 3 percent from North and South

Page 49 - [see page image]

36
FOR OUR SOUL
America, Africa, and Oceania. 5 Most Jews in Palestine were concen
trated in the three largest cities of Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Jerusalem;
only about 15 percent lived in rural settlements. This pattern of set
tlement would have repercussions on the dispersion of subsequent
immigrants, particularly those coming from Africa and Asia, for
whom successful absorption and integration were major goals.
The preceding analysis shows that the formation of the Yishuv
(the Jewish community of Palestine), which took place over a rela
tively short time, was a community created by immigrants as well as
one absorbing them. The axioms often made that the quality of im
migrant absorption is a function of immigrant role expectations on
the one hand and the demands made on them by the established soci
ety through its institutions on the other could not hold true here
since the Yishuv community did not have sufficient time to institu
tionalize its demands. In other words, the requisite institutional
framework through which immigrants could be absorbed was not
fully organized or established. It was only through the interaction be
tween the succession of immigrants, mainly between the two world
wars, that such institutional structures emerged. In addition, except
for the relatively few immigrants from Africa and Asia, most of the
immigrants were of European background who presumably had some
broadly shared cultural, political, and ideological reference points as
well as similar aspirations informed by the harsh economic, political,
social, and cultural realities of Europe. Whatever differences existed,
members of this European majority must have had a relatively easy
time communicating with one another about the type of society they
wished to create and the strategy or means for establishing the frame
work. At any rate, unique in the history of immigrants, a complete
dispersion took place, with only a few exceptions such as the Orien
tals and some Jews from central Europe. Dispersion is considered one
of the most important elements in the absorption and integration of
immigrants in the host society. For the Yishuv this happy coincidence
occurred, but it would not repeat itself when immigrants from the
non-European regions began to arrive en masse. By the time state sov
ereignty was achieved, the Jewish community was well solidified; the
institutional frameworks it wished to develop and behavioral norms it
desired to cultivate in the new state were defined. Those arriving later
were required to conform to the norms and role expectations of the
“establishment.”

Page 50 - [see page image]

37
Israel as an Absorbing State
ISRAEL AFTER 1948
In the aftermath of World War II,
the Jews of Palestine and their allies elsewhere concentrated their ef
forts on addressing the issues of Jewish immigration, the fulfillment
of the Balfour Declaration, and the provisions adopted by the United
Nations. Such nationalist aspirations and activities were the rule of
the day, for following the war, many heretofore colonized countries
were seeking their independence and freedom from European pow
ers. But what distinguishes the Jewish claims from the others is that
the Jews were not agitating for equal rights, independence, civil rights,
and so on, as most of the others were doing. Rather, they were agitat
ing for an ingathering of Jewish immigrants to Palestine to colonize it
and establish the right to enjoy their Zionist or national aspirations
there. Eventually, the Mandatory power, Great Britain, was forced to
bring the matter before the United Nations, which led to the decision
to partition Palestine between the Jews and the Arabs. It is not sur
prising, therefore, that in 1950, two years after the attainment of
statehood, Israel enacted the Law of Return, declaring the right of all
Jews everywhere to immigrate to Israel. This policy of kibbutz galu-
yot, or ingathering of exiles, was in complete accord with the cardinal
aim of Zionism: to reestablish a Jewish state on the land of ancient Is
rael, which would serve as the instrument for the fulfillment of the
Jewish. 6
The migration of world Jewry to Israel is best understood when
viewed in the framework of the total demographic perspective. Since
the dichotomies between the different subcultures within the com
munities are pivotal in our analysis of ethnicity, pluralism, and equal
ity, we will take some space to highlight some of the more outstand
ing characteristics of the different groups. For one thing, the dispersal
of the community at the global level is very interesting. Although the
division of Jews into different categories of Ashkenazim, Sephardim,
and Orientals presents some methodological problems, the following
statistical patterns emerge. The total Jewish population in the world
in the year 1500 was one and a half million. 7 Of this total the vast ma
jority (67 percent) were of Sephardic-Oriental origin. In the same year,
some five thousand Jews were living in Palestine, of whom 80 percent
were of Sephardic-Oriental origin. By 1800, the world’s Jews num-

Page 51 - [see page image]

38
FOR OUR SOUL
bered about two and a half million, of whom the Sephardic-Oriental
sect or comprised 40 percent. In the same year, the Jewish population
living in Palestine was eight thousand, 60 percent of whom were Se
phardic-Oriental. From 1895 on, the global Ashkenazim population
increased dramatically; in that year, the global total stood at ten mil
lion, of whom only 10 percent were Sephardic-Oriental. In Palestine,
the total Jewish population was forty seven thousand of whom 40
percent were Sephardic-Oriental. From then on, the Sephardic-Ori
ental population continued to shrink relative to the global total until
in 1975 it constituted only 17 percent of 14,145,000. However, as the
relative number decreased at the global level, it increased in Israel. Of
the approximately three million Jews in Israel in 1975, the Sephardic-
Oriental group constituted 55 percent of that total. Thus, although
the total Sephardic-Oriental population in the world is now less than
17 percent, in Israel it constitutes a significant and growing majority.
By 1985, 58 percent of the Jews in Israel were of Sephardic-Oriental
background. Although there has been some moderation in recent
years, the birth rate of the Sephardic-Oriental segment of the popula
tion in Israel is higher than that of the Ashkenazim (except for the ul-
tra-Orthodox, who tend to have large families). With these facts in
mind, we now return to Israel proper.
At the time of the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, the total
Jewish population stood at 716,678. Of this total, 35 percent had
been bom in Palestine. Of those bom abroad, 85 percent had been
bom in Europe, America, or Oceania; 12 percent in Asia; and only 3
percent in Africa. Of those who had come from Europe, at least in
the earlier aliyot, many were single persons, while most from Asia
and Africa already had formed families before their arrival. Those
Ashkenazim who came as single persons then eventually met each
other in the context of forging a Jewish state in Palestine, indicating
bonds of shared aspirations and experiences. When children were
later bom to these couples in Palestine, the parents were in the posi
tion to inculcate in their offspring the spirit of pioneering Zionism.
The same cannot be said for the Oriental groups, since families were
already formed and in all likelihood children were bom both in the
land of origin and after arrival in Palestine.
Upon attainment of statehood, the migration of Jews to Israel ac
celerated. Within the first two and a half years, the Jewish population
doubled, and by 1960 it had tripled, most of the increase coming
from immigration. 8 Between May 1948 and the end of 1984, more
than one and three-quarter million immigrants arrived in Israel, in

Page 52 - [see page image]

39
Israel as an Absorbing State
contrast with fewer than five hundred thousand who came to Pales
tine between 1882 and 1948. This great influx of immigrants, of
course, overwhelmed the new state. The number, the diversity of
immigrant backgrounds, and the speed with which the migration
took place all would have significant consequences for absorption
and integration. Transporting, settling, and caring for the influx of
mostly poor immigrants placed an inordinate burden on the receiving
society, which on the whole shouldered it heroically.
Soon after the attainment of statehood, priority for migration was
given to the Jews of Europe who were in displaced persons camps in
Germany, Austria, and Italy. When the camps were emptied of their
initial occupants, they continued to be used as transit points for oth
ers waiting to migrate. In addition, those Jews whom the British had
interned in Cyprus as “illegals”—Jews trying to enter Palestine with
out their permission—now were brought in as well. Also during this
mass immigration period of 1948 to 1951, one hundred thousand
Polish and one hundred twenty thousand Romanian Jews migrated to
Israel. During the same period, non-European Jews began to arrive in
unprecedented numbers. Between 1949 and 1950, during what be
came known as Operation Magic Carpet, forty thousand Jews from
Yemen were flown to Israel. During the same period, almost the en
tire Jewish community of Libya was transferred. In the following
year, 1950-51, one hundred twenty-four thousand Jews from Iraq
and twenty-seven thousand from Persia immigrated. The differences
in geographic origin, and hence the sociocultural differences, were
very pronounced, obviously. Of the total number of Jewish immi
grants to Israel of the 1948-51 period, only about half were from Eu
rope, about 35 percent were from Asian countries (mostly from Iraq,
Yemen, Persia, and Turkey), and another 14 percent were from
North African countries (primarily Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and
Libya); that is, about half were from what are known as the Third
World countries of Asia and Africa. The pattern continued. Of the
total number of immigrants who came between 1948 and 1975, 50
percent were from African and Asian countries (Orientals). During the
years of 1952 and 1953, there was a slight decrease in the number of
immigrants primarily because Israel’s altered policy to give first prior
ity in aid to those individuals and communities whose security was
threatened, second to those whose skills were required by the state,
and only as the third priority to others. But even during this time,
only 29 percent were of Ashkenazi background. The largest group
was of African and Asian origin, 42 and 28 percent of the total, re-

Page 53 - [see page image]

40
FOR OUR SOUL
spectively. This is in sharp contrast to the 90 percent of Ashkenazim
immigrants who came during the Mandate period.
The explanations for this profound change in the origin and cul
tural backgrounds of Jewish immigrants to Israel are not obscure: the
wholesale destruction of the masses of European Jewry outside Rus
sia between 1939 and 1945; the refusal of the Russians to allow Rus
sian Jews to emigrate in any significant number; the general satisfac
tion of the remaining large communities of “western” Jews—in the
United States and Canada, South America, England, and South Africa
—with their conditions and opportunities in their countries; and, on
the other hand, the low status of, and quite often marked discrimina
tion against, Jews in Asian and African countries. But the point to be
emphasized is that the very pronounced shift in the kind of immigrant
who now entered Israel, as distinguished from the kind of immigrant
who had come to what had been Palestine, was not just a shift from
one kind of culture to another but also a shift in expectations. Jews
now were coming to a country in which Jews were in charge—and it
was still foreign, alien, and frustrating. Also, most of the Oriental
Jews who came now had lived among Arabs for centuries and found
that the Jews in charge in Israel knew comparatively little about them.
These differences, too, had profound repercussions, not only for Is
rael but for its Arab neighbors. 9
There were still other complications. The birth rate of people of
Asian and African origin was much higher than that of the Ashkena
zim. For instance, in 1960, the Jewish population stood at 1,911,000,
representing a 267 percent net increase over the 1948 population; 69
percent of this growth in population was a result of net immigration,
and 31 percent was natural increase. During this twelve-year period,
the number of children younger than ten quadrupled. The Jewish
population of Asian birth increased five-fold and that of African birth
increased fifteen-fold. New centers were opened for settlement to ac
commodate this influx and the rural population quadrupled. Immi
grants came from 89 different countries. 10 Because of the great pres
sures to accept and settle this influx, of new immigrants, insufficient
thought was given to the long-term implications for absorption and
integration of these settlements. Those arriving from the developing
countries came as groups and wished to settle in close proximity to
one another in Israel so that they would not lose the kind of com
munal traditions they had enjoyed in their lands of origin. The Orien
tals also expected not only to practice their Judaism as they had de
veloped it but also to maintain their other communal, cultural, or

Page 54 - [see page image]

41
Israel as an Absorbing State
economic values from their lands of origin. This was a major differ
ence between the Ashkenazim and the Orientals in the Yishuv and it
remained critically important in Israel. As a result, the form and sub
stance of the Zionist dialogue within the Jewish state became altered,
perhaps irreversibly. The Orientals were perceived by the Ashkenazim
as coming from underdeveloped, semi-feudal, and traditional soci
eties, with different types of aspirations (primarily religious Zionism)
and different expectations and perceptions of political goals." More
over, the Oriental immigrants had large families and were mostly
poor, without education and without modem skills. On the whole,
they were generally unprepared to participate fully in a modem, Wes
ternized society such as Israel. The existing society perceived the
coming of the Orientals as a challenge. They had to be socialized,
trained, and acculturated to Western modes of behavior, which was
considered imperative for modernization. Perhaps it is fair to say that
as far as the Orientals were concerned, the only things they had in
common with the predominantly Ashkenazi society existing then in
Israel was their Jewishness as defined in broad terms, a common de
sire to develop and use the Hebrew language, and an abiding concern
for the security and survival of the Jewish state.
The concern for security, survival, and viability is, of course, in the
heart of every Jew in Israel. This is made imperative by a number of
realities emanating primarily from the historical circumstances sur
rounding the founding of the modem state. Israel is a pluralistic state
in religion, ethnicity, culture, and nationality. Of the 4.3 million peo
ple living in Israel at the end of 1985, for instance, approximately 3.5
million were Jews, representing 81 percent of the total; of the six
hundred fifty thousand Israeli Arabs, who constituted some 15 per
cent of the total population, more than three-fourths were Muslims,
15 percent Christians, and 9 percent Druze. The rest, about 4 percent
of the population, were made up of other communities such as mem
bers of the various Christian representatives, and the Armenians. 12 In
addition there are the two and a half million Palestinian Arabs whose
territory was seized from Jordan in 1967 and has since been under Is
raeli occupation.
To complicate the pluralistic nature of the society of this small
state even further, serious divisions exist within the Jewish commu
nity. Among the Jews, 70 percent consider themselves to be nonreli
gious (secular); the remaining 30 percent are religious (different
shades of Orthodox). Among the latter are people who not only do
not believe in Zionism but actively oppose the instruments set up for

Page 55 - [see page image]

42
FOR OUR SOUL
the state’s existence. Yet the latter are the ones who set up the rules
that govern most of the fundamental aspects of life such as the initia
tions of children, marriage, divorce, and holiday observation. As one
might expect, the relationships between the religious and the non
religious communities are in many respects at cross purposes. Yet
there is also an understanding, or so it seems, that one cannot exist
without the other. For in Israel, there is no separation of state and re
ligion, even while there are serious disagreements about the reasons
why this should be so. The magnitude of the immigration, especially
from the African and Asian countries, over a short period of time and
the many economic, occupational, and educational challenges it rep
resents must be viewed in this context.
As far as the state was concerned, the greatest challenge was how
to marshal the resources needed to address the many problems repre
sented by the immigration of the Orientals. Many other nations, at
one time or another, have been confronted with similar problems,
but never on the scale Israel faced in the 1950s. The young state was
overwhelmed by immigrants who were different in many respects—
poor, unskilled, and with different aspirations and worldviews. These
important differences made the successful absorption and integration
into existing communities problematic. When the immigration of
Orientals to Israel was at its zenith, the culture was still being formed,
and the institutions were in the conceptual stage and not yet organ
ized. The Orientals came in as the institutional infrastructures for ab
sorption were being put into place. But they were given little opportu
nity (or perhaps they were unable or not sufficiently mobilized to
seize the opportunity) to participate in the shaping of the infra
structure to suit their purposes or even to leave the imprint of their
thoughts, hopes, and concerns on these institutions. Instead, the Ori
entals accepted what existed in the country and tried to align their
economic, political, and cultural lots, hopes, and aspirations accord
ingly. Later they came to regret those lost opportunities.
THE “ORIENTALIZATION” CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES
The mass migration of Oriental
Jews to Israel was perceived by the receiving Ashkenazi society as the
Orientalization of Israel, a formidable challenge to the concept of

Page 56 - [see page image]

43
Israel as an Absorbing State
mizug galuyot (the fusion and integration of exiles). As was alluded
to earlier in this chapter, the African and Asian Jews—the Orientals—
were perceived as backward in their economic, cultural, educational,
occupational, and technological backgrounds as well as in their gen
eral sense of civic responsibilities. To the Ashkenazim, this implied
that a massive program of modernization had to be undertaken at
once. 13 Their orientation had to include aspirations for the “national”
culture and solidarity. The possibility that certain aspects of the Afro-
Asian cultures might be worth keeping, perhaps fusing them with the
best ones in existence, was not entertained. Instead, the Orientals’ tra
ditions were considered obstacles to modernization. It was imperative
to wipe out the inferior traditions of the Oriental immigrants and re
place them with Ashkenazim traditions and Western attitudes and
behavior. The primary objective was to achieve behavioral assimila
tion. Structural assimilation was also sought, though pursued with
much less vigor. 14 The key word was assimilation, reflecting the vi
sion that Israel could become a “melting pot” for Jews from a wide
range of backgrounds. 15 This same vision once was held for the
United States.
The task involved the desocialization, socialization, and resociali
zation of the Orientals. 16 The Orientals were expected to abandon
those values and traditions that were considered incompatible with
and indeed obstacles to the modernization they were to achieve as
they learned and accepted new attitudes, behaviors, and skills in line
with the conditions and expectations of life in Israeli society. How
ever, many scholars say that while the efforts to resocialize and edu
cate the Afro-Asians were necessary and indeed commendable, the
premises on which these efforts were based and the way they were
carried out left much to be desired. In several ways, the policies were
similar to those of the European colonialists toward their Asian and
African subjects up until the first half of this century. As Klaff made
clear, in the 1950s (and even today), there were strong convictions
among the Ashkenazi settlers and a good segment of the academic
community of Israel about what social and cultural characteristics
should become dominant in the future of Israeli society. The Ashken
azim “believed the absorption of new immigrants required giving up
previous habits, customs, etc., and adopting the traditions of the vet
eran community, approach similar to the ‘Anglo-conformity’ concept
in American literature. This assimilative perspective has tended to
persist in Israeli sociology with the issue of ethnic integration seen as
a problem of modernization of immigrants from Asian and African
countries.” 17

Page 57 - [see page image]

44
FOR OUR SOUL
Voices arguing the opposite views were not lacking, however. For
instance, Selzer 18 maintained that the positions taken by the veteran
Ashkenazim were nothing less than deliberate discrimination against
the Asian-African communities which led to the destruction of the
latter’s culture. He claimed that all cultures have equal validity and
that in a democratic state cultural pluralism should be encouraged
and cherished. Selzer’s position was, criticized however, by Cohen, 19
who argued that the cultural traits brought and maintained by the
Afro-Asians were neither endemic nor desired by the people con
cerned and that these cultural traits are not suited to the life-style of a
modem technological society.
The affected groups on their part could not be faulted for not
trying to accept and internalize the roles assigned to them. Shuval, in
her study of an ethnically mixed housing project, found that the Ash
kenazim were ranked highest and the Moroccan group lowest in sta
tus. The same study also showed that the Moroccans ranked them
selves lower than the Ashkenazim. Shuval added that in their desire to
gain acceptance, the northern Africans were conforming to norms
and values defined by the dominant group of the society, even when
they saw evidence of discrimination against themselves. 20 Weingrod
further elaborated on the depth of perception of the hierarchical sta
tus symbols: “To come from Poland or Britain is, ipso facto, to be
more prestigious than to have one’s origins in Egypt or Iraq. This rift
is fundamental, and it runs throughout the [Israeli] society.” 21
After studying the residential pattern of ethnic distribution, Bachi
reached a similar conclusion. He generalized that “the most marked
contrast was found between the geographical distribution of people
of Polish and Russian origin (who constituted both the largest group
among veteran settlers and the largest European group), and that
of people from Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria (being both the larg
est non-European group and the largest group among new im
migrants).” 22 Klaff added that the evidence demonstrates that ethnic
distribution patterns in Israel represent a “mosaic of segregated
people.” 23
Inequalities, real and perceived, could have been minimized if it
had been possible for the communities to live in proximity to one an
other so that they would interact and hence come to know and un
derstand one another’s habits and values. But this was not possible.
The Yishuv had settled mostly in the major cities, and, as pointed out
already, there was no congregation of immigrants based on country
of origin. The European immigrants, even when they came from dif-

Page 58 - [see page image]

45
Israel as an Absorbing State
ferent parts of Europe, were able to communicate with and under
stand one another. But the Orientals arriving after the establishment
of Israel were increasingly brought to settlements far removed from
the cities. Moreover, they were also settled by groups based on their
association in the land of origin. The Ashkenazi immigrants placed in
settlement towns later moved out to urban environments and better
opportunities while the Orientals stayed on. In summarizing the resi
dential patterns studied, Klaff concluded that “the data confirms that
the closer the geographic and cultural character of the country of ori
gin, the more similar the residential distribution of two populations
[Ashkenazim and Orientals].” 24
EDUCATION
Educational institutions often are
thought to be the best agencies for the absorption and integration of
immigrants. They are able to draw people from diverse home back
grounds. They try to impart common values, goals, ideology, and
skills as no other single institution can. The development and prog
ress of institutions of education in the absorption of immigrants
therefore deserve separate consideration.
The Jewish people have been known as “people of the book,” in
dicating their rich traditions and the great respect held by families and
individuals for high literacy, learning, and scholarship. The home, the
synagogue, and formal learning institutions are the major means of
perpetuating that tradition. However, the amount of dedication to
learning and scholarship varied among the Jewish people during the
centuries of the Diaspora. Whereas European Jewry was, in the main,
dedicated to the pursuit of religious and secular education, Jews living
in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa associated education with reli
gion—to be pursued by religious leaders or those aspiring to assume
some kind of leadership in aspects of religion. Mass literacy and aspi
rations to achieve intellectual eminence in secular fields were not nec
essarily a part of all Oriental or Sephardic traditions. This was mostly
a reflection of the largely Muslim host countries. To a large extent,
these differences between the Ashkenazim and Oriental groups were
carried to Israel and persist to this day.

Page 59 - [see page image]

46
FOR OUR SOUL
In Israel, educational and training enterprises are operated by sev
eral governmental, quasi-govemmental, and nongovernmental agen
cies such as the Ministry of Education, the Jewish Agency, the His-
tadrut (Labor Federation), the armed forces, and other independent
religious or secular organizations. Throughout the Yishuv, primary
schooling was maintained under the auspices of the different “trends”
—namely, the general, religious, and labor. Each of the trends was as
sociated with a political party, and each espoused a variant of the tra
ditions of eastern and central European Jewish education. Each tried
to use its influence to inculcate its nationalist, religious, or socialist
brand of ideology and party politics. This diversity of approaches to
national education was further complicated by the organization, con
trol, and administration of the secondary school system. The second
ary schools were not affiliated with any political party; they were in
dependent and primarily under private ownership, with the exception
of a very few vocational schools similar to the gymnasia type in cen
tral Europe. The British Mandatory Government tried on several oc
casions to unify the elementary and secondary school systems along
lines similar to those adopted by the Arab Palestinians, but their pro
posals were rejected out of fear of British cultural domination.
The demise of the trend system began to occur with the influx of
immigrants from northern Africa and other Middle Eastern countries
in the late 1940s. Immigrants had always been courted for their affili
ation with the political parties. The schools and youth movements
were means of political recruitment and indoctrination. But now,
since most of the Oriental immigrants were religious, the labor trend,
which was not religious, rushed to patronize them—going so far as to
establish a subreligious system. This political step aroused open ri
valry and accusations among the political parties supporting the
trends. The matter was referred to the Knesset resulting in a coalition
crisis and the resignation of the government. Finally, after two years
of negotiations, the State Education Law was put into effect in 1953.
This law abolished the trend system and replaced it with a unified sys
tem under the purview of the Ministry of Education and Culture. The
primary education system was divided into two categories: state
schools and state religious schools. With the exception of emphasis
on religious studies, the curricula, under the supervision of the Minis
try of Education, were standard across schools. This legislation
brought some relief, but dissensions arising from party politics, espe
cially between the religious and labor or socialist wings, continued
under numerous pretexts.

Page 60 - [see page image]

47
Israel as an Absorbing State
Since the establishment of the state, education has been conceived
as a major tool for the cultural, political, and social integration of the
olim and for the forging of a unified society out of the disparate eth
nic groups. However, as already noted, the underlying assumptions or
principles of immigrant absorption were based on two of the valued
premises of political Zionism: the collective particularism of the Jew
ish aspirations for an independent national state and the universalism
of modem Western civilization (the ultra-Orthodox wing of the reli
gious party, Agudut Israel, has its own agenda which is completely at
variance with these principles). With these premises in mind, the ab
sorption of immigrants was conceived as a complete reeducation or
resocialization of the newcomer, who in the process was to become a
new person. 25 The Oriental immigrants were expected to forgo and
forsake their past, including their Diaspora traditions, values, and cul
tures. Although in the majority, as latecomers who suffered from high
rates of illiteracy, low skill levels, and lack of democratic experiences,
they were required to adopt European standards and characteristics in
order to become participating members of Israeli society. The chal
lenges of absorbing immigrants from Europe were not so formidable,
since their cultural values were close to those being promoted in Is
rael. With the passing of time and the increased influx from Asia and
Africa, this unitary concept of absorption and integration became in
creasingly untenable, so much so that it was explicitly challenged by
the affected groups as unrealistic and discriminatory to the Orien
tals. 26 These challenges gave rise to a realignment of thinking in an
accommodationist mode.
Returning specifically to education, the gaps between the Orientals
and the Ashkenazim widened. The Orientals lagged seriously behind
in completing even their primary level education. Only a few were
able to pass the seker, the examination used for admission to the sec
ond level of education. At the secondary level, the dropout rate was
very high, and very few Oriental students were admitted to post
secondary or tertiary institutions. As the Ashkenazim moved into the
first-rate academic high schools that fed the universities, the Orientals
were channeled into the previously deserted second-rate technical
and vocational schools. 27 In other words, the Orientals were not get
ting very far with their education, and they knew that without higher
education they were not going to get anywhere in Israeli society. In
response to these challenges, a series of laws was effected between
1953 and 1978. In many respects, the problems of the Orientals were
similar to those which black Americans were experiencing in the

Page 61 - [see page image]

48
FOR OUR SOUL
United States. But in the United States, cognizance was taken of the
fact that the black minority was not benefiting from the status quo
due because of historic racial discrimination. In Israel, the problem
was attributed to differences in ethnic background, and the more
threatening factor of racial discrimination was not mentioned. In Is
rael, emphasis was placed on the Diaspora backgrounds of immi
grants which, with time and compensatory efforts, would be over
come. In other words, the difficulties were attributed to the
environmental rather than genetic backgrounds of the immigrants and
were therefore not a result of resistance of the dominant society. At
any rate, the specific goals of these laws were to encourage the enroll
ment of more children in the school systems, to encourage youth to
stay in school as long as possible, and to provide extra help for chil
dren from disadvantaged backgrounds to enable them to participate
as fully as possible in education. More specifically, in 1949, the state
provided free and compulsory education for children between the
ages of five and fourteen years and for youth ages fourteen to seven
teen who lacked elementary education. In 1953, the state abolished
the politically oriented trends system in favor of a uniform curricu
lum for all. The rationale for this law was that it would facilitate the
assimilation of the immigrants into the economic, social, and cultural
structure of the state. 28 This kind of legislative action was consistent
with the “melting pot” paradigm of absorption. But it soon was dis
covered that universal education and uniform curriculum did not
guarantee equal outcomes. Although more students were being ad
mitted to the schools, many were not graduating as expected. For in
stance, in 1956 to 1957 the ratio of Orientals in the age category of
fourteen to seventeen was 55 percent of the total, but their propor
tion in the secondary schools was only 18 percent; in the academic
secondary schools, their representation was even lower, 13 percent.
The authorities had to admit that the low achievement of Oriental
students was a result of “cognitive deprivation” during their early
childhood. This was followed by legislation to provide for
“compensatory” education along the lines followed for minorities in
the United States. Throughout this period, the aim of education was
to “change or adapt Oriental students to the existing structure of the
educational system which was elitist and largely responsible for the
failure of many Oriental students.” 29 The goal of equality of outcome,
however, remained elusive. In 1968, the School Reform Law pro
vided for the change of the educational structure from eight-plus-four
to six-plus-three-plus-three. The intention was to provide for articula-

Page 62 - [see page image]

49
Israel as an Absorbing State
tion at each stage so that the performance of students would improve
successively at each stage and to encourage social integration. The
law also provided for more qualified teachers in the middle schools; a
shift in teaching methods which emphasized inquiry rather than ver
balization; democratization of the secondary schools through elimi
nation or minimization of formal selection; and introduction of guid
ance and counseling, provision of kindergarten education,
encouragement of parental participation in school endeavors, and
fostering greater social interaction with the introduction of busing,
rezoning, and the like. But despite these reforms, the gaps remained,
especially at the secondary and college levels, with the result that
even the self-perceptions of the Oriental children were damaged. 30
Since 1975, there has been some acknowledgment that the problems
of relatively poor performance and negative self-image among Orien
tal students might have to do with the way they are instructed. Specif
ically, it was concluded that the problems may have more to do with
the nature of cultural or ethnic pluralism and less with material ine
quality between the Ashkenazim and the Orientals.
This recognition gave rise to the concession, hitherto a taboo con
cept, that ethnic pluralism was a legitimate reality in Israel’s life. In
1976, the Ministry of Education announced its intention “to integrate
the spiritual heritage of Oriental Jewry into education and culture.”
Though there remained a general tendency among educators and pol
iticians to negate ethnicity, it was felt that “in order to foster a posi
tive self-image of Oriental children, the culture, traditions, customs
and literary heritage of Oriental Jewry should find its place in the
one-sided European curriculum.” 31 It was alleged that these actions
would restore pride among Oriental students, mitigate their feelings
of inferiority to the culturally dominant Ashkenazim, and minimize
feelings of alienation in Israeli society. It is too early to evaluate the
outcomes of this shift in thinking. Casual observation of teaching
methods and classroom activities, however, suggests that little real
change is occurring. One might conclude that even in the State of Is
rael, which was created to achieve an egalitarian and just society
based on social-democratic principles, the traditional Western ethno-
centrism seems to persist.
The education system in Israel today is highly centralized under
the Ministry of Education and Culture headed by a cabinet-level offi
cer who is a member of Knesset. This central administration is re
sponsible for the training and certification of school personnel and
the curriculum. 32 The country is divided into six regions, each admin-

Page 63 - [see page image]

50
FOR OUR SOUL
istered by an inspector. The regional offices report to the cabinet
minister through the director of education, who is appointed and is
typically a professional educator. The responsibilities of the director
include the formulation and administration of national policies and
supervision of their implementation. The Ministry of Education has
two major branches: the state secular branch, which handles the non
religious education system, and the religious branch. Although both
branches have set minimum professional qualifications for teaching
staff and administrators, the certification requirements are not exactly
the same in both cases. The National Religious Party, which is re
sponsible for the maintenance and operation of the religious branch,
guards its schools closely. It is rare that one finds secular profes
sionals working in the religious schools. The secular branch maintains
criteria of professional status and employs qualified teachers whether
they are religious or secular.
Each branch has its supporters in the Knesset who negotiate politi
cally tight situations. Moreover, the political and religious factions
persist in their efforts to recruit individuals or groups of immigrants
into their own rank. Recruitment is facilitated by political clubs,
youth organizations, kibbutzim, and so on. Recruitment of new im
migrants is a very interesting aspect of national politics which, as we
will see, affected the Beta Israel. 33
With this brief background, one can see that even before the ar
rival of the Beta Israel, the culture, goals, aspirations, and expecta
tions of other Asian and African immigrants challenged the state ap
paratus and philosophy for absorption and subjected the educational
system to severe pressures. As Eisenstadt observes, “The educational
system was faced with the fact that the pioneering ideology had lost
much of its vividness and drawing power for the new Israeli genera
tion, that it could not be upheld by the teachers, did not appeal to the
new immigrants, and did not provide enough common bonds be
tween the old and the new parts of the population.” 34
In conclusion, then, it may be argued that to perceive the Ashkena
zim—their values, skills, and achievements—as superior and, in con
trast, the Orientals—what they stand for and their traditional values
—as inferior is to accept Western criteria of modernity. These include
such constructs as income, occupation, education, and power. By
these measures, the Orientals are indeed very far behind the Ashkena
zim. In other words, inequalities as measured by income, levels of ed
ucational achievement, and status attainment are glaringly apparent.
The question is how to explain the longevity of the phenomenon, de-

Page 64 - [see page image]

51
Israel as an Absorbing State
spite the society’s serious efforts to rid itself of it. There are, of
course, various answers. For instance, Chaim Adler of the Hebrew
University, who has studied these issues in depth over a long period of
time, points to the fact that the “population dispersion” policy—the
settlement of Oriental Jewish immigrants in remote parts of the coun
try—while it may have political and military importance, has tended
to aggravate the isolation of this disadvantaged category of citizens. 35
If, as postulated, social integration in heterogeneous societies such
as Israel is to be achieved, one of the primary efforts should be di
rected at achieving a structural dispersion of the various ethnic groups
so that they could interact at the institutional as well as individual lev
els and thereby come to understand and learn from one another. Be
havioral assimilation would be impossible to attain without structural
dispersion. In other words, unless the different ethnic groups live in
close proximity in residential settings, social integration would be
very hard, if not impossible, to achieve. The vexing issues of inequali
ties or perceived inequalities would persist, which, in turn, would lead
to communal friction and disharmony.
As things stand, inequalities among the various ethnic groups, most
importantly between the Ashkenazim and the Orientals, continue to
exist in educational attainment, employment opportunities, power
and status. Why the groups thus negatively affected are not going to
the streets in protest as they do in other societies has to do with the
external threat Israel is always confronted with. If that threat were
reduced, many Israeli scholars think there would be social disruption.
Researchers rule out the notion that such manifest disparities be
tween the two major subgroups of the society leading to inequalities
could be explained in terms of biological factors. Rather, they attri
bute the disparities to the different cultural backgrounds of the two
groups. It is admitted that to overcome the deficiencies represented
by the cultures and circumstances of the Orientals, massive educa
tional, training, and socialization efforts should be mounted.
Sociologist Sammy Smooha of Haifa University, himself an Orien
tal Jewish scholar, observes that the founders of it had sought to
make Israel as homogeneous and egalitarian as possible. This non-
pluralistic vision has led the nation for a long time to assume an os-
trich-like stance. “The time is overdue,” Smooha asserts, “for Israel to
come to grips with its structural pluralism, intergroup inequality and
conflict and to do justice to its disadvantaged groups. Israel’s most
cherished political stability and national cohesion are in danger unless
firm measures are taken to redress structural inequalities.” 36 Other so-

Page 65 - [see page image]

52
FOR OUR SOUL
cieties, such as the United States and Canada, have abandoned the
melting-pot theory as nonfunctional in a multiethnic society. In Israel,
for many reasons, this would be very hard to accept. But if, on the
other hand, the status quo continues, will the society continue to
grow into a harmonious whole?
Such questions are raised here primarily because the coming of the
Beta Israel, the most conspicuous minority group, may help to
sharpen the debate. Fortunately for the Beta Israel and the host soci
ety, there are forces at work now to change the situation in the right
direction. The policymakers are increasingly aware of the need not to
overlook background factors of populations in education. Students
different ethnic backgrounds do attend schools together, and more of
the disadvantaged youth are proceeding.to advanced levels. Annually,
up to 25 percent of marriages in the larger society are inter-ethnic.
Some of the Ethiopians already have begun to intermarry with the
veterans. Changes such as these augur well for the possible successful
integration of the newcomers.

Page 66 - [see page image]

❖
ILLUSTRATIONS
❖
Beta Israel boys at the praying (Wailing) Wall.

Page 67 - [see page image]

Two boys at a
bar mitzvah in
front of the
Praying Wall.
Sons and fathers at a bar mitzvah in front of the Praying Wall.

Page 68 - [see page image]

Nursery school children in Kiryat Arba (Hebron).
Yani Elchanan,
absorption center
director, Kiryat Arba,
with a Beta Israel girl.

Page 69 - [see page image]

Elders in council, Kiryat Gan.
Youth Aliyah World Director Uri Gordon chatting with T. Wagaw in front of
school Miqveh Israel near Tel Aviv.

Page 70 - [see page image]

Adult students in Mevasseret Zion near Jerusalem.
Vizunisky, in charge of Youth Aliyah programs for the Beta Israel, with the author
in Vizunisky’s office, Tel Aviv.

Page 71 - [see page image]

Workers at their tasks, Kiryat Arba.
Four generations of a Beta Israel family attending class with immigrants
from other lands.
Nurse’s aids at graduation.

Page 72 - [see page image]

Beta Israel young men at a metal workshop.
Young men at a workshop.

Page 73 - [see page image]

Recently arrived parents, their son who had come earlier, and his wife.
Demonstration in front of the prime minister’s office demanding reunification in
Israel with relatives left in Ethiopia.

Page 74 - [see page image]

53
CHAPTER THREE
The Journey and Settlement
As the Beta Israel left their Afri
can home for Israel, they must have anticipated that the move would
not be easy. But it is doubtful whether they, or anyone else, expected
the magnitude of the ordeal awaiting them. They were caught up in
actual and latent local, regional, and international rivalries and ani
mosities in and among Africa, the Middle East, and the superpowers.
Their flight from Ethiopia was exploited as a political lightning rod in
attempts to channel public attention away from the ills of these other
societies. In the process, the Ethiopians paid a heavy price arising
from their membership in a particular group of people in the Middle
East, involving their religion, race, and level of modernity. This chap
ter describes and analyzes the many intrigues and political machina
tions encountered by these people and the eventual triumph many of
them achieved in reaching their ultimate objective. The chapter also
indicates the extent to which the experiences of the Beta Israel may
affect their quest for successful settlement and integration in Israel.
In the winter of 1984, massive airlifts that came to be known as
Operation Moses effected the transfer of more than eight thousand
Ethiopian Jews from Africa to Israel. Operation Joshua, brought nine

Page 75 - [see page image]

54
FOR OUR SOUL
hundred more. Together, these were the climax, not the beginning, of
the exodus of Ethiopian Jewry from its home of more than twenty-
five hundred years. The magnitude of the escape of entire families
from religious, political, and economic oppression has as precedent in
African history only the exodus of the ancient Hebrews from Egypt
to the land of Canaan some three thousand years ago under Moses
and Joshua. This latest episode galvanized the attention of most of
the world across all spectra of beliefs, political orientation, and ideol
ogy. Up to that time, the world, which for the most part had been un
aware of the existence of African Jews, began to look into the mean
ing of the whole drama. Some people were alarmed by the political
and economic significance for the region from which the Jews came,
as well as for their destination. Even non-Jewish Ethiopians, living
outside the immediate areas of Gondar and Tigray, were, for all in
tents and purposes, ignorant about Ethiopian Jewry. In the long and
turbulent history of Ethiopia, even those people among whom the
Jews had dwelled for so long were not able to conceive of any asso
ciation between the Ethiopian Jews they called Falasha, taib, bale-ij,
kayla, or even buda,' and world Jewry or, since 1948, with the peo
ple of the State of Israel.
After the birth of the State of Israel, productive relationships in
commerce, security, education, and culture were forged and nur
tured. Following the Arab-Israeli war of 1973, Ethiopia, with other
members of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), broke diplo
matic relations with Israel. However, some tacit relations were main
tained off and on thereafter.
These positive dispositions had their roots in the religious and po
litical persuasion of Ethiopians. To begin with, the Orthodox Chris
tian faith, for long the state church, more so than other forms of
Christianity, is based on the tenets of the Old Testament, or Orit, and
on the other books that are considered apocryphal by most other
Christians but are accepted by Ethiopian Christians and Jews alike.
(The only extant book of Baruch is found in the Ge’ez language in
Ethiopia.) In addition, deeply ingrained in the ethos of Ethiopians is
the legend of the queen of Sheba, or Queen Makeda, and her union
with King Solomon of Jerusalem in the tenth century b.c. Their son,
Menelik I, was the founder of the Ethiopian Solomonic dynasty. 2
This union also gave birth to the legend that copies of the tablets (the
Tabot) on which the Mosaic Ten Commandments were inscribed, to
gether with some priests (kesoch) and cantors (debterawoch) were
transferred to Ethiopia. According to that legend, the Tabot was de-

Page 76 - [see page image]

55
Commonwealth of independent States
(formerly Union of Soviet Socialist Republics)
MAP 3. Approximation of routes followed to Israel

Page 77 - [see page image]

56
FOR OUR SOUL
posited in the historic church of Aksum Tsion (Zion). 3 This and simi
lar stories are enshrined in the highly revered book of the Kibre Ne-
gast (“Glory of the Kings”). Such legends legitimatize both political
and religious claims, as they are intended to do. But it is surprising,
with this background of intimate relations with Judaism, to learn that
the Beta Israel have been subjected to harsh discrimination and perse
cution by the very people who trace a good part of their intellectual
or religious beliefs and cultural, linguistic, and political traditions to
Judaism. The most plausible explanation may be the following com
bination: (1) In the course of time, the larger community of Ethiopi
ans was unable or unwilling to associate the Beta Israel with main
stream Judaism or even Judaic traditions. 4 (2) The maltreatment of
the Beta Israel at the hands of others was based neither on ethnicity
nor on anti-Semitic feelings. Indeed, the dichotomy that some have
drawn between the Beta Israel and the Amhara is misleading. The
Beta Israel are for all intents and purposes Amhara. Moreover, the
Christians in the area were suspicious toward any non-Orthodox reli
gion or peoples, not just the Jews. 5 (3) Over time, orthodoxy com
bined with jealousy of the special skills the Beta Israel developed to
compensate for their forced landlessness. 6 But the subjection of the
Jews to severe persecutions by the Orthodox majority, whose religion
for centuries enjoyed political and material support from the state,
was not unique. For instance, most of the Muslims, who are another
minority in the parts of Ethiopia of concern here, are also landless
and survive by engaging in trade, handicrafts, and weaving, as do the
Beta Israel. Roman Catholics and Protestants have been viewed with
grave apprehension and from time to time also were subjected to os
tracism, expropriation of property, and physical harm, until recently.
For smaller Christian sects operating in the country, such as the Pen-
tecostals and Baptists, termed addis mette (“newcomer”), the situa
tion during the Derg era (1977-1991) was very bad. Persecution was
coming not only from the local communities but also from zealot
forces of the Marxist central government.
In light of their long history of persecution and maltreatment, why
have the Jews in Ethiopia only recently come to the attention of the
world? More specifically, why, after having lived for more than
twenty-five hundred years in Ethiopia, did mass migration to Israel
become necessary? Were conditions worsening for them? Or have
they been maintaining the long-range goal of a return to the Holy
Land all this time? The reasons for recent mass emigration have to do
primarily with the current (post-1974) political, religious, and eco-

Page 78 - [see page image]

57
The Journey and Settlement
nomic conditions of Ethiopia. Their departure also was facilitated by
change in the political situation of Israel and countries in northeast
Africa such as the Sudan, Egypt, and Kenya, as well as in the United
States and, to some extent, Western Europe and what was then the
Soviet Union. Some of the political and economic entanglements of
these countries and their effects on the conditions of Ethiopian Jews
are examined below.
POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC CONTEXT
The immediate reasons for the
mass exodus of the Ethiopian Jews include (1) the drought and the
consequent famine which has become increasingly acute since 1973;
(2) the civil strife and military activities within Ethiopia which contin
ued to get worse following the 1974 revolution; (3) the increased
awareness on the part of religious or ethnic groups of their political,
cultural, or religious rights within the Ethiopian union following the
1976 Declaration of the Democratic Charter; 7 and (4) just as impor
tant as any of these for the Beta Israel, the availability of another via
ble home in Israel. 8 To escape to Israel, however, the Jews had to
mingle with the other refugees from the famine in the northern and
northwestern regions, from Eritrea, Tigray, Gondar, and parts of
Wollo. In the process of departure and resettlement, political groups
within and outside Ethiopia and the regimes of many African and
Middle Eastern countries played interesting roles whose conse
quences still reverberate across Africa and the Middle East. Needless
to say, these groups and regimes pursued their own political or eco
nomic ends unrelated to the interests of the Beta Israel. In 1973, after
a long, drawn-out debate, the Sephardi chief rabbi of Israel, Ovadia
Yosef, ruled that the Jews in Ethiopia were in fact descendants of
Dan, one of the ten lost tribes of Israel, and were therefore entitled to
avail themselves of the 1950 Law of Return which affirmed the right
of Jews in the Diaspora to return to Israel as full citizens. Two years
later, the Ashkenazi chief rabbi expressed agreement with the deci
sion, and on April 25, T 975, the government made it law. Through a
variety of channels, this decision was communicated to the Ethiopian
villages. We will return to this theme, but first let us further analyze
the factors that precipitated the emigration.

Page 79 - [see page image]

58
FOR OUR SOUL
Famines and attendant diseases have been with the people of high
land Ethiopia, off and on, for some time, especially in the Tigray and
Wollo regions, where a smaller number of Beta Israel are found. In
southern Gondar, the home of most of them, the drought was not so
severe. But the fighting between the rebels and the central govern
ment was severe enough for the young people and peasantry of these
regions to want to leave.
Since December 1960, when the first well-known unsuccessful at
tempt to oust the Haile Selassie government was made, the educated
generation of Ethiopian youth organized and staged various political
actions against the conservative and increasingly oppressive govern
ment. Schools and college campuses became centers for political
mobilization and demonstrations in favor of land reform, equitable
distribution of economic opportunities, more education for all, and
the like. The cumulative effect of these political agitations and ac
tions by students, who were later joined by people from organized la
bor and professional unions, was the popular revolution of 1974.
Haile Selassie was deposed, the constitution was suspended, and the
parliament was abolished. At all levels and in every direction in the
political, social, and economic sectors, fundamental and perhaps irre
versible changes were imposed on the country.
The military, which subsequently assumed power, tried to forge
coalitions with various civilian groups. But most of these, once again
led by the politicized student organizations, insisted on establishing a
civilian, progressive, “democratic” government of their choosing. The
military government, led by the Derg (committee), refused. Soon af
ter, the civilians, led by the students, decided to reorganize them
selves into an entity that later came to be known as Ethiopian Peo
ple’s Revolutionary Party (EPRP). EPRP, as a first stage, decided to
launch a guerrilla war against the Derg and its representatives and sup
porters under the campaign known as “white terror.” This was a fatal
mistake. The Derg retaliated against the EPRP with its own “red ter
ror.” The terror campaign against EPRP and its suspected sympathiz
ers was carried out in 1977 and 1978. 9
In spite of its considerable organizational and tactical skills, the
EPRP was no match for the government. Eventually, it was forced to
retreat from its major centers of activity, Addis Ababa in particular
and the Shoa region in general, to the northern regions of Gondar and
Tigray. In the meantime, the Derg’s pursue-and-destroy tactics re
sulted in the deaths of thousands of young people. Many were cap-

Page 80 - [see page image]

59
The Journey and Settlement
tured; some were executed, others suffered long terms in prison, and
still others were coopted to serve as informants and collaborators
with the Derg against their erstwhile compatriots. Among the cap
tured and persecuted were children as young as ten. The brutality in
flicted by the government’s forces on their victims is beyond descrip
tion. The EPRP was forced to regroup in the north, where it found
support from young Jews, among others. Retreat forced some of
these young people to seek temporary shelters in such neighboring
countries as Kenya, the Sudan, and Djibouti.
To satisfy its ever-growing need for military manpower, in 1979,
the Ethiopian government instituted a law of conscription—the first
ever in modem Ethiopia—forcing young people to serve in the armed
forces for up to three years. 10 Thousands of ill-trained or untrained
peasant youth were perishing in the civil wars raging in the north.
This decision on the part of the government added impetus for young
people and their parents to leave the country in droves.
As for the Jews, most of whom have been landless for decades, if
not for centuries, the announcement of the Land Reform Law in
1975 by the Derg was a welcome event. From now on, they could
own land, they thought, and make their livelihood. However, the
peasant associations newly established by the government across the
country continued to operate along traditional, discriminatory lines.
Committee members, at least initially drawn from the older genera
tion, tried to assign marginal or nonproductive lands to the Jews. Bet
ter lands were taken from them and given to others. In addition, with
the importation or local development of new technologies of farming
and manufacturing and the emergence of a new class of artisans
among the non-Jews, the economic conditions of the Jews went from
bad to worse. The Beta Israel’s initial joy at the prospect of owning
land must have been replaced by deep disappointment and helpless
ness. Once again, it was made clear that since, for the most part, dis
crimination against and persecution of the Jews were based at the
community level, a change of government or law did not appreciably
change their condition. In their search for alternatives, the possibility
of migrating to Israel must have seemed more and more attractive.

Page 81 - [see page image]

60
FOR OUR SOUL
THE PROMISE OF ISRAEL
Beginning in the 1960s, with the
cooperation and material and technical support of European and
North American Jewish organizations, and with some help from the
Israeli government," the Beta Israel operated some education and
health-care programs in Ethiopia. These programs included instruc
tion in Hebrew and religion. Encouraged by some changes in Ethio
pia, the Jewish ORT (Organization for Rehabilitation and Training)
initiated educational, religious, and medical programs in the Gondar
region, not only for the Beta Israel but for all Ethiopians living in the
immediate vicinity. 12 Convinced that the ORT programs supported
what the Derg was trying to institute across Ethiopia, the government
first extended a welcoming hand to the programs. ORT operated
them effectively through 1980. Then, quite suddenly, they were or
dered to cease and desist. Among the reasons adduced were that the
agency was serving as an arm of the CIA and of “world Zionism,”
anathema to a Soviet-supported regime that belonged to the Organi
zation of African Unity whose membership includes the Muslim
states of North Africa. ORT was further accused of either encourag
ing or facilitating the departure of Ethiopian Jews for Israel. 13 More
over, Payne asserts that the Israeli government feared their develop
ment activities were inculcating notions of the possibility of mass
migration to Israel among the Beta Israel—a dream Israel was not
prepared to fulfill."
So, as the Ethiopian Jews struggled to cope with the rapidly shift
ing socioeconomic circumstances within their country, and as many
of their young people were being persecuted relentlessly, the news of
the availability of a viable option filtered to their several villages. This
was indeed news. Except for a brief episode in 1836, the Beta Israel
generally have believed that their redemption had to await the com
ing of the Messiah, who would gather the faithful together in the
Holy City of Jerusalem in eternal peace, justice, and harmony.
Some Beta Israel youth had gone to Israel in the 1950s primarily as
students to receive vocational and religious training. Most returned to
Ethiopia to work for the government or in the Jewish villages as
teachers or religious instructors. But the influence of these teachers,
traveling back and forth, was very limited and affected only a small

Page 82 - [see page image]

61
The Journey and Settlement
number of young people. Despite both ancient and more recent cor
dialities between Ethiopia and Israel, permanent emigration of Ethio
pians, no matter how subjugated or despised, was never any part of
Ethiopian culture. Not only Ethiopians but leading European and
North American scholars as well documented that the Ethiopian Jews
were busy trying to improve their lot within Ethiopia. The concept of
aliyah, the ingathering of Jews of the Diaspora, did not apply to
them. 15
Nevertheless, political and economic conditions in Ethiopia con
tinued to deteriorate rapidly. World Jewry’s influence became palpa
ble. The new government of Menachem Begin approached the Derg
to discuss the legal emigration of Jews to Israel. 16 Given the Ethiopian
tradition regarding emigration of citizens, and especially the then-
prevailing domestic and international political situation, one would
have expected the Derg to refuse. But that is not what transpired.
Pressed as it was, the Derg instead decided to use this leverage to ob
tain weapons and munitions from Israel to use in its fight against So
malia and the local rebels. The two governments concluded agree
ments in 1977. Two Israeli aircraft flew to Addis Ababa loaded with
weapons and ammunition. On their way back to Tel Aviv, they trans
ported 121 Beta Israel people from Addis Ababa. It is probable that
such arrangements might have continued were it not for the unfortu
nate (some say deliberate) and premature disclosure by the minister of
foreign affairs of Israel, Moshe Dayan, at a press conference in Switz
erland in 1977 that Israel was indeed helping Ethiopia’s war efforts
through the provision of essential armaments. As could be expected,
this disclosure was viewed as extremely embarrassing and politically
damaging by the Derg, which vented its anger not only by denying the
whole story but also by expelling all Israelis from Ethiopia. Legal mi
gration was frozen. From then on, in the face of the worsening condi
tion of the Beta Israel group, and under mounting pressure from the
American Association for Ethiopian Jews (AAEJ) and other individu
als and similar organizations elsewhere, other means of escape had to
be found for the Ethiopians. With the cooperation of Kenya and the
Sudan, small groups of people began to slip out from Africa to Israel.
Still, the total number of Ethiopian Jews who settled in Israel up to
1979 may not have been more than four hundred. Thousands more
were waiting.
Toward the end of 1979, a new and dramatic phase began. With
stepped-up rebel activities in Tigray, Eritrea, and parts of Gondar and
Wollo, cooperation to facilitate the passage of the Jews to neighbor-

Page 83 - [see page image]

62
FOR OUR SOUL
ing countries and from there to Israel improved. At the same time, Is
rael’s increasing hospitality was becoming more widely known in the
villages and hamlets of the Ethiopian Jews. Ethiopians in Israel wrote
letters home, and some were even smuggled back by the Mossad, the
Israeli secret service, to help establish escape routes. 17 Now hundreds
of people from the southern parts of Tigray and from Wolqait left
their villages for the Sudan en route to Israel. By 1980, when nearly
half a million Ethiopians were in the Sudanese refugee camps, about
three thousand Jews were among them. The agents instructed the
Beta Israel people about the opportunities for escape and how the
journey could be facilitated to the Sudan. The villagers were assured
that if they made it to the Sudan or Kenya, the trip from there to Is
rael would be relatively simple. Some of these Israeli-Ethiopians
served as guides along prearranged routes where provisions were hid
den. Other cooperating agents on both the Ethiopian and the Su
danese sides were recruited to help.
THE SUDANESE
The person and the country that
played significant roles in the flight of the refugees need to be de
scribed at this point. The Sudan, Africa’s largest country, has had a
history of shifting alliances in regard to regional politics as well as re
lations with the superpowers over the last twenty-five years. Colonel
Gaffar al-Nimeiri came to power in 1969 in a Soviet-supported coup
inspired by the Egyptian revolution of 1952 led by Gamal Abdel Nas
ser. Two years later, in 1971, Nimeiri’s efforts to reduce Soviet influ
ence in his country led to an attempted coup against him which he
soon crushed with the support of Colonel Muammar Qaddafi of Li
bya. But subsequently, when Nimeiri stalled on the proposed merger
of the Sudan with Egypt and Libya, a perpetual dream of Qaddafi’s,
the latter began to plot to overthrow Nimeiri. In 1976, yet another
coup was attempted. Organized and financed by Libya, it was led by
Sadik el-Mahdi, a descendant of the Sudanese hero by the same
name. This time, Nimeiri turned to Egypt for help and was able to de
feat Sadik el-Mahdi and the Libyans. It was inevitable that events
such as these continued to play pivotal roles regarding the political
alliances and policies affecting the conditions of the Ethiopian
refugees. 18

Page 84 - [see page image]

63
The Journey and Settlement
The decision of the Sudanese government to open its borders to
thousands of Ethiopian refugees may have been influenced by the re
alization that the border of more than six hundred miles between the
two countries could not be sealed. And, as some have claimed, the
government’s reasons also may have included Nimeiri’s mother’s ori
gins in northwestern Ethiopia. Nimeiri himself has cultivated a deep
friendship with many Ethiopians from different walks of life. What
ever the underlying reasons, his manifest attitude was that the Sudan
could not turn away hungry women and children. But the Sudan is an
Arab state and a member of the Arab League. It was forbidden by law
to do anything that would promote or facilitate the policies or ac
tions of Israel. Handling the Beta Israel issue was a political as well as
moral dilemma for Nimeiri. At the initial stage, at least, his policy was
to let the Beta Israel come to the Sudan like any other refugees and to
let them proceed to Israel as long as this was done with great care and
discretion. For a time, this policy worked. Groups of Beta Israel ar
rived in Israel via the Sudan by air. The Israeli public as well as the lo
cal and international press knew of these operations but cooperated
with the government’s request to maintain secrecy. To a large extent,
a remarkable degree of discretion was exercised for a long time.
However, the influx of Jews to the refugee camps accelerated. By
1983, the number of Beta Israel in the camps greatly exceeded the
number of people departing for Israel. Hundreds of people were
dying daily from diseases, malnutrition, or starvation, and from mal
treatment at the hands of camp officials and inmates. 19 Between 1983
and 1984, an estimated three thousand to five thousand Beta Israel
perished during the flight and from disease and privation in the refu
gee camps. According to those who survived and made it to absorp
tion camps in Israel, beatings, imprisonment, robbery, and rape were
also part of the ordeals en route to and in the camps. 20 Survivors re
lated in 1985 that robbery came at the hands the shiftas (vagabonds)
as well as government officials. In many instances, they thought the
shiftas and government officials worked together. They reported that
they were robbed of clothing, food, and whatever little money or per
sonal effects they had with them.
As the refugees tell it, within Ethiopia, the attitude of the Derg was
stubborn and oppressive. Local officials such as Major Melaku Te-
ferra (his name means “angel” in Amharic), the governor of Gondar
region, 21 stood firmly against letting them go. At first, those Beta Is
rael who were captured as they tried to escape were beaten up, im
prisoned, and told not to try again. This seems to have worked ini-

Page 85 - [see page image]

64
FOR OUR SOUL
tially. But with the passage of time and the increased worsening of
their conditions, more and more of them attempted to get out. Many
succeeded. Eventually even Melaku Teferra was forced to admit it
was futile to attempt to stop the flight. What seems to have followed
was a policy of denial, ignoring the whole effort as if it did not exist.
In the meantime, in the Sudanese refugee camps, the situation for
the internees was growing worse. As reports about camp conditions
reached the outside world, pressures mounted on Israel to find alter
native, even unorthodox, means of getting the Beta Israel to Israel.
The Nimeiri government, on the other hand, fully aware of the politi
cal implications, refused to let a mass exodus to Israel take place di
rectly from its soil. The Israeli government now turned to a mutual
friend, the U.S. government, 22 to apply whatever pressure it could on
the Sudan. In response, the then-roving ambassador, General Vernon
Walters, discussed the need for a massive lift of the Beta Israel with
Nimeiri early in 1984 on a visit to the Sudan. In March of the same
year, Vice President George Bush followed this up during his visit to
the Sudan. In the meantime, the AAEJ, the strongest advocacy organi
zation on behalf of the Beta Israel, was letting the world know the Is
raeli government was stalling and urged the U.S. Congress and admin
istration to supply needed material and human resources.
In Israel, the Shimon Peres government was becoming increasingly
aware of the urgency of the matter but was also convinced it could
do very little without the full cooperation of the Sudanese govern
ment. Accordingly, Peres dispatched his deputy prime minister and
minister of foreign affairs, Yitzhak Shamir, to Washington to plead
with Ronald Reagan’s administration to prevail on the Sudanese to
cooperate, and to do it quickly. The U.S. administration in turn al
ready was feeling pressure from Congress and lobbyists to do some
thing on behalf of the Jews. Accordingly, the United States instructed
its embassy in Khartoum to do whatever was necessary to cooperate
with the Israeli and Sudanese governments.
The worsening political and economic conditions of the Sudan,
like those of Ethiopia, continued to play a significant role affecting
the welfare and eventual fate of the Beta Israel. Sudan had a debt bur
den of more than nine billion dollars, food production was low,
drought and famine were realities in the daily lives of millions of its
citizens, and it was fighting a prolonged and debilitating civil war
against the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), led by Colo
nel John Garang, who was supported by Ethiopia and Libya. Fighting
to survive and to bolster his sagging prestige, Nimeiri promulgated

Page 86 - [see page image]

65
The Journey and Settlement
the Sharia, or Islamic Law, in 1985. This might have gained him some
friends in the Arab world but did not help improve his relations with
the SPLA, which is made up of Christians and animists. As he well
knew, Nimeiri was in troubled waters. He did not need additional
problems. But given the urgent economic conditions on top of the
political ones, he was bound to respond positively to the demands for
facilitating the departure of the Beta Israel, even if that could lead to
further trouble. It was American financial aid, more than $197 mil
lion in 1984 with a promise of $250 million for 1985, which was later
doubled, that persuaded him. As was later brought out during the
trials of former officials, some monies from Israel and from other
Jewish sources might have been promised and delivered as well, either
to compensate the Sudan for its efforts or to purchase and equip
transport vehicles, provide safe houses, and meet security expenses.
Even now, however, Nimeiri resisted Israel’s wishes to move the
Beta Israel to Israel through the port of Sudan by boat or by any di
rect means. 23 However, Nimeiri did agree to the use of civilian air
lines to transport the refugees, but he insisted that this, too, had to be
done discreetly, on a small scale, and indirectly, to some location
other than Israel. Finally, the Belgian-based, Jewish-owned European
Airways was identified, agreements were secured, and the major op
eration was ready. Commenting on possible economic retaliation by
the Arabs, the owner of European Airways, George Gutleman, is re
ported to have said, “There is no greater obligation than the redemp
tion of captives.” 24 The Nimeiri government could not have been
more cautious. It tried to plug all loopholes, cover all tracks of com
plicity, and avert the wrath that would inevitably erupt in the Sudan,
other Arab countries, even the larger Islamic world. The Sudanese
tightened security around the camps where the Beta Israel were con
centrated. Visitors to the camps were barred. Certain government of
ficials, trusted only incompletely, and some individuals representing
international aid organizations were removed from positions where
they might be able to observe or interfere with secret operations. For
instance, in October 1984, the Sudanese commissioner for refugees
was summarily fired on the grounds that he had defied the Sharia
by drinking hard liquor. The truth was that he knew too much and
was about to know a great deal more of what was to transpire around
the camps.
Israeli agents continued to infiltrate the Beta Israel camps as spot
ters to identify, round up, and bring the emigrants together at desig
nated centers. At about this time (October 1984), a Sudanese diplo-

Page 87 - [see page image]

66
FOR OVR SOUL
mat is reported to have traveled to Switzerland to meet with
representatives of the Mossad and the Jewish Agency. There monies
were exchanged for the Jews’ safe departure and perhaps to reward
individual or collective official efforts for cooperation. 25
Finally, on November 21, 1984, one of the biggest ventures of its
kind in recent world history, later to be known as Operation Moses,
got under way. Between that time and January 6, 1985, Boeing 707s
made at least thirty-five flights between Khartoum and Tel Aviv via a
number of western European countries. The planes flew over Egypt,
stopping in several European airports for refueling, rest, and exchange
of flight personnel. Most of their charges were in terrible mental and
physical condition. In case of trouble that might have interrupted the
operation, it was decided to transport the weak, the children, and the
elderly first.
The operation was going well and might have taken care of nearly
all who needed to be removed, but the secret was leaked by an offi
cer of the Jewish Agency and later officially confirmed by Peres in a
press conference in Tel Aviv. The disclosure of the venture embar
rassed the Sudanese and Ethiopian governments and the operation
was brought to an abrupt halt. After a delay of some three months,
with the help of American military and CIA resources, an additional
eight hundred to nine hundred people were airlifted to Israel. Known
as Operation Joshua, this got most of the remaining Jewish refugees
out of the camps. The few left behind migrated to other countries, re
turned to Ethiopia, or died in the Sudan. Official doors have been
closed since then, but a trickle of Beta Israel continue to find their
way to Israel. In May 1991, a huge airlift brought nearly fifteen thou
sand Beta Israel from Addis Ababa to Tel Aviv. Since then, most of
the remaining have joined their relatives in Israel. For all practical
purposes, Ethiopian Jewry is totally uprooted from that country
which had been their home for centuries.
REPERCUSSIONS
For a period of at least six weeks,
Israeli officials and newspapers as well as international agencies had
agreed implicitly to honor the request of the Israeli military censors to
refrain from discussing any aspect of the operation. However, some

Page 88 - [see page image]

67
The Journey and Settlement
mayors began to raise questions regarding their ability to absorb the
newcomers, religious leaders were concerned about the Halakic im
plications of the new arrivals, and parliamentarians were dismayed at
both. When the leak finally occurred, it traveled through a very un
usual route.
The director-general of the quasi-govemmental Jewish Agency,
Yehuda Dominitz, revealed the existence of Operation Moses in an
interview with a very inconspicuous right-wing newspaper, Netuda,
published by a small group of West Bank Jewish settlers. 26 On Janu
ary 3, 1985, early in the day, two big daily tabloids, Yediot Ahvonot
and Ma’ariv, played up the story on their front pages. It is still a mys
tery how the story got through the censors. Netuda was not cen
sored, but the story was picked up by the Itim news agency on
Wednesday, January 2. When the two papers played up the story the
next day, the floodgate was opened. The international news agencies
spread the reports worldwide, and, as the article “An Unfinished
Rescue” in the Jerusalem Post on January 6, 1985, observed: “The
dike was in shambles. . . . Certainly no international, no African and
no humane interest can be served by any interruption of this exodus.
It must be hoped . . . that once the present hue and cry subsides the
effort can be resumed and the remaining refugee Jews of Ethiopia re
united with their families here.” But the repercussions of the disclo
sure reverberated worldwide, including in the United States, Africa,
and the Middle East. The Peres government held a press conference
on the January 4 to confirm the existence of the operation. This was
more than other governments could stand. Whatever tacit or explicit
help had been given, they did not expect it to come back at them this
way.
Senior American White House and State Department officials as
well as American Jewish individuals and spokespersons of various or
ganizations claimed to have been shocked and deeply annoyed by Is
rael’s decision to lift military censorship of the sensitive operation
Israeli officials claimed they had permitted publication only of the
absorption of the Jews, not the details of the airlift. Indeed, on Janu
ary 7, 1985, the Jerusalem Post reported in an article entitled
“Ethiopians Upset and Bitter over Airlift Halt” that the Jewish Agency
chairman hoped the worldwide publicity, on the contrary, would en
sure continuity of the scheme. While sending messages to the Ameri
can administration that the disclosure forced it to bring the operation
to a halt, the Sudan government accused Ethiopia of selling its Jewish
citizens for twenty million dollars in spare military parts. The Ethiopi-

Page 89 - [see page image]

68
FOR OUR SOUL
ans retaliated by labeling the Sudanese Zionist sympathizers who had
abducted the Ethiopians for money. Libya demanded an emergency
meeting of the Arab League to discuss the operation. Within Israel,
the opposition parties in the Knesset threatened a motion of no confi
dence in the government, charging that by officially confirming the
news reports, the Jewish Agency had jeopardized thousands of Beta
Israel still trapped in Ethiopia or other Third World countries. The
severest critics, however, were the veteran Beta Israel in Israel. A
crowd of two hundred fifty demonstrators marched in Jerusalem to
demand punishment for those responsible for the disclosure. “This is
sabotage. . . . This is calculated murder,” they thundered. In the
“Unfinished Rescue” article in the Jerusalem Post on January 6, 1985,
some others reportedly accused Israel of trying to back out of its
commitment to bring all those who wanted to come to Israel. Prime
Minister Peres tried to reassure all those who would listen. He in
sisted that the airlift would continue. “No economic difficulty, no in
ternal distress, no geographical distance and no political obstacle will
halt the effort,” he said. “We shall not rest until all our brothers and
sisters from Ethiopia come home.” 27
The Soviet Union, picking up the rehearsed lines from Ethiopia’s
Mengistu, opined that the United States had misused the funds desig
nated for relief to “abduct” Ethiopians. Mengistu appeared on televi
sion shows in Canada, insisting that the Ethiopians were not Jews,
that they were abducted and held in Israel against their will, and that,
given the chance, they would like to return to Ethiopia. In that May
1985 interview, he claimed that since they were not permitted to do
so, many were committing suicide. 28
The Sudan, because of its strategic location relative to the Persian
Gulf, is of vital economic interest to the West. Its geographic signifi
cance is strategically complicated: it borders on Egypt, Libya, and
Ethiopia, all of which are of vital importance to the global jockeying
of the United States, and it bestrides the Arab and sub-Saharan cul
tures on the continent of Africa. Nimeiri had balanced the various
conflicting pressures quite successfully, securing needed support and
assistance from both East and West. But from the early 1970s on, he
tried to align his government more with the West and received a sub
stantial amount of military and economic assistance over the years.
Now, when the West tried to call upon his assistance in the migration
of the Beta Israel, he delayed, fully aware of the repercussions sure to
follow once his complicity was revealed. And when the disclosure did
occur, his regime was indeed vilified by the Arab League, Ethiopia,

Page 90 - [see page image]

69
The Journey and Settlement
Libya, and a number of other Third World countries. His govern
ment was seriously undermined, so much so that his erstwhile allies
were already counting him out. The United States, for instance, was
withholding promised aid, and Egypt was apprehensively watching
the accelerating process of decline.
The occasion of Nimeiri’s state visit to the United States via Egypt
was seized by some of his military officers, led by his defense minis
ter, Lieutenant-General Suwar al-Dahab, to stage a successful coup on
April 4, 1985. Nimeiri stayed in Egypt. What transpired in the Sudan
as well as in other Arab countries following the coup demonstrated
political duplicity and intrigue of unusual proportions, highlighting
once again the fragile nature of the regional and international eco
nomic, military, and cultural alliances.
The new military council led by al-Dahab and the civilian cabinet
headed by Dr. Gizzuli Daffa-Allah, as prime minister, must have taken
stock of the conditions of the Sudan they inherited—the wrecked
economy, the drought and famine, political polarization among the
citizens based on religion and ethnicity, and a civil war that had been
festering for more than two years. They also knew that these condi
tions had grown worse while the Sudan was still enjoying the material
and political support of its erstwhile principal allies, the United States
and Egypt. The Sudanese decided to realign themselves with their
neighbors without, they hoped, alienating their traditional allies.
They approached both Ethiopia and Libya for reconciliation. These
two countries had up to now supported the SPLA in the south. If
Ethiopia and Libya could be persuaded to see the new government as
meriting reconciliation, the Sudanese thought, then John Garang,
leader of the SPLA, would have no chance of survival and would
soon be forced to the conference table for negotiation and accom
modation. The Sudanese also sent a high-level delegation to Moscow
to plead for Soviet help to persuade Ethiopia not to support the
SPLA. 29
In the meantime, the new leadership wanted to rally its citizenry in
support of its initiatives. This, they thought, could be done by putting
members of the former government on trial, thus diverting attention
from other problems. The main crime with which these former gov
ernment officials were charged was Sudan’s participation in the airlift
of Ethiopian Jews to Israel. As a member of the Arab League, the Su
dan had statutes prohibiting any kind of dealing with Israel. The four-
month trial in the fall of 1985, which was broadcast daily over radio
and television, tried to highlight what were considered Nimeiri’s fail-

Page 91 - [see page image]

70
FOR OUR SOUL
ures and looked closely at the activities of American officials in the
Sudan, in particular Ambassador Hume A. Horan. In the trial the
attorney general charged that the airlift had been supervised by the
U.S. embassy in Khartoum and that the CIA also had played an
active role. 30
The former first vice president, who was also in charge of the State
Security Forces, Major General Omar Mohammed el-Tayeb, was the
major figure in the trial. Attorney General Omar Abdel Ati charged,
for the state, that Tayeb was a culprit in undermining the constitution
and instigating war against the state and was guilty of treason and
spying. The charge added that the Sudanese penal code and constitu
tion prohibited dealings with Israel and that the airlift constituted
strategic support for Israel. In the meantime, the occasion was used to
highlight the complicity of the American embassy in the activities.
Tayeb was sentenced to two thirty-year terms, the equivalent of two
life terms. 31 The attorney general had wanted a death sentence and
said he would appeal. Tayeb also said he would appeal. While the
trial lasted, the Sudanese radio and TV public was entertained daily
with the detailed reporting of the Beta Israel airlift and the roles
played by the former officials and the U.S. government. Apparently
the public enjoyed it. 32 But the government’s hopes that the trial
would serve as a lightning rod were of short-lived. Sudan had to face
the realities confronting it.
The Ethiopians’ response to the Sudanese quest for reconciliation
consisted of two demands: (1) that the Sudanese government expel
the Eritrean and Tigrean rebel forces from the Sudan, and (2) that the
Sudanese culprits in the airlift should be brought to trial. Libya, on
the other hand, was eager to establish diplomatic ties and concluded
military agreements with the Sudanese. Libya also gave three hundred
thousand metric tons of free oil as well as two military aircraft to Su
dan and provided employment opportunities for thousands of Su
danese laborers in Libya. Libya did not seem to have any hesitation
about abandoning the SPLA, which it had been supporting against the
Khartoum government. The United States, for its part, continued to
provide economic, military, and famine assistance (four hundred fifty
million dollars for 1985 fiscal year) but reduced its staff in the Sudan
significantly, charging that the political climate in that country threat
ened the security of American personnel. 33 Egypt found itself in a very
precarious situation. After some hesitation, it, too, came up with
some fourteen million dollars in military aid, which was substantially
increased later.

Page 92 - [see page image]

71
The Journey and Settlement
The Ethiopian Jews long have maintained that they have been used
as pawns in the games of Ethiopian and foreign politicians. It is in
deed clear that they were caught in political webs and that their vic
timization was irrelevant to the players of the games. For the Jews,
the end does not yet seem to be in sight.
SUMMARY
The flight of Ethiopian Jews from
Ethiopia to Israel has been full of drama, conflict, tragedy, and
triumph. The Ethiopians, when they eventually decided to leave their
country of origin en masse for the Promised Land, ran into a complex
of problems they could not have imagined. They might have been
familiar with corrupt local government officials and with bandits who
robbed and plundered them, but how could they have anticipated
that they would become an issue of such grave importance to leaders
of African and Middle Eastern countries, let alone the superpowers?
The repercussions of the events must be viewed not only in global
terms but also in human terms for the sake of the immediate and
long-term well-being—mental, physical, and social—of those who
survived the ordeal and those who are still trapped in Ethiopia. In the
course of the whole episode, it must be recalled, many families were
separated. Parents departed with only some or none of their children;
children left their parents. Under Operation Solomon most of the re
maining Beta Israel have come to Israel. Now, the question for those
who survived the long ordeals is not separation from loved ones but
surviving and eventually flourishing in the new home. The question
must be, once again, what will be the future of this ancient, proud,
and battered people?

Page 93 - [see page image]

72
CHAPTER FOUR
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
❖
This chapter deals with the family
in its various forms, compositions, and relations. It presents briefly
the traditional goals and practices for conducting life before coming
to the new land and proceeds to discuss how family members once in
Israel are coping, collectively and individually, with the tremendous
challenges; the types and quality of resources provided by the host
society to facilitate the survival and adaptation of the family; and the
immigrants’ perceptions of the service providers and material re
sources. The chapter concludes with consideration of some of the
main problems—technical, human, and perceptual—that have
emerged how these challenges and issues have been handled, and the
consequences of decisions made and actions taken.
THE SETTING
Organized immigration to Israel
from Ethiopia began toward the end of 1979. Before that time, there

Page 94 - [see page image]

73
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
were approximately four hundred Ethiopians in Israel. They had
come over beginning in the mid-1950s individually or in small groups,
primarily for purposes of education, to accompany a spouse, or for
other individual interests unrelated to aliyah. The only exceptions
were those 121 people who came in 1977 under a bilateral agreement
between the governments of Ethiopia and Israel. As indicated already,
that event had no precedent and was halted abruptly when an Israeli
politician carelessly made it public. Following that episode, legal or
open emigration visas were denied to the Ethiopian Jews. Alternative
strategies were devised. Most of the sixteen thousand (1988 estimate)
immigrants now in Israel escaped from Ethiopia in two stages be
tween 1980 and 1985.
The first stage began sometime in February 1980 and continued
through November 1984. In these years, some seventy-five hundred
immigrants, mainly from Tigray province and adjoining districts, ar
rived in Israel. The second stage, known as Operation Moses, began
on November 21, 1984, and ended on January 6, 1985. Operation
Moses, together with the mopping-up operation in March 1985,
brought approximately eight thousand more immigrants. Although
dramatic, massive airlifts were interrupted for a long time, small
groups of Beta Israel continued to find their way to Israel through dif
ferent channels. Between 1980 and 1985, some fifteen thousand im
migrants had arrived in Israel. Since 1985, approximately five hundred
more Ethiopians have come in small groups, making a total of sixteen
thousand Beta Israel immigrants. 1 However, these latecomers tend to
differ from earlier emigres. Many are from urban areas such as Addis
Ababa and had attained (or their parents or spouses had attained) sig
nificant positions in teaching, the health professions, or the civil ser
vice before leaving Ethiopia for Israel. The rest are young people with
considerable formal educational background. This group, then, is
comprised of Beta Israel who had become well integrated into the
mainstream of Ethiopian society. As the general conditions in Ethio
pia worsened, they came to see Israel as a viable alternative and began
to claim their erstwhile dormant rights. 2
When we consider the conditions and characteristics of the Beta
Israel in this chapter, we have in mind those who arrived in the two
stages between 1980 and early 1985. Most of those who arrived in
the first stage were from the Tigray administrative region. The Ti-
grean group constitutes about 20 percent of the estimated thirty thou
sand total Beta Israel population, including those still in Ethiopia.
Their native language is Tigrigna; Amharic is a second language.

Page 95 - [see page image]

74
FOR OUR SOUL
Those from Gondar and districts adjoining Tigray province, on the
other hand, generally speak both languages and are more versatile in
relating themselves to or dealing with the two major ethnic groups of
Tigreans and Gondares (Amharas). As a result of the Italian invasion
in the 1930s and the consequent movement of populations, a consid
erable number of intermarriages have taken place between people liv
ing in the border areas.
According to the Jewish Agency, the total number of families was
estimated at three thousand, and an additional two thousand adults
were singles. Many of the families were broken up through separation
or death, either on the way to third countries, such as the Sudan and
Kenya (mostly the latter), or in the refugee camps. Between three
thousand and five thousand people are believed to have died. 3
Although as a whole there were more men than women among the
immigrants (56 percent men, 44 percent women), in 1986, the Jewish
Agency estimated that nine hundred, or about 30 percent, of the
three thousand Ethiopian families in Israel were single-parent fami
lies. This is a reflection of the toll the hardships had taken. Moreover,
80 percent of these single-parent households were headed by females.
Among these females who headed households, 44 percent were di
vorced, 24 percent were widowed, 30 percent were married but had
husbands who were left in Ethiopia or had abandoned the family
since coming to Israel, and 2 percent were unwed mothers. About 60
percent of these women were younger than forty (36 percent of
whom were younger than thirty). In light of the fact that the female
population is the less literate or skilled and traditionally has been
restricted to the home, families headed by females present formid
able challenges in skill development, employment, socialization, and
adaptation. 4
Table 1 depicts the age structure of the immigrants. 5 It can be seen
that 7,620, or more than 52 percent, of the immigrants were younger
than eighteen. Of the remaining Beta Israel immigrants, 27 percent
were between 19 and 34; 8 percent, or 1,120, were between 35 and
44; 7 percent, or 1,080, between 45 and 64. Those 65 years of age and
older number only 860, 6 percent of the total.
Among those thirty-seven years of age or older, more than 90 per
cent were illiterate; very few females were literate. Among those
younger than twenty-five, about 37 percent had at least six years of
some kind of formal education. Nearly all of the adult population are
of peasant background and unskilled, and most had never traveled
beyond the immediate environs of their respective villages.

Page 96 - [see page image]

75
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
TABLE 1
Beta Israel immigrant population characteristics
Age group
Number
Percentage
0-3
992
6.8
4-6
1,442
9.9
7-12
2,598
17.8
13-14
782
5.3
15-18
1,806
12.4
19-24
1,970
13.5
25-34
1,950
13.3
35-44
1,120
7.7
45-65
1,080
7.4
66+
860
5.9
Total
14,600
100.0
Children and youth
7,620
52.2
Adults
6,980
47.8
Source: Jewish Agency of Israel and the Ministry of Immigration, Government of
Israel.
The demographic picture clearly shows that the immigrants are
overwhelmingly young and in need of tremendous amounts of train
ing, education, and socialization in line with the requirements of the
new realities. As a result of the traumatic experiences the immigrants
went through to reach Israel and their encounter with what must
seem to be an alien, confusing, complex, and overwhelming modem
technological society, the immigrant community is in serious crisis. It
may continue to deteriorate, unless determined, well-conceived inter
ventions are made at the different stages of the absorption process.
The Jewish Agency, the Ministry of Education and Culture, and the
Labor Federation or Histadrut have the challenge and opportunity to
organize the institutions of learning and training—the family, the

Page 97 - [see page image]

76
FOR OUR SOUL
schools, and the numerous training institutions sponsored by the gov
ernment—and to address the many needs of the group in terms of
skills, knowledge, and attitude formation.
CONCEPTUAL CONSTRUCTS
For immigrants, surviving and pre
vailing in a new society are facilitated by strong ego identity which
may be derived from strong primary group and family identity and
family support. 6
In addition, I suggest that the speed and quality of integration and
adaptation of immigrants are a function of the policies and orienta
tion of organizations—secular, religious, democratic, socialist, etc.;
the quality of the leadership in the organization(s) and the circum
stances under which they operate, at least at the initial stages; and the
ratio of the new immigrants to members of the receiving society. If
the number of newcomers is relatively large in relation to the popula
tion of the veteran community, the latter come to feel they are re
quired to carry too heavy a burden relative to their capacity to help
the immigrants without jeopardizing their own legitimate interests. In
other words, competition for limited resources tends to breed nega
tive attitudes toward the newcomers. Hence, a prudent policy pro
vides for a fair distribution of national burdens or responsibilities for
the immigrants among the receiving communities in proportion to the
resources at their disposal. If not, resentments build up, and eventu
ally the immigrants get hurt and form negative attitudes toward their
new country, while the host community remains bitter and divided
and may have to live with a residue of guilt. Also important are the
age structure and educational attainments of the immigrants. The
younger and more educated immigrants have more opportunities and
are therefore more likely to adapt successfully. Finally, the tempo of
immigration, settlement, and transition are vital ingredients in the
quality and speed of adaptation. If too many immigrants arrive within
a short time without adequate advance information and preparation
on the part of the host society, the newcomers tend to put too much
strain on available local capabilities and resources. As a result, either
the quality and amount of services suffer, or the absorbing society
is compelled to reach beyond its borders in search of additional

Page 98 - [see page image]

77
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
assistance. Such assistance may not be forthcoming, or it may come
too late.
THE MANNER OF HOMECOMING
To come to the Promised Land,
most of the Ethiopian olim experienced many hardships and much
suffering at the hands of government officials, vagabonds and ban
dits, and inmates. They suffered hunger and disease and witnessed the
deaths of many relatives at refugee camps. Since they left Ethiopia se
cretly, decisions had to be made about which family members should
leave first. Usually the young, who were more likely to survive the ar
duous and dangerous journey, were encouraged to leave first. An esti
mated three thousand to five thousand people perished in the pro
cess. Those who did manage to survive were in horrible condition by
the time they reached Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv. At first, there
was some relief; the ordeal was over. But gradually, remorse and guilt
set in as they realized family members left behind would not be able
to follow soon and conditions in Ethiopia were worsening. Nearly
everyone who emigrated from the Gondar region left some close
family member or members behind. Reports coming from Ethiopia
regarding the drought and famine in general, and the continued mis
treatment of the Jews left behind in particular, further aggravated the
conditions of the olim. They tried to pressure the government of Is
rael to try new means to free their mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers,
sons, and daughters from Ethiopia. Demonstrations ensued, and
promises were made. But the situation did not improve, making adap
tation all the harder. More than anything else, the plight of the rela
tives they left behind continues to be a constant concern.
THE CHANGING ROLES
Ethiopian Jewish society is based
on patriarchy. At the turn of this century, Faitlovitch made some in
sightful observations about their family life. His remarks on divorce,
for instance, may be somewhat exaggerated, but otherwise the condi-

Page 99 - [see page image]

78
FOR OUR SOUL
tions he describes are remarkably similar to those found today. He
noted: “I speak ... of their life, which has preserved the patriarchal
character of the ancient Jewish family life. Polygamy or divorce are
things unknown among the Falasha. Their families are fairly numer
ous; on the average they have six children.” 7 The male, usually the fa
ther and husband of the household, is the dominant figure. He sets
the rules governing how the family should function, gives orders and
assignments to each member, and otherwise assumes the position of
unquestioned authority. In matters of spiritual and judicial activities,
the village elder, usually a kes (priest), is expected to provide guidance
and render justice. The woman, on the other hand, is expected to
obey or otherwise fully recognize the authority of her husband; she
has certain responsibilities within the household and is expected to
discharge her duties with the assistance of other women in the house
hold, such as mature daughters or daughters-in-law. In public life, the
woman has the right to initiate divorce. If successful, she takes half
the wealth accrued in the family during the marriage. Custody of mi
nor children is awarded on the basis of the age, gender, and inclina
tion of the children as well as the ability and fitness of each parent to
look after their well-being. During his visit to the Ethiopian Jews in
the Gondar region in about 1867 on behalf of Alliance Israelite, Hal-
evy, a Jewish Orientalist from France, observed that the women of
the villages participated fully in public discourse on matters related to
religious and village life. He noted: “Women . . . take part in public
gatherings as well as men. . . . They state their views on all questions,
and their opinions, especially on the subject of the laws of purifica
tion, prevail over those of men.... They are all very religious, and do
not omit to recite their morning and evening prayers.” 8
The mainstay of the family’s economy was subsistence farming and
craft work of many types. In this endeavor, all members of the family,
including children age seven and older, contributed labor. But the
central figure was the father. The rest of the family looked to him as
protector, provider, and leader in all spheres of family life. The
mother was primarily responsible for the upbringing of both male and
female children. When sons reached the age of five or so, the father
assumed full responsibility for them. The mother continued to be re
sponsible for the daughters.
On the whole, both parents, assisted by members of the extended
family, such us grandparents, uncles, and aunts living in the same vil
lage or in one of the nearby villages, recognized the gravity of their
responsibilities in raising their children. On all occasions, skills, mor-

Page 100 - [see page image]

79
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
als, and appropriate deportment were deliberately taught to children
at all stages of development. Some of these tasks, expectations, and
deportments in the educative processes were gender-linked, and pa
rental roles were delineated by sex. As far as the parents were con
cerned, to fail in the full discharge of their responsibilities would not
only deprive the child of his or her rightful place in society, but, if the
child failed to master developmental tasks and age-appropriate de
portments, he or she would bring shame to the family. Thus, in addi
tion to an intrinsic interest in the well-being of the child, concern for
the opinions of others prompted parents to be diligent. The following
terms and sayings in Amharic illustrate not only the general thrust of
societal expectations and parental role assignments but also the dif
ferent tasks and role expectations for males and females. Libant, a
very inclusive term, refers to a girl who is wise, well versed in matters
of proper deportment, and a skillful cook, or, in more general terms,
one who skillfully manages her several roles as a daughter, wife,
mother, and mother-in-law. Enatitwan ayteh lijitwan agiba means
“Marry the girl only after you have known or observed the mother”;
as the mother is, so is the daughter. In the same vein, society expects
that the boy should be appropriately brought up by his father. Failing
to do so results in the display of inappropriate behavior on the part of
the child, who is ridiculed, reproached or shamed for it. The term
yeset lij literally means “child of a woman.” It means that although
the individual’s body is male, his expressions and behaviors are wom
anly, which further translates to mean cowardly, fearful. This insult
denotes that a male child was not brought up by a man and therefore
his deportments display womanly characteristics. This shames both
the individual and the family. In a society that places a high premium
on manliness, 9 this kind of appellation is taken very seriously by the
person to whom the insult is directed. Many other expectations apply
to both males and females. On the positive side, the boy who has
been brought up well is described as yejegina lij or “son of a brave
parent” (father), once again showing the importance not only of
proper upbringing according to societal expectations but also of par
enthood and the appropriateness of gender roles. Still another term
that applies to both genders is yechiwa lij, or “a child of proper or
gentle upbringing.” The opposite is balege or even worse, yebalege lij,
which means “an uncouth child” or “the son of an uncouth parent.”
When the child has done something seriously wrong, the strongest
term, assadagih ayideg, is applied, meaning “May the one who
brought you up be destroyed (cursed).” These expressions illustrate

Page 101 - [see page image]

80
FOR OUR SOUL
the tremendous forces of the community not only in mapping out the
parameters of appropriateness but in specifying the contents thereof
as well. Families wishing to maintain respectability in the community
and wanting their offspring to be respectable must and do take child-
rearing very seriously. 10
Often, the father—or, in his absence, another male relative such as
a brother, grandfather, or uncle—concentrates on imparting to the
growing male child the imperatives of manhood, including moral for
titude and physical courage in support and defense of the family and
clan; and the an of being a good provider, with emphasis on farming,
cattle breeding, handicrafts, knowledge of the seasons, the nature of
the crops, the soil, and the like. The mother, on the other hand, con
centrates on teaching her daughter to become libam, wise and
thoughtful in matters of the family and the community. The mother
teaches the daughter how to cook nutritious and appetizing meals,
how to sew, how to serve the husband, and how to relate and interact
with the different segments of people in the family and community.
There is much to be taught and learned. Often, to achieve the goal of
inculcating proper behavior, parents or parent surrogates resort to
methods that demand obedience and imitation. Complete obedience
to one’s parents and elders is the time-tested, quickest way of instill
ing what is considered desirable. Traditional expectations and roles
do not leave much leeway for individuality or individual differences
and creative approaches to problem solving. It is not that effective so
lutions are not appreciated when they can be had, but the tacit as
sumption is that there is no time or tolerance for innovation. One has
to work hard within the prescribed parameters of behavior and find
his or her fulfillment in that context. When one fails to do so, the
punishments are severe and bring shame to one’s self and family.
With the coming of modern schooling in the post-World War II
decades, some children—even those in remote rural areas such as
where most of the Beta Israel lived—began to attend modern, secular
schools. The primary schools were located near the villages so
schoolchildren could continue to live at home. Secondary schools, on
the other hand, often were located some distance away, and those
few who were qualified and could afford to attend had to leave home
and take up residence in towns or cities. In the process, the traditional
responsibilities and expectations of the homes were diluted and
eroded. For one thing, as parental contact and influence diminished,
the influence of schools increased. In schools, the better ones at least,
the modes of thinking and behaving that were taught and reinforced

Page 102 - [see page image]

81
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
ran contrary to the methods and goals of traditional family education,
such as the values of independent thinking, rationality, the proper
place of authority, and the roles of family, government and the indi
vidual in the scheme of building a society. Concepts such as these are
for the most part at cross purposes with the traditional values out
lined above. Also, because relations between the homes and the new
schools were not close, there is little doubt that children experienced
some confusion about expectations and roles. Yet, since the number
of those who had access to schooling was relatively small and the in
novation of schooling based on secular values was of recent origin,
major problems and conflicts between the expectations and value ori
entation of the two generations remained for the most part sub
merged. When they did surface, traditionally sanctioned means were
used. 11
In this regard, the Beta Israel community’s situation was not much
different from that of other communities of similar modernity within
or outside Ethiopia. It has been demonstrated several times that mod
ern, secularly based schooling tends to encourage divisions between
families, between the old and the young, between the educated few
and the illiterate many, between the time-tested wisdom of tradi
tional values and freedom, and between absorbing received wisdom
and engaging in an active search for new ways of knowing and learn
ing. 12 Such tendencies toward dislocation are usually handled within
the communities, though often at great pain. As long as the contend
ing parties are on their own ground and traditional institutions are
still in place to provide moderating influences, complete dislocation
or confusion does not usually result. But when that society is also
confronted with complete physical, social, or psychological disloca
tion, as happened to more than half of the thirty thousand Ethiopian
Jews, the challenge is very different.
In Israel, as immigrants to a new land and culture, the olim found
that the familiar arrangements regarding role expectations, the struc
ture of the family, and the status of its members were all drastically
changed. To begin with, the new arrangements called for both the
husband and the wife to receive equal shares of income in the form of
either pension or wages. The man discovered that in this new envi
ronment, he no longer had special skills or other attributes which tra
ditionally provided him with an aura of status and power vis-a-vis
other members of the family. For the first time, the woman was in a
position to own and control her own income. She was encouraged by
social workers and others at the absorption centers and in the perma-

Page 103 - [see page image]

82
FOR OUR SOUL
nent settlements. While the man’s skills in subsistence farming, crafts,
or any of the other similar areas had no value in the new society, the
woman was still able to teach weaving, sewing, cooking, and basket
making to her daughters. 13 Unlike men, then, the women could con
tinue to receive some kind of psychological reward for continuing to
be useful along traditional lines, even as they began to enjoy the new
power derived from their new sources of income. The ensuing con
flicts led to the development of destructive behaviors such as fighting
in the family, drunkenness, and abandonment of the family altogether
for another town or woman. Knowledgeable Israeli informants esti
mate that the divorce rate among the Ethiopians is five to six times
that of Israeli society as a whole. 14 In the Jewish population in Israel,
6 percent of the families are headed by single parents; among the
Ethiopians, the figure is 38 percent. Of the single parents, 80 percent
are female. The same sources estimate that before the Beta Israel left
Ethiopia, only 23 percent of their families were headed by single par
ents. But these same sources add that the rate of divorce among the
Beta Israel immigrants may not be any higher than it was in Ethiopia.
It is possible that the higher incidence of single-parent families is a re
sult of separations and deaths that occurred en route to Israel from
Ethiopia. This has been challenged, however, by others, including the
Ethiopians themselves, who assert that the rate of divorce or deser
tion has increased significantly since arriving in their new home. At
one time, the problems of divorce and desertion were so worrisome
that one of the ministers in charge of welfare appointed a committee
to investigate the problem and make recommendations to his ministry
for action. 15
Yochi, a woman about forty years of age, married to an Ashkenazi
physician, is director of a community center of Afula where there is a
large concentration of Beta Israel (sixteen hundred of them at one
time, reduced to fourteen hundred by the time of my visits in Febru
ary 1987). The town is divided into three zones. Two are develop
ment zones where, among other things, housing is controlled by the
government, similar to public housing projects in the United States.
The American-Israeli “Project Renewal” scheme was in operation. It
aims to rehabilitate poor neighborhoods so they have better chances
to be on their own after the termination of the five-year project. The
third segment of the town is of high socioeconomic status—the
houses are individually owned and very expensive, and the people
who live there are doctors who work in the local large hospitals and
others of similar socioeconomic status. Yochi belongs to this latter

Page 104 - [see page image]

83
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
group. The community center is large and provides opportunities for
people of all ages to learn a wide range of basic skills. In addition, it
provides some facilities to local schools to enhance their programs. I
wanted to learn what Yochi thought about the Ethiopians. To begin,
she complained that there were too many of them in this one town,
which is not good for their integration and adaptation; they are un
willing to transfer to other towns—they like to be together. She
added, “If the Ethiopians want to live like that [in segregated
settlements], they will never become like the Israelis.” She said it is
not always the Ethiopians’ fault that they stay where they are. The
government wants to move them, but some communities do not want
them; in others, houses are not available. In other cases, Beta Israel
have declined the suggestion that they resettle in Kiryat Yam or Jeru
salem. “It is to the advantage of none to let them stay where they are
for a longer time,” Yochi said.
Responding to specific family situations, Yochi continued: “Unless
the Ethiopians change their attitudes regarding the role of the men,
women, and children, there are bound to be problems because family
members have different roles in Israel and the Ethiopian personalities
can’t stand what exists here. The families are in trouble. In Israel,
Ethiopian Jewish women work outside the home; as such, she may be
running too fast for the man. Also, parents are not as important here
as they were in Ethiopia. The same holds for the elders of the com
munity.” As far as religion was concerned, Yochi felt the Beta Israel
“are confused about their religious feelings or activities. They are a
very suspicious people. If you take their children for school picnick
ing, they suspect that you are taking them to a mikveh [ritual
immersion] for conversion [here she is referring to the controversial
issue of mass immersion mandated by the chief rabbinate of Israel
which the Ethiopians were resisting]. On the other hand, she adds,
“The Israelis want them [Beta Israel] to behave like them, and the
Ethiopians are not ready. Even if they want to do what is expected of
them, they cannot do it all at once.”
What about the spiritual conditions of Beta Israel? Yochi re
sponded: “No one knows. They are not a part of the community.
They are very suspicious. They got more promised than could be de
livered. . . . Ethiopians do not have confidence in other Ethiopians
[veteran Ethiopians]. Maybe they have to be told the truth.” A relia
ble Ashkenazi informant who was present at the interview added that
she had heard on several occasions that the older generation of immi
grants have said they are glad they came to Israel for the sake of their

Page 105 - [see page image]

84
FOR OUR SOUL
children—even though it may be hard for the older generation. They
said they are happy with what they already have begun to see over a
period of a year.
Yochi related that the community center she headed was trying to
help the Beta Israel children as well as adults, but with emphasis on
the children, to acquire academic as well as vocational and social
skills. Here the Ethiopians and other people from the community
come for recreational and learning activities. The students come for
supervised afternoon studies. Volunteers go to the apartments or set
tlements of those who don’t come to the center to provide supervised
after-school activities, such as homework or recreational, social, or
cultural activities. In addition, the community center brings together
representatives of government departments to plan and coordinate
policies and programs for the Beta Israel. I asked whether she had
tried to get help from the veteran Ethiopians, and Yochi replied:
“Here in Afula, we do not have the right kind of Ethiopians to get
involved. . . . We do not have educated Ethiopians in this town.
Even when we tried to recruit people for social work training, we
could not find one. For some reason, educated Ethiopians do not
come to Afula. I am actively looking for one. We want to help them
help themselves. So far, we have been having so many problems with
the Ethiopians that we did not have much time to think about any
thing else.”
The problems of the family are compounded by the absence of
sources of emotional or spiritual support. The traditional sources of
spiritual and legal support, the kesoch, or religious leaders, have lost
their significance in the new order of things. 16 They cannot be
counted on. New sources of spiritual succor have not been discov
ered, cultivated, or utilized successfully . Here linguistic as well as
cultural differences are the culprits. The few who have tried to use
the local rabbi, a vatkim or veteran Israeli, found that absolutely un
workable.
Let us take the case of Yalganesh (not her real name). I visited Yal-
ganesh in her two-bedroom apartment in one of the larger settlement
centers. Two female social workers who were familiar with both Yal
ganesh and the center were also present. One of the women had
worked at this center for a year as a social worker and assistant to a
researcher. Let’s call her Rachel. Rachel speaks good Amharic and
very good English as well as Hebrew. Although she had been trans
ferred to another center before the interview took place, she returns
to this center periodically, primarily, she said, to visit Yalganesh and

Page 106 - [see page image]

85
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
her family. They’re very close. The interview took place in Amharic
and English. Yalganesh and Rachel spoke to each other in Hebrew.
Yalganesh is an attractive woman in her late 30s. She lives with her
two small children and a sister. She was divorced from her Ethiopian
husband. Yalganesh was a little inhibited when it came to talking
about intimate personal matters. Her close friend Rachel did much of
the talking. Rachel said that Yalganesh, being young, single, and a di
vorcee, was subjected to a lot of suspicion by her Ethiopian neigh
bors. She was controlled by what others thought of her. Yalganesh’s
sister, Asrat, who said she was eighteen years but looked at least ten
years older, worked in a factory in the same town. Rachel related that
Asrat had had an abortion, and as a result of this and similar experi
ences, Rachel was giving instructions to both women regarding meth
ods of contraception. Asrat recently had had an affair with the inter
preter of the center. But Rachel and Yalganesh put pressure on Asrat
to terminate the relationship because the man was much older than
Asrat and had a wife and children. Rachel said that the two Beta Is
rael women are not inhibited in asking her about methods of contra
ception. They even asked Rachel what kind of devices or methods
she used. She told them. But, added Rachel, when she asked the Ethi
opians how they protect themselves, they became evasive. They
would say atkkelidge (Amharic for “You must be kidding”,) or they
would evade the issue by asking another question. In spite of this in
hibition to discuss the subject in public, however, contraceptive infor
mation and the technologies that go with it are sought and provided
formally or otherwise in certain of the high schools as well as at
the clinics.
On the subject of family planning, we should note that there are
no open official sanctions in Israel. This is so for any one of the fol
lowing reasons: (1) the state needs to increase its Jewish population
vis-a-vis the rapidly increasing numbers of non-Jews in and around Is
rael; (2) birth control is not acceptable to the religious leadership; and
(3) at least the non-Ashkenazim segment of the population frowns on
birth control. The fact of the matter is that, as one visits settlement or
absorption centers, one comes across many small children playing on
the sidewalks and the streets, and most of the young Beta Israel
mothers are carrying babies on their backs or pushing trams. It also
appears that, among the Beta Israel, many older men are married to
younger women, in which case the women continue to bear children
even when the men seem to be unwilling to have children at their age.
This perhaps is explained by what some social workers call the factor

Page 107 - [see page image]

86
FOR OUR SOUL
of yenjera lijocb or stepchildren. The extent of separation through
divorce or death within the community must have made it possible
for many older men to marry younger women and hence to continue
to have children well into their later years. The total number of chil
dren in a family, including all children from the previous marriages of
both partners, would thus be larger than normal. At any rate, a num
ber of the men reported to me that they would like to stop, but that
either the available methods of birth control were not suitable to
their spouses or the younger spouses wanted to have more children
from the marriage. On the other hand, many young women of high
school age became pregnant unintentionally while still in school. This
is a very delicate matter which the authorities do not talk much
about, but it is a real problem. For many of these young Beta Israel
women, this is their first exposure to men of their age without adult
or parental supervision. Up to now, either they had married earlier,
say at nine years old or so, or, because most of them did not attend
school, they did not have the opportunity to meet men. Temptations
or opportunities did not arise. In contrast, opportunities now exist,
and controls are very lax. Many young women have no parents or,
living in youth villages (Youth Aliyah), are far away from them. Desir
ous of human affection and closeness (like anyone else), they are not
well versed in coping with the consequences. In other words, they
may not know how to enjoy sexual intimacy without unwanted preg
nancy. When pregnancy occurs, however, the young father is encour
aged to acknowledge paternity and, if possible, marry the woman.
But when a marriage does not take place, the woman is taken to one
of two centers in the country where she can receive proper medical
care. Once she gives birth, she transfers to another school to continue
her studies The child remains at the center and is raised by the care
takers there. One administrator told me that when one of the young
women was asked why she was not careful, she denied that she had
had sexual relations with any man—“it is only that God must have
willed it.”
In spite of the lack of official sanctioning or the unwillingness of
authorities to discuss the subject in public, family planning and provi
sions for sex education are available at some of the high schools and
at clinics for those who want them. Since 1986, family planning edu
cation was formally instituted under Dr. Emanuel Chieger, who
serves as director of medical and psychological services for the Youth
Aliyah system. Using carefully developed audio-visual materials, in
structors try to teach young students about reproduction and sexual-

Page 108 - [see page image]

87
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
ity, including the social and psychological consequences of love-
making. There are other clinics where some family planning advice
and assistance are available to those Beta Israel who are not attend
ing school.
Emotional and spiritual support for Yalganesh came primarily
from her immediate family—her two children, her sister, and her
friend Rachel. There is one Sephardic rabbi in the area, but “he is use
less,” said Yalganesh. He even lost her divorce papers. There is no
trained Ethiopian rabbi, and the traditional leaders, or kesoch, have
lost their significance since arriving here. Interviewees at other centers
also reported that they were unable to find an understanding, inter
ested, and competent rabbi. In light of their backgrounds, it is reason
able to assume that men find it even harder to reach out for spiritual
or other types of counseling.
In general, real friendship between the Ethiopians and the veteran
Israelis is either rudimentary or nonexistent. This is not surprising
given the linguistic, cultural, and other important differences. When
friendships between members of the two groups do develop, it is a
phenomenon in and of itself. Such is the case between Rachel, a vet
eran Ashkenazi Israeli, and Yalganesh and her family. Although now
working at another center some distance away, Rachel still comes
twice a week to visit her Ethiopian friends. “When I first met them, I
thought that the Beta Israel women were unfriendly and suspicious;
their health habits were not acceptable to me. When I first met Yalga
nesh, she would not even sit facing me. Instead, she gave me her side
profile. But gradually I came to discover that the reserved attitudes
were just external facades. Underneath, I discovered warmth, caring,
and genuine friendliness—they care for me.”
The preceding case illustrates how some family problems are tack
led. Obviously, human ingenuity continues to inspire hope where one
does not expect to find it. Another case was related to me by the
head of a regional Ministry of Absorption office, division of social
services. According to Offir, a Beta Israel woman who came to Israel
without her husband subsequently got pregnant by another Ethiopian
man. When the child was bom, there arose the question of how to
register him for social service purposes. If they tried to register him
under the real father’s name, the father would abandon the child and
the mother because he did not want the relationship to be known.
Eventually, the matter was settled, at least temporarily, by registering
him in the mother’s name. This provides immediate relief, but in Is
rael, where the rabbinate does not accept or recognize children bom

Page 109 - [see page image]

88
FOR OUR SOUL
out of wedlock as legitimate, the future life of the poor child may be
come practically untenable. “There are many cases such as this one,”
Offir concluded.
Another practice should be noted. However, because it has not
been well investigated, it is not easy to draw conclusions regarding its
effect on the family. It is the practice of ritual purity followed by the
devout Beta Israel. This includes, among other things, the seclusion
of a woman when she is menstruating. In Ethiopia, the menstruating
woman is secluded in a hut apart from the household. At the end of
each menstrual period, she immerses herself in a river before rejoining
the family. The woman is also secluded after giving birth. Postpartum
seclusion lasts forty days if the child is male and eighty days if female.
Here again, when the prescribed seclusion is over, the mother dips
herself in a river before she returns to the family. In the Israeli con
text, the Talmudic traditions do not include these practices. But for
the Ethiopians, dropping the practice, which they think is mandated
by the Torah, is very hard and painful. In addition, it is practically
impossible to find a running river in Israel. Conflicts within families
and between families and the authorities have been reported. 17
As for the children, they may be divided into two categories: (1)
those up to eleven years of age who attend one of the neighborhood
schools and most of whom live with at least one of the parents or a
guardian, and (2) those between the ages of twelve and eighteen who
attend boarding schools (youth aliyah) and who visit their families
only once every three or four weeks. The contact between the latter
group and the home is very insignificant and may be dismissed as non
existent. Following the experiences at boarding schools or youth vil
lages, most of the able-bodied male youth join the Israeli armed
forces for three years. (For religious reasons the Ethiopian females are
exempted from service.) While in the armed services, they receive ad
ditional training in vocational, linguistic, and civic skills. During leave
times, they are expected to visit their families. A question that may
arise regarding this latter group is, how are they going to relate to
their parents in a few years from now? But for the younger children
who stay at home, several sets of challenges already have begun to
emerge. To begin, many of the children younger than seven were
bom after their parents left Ethiopia—either on the way, in refugee
camps, or in Israel. For all practical purposes, these children have for
gotten their home languages (Amharic or Tigrigna), making even sim
ple communication between the non-Hebrew-speaking parent and
the child who is fluent in that language extremely limited and diffi-

Page 110 - [see page image]

89
The Beleaguered Family in Transition
cult. The older children (nine to twelve years of age) speak Hebrew
with their siblings and peers, though they still speak the home lan
guage with their parents. So, in theory, communication should not be
a problem. But it is. The inability of the parents to speak Hebrew is
not only considered a lack of skill but also denotes a lack of modern
ity in the eyes of the child. Also, seeing that the father’s skills are ir
relevant in the new setting and that he has no position of dominance
in the family, many of the children ignore him; at worst, they remind
him of his loss in status—and they do it in Hebrew. One social
worker observed that “of all categories of immigrants, the father has
lost the most.”
Here emerges the question of ego identity. Some fathers have be
come strong enough to understand the new realities and try to live
with it as best they can. Others are not so fortunate and resort to abu
sive methods in their attempt to regain lost prestige and control, for
instance, by assigning children tasks that interfere with their school
ing, asking them to stay behind from school to do the cleaning in the
apartment, or sending them to buy some groceries when they are sup
posed to be in school.
There are parents who are concerned with their children’s school
ing. Also, some children, such as Odium, are concerned about their
parents. Odium is one of the best students in her fifth-grade class. Un
like most of her Ethiopian age-mates in Israel, she attends a secular
public school. She said she prefers to speak in Hebrew, but for the
sake of her parents she always tries to talk to them in Amharic except
when she wants to help them to learn Hebrew. At the regional center,
an administrator showed me a letter Odium had written to the hous
ing administration pleading with them to assign her family an apart
ment near a good school so that her goals would not be stifled. The
letter, written in Hebrew, impressed the administrators, and they told
me it is the kind of phenomenon that helps to keep them going.
An Israeli psychologist who has worked and studied Beta Israel
youth said, “By coming here [to Israel], the position and authority of
the parents are weakened.” The parents realize this and, for the most
part, have accepted it well. Although parents may regret leaving their
country of origin, their sacrifices seem worthwhile when they con
sider the opportunities their children will have in Israel. One father
who was nonliterate when he arrived in Israel six years ago but is now
literate, has eight children. His regret was that he and his family did
not come to Israel fifteen years earlier (the age of his oldest son). His
children would have been able to start their education earlier. This

Page 111 - [see page image]

90
FOR OUR SOUL
kind of sentiment is almost universal among families with children,
even as they express reservations about their own personal future.

Page 112 - [see page image]

91
CHAPTER FIVE
Setting Up Home
❖
The Ethiopian Jews were, of
course, not the first olitn to come to Israel. In a state conceived and
built around the idea of providing a home for all Jews in the Dias
pora, even before its creation in 1948, mechanisms and institutions
were put in place to encourage and facilitate the arrival, settlement,
and continued survival of Jewish immigrants. Beginning in 1882, small
and large waves of immigrants, a vast majority of them from Europe,
have been arriving in Palestine. Since the formation of the state in
1948, even larger waves of Jewish immigrants continued to arrive, pri
marily from the developing regions of Asia and Africa. The rate of
immigration reached its peak in the early 1950s with the arrival of
thousands of Jews from northern Africa and Asia. The Ethiopians
were the last of the large waves of immigrants from the developing
part of the world. In fact, by the 1970s, the rate of immigration from
the traditional sources of Europe, Asia, and other parts of Africa was
tapering off very drastically, with the result that institutions, facilities,
and personnel had become idle. Therefore, when the Ethiopians
began to arrive, they could not have done so at a more opportune
time. Addressing this topic, the dynamic director of Youth Aliyah,

Page 113 - [see page image]

92
FOR OUR SOUL
Uri Gordon, was prompted to declare that “this was the era of
the Ethiopians.” 1
The two waves of Beta Israel that immigrated to Israel between
1980 and 1985 (or most of others since, for that matter) were not se
lected based on any criteria other than their desire to come and their
willingness and ability to endure the long, arduous process of leaving
home, traveling to the camps in third countries, and eventually reach
ing their destination in Israel. Thus came people who were young and
old, preliterate and literate. The vast majority were people of peasant
background who had never before ventured beyond their immediate
communities; they were devout but unlettered people. They came
from parts of Ethiopia unexposed to outside influences, where mod
em means of communication, commerce, and education were very
undeveloped, to settle in Israel, a technologically and scientifically
advanced Western society with no previous experience with people
from sub-Saharan Africa claiming to be Jews and entitled to set up
homes in the Holy Land. The Israeli authorities had ample time to
prepare for the arrival and reception of the Ethiopian Jews long be
fore they were overwhelmed by events in the 1980s.
IMMIGRANT RECEIVING CENTERS
The policy, now formulated, was
to take the immigrants to receiving centers in two stages before they
were released into the larger society. This policy took into account
the very poor physical and mental condition of the Ethiopians at the
time of arrival and their peasant background. The need to educate the
Israeli public about the Ethiopians in such a way as to minimize, if
not totally forestall, formation of negative impressions was also rec
ognized. Therefore, the decision was made to settle the immigrants in
sheltered centers until they had mastered at least the rudiments of
Hebrew and met the basic requirements of setting up home in the
context of Israel.
It was also anticipated that through the utilization of the media,
the Israeli public would come to know and appreciate these Zionists
who had suffered so much for the sake of their faith and Jewish cul
ture. As will be detailed later, considerable effort was made to depict
the Ethiopians as heroic, which they were, but, more importantly, as a

Page 114 - [see page image]

93
Setting Up Home
people who for centuries had longed to be united with their coreli
gionists in Jerusalem. Moreover, they were presented as a people who
considered themselves aliens in Ethiopia, seldom participating or
wanting to participate voluntarily in the development or protection of
their land of origin. Their languages—Ge’ez, Amharic, Tigrigna, or
any of the others—were depicted as uniquely their own. In other
words, the Ethiopians and their Jewishness were packaged and pre
sented in a way that resembled the historical conditions experienced
by Jews in Europe, the Soviet Union, and to some extent in Arab
countries in the hope that the Israeli public would understand and
identify with them.
While this was going on, the immigrants were living in sheltered or
absorption centers, where they could be prepared for gradual release
to their own apartments in communities throughout Israel. The hope
and expectation were that eventually they would become accepted as
functioning and contributing members of such communities like any
other immigrant group. This was the objective.
There was some recognition, nevertheless, that for some time to
come, the immigrants would be receiving far more than they could
give to the local communities, which would have some problems ac
cepting them. Therefore, efforts would be made not to place too
many immigrants (in proportion to the veterans) in a given apartment
block, neighborhood, or town. The authorities did appreciate, over
all, the magnitude of the task at hand. For “by its very nature ... a
comprehensive long-term [plan] that seeks to grant destitute immi
grants a basis for integration in the normal Israeli life is expected to
be costly.” 2 By all accounts, indeed, the Ethiopian immigrants, have
been the most costly olim.
The coming of the immigrants was the responsibility of the Israeli
government at the first level. The assistance of international Jewish
organizations and other governments such as that of the United States
were crucial at certain stages of the process but not indispensable. It
was imperative that many of the governmental agencies such as the
ministries of foreign affairs, interior, absorption, labor and social wel
fare and the security apparatus play their respective and unique roles
efficiently. But once the immigrants were in Israel, and at least for the
duration of their first year, the responsibility for their processing and
welfare was that of the quasi-govemmental Jewish Agency for Israel
(JA). After the immigrants had completed their year at the absorption
centers, the Ministry of Immigrant Absorption would move to center
stage. Assisted to some extent by other private organizations such as

Page 115 - [see page image]

94
FOR OUR SOUL
the Joint Distribution Committee, and in cooperation with other rele
vant governmental departments, the Ministry of Absorption assumed
responsibility for coordinating the immigrants’ housing, training, em
ployment, and socialization functions.
At the initial stage, they were received in a care center known as
the Absorption and Sorting Base. Here, the immigrants were identi
fied, registered, and assigned new Hebrew names, authorities having
decided this would resolve immediate and long-term problems for
the absorbing society and the immigrants. The 1984-85 arrivals also
were reconverted (they had to go through symbolic circumcision in
the case of males and immersion in water for all), reunited with fami
lies if any, and in general allowed time to recover from the hardships
they had experienced. Immigrants were provided with clothing, medi
cal care and were otherwise prepared for referral to other centers.
Immigrants could stay from a few days to up to three months, de
pending on their readiness and the availability of proper absorption
centers. When they stayed longer, they were taught Hebrew and
learned housekeeping and some rudiments of life in Israel. Except for
some organizational difficulties, according to those who had a chance
to evaluate the procedures and accomplishments, the quality of care
and reception provided was very good. 3 At the next stage, however,
when the immigrants were to pass a year in absorption centers before
being placed in permanent quarters, there developed organizational,
administrative, and personnel problems that would affect the quality
and efficiency of the absorption processes and would have serious
consequences for the immigrants in the first instance and the absorb
ing society in the second.
During the period of this study, there were more than thirty-three
centers of absorption scattered throughout Israel and at least one on
the West Bank. 4 In most instances, immigrants stay for only about
five to six months in absorption centers, but in the case of the Ethio
pians, this was extended to about a year. The Ethiopians, it was rec
ognized, were unique cases in the annals of immigration to Israel.
They had long been separated from the bulk of the Jewish people and
their history. They came from a traditional, developing society to an
industrialized, Western society, and there existed a huge gap in all
aspects of life-styles between the two. Their deteriorated physical
and mental conditions rendered them unfit to confront life in the
new society.
Another set of factors that needs to be considered is the crumbling
family structure that began en route and continued after arrival.

Page 116 - [see page image]

95
Setting Up Home
But perhaps what set the Ethiopians apart from the other Israelis
most of all was their color—their blackness. The Yemenites and the
Benei Israel (Jews from India), who had preceded them in coming to
Israel, are darker than most of the other Israelis, but the Ethiopians,
or at least most of them, stood out much more because of the color
of their skin. These were some of the Ethiopians’ differentiating char
acteristics to be taken into account when planning for their absorp
tion in Israel. 5
The objective, then, was to create conditions that would bring the
two groups gradually together. The immigrants were to be prepared
for the requirements of the absorbing society at the absorption cen
ters. They were then to be placed in permanent settlements that
would allow the continuation of communal life but avoid the crea
tion of “ethnic pockets,” as had happened with earlier immigrants
from Asia and Africa. The immigrants ultimately would be placed in
areas neither too strong (from the point of view of culture and eco
nomics) nor too weak, and dispersed among the absorbing local com
munities. In other words, the objective was to maximize interaction
between the immigrants and the members of the local communities
without jeopardizing communal life or straining the capacities of the
local communities to handle the absorption of immigrants. That is
why it was imperative to plan the stages of absorption at different lev
els carefully and to monitor them closely.
The immigrants who arrived between 1980 and 1984 were accom
modated by themselves in centers that were empty. However, when
the number of immigrants increased because of Operation Moses,
other temporary shelters such as hotels and guest houses were used.
But when it became clear that the latter type of accommodation was
not suitable, attempts were made to place the immigrants in existing
centers alongside immigrants from other countries. What emerged
from the various arrangements in the fall of 1985 was the following:
5,377 Beta Israel were placed in seventeen centers owned by the Jew
ish Agency; 2,552 were placed in nine centers made up of hotels and
guest houses; and seventeen other centers accommodated another
2,552 Beta Israel mixed with other immigrants. Most of the immi
grants were accommodated in centers of their own.
Different categories of personnel were recruited and deployed in
the centers. They included veteran Ethiopians (vatikim) who acted as
interpreters and instructors and served as effective bridges between
the newcomers, the care givers, and the local society. Homemakers,
recruited from the local community, guided the immigrants in ways

Page 117 - [see page image]

96
FOR OUR SOUL
of life, health, and household management, a service absolutely es
sential for the newcomers. The most important groups of profes
sional personnel were the social workers and the medical practition
ers (nurses and doctors) who worked under the supervision of a
center director. Later on, other professionals such as anthropologists
and psychologists were added. These constituted the core group of
personnel whose skills or lack thereof molded the nature of at least
the initial processes of adaptation and absorption of the immigrants.
In other words, the immigrants were entirely dependent on the skills,
knowledge, and attitude of the personnel assembled to guide them
through the strangeness of their new environment. At this stage, the
immigrants were taught in ulpanim (formal and informal centers for
learning the Hebrew language) the rudiments of Hebrew, how to set
up homes using unfamiliar utensils and furniture, how to shop, how
to manage the household budget, how to prepare meals using local
ingredients, and the many other things vital to existence in a modem
society. As the immigrants learned skills that would help them to sur
vive, they also acquired and developed attitudes toward life in Israel,
mostly as reflected through the people they came in daily contact
with—the care providers at the absorption centers. Before examining
the degree of success these people had, as seen from the immigrants’
point of view, let us review some of the accomplishments primarily
from the organizational and administrative points of view. 6
At the height of the initial absorption activity, there were about
one thousand employees of the Jewish Agency, both permanent and
contractual, some working in the headquarters but most in the field
working with the immigrants. About eighty were social workers, 113
were instructor-interpreters (veteran Ethiopians), and the rest were
teachers, house mothers, block supervisors, health-care providers,
and so on. In their respective spheres of responsibility, these people
were the gatekeepers between the new immigrants and the veteran
society. Most of them did a commendable job, working hard to es
tablish good relations with the immigrants and to gain their confi
dence. The social workers were especially commended by both the
immigrants and official reports. The instructor-interpreters had a
number of problems with the immigrants, as will be described. But
there were also serious oversights that could have been avoided or,
once apparent, could have been corrected earlier, whose effects were
untoward for the immigrants as well as those working with them.
There had been no comprehensive search within the Jewish
Agency to identify people with qualifications and experience in immi-

Page 118 - [see page image]

97
Setting Up Home
grant absorption, although such people did exist. Nor was the possi
bility considered of recruiting retired employees who had extensive
experience in absorption of immigrants. They were not even asked to
work as volunteers. The steps taken to recruit workers were not made
public, the positions were not advertised, and the recruiting commit
tee was drawn mostly from junior employees. Such shortcomings also
applied to the recruitment of the most crucial persons, the directors
of the absorption centers. The result was that quite a number of un
qualified persons were retained which resulted in several disturb
ances, including open demonstrations by the immigrants in a number
of centers. The homemakers, who were recruited locally, on the
whole seem to have worked hard and effectively. But even here,
when the internal organization in the absorption center was deficient,
the homemakers were not adequately utilized.
At another level, conflicts occurred within the absorption centers
among the professional and staff people as well as people working
under one of the two wings of the Jewish Agency. There was confu
sion regarding the lines of command. The homemakers and instruc
tor-interpreters were moved from one line of command to the other
so frequently that they became confused. Lack of sufficient orienta
tion at the start of employment regarding the nature of their charges
and the policy of JA and absence of guidance once on the job may
have contributed to the failure of some of the directors. Of course,
the JA department responsible for the immigrants pointed out that,
among other things, they could not have announced many of their ef
forts to the public because the arrival of the immigrants was necessar
ily secret. This is true, but it does not explain all the shortcomings of
those efforts over a relatively long time. It seems traditional bureau
cratic inertia, narrow self-interest, and red tape were at work full
time, despite the most urgent and important needs of the immigrants.
The immigrants, then, had to go through the experiences of the
absorption centers. The ways and conventions of the new society had
to be learned gradually, and during the process the immigrants were
to be accommodated so that their encounters with the larger society
would not be awkward for either side. There were many obvious ad
vantages to this concept, but important questions remain. How much
time should have been spent at this stage? What might have been the
optimal mix of shelter and exposure to the real environment so that
adaptation could begin? These are hard questions, and this study pro
vides no answer for them. What might be said here is that living in the
absorption centers entailed a dependence on the care providers for

Page 119 - [see page image]

98
FOR OUR SOUL
even routine duties (shopping, getting children ready to go to school,
being escorted to the clinics and banks, etc.) incompatible with steady
progress toward adaptation. Postponing the time when reality has to
be faced creates more dependency, distorts family structure, pre
cludes interactions with local people, and might lead the immigrants
to think that their sheltered existence and the provisions made on
their behalf were normal and would last indefinitely.
The JA was challenged for not asking whether the premises on
which the absorption center concept was based were tenable. At one
stage, there was a conflict among members of the two major ethnic
groups (Amhara and Tigray) in one of the absorption centers in the
Negev which led the authorities to remove some of them to regular
apartments. Later follow-up revealed that the people mainstreamed
earlier had made faster progress toward adaptation than those who
stayed behind. The agency was criticized for not following up on that
experiment by trying to mainstream as early as possible most of the
rest of the immigrants. 7
Unfortunately, the care providers apparently did not encourage
their charges to lead increasingly independent lives (which would
have made their services unnecessary). Instead, the immigrants be
came more and more dependent on such personnel, even to the point
of seeking authorization to leave camp. When some of these unto
ward side effects were revealed and the agency was criticized for
them, it wanted to terminate its role and responsibilities. This created
additional problems and further complicated the issues.
In the winter of 1986, the Jewish Agency announced termination
of its operation of the absorption centers, saying it was time for the
Absorption Ministry and others to locate the immigrants in perma
nent houses. The agency said the original plans called for the immi
grants to stay in temporary centers for only about a year, and that pe
riod was over. Further, the agency had run out of money, and the
immigrants were becoming too dependent on the care providers of
the centers. As long as they stayed in absorption centers, had their
bills paid and stipends delivered on time, and sought and received
direction from the care providers before making any simple move, the
immigrants would never be able to stand on their own, negating the
fundamental objective of gradual adaptation to Israel. The agency’s
termination of its role included removal of the telephones, mail
boxes, furniture, and utensils on which the immigrants had come to

Page 120 - [see page image]

99
Setting Up Home
rely. No alternatives were provided. The agency wanted to get out
quickly and dismissed practically all workers, except a few social
workers in some of the centers. The residents as well as most of the
workers protested the agency’s sudden decision to withdraw, saying
the move would create hardships for the immigrants and that more
time was needed to make the transition—but to no avail.
To determine if there were motives other than the stated ones for
this sudden decision, I interviewed different people I thought were in
positions to know. One senior official of the agency’s department re
sponsible for the centers gave the following account of the sudden
withdrawal. It is true that there had been an agreement among the
governmental bodies that the agency would get out at the end of the
first year or before, but the real reason was that the immigrants’ situa
tion was becoming increasingly afflicted with problems and contro
versies and was not a glamorous front-page news story anymore. In
stead, the news media were carrying accounts of strikes, fights, and
similar stories of rancor among the immigrants, between the immi
grants and certain sectors of care providers, and among the various
categories of workers. So it was decided to get out at once. For what
ever reasons, this informant added, there was no doubt that this deci
sion created a lot of problems for the Absorption Ministry, which
had to get in now and assume the many challenges, and for the work
ers and olim. Other administrators supported the agency’s move, say
ing that continuation of the efforts would have served neither the in
terests of the immigrants nor those of the absorbing society. The
Ethiopians were receiving distorted impressions of Israel, they said.
The overall reaction was that the agency had to pull out sometime
anyway and it already had met its contractual obligations. They did
regret that the agency did not see fit to give advance warning so that
adequate provisions could have been made for all concerned. More
than half of the immigrants were still in the centers, and for them the
abrupt weaning was a shock and suggested that they were being pun
ished for things done or undone by others over which they had
no control. The immigrants were disappointed or bitter about the
decision. Most seemed to blame the lower echelon staff in the agency
for prompting the action. It is still too early to find out what impact
this action had on the process of adaptation. The possibility that it
may result in psychological regression for the immigrants cannot be
ruled out.

Page 121 - [see page image]

100
FOR OUR SOUL
MEASURING SUCCESS
For most of the Ethiopian Jews,
1986-87 (which coincided with my fieldwork) was a year of gojo
mewttat, or establishing a home, striking out on their own. Usually,
the term is used in connection with a married son living with his wife
in his parents’ household until he is financially and otherwise secure.
When the time comes to set up his own home, he does so with the
blessing and support of his parents. The new home usually is estab
lished on the same premises as that of his parents. The transition from
being an integral part of the family to becoming fully independent
takes place gradually. In Israel, the immigrants applied the expression
gojo mewttat to their situation, which at first sounded strange for
adults but on second thought was quite appropriate. They were strik
ing out on their own for the first time. This was also the beginning of
the test of their readiness, of the adequacy of their preparation during
the previous year(s) at the absorption centers. For the first time since
their arrival in Israel, they were confronted with choices in housing,
employment, training, and schooling; they were expected to pay gro
cery and utility bills fully and on time, travel to the municipalities
without an escort, pay taxes, and otherwise forge their niche in the
larger community. This was also the year most of the school-age chil
dren were mainstreamed into the regular schools and began to inter
act with members of the absorbing society. For the parents, this was
another challenge. They were now expected to encounter not only
the teachers and administrators of the schools but, through the
schools, the general adult population. New sets of rules, procedures,
and activities had to be followed by both the children and their par
ents. The extent to which the immigrants would be able to perform
the myriad routines of daily life in the new society independent of
center supervision could be considered a measure of the effectiveness
of the absorption program and immigrant adaptation.
Arrangement for housing and permanent settlement were high on
the list of priorities. For this, the Absorption Ministry required the
coordinated efforts of the various ministries, including housing, fi
nance, and labor. The cooperation of the immigrants was also very
crucial, especially in light of their natural desire to stay near relatives
and close friends. The government wanted to disperse the immigrants

Page 122 - [see page image]

101
Setting Up Home
among Israeli communities that were neither too weak nor too strong
and where different ethnic groups and persons of different ages and
marital status are represented in a way that the olitn could maintain
some relations among themselves. Strong communities would be too
much for the immigrants to cope with, since the class structure would
make the immigrants feel inadequate; communities that were too
weak, however, would be unable to help immigrants make the neces
sary progress toward independence and long-term well-being. Access
to good schools and opportunities for employment were part and
parcel of the prerequisites taken into account.
As sound and as logical as these objectives appeared, when it came
time to implement them, other practical problems emerged, most of
which had to do ultimately with money, though that was not the only
problem. For instance, there were empty apartments built earlier for
other immigrants which had been empty for some time. Because of
their location, nobody wanted to live in them. Some were located
where there were no possibilities for employment; others were lo
cated in weak communities. The Absorption Ministry tried to urge
the building of additional structures at the desired locations but was
told by the Housing Department and the Jewish Agency that there
were no funds to do this. Negotiations among the various agencies re
sulted in considerable compromise, and the final outcome was not
always what was desirable. Finally, some of the absorption centers
were converted into permanent settlements. Large groups of immi
grants were thus settled in communities of their own, thereby aban
doning the goal of integrating them into the larger Israeli society.
Others remained in the absorption centers on a temporary basis while
the search continued for permanent apartments. Still others were
placed in permanent apartments according to the original plans. As
time passed, differences in the progress toward goals of absorption
and adaptation of the groups settled in these different ways became
apparent.
Setting up home, or gojo mewttat, proved difficult for many of the
immigrants. During the absorption period at the centers, social work
ers and others had assumed many of the family’s responsibilities. The
image of destitute immigrants that had been presented on television
when the immigrants first arrived left an overwhelming emotional
impact on the minds of the public. As a consequence, many people
had volunteered to work for free, others for nominal pay, and still
others as full-time employees to help the immigrants. Naturally the
tendency was for these well-intentioned people to do too much for

Page 123 - [see page image]

102
FOR OUR SOUL
too long, depriving the immigrants of the opportunity to learn to do
things for themselves and thereby gradually become self-reliant.
When the time came, serious problems developed. For one thing, the
Ethiopians had no idea about Israeli expectations. They could not an
ticipate what they should or should not do on those rare occasions
when they encountered outsiders. More importantly, this was the
year the children of the immigrants were sent to schools attended by
other Israeli children. Here was a critical test of the level of under
standing the Ethiopian and veteran Israeli populations had of each
other and of how effectively they could work together to resolve is
sues without the mediation of absorption center personnel.
For instance, in one of the largest centers where some Ethiopians
still were waiting to be assigned permanent apartments and where
others already had settled, I heard a lot of complaints from the teach
ers, social workers, and school administrators that the Ethiopian par
ents were not participating, as any parent should, in preparing and
sending their children to school on time. They complained that the
Ethiopian children often came to school untidy, ill clothed, ill shoed
(barefoot or in sandals even in winter), with unwashed faces, runny
noses, and some with shaved heads. This shocked Israelis especially
when they saw sores on the child’s head which might have been one
of the reasons for shaving. Further, the children were said to be full
of lice, disorganized in personal appearance, coming to school with
out notebooks or school bags, and often lethargic, perhaps indicating
lack of proper rest the previous night. The Israelis felt the Ethiopian
parents did not care how their children presented themselves or,
more generally, were disinterested in the overall well-being of their
children, including their education. In an achievement-oriented soci
ety such as Israel, they argued, this kind of behavior was intolerable.
Such complaints were so frequent, intense, and widespread that in
one instance I asked the head volunteer social worker at one of the
large centers who spoke some Amharic and was well accepted by the
Ethiopian community as well as the school authorities if she could ar
range for me to talk to the parents in groups. A month or so later, on
December 8,1986,1 was again in the area and made the same request.
In a matter of thirty minutes, a meeting was arranged. The social
worker, some of her colleagues, and I met with the Ethiopians in a
packed hall with some overflowing into the corridors. Parents and
nonparents, young and old came. Most of the people either had seen
or heard of me before in different contexts in both Ethiopia and Is
rael, so they had a fairly good idea of what I was doing.

Page 124 - [see page image]

103
Setting Up Home
I briefly introduced myself, highlighting my background, experi
ences, and work in Ethiopia and the United States. I told them I was a
visiting professor at the Hebrew University for a year. I added that I
was at this meeting to tell them what the complaints against them
were and to serve as an honest broker by listening to their side of the
story which, if they so wished, I would convey to the authorities on
their behalf. Then I presented the litany of complaints I had heard
leveled against them. From the beginning, it was apparent to me that
the people present were starving to talk to someone in their own lan
guage, especially someone they saw as being of some consequence. I
spelled out what I had heard already and let them respond to the
charges. I had not expected their reactions to be as serious, heartfelt,
and articulate as they were. As happens often in such gatherings, a
few tended to talk more than others. But speak they did, for the bet
ter part of two hours. From what I observed, there was no inhibition
on their part, which is also a measure of their adaptation, since they
felt that they could express their anger against the authorities without
fear of retribution.
At the root of their problems was a lack of money. Whether they
are employees or pensioners, their income was not sufficient for their
many needs. They were unable to purchase new clothing for them
selves or their children and certainly had no money for parties. Some
of their clothing had been handed to them at the time of arrival more
than a year earlier. As far as the complaint about their parties was
concerned, there were no parties. In accordance with their customs,
at the time of merdo, the breaking of the news of the death of a fam
ily member in Ethiopia; at gizret, the circumcision of a child; at tez-
kar, the remembrance of a dead relative; or, at the time of weddings,
the death of a relative or close friend, and the birth of a child in the
family, friends and family members get together to mourn or rejoice
over the event. Usually, each adult contributes either food, soft
drinks, or money. The expenses are small and distributed among the
family and friends. These occasions make it possible for them to get
together and give one another emotional support. They asserted that
these were some of the cultural components they cherished and were
not willing to give up. “These are the things we used to do in our
country. We are not ready to abandon them. As it is, we have modi
fied many of our customs already. Endenesu mehon anfelgim bet ze-
gitew yetnibelu; yenesun babrye memar anfeligim. [Amharic: “We do
not want to be like those who close their doors when they eat—
meaning they are uncaring.”] We do not want to learn their culture.”

Page 125 - [see page image]

104
FOR OUR SOUL
“We [here] are oppressed people,” another elder added.
It was apparent they felt unjustly treated and were going to de
mand redress for their grievances. At one stage, the settlers had been
promised that people with large families would be able to buy wash
ing machines at reduced prices. As instructed, they filled out the
forms. A few months later, they were told to come again and fill out
another set of forms because the former ones had been lost. They
filled out the second set. But the promised machines did not arrive.
The people continue to hand-wash their clothes in an environment
that is not suitable (back in Ethiopia, they also washed their clothes
by hand, but in the rivers where the natural contours and stones were
more suitable). The result is that they cannot wash the clothes as of
ten as necessary. In the winter, it takes longer to dry them, and they
do not have enough clothing for changes.
The adults also had been told they would receive some clothing if
they came to the centers and signed some forms. They did. Later they
were told they would receive the clothing through the local schools.
When they reported to the schools, they were told that the money in
tended for clothing had been used instead to purchase school supplies
for the children. (Actually, the clothing had been donated for the
Ethiopians by persons and organizations outside Israel. The local au
thorities, I was told later, decided to sell the clothing and use the
money to purchase school supplies. This is directly related to the
complaint that the parents were unwilling to invest money on behalf
of their children for school-related expenses. One way of getting the
money was to use the proceeds from the sales of donated clothing.
Obviously, the parents were furious that they had been given a run
around and were not trusted to handle their own affairs. The immi
grants, in fact, strongly suspected that the money from the proceeds
went into the pockets of local officials and that this was not the first
time that had happened. They repeated that the local officials were
dishonest, including the very detested astergwami (Amharic for
“veteran”) Beta Israel instructor-interpreters. The immigrants were
convinced that other food and clothing which had been sent for them
from abroad had been appropriated by the local authorities and inter
preters.
Several of the speakers repeatedly emphasized how their lack of
language proficiency worked against them and how the local authori
ties were getting away with murder. They said this was the first
chance they had had to express themselves collectively and fully in
their own language. For this they were grateful.

Page 126 - [see page image]

105
Setting Up Home
They moved to the provision of day-care, another point of conten
tion a number of the younger parents complained about. One young
father of two small children related that the local day-care center had
a policy of accepting only one child per family and that there was no
other center in town for his other child to attend. What could he do
with the second child? The mother, when she does not work outside
the home, has to take care of household duties, including doing the
laundry by hand. They needed to find a place for the child.
The immigrants also complained that they were ignored when they
went to visit the clinics. Other people, they said, were given priority
by the health-care providers. Sometimes, after spending an entire day
waiting for treatment, they would be told to go home and try again
tomorrow. They said they also were denied ambulance services even
when there were emergencies such as childbirth and acute cardiac at
tack. One elderly woman added that it was because of their religion
that they suffered this kind of indignity and insult. She meant that if it
were not for their religion, they would not have come to Israel.
In brief, the immigrants had come to distrust the local authorities
as well as the employees of the Ministry of Absorption and the Jew
ish Agency. Immigrants questioned the intentions and actions of these
personnel. They also questioned their integrity in matters of finance.
(There were a few exceptions, and most of them were volunteers.)
They emphasized that the money they either earned or received from
pensions was very inadequate. Without articulating why, they thought
they deserved better treatment than what they were getting. It should
be recalled that this was their first year out of the absorption centers
and for most of them their first attempt at independent living, gojo
mewttat. Some were still waiting for permanent housing. Their condi
tion may be described as one of transition. Their bitterness and anger
emanated from their experiences in the absorption centers as well as
their first year of independent living. They related their experiences to
me with deep feeling, clear thinking, and great eloquence. Even as a
native speaker of Amharic, intimately familiar with the manner of
thinking and speech of the people, I was profoundly moved by the
way they were able to express their thoughts and experiences. I only
wished that the authorities could hear them as I did.
Unfortunately, because the authorities do not understand Amharic
or Tigrigna and are unfamiliar with the immigrants’ culture, they, as
well as the Israeli public and even the care providers, see the Ethiopi
ans as awkward and incompetent as they try to do things for them
selves in everyday life. Had they heard what I did that evening, they

Page 127 - [see page image]

106
FOR OUR SOUL
would have understood the Ethiopian olim much better; more impor
tantly, they would have accorded them much more respect than they
have done so far. It is apparent that the local authorities acted on the
assumption that the immigrants were, for the most part, simple folks
of peasant background who would not and could not understand
much of what was good for them. Consequently, the authorities seem
to feel that whatever decisions were made on their behalf should have
been accepted, even appreciated. 1 find it hard to believe that corrupt
practices by local representatives are as prevalent as the immigrants
report, but at the same time, the appearances of corruption are there.
If clothing had been sent to the people, they should have participated
in decisions regarding its fair distribution or alternative uses. What
transpired was that since the immigrants were allegedly wasting
money on “partying” (which was a misunderstanding of their con
cepts and practices) and seemed unwilling to contribute money for
extracurricular activities and school supplies, the authorities took it
upon themselves to sell the clothes and use the proceeds to purchase
the needed items. Apparently, no effort was made to account for the
money to the satisfaction of the immigrants. Misperceptions ensued
which in turn solidified into mistrust and confrontations.
Following the meeting, I briefed the non-Amharic-speaking work
ers who had helped organize the meeting and were present through
out the lengthy discussion. They told me they were electrified by the
way the grievances were articulated. On the following morning, I
traveled to the other side of town to meet with the regional repre
sentatives of the ministry and the Jewish Agency, including the top
administrator in charge of the Ethiopians. At first, she told me how
things were moving smoothly in finding housing and employment
opportunities for the immigrants. But I told her I was duty-bound to
relate to her what I had learned from my previous contacts and espe
cially the meeting from the previous night. She was visibly shaken.
Perhaps she was concerned about whether an outsider could be
trusted enough to be told all these things. At any rate, she said it was
true that they had many problems with both the immigrants and the
workers. She also admitted that, because of language problems, some
mistreatment, including at the health clinics, might have taken place
as described. She and others also admitted that the reports regarding
the disposal of clothing were true, though they insisted the proceeds
were put to good use in helping children with their education. She
added that some of the other complaints also might have been justi
fied. But then she gave her side of the story.

Page 128 - [see page image]

107
Setting Up Home
She said the Ethiopian Jews had declared that they want to be Is
raelis, that they want to learn, and so forth. “We would like to help
them achieve those goals,” she said. “At times, we find that their
wishes are incompatible with what we think is in their long-term in
terest. They want to live in places such as Petah Tiqva or Haddera
where there are already too many Ethiopians. We want them to go
where the jobs are and where they can become integrated with vet
eran Israelis. We urge them to travel with us and visit some of the
other places, but most are not willing to move even a distance of a
mile. They all want to stay together in this one place. Since the mer-
kaze klita [absorption centers] are not their own, they do not look af
ter them well. After we have told them repeatedly of our positions,
they keep coming with the same requests.”
“Personally,” she continued, “I like to go to their houses to talk to
them instead of having them come to the office. But they do not
seem comfortable. If they keep coming here, how can I go there? I sit
on this side of the table [in her office] and they on the other, and it is
not possible to establish rapport, trust, and understanding. But if I do
go to their houses, they may expect that they will get everything they
want. This is not possible. Administrators have to say no sometimes.”
What seems to be working here is a cultural assumption on the
part of the immigrants: if you do not get what you want the first time,
try again until you convince the official that your cause is justified.
Eventually, the official will get tired and grant your wishes. This is
known as dejmettinat in Amharic. Literally, it means “waiting at the
gate”; in other words, after you have made your request, keep show
ing up in person at the gate until you succeed. For some, this works
even in Israel, but nonetheless the officials get baffled when the Ethi
opians do not take no as the final answer.
Regarding the condition of the Ethiopians, this administrator
thought there was too much generalization. “They were depicted to
us as destitute, poor, and severely persecuted because of their Jewish
ness. Now we know differently. But the depiction of them as such
was helpful in precipitating a lot of dialogue that led to the mobiliza
tion of public opinion which in turn led to their coming to Israel.”
By way of summary, then, it could be said that the Beta Israel’s
first year in Israeli society—their new home—was full of challenges
and surprises, not all of them pleasant. How these initial experiences
will color or influence what lies ahead remains to be seen.

Page 129 - [see page image]

108
CHAPTER SIX
❖
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
If it is assumed a healthy ego iden
tity and a sense of continued belonging to the primary group are es
sential for successful absorption of immigrants, 1 then it is important
to identify clearly some of the major factors that fortify the ego and
bind the group together. This chapter delineates some of these factors
as they relate to the Beta Israel and examines how they are function
ing in the context of Israel. The analysis considers the conditions and
demands imposed by the absorbing society, or significant representa
tives of it, on the immigrants and how the immigrants have tried (or,
in some instances, have refused to try) to respond to the demands.
RELIGION AS THE CENTRAL ISSUE
Whether Ethiopia’s social, eco
nomic, and political hardships had much to do with the Beta Israel’s
flight to Israel, or whether they had deeper motives, is the subject of
debate. Delineating the push and pull factors in the migration of the

Page 130 - [see page image]

109
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
Beta Israel is a very complicated and sensitive task. Most Ethiopians
would say that they left for Israel at the time preordained by God and
foretold by the prophets. They say: “Lenefisachin sinil new
yemettanew” (“We came for the sake of our soul [religion]”). No
doubt, some came for more mundane economic or political reasons.
Certainly, Israeli society and many other supporters of the Diaspora
Jews considered the rescue of the Ethiopians a religious act to be ac
complished on the same bases as that of other Jews from Asia, north
ern Africa, eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union. So on both sides the
religious reason was compelling. Perhaps it is precisely for this reason
that the ensuing controversies may seem contradictory and illogical to
the Ethiopian Jews and to others outside the Israeli rabbinate and Or
thodox circles. It must be remembered that, as far as the Beta Israel
were concerned, at this juncture they were confronted with two very
important challenges. At one level, they were Ethiopian citizens and
Ethiopian Jews just as there are American or Indian Jews in their re
spective countries. But by immigrating to Israel, they were suddenly
Israeli citizens and Israeli Jews. Their previous identities in the land of
origin counted very little if at all. In other words, their civic as well as
religious identities underwent dramatic transformation at the. very
time that they were trying to recover from the ordeals and traumas of
their very debilitating journey.
As far as their Jewishness is concerned, the Ethiopians maintain
that for twenty-seven hundred years they led an authentic Jewish life
in accordance with the principles and guidance of the Orate and sup
plemented by their own religious works which evolved over the cen
turies. 2 In matters of ritual purity, marriage and divorce, circumcision,
and observance of holidays, they followed the injunctions of the
Holy Writ. They tried to live an isolated and uncontaminated life vis-
a-vis other groups in their native country and as a result suffered
much persecution, discrimination, and injustice. 3 For the vast major
ity, coming to the Holy Land fulfilled a long-cherished hope; it was
not a special favor to them or dispensation on the pan of anyone.
For the most part, the Ethiopians had remained ignorant of the ex
istence of other Jews, just as other Jews knew nothing about the Ethi
opians. In the latter part of the sixteenth century, some Ethiopian
Jews did try to find their way to the Holy Land. 4 Later, similar at
tempts had no appreciable results. 5 At the time when Joseph Halevy
visited Gondar, he told the Beta Israel community that there were
other white Jews, like himself, who were interested in the well-being
of the Ethiopians. Upon his return, he urged the European Jewry to

Page 131 - [see page image]

110
FOR OUR SOUL
respond to the plight of the endangered Ethiopian Jews. Jacques Fait-
lovitch, following in the footstep of his mentor in 1904, established
an enduring relationship with the Beta Israel that contributed greatly
to the continued viability of the community. Among other things,
Faitlovitch was instrumental in establishing the first Jewish school
and synagogue in Addis Ababa, and in sponsoring some promising
young people from Gondar to study in Palestine, Germany, Switzer
land, and other places. He also presented the cause of Ethiopian
Jewry at the courts of Emperor Menelik II and his successor, while
advocating their cause in Europe to gain the sympathy and under
standing of Jews there. Later, the young people he had helped to ob
tain Jewish education overseas returned to Ethiopia. Men such as
Emmanuel Tamarat and Yona Bogale became outstanding leaders of
Ethiopian Jewry in the areas of education and health care and served
as effective bridges between the Ethiopians and the larger world com
munity of Jews.
When the State of Israel came into being in 1948, it was intended
to be the effective home base for world Jewry which had been scat
tered for nearly two thousand years. Potentially every Jew can choose
to be a citizen of Israel as soon as he or she touches its soil. The new
state, guided by its Zionist mission, was to work hard to encourage
and support the aliyab (“coming home”) of Jews from all parts of the
world. The Ethiopians were the last community to be recognized as
Jews and accorded the privileges of the Law of Return. 6 After World
War II, the Ethiopians made frequent, albeit unorganized, attempts to
be recognized as Jews by Israel; those who did go to Israel found it
nearly impossible to get such recognition. In the mid-1950s, some
young people went to Israel for vocational and religious training.
Upon completion of their courses, most returned to Ethiopia; only a
few joined a kibbutz, married, or otherwise settled in Israel as citi
zens. In a memorandum written in 1966 after a meeting between
Yona Bogale and Israel’s minister of religious affairs, Yitzhak Rafael,
the latter made several promises: to support the training of three to
five young Ethiopian Jews in yeshivot in Israel, to provide the Beta Is
rael with religious artifacts as needed, and to arrange for the training
of shohatim (religious Israeli slaughterers, some of whom were work
ing in Gondar for an Israeli meat-packing company). In 1971, a letter
written and signed by seventeen people representing the Beta Israel
community of Tigray, led by the ubiquitous Yona Bogale from Gon
dar, was sent to the Sephardi chief rabbi Yitzhak Nissim. In the letter,
the Ethiopians are reported to have said that they desired to be in-

Page 132 - [see page image]

Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
eluded in the world Jewish community and that they were willing to
fulfill whatever requirements the government or religious authorities
of Israel deemed necessary in order to gain full acceptance. 7 The Is
raeli authorities took no immediate action. However, the idea of
mass migration came into being. 8
For a number of reasons, the tempo of action began to pick up
around 1973. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the political situation in
Ethiopia was rapidly deteriorating, and life for the Jews was becom
ing untenable. 9 The involvement of international Jewish organiza
tions, particularly those in North America, intensified, and they
voiced their concerns about the Beta Israel to the Israeli government.
In 1973, one of the two chief rabbis, Ovadia Yosef, ruled in favor of
the Ethiopian Jews. His ruling was based on the opinions of other
rabbis rather than on secular or scientific evidence. 10 He particularly
referred to the ruling of the sixteenth-century chief rabbi of Egypt,
David n-Zimra, and his disciple and successor, MaMahari Castro.
The rabbis reiterated that the Ethiopian Jews were bona fide Jews,
descendants of the lost tribe of Dan. It took another two years before
the Ashkenazi chief rabbi, Shlomo Goren, affirmed the decision made
by his Sephardi colleague. Having obtained concurrence of the reli
gious authorities, the Begin government passed a law in 1975 declar
ing that the Beta Israel were indeed bona fide Jews and entitled to
immigrate to Israel like any other community of Jews. 11 However,
Chief Rabbi Yosef reportedly had made an additional stipulation,
which later created problems for the immigrants: “To remove any
doubt of the Jewishness of the Falashas—in case at any time they re
ceived converts who were not converted according to Halakah—I
ordered the conversion ceremony.” 12 The conversion consisted of
mass public immersion and symbolic circumcision for the males.
At any rate, the decision to recognize the Beta Israel as Jews, even
with these reservations, was monumental and opened the door for
immigration. But how could the significance of this decision be con
veyed to the villagers in Ethiopia without arousing the wrath of the
Ethiopian government? In the beginning, the Ethiopian government
agreed to allow some Jews legal emigration, provided it was done dis
creetly. In exchange, the Begin government agreed and, as expected,
was ready to grant shipment of arms 13 to enable the Mengistu govern
ment to continue the several wars that were raging in different parts
of the country and against Somalia. Two planes loaded with muni
tions left Tel Aviv for Addis Ababa, and on their return the following
night, they carried 121 Beta Israel to Tel Aviv. These Beta Israel were
ill

Page 133 - [see page image]

112
FOR OUR SOUL
the first and last legal Ethiopian immigrants to Israel. Had the secrecy
of the operation been maintained, it might have continued until the
Ethiopian government became afraid of discovery by other Ethiopi
ans, other African countries (especially from the Arab part of the con
tinent), and Middle Eastern countries. But, thanks to the premature
disclosure of the existence of the deal by the Israeli foreign minister
of the time, the deal was called off, and the Mengistu regime expelled
all Israelis from Ethiopia. 14
The legal emigration of Jews ended abruptly at the very time when
many of the villagers were getting the message to prepare for their
departure to Israel. Other nonconventional means were found. Be
tween 1977, when legal emigration stopped, and 1984, approximately
seven thousand Ethiopian Jews found their way to Israel. The immi
grants were mostly from the southern region of Tigray; a few came
from the areas of Wolqait-Tseggede-Tselemit, and Lasta (Wollo re
gion), located between the Gondar and Tigray regions. Families were
relatively intact, less maltreated, and in relatively sound physical and
mental condition upon their arrival in Israel.
Rabbi David Ben Zimra (Radbaz), the fifteenth-century scholar,
spiritual leader, and chief rabbi of Egypt, had declared that the Ethio
pians were authentic Jews who could marry other Jews. He based his
decision on the accounts of a ninth-century Jewish traveler, Eldad
Hadani, who had traced the lineage of the Ethiopians to the lost tribe
of Dan. 15 According to the present rabbinate, however, even Rabbi
Zimra admitted that the Ethiopian community was innocent of He
brew and did not include Torah scholars. 16
Further, the chief rabbinate of Israel reasoned, the Ethiopians had
been cut off for long from the Jewish community, and, because of ir
regularities in divorce procedures, there was a serious problem of
mamzerut (Halakic illegitimacy; in Amharic, dikkala, “bastard” or
woshela, “uncircumcised”). According to Jewish law, a mamzerut can
marry only another mamzerut} 7 For such persons and their families,
the Amharic and Hebrew terms connote a heavy burden and secular
and religious stigma. The person bom to such parents has no legiti
macy in religious law, which means everything in the context of Is
rael. Without the complete process of conversion, the person is a
nonentity and has no standing whatsoever in Halakah.
Some members of the Ethiopian community were suspected of
these irregularities. For instance, if a woman has a child in her second
marriage without first following the religiously mandated formula for
divorce from her first husband, the child is considered a mamzer

Page 134 - [see page image]

113
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
(“bastard”). The rabbinate, after extensive discussions with religious
scholars, found that such irregularities are found among the Ethio
pian community of Jews. So, reasoned the rabbinate, to forestall pres
ent and future suspicions and to facilitate the free intermingling of
Ethiopians with other members of the Israeli community, it would be
best to have them undergo mass conversion (note: not reconversion).
The process of conversion was to consist of the following main ele
ments: mila (circumcision), tevila (ritual immersion in the mikveh, or
bath), and kabbalat ol mitzvot (oral declaration of acceptance of the
commandments of the Torah). But since the overwhelming majority
of Ethiopians are circumcised on the eighth day after birth, the rabbi
nate deemed that symbolic circumcision, a simple procedure of draw
ing a drop of blood from the penis and recitation of the appropriate
religious passages, would suffice. Although very unhappy with the de
cision, most of the first wave of Ethiopian immigrants, nearly seven
thousand of them, underwent conversion without much resistance. 18
But this quiet, albeit reluctant, acceptance did not last long. Within
a period of about six weeks, between December 1984 and January
1985, Operation Moses brought some eight thousand Ethiopians to
Israel. In many respects, this group differed from those who had ar
rived earlier. Many had languished for up to three years in the refugee
camps in the Sudan. They were almost all from the Gondar region
and had a different psychological makeup and political persuasion.
Their arrival, after the disclosure of the hitherto secret operations,
was made public. For the first time since 1977, Israelis got a glimpse
of this group of immigrants.
Aware of the complaints of the previous wave of olim regarding
religious conversion rituals and the growing resistance of the new
comers, 19 the rabbinate appointed Rabbi Glicksberg of Givatayim, a
member of the Chief Rabbinate Council, to chair a blue-ribbon com
mittee comprised of forty-eight men from all walks of professional
life, to review the requirements once again. In the course of its delib
erations, the committee consulted some kessocb (Beta Israel religious
leaders) and Rabbi Yosef Adane, the son of an Ethiopian kes and the
only Ethiopian rabbi who was trained and ordained in Israel. 20 Even
tually, the committee published the results of its deliberations. The
report stated: “The return of the Jews of Ethiopia to the Holy Land
was an inspiring act for all Israelis and the entire House of Israel.” It
reaffirmed the Jewishness of the community but supported the rabbi
nate’s position that the community undergo a “renewal of the cove
nant, in accordance with established practice,” that is, in accordance

Page 135 - [see page image]

114
FOR OUR SOUL
with Halakah and “would serve the best interests of the community
itself.” The committee added: “There is a great temptation to solve
the problem by postponing it, but the result would be future suffering
and contention.” The committee made an appeal to a broad segment
of the population: “We call upon all who are sensitive to the dignity
and future of the Jews of Ethiopia, and who are genuinely interested
in their welfare, to strengthen the chief rabbinate in its conciliatory
approach. . . . May we all rally around the Torah whose ways are
ways of pleasantness and peace.” 21 Except for some modifications in
the procedures for circumcision, the committee, not unexpectedly,
supported the position of the rabbinate. The chief rabbinate accepted
the committee’s findings and recommendations and dropped the sym
bolic drawing of blood from the men. 22 The other requirements were
not affected.
The Ethiopians rallied to show their total opposition to the con
version requirements. They argued that for thousands of years they
had endured untold hardships to maintain their Jewish faith. They
followed the injunction of the Law of Moses as they understood it
and observed the laws of slaughtering, divorce, marriage, Sabbath,
and other holy day celebrations. Although their tradition did not in
clude speaking and reading Hebrew, which they regretted, they were
self-sufficient in most other respects. If there were some isolated ir
regularities, these could be dealt with by drawing upon the knowl
edge of respected kessoch within the community itself. The Ethiopi
ans felt the imposed mass conversion was an insult to their identity
and dignity. They could view it only as discrimination for reasons
other than religion. 23 They said no previous group had been required
to undergo mass conversion. 24 But the rabbinate did not budge. The
Ethiopians organized a public demonstration, stopped normal activi
ties, and threatened to return to Ethiopia via Egypt to dramatize their
determination. 25 Some threatened suicide, others homicide. 26
At the same time, the Ethiopians appealed to the government in
the person of Prime Minister Shimon Peres, a member of the Labor
Party. The prime minister, mindful of the hardships the group might
suffer and aware of the political repercussions of such acts, met with
representatives of the community in his office in the presence of Ab
sorption Minister Yaacov Tsur. The Ethiopians told him they had left
Eretz Yisrael thousands of years ago carrying the Bible and returned
carrying the Bible. Yet, by requiring their conversion, the rabbinate
denied their Jewishness. The immersion requirement, they said, was
degrading. One representative of the community added that seven sui-

Page 136 - [see page image]

115
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
cides over the past several years had been related to the pressure of
conversion. The prime minister assured the Ethiopians that “we are
brothers in all circumstances Only distance and time, not religion,
separated us in the past.” He added that the recent conflicts between
the immigrants and the rabbinate “should be viewed as a family spat.”
He promised to find a solution to the problem in a few weeks’ time. 27
The Ethiopians agreed to wait; this was in mid-July 1985.
Peres subsequently met with chief rabbis Avraham Shapiro and
Mordechai Eliahu, who later would appear before the Knesset com
mittee on immigration. After much negotiation with the rabbis, Peres
was able to work out a formula. The statement that came out of the
series of negotiations indicated that while the immersion ceremony
was not a condition for accepting the Ethiopians as Jews, the personal
status of each Ethiopian must be clarified and treated accordingly. In
other words, mass conversion might be waived, but any Ethiopian
wishing to get married must first submit to ritual immersion.
Other clauses in the statement stipulated that when dealing with
the Ethiopians, rabbinical courts must seek advice from the kessoch.
The agreement reflected the fact that the prime minister did not wish
to be involved in matters of Halakah. However, in explaining the
agreement to the public, an aide to the chief rabbis added that “all
Jews from abroad who want to be married in Israel must prove that
they are Jews. The Ethiopians will have to undergo exactly the same
procedure.” 28 In other words, the situation of the Ethiopians was
linked to the perennial question, “Who is a Jew?” 29 This modification
in the requirement of mass conversion did not satisfy the Ethiopians.
They acknowledged that there were some individuals whose back
grounds might call for immersion, but to require all Ethiopian males
to undergo conversion prior to marriage was unfair. 30
There was a stalemate. A few weeks later, Ethiopians pitched camp
outside the headquarters of the chief rabbinate in the heart of Jerusa
lem. As intended, the event embarrassed the rabbinate. 31 The Beta Is
rael gained tangible and intangible assistance from the press, the non-
Orthodox Jews, and nonreligious political parties, among others.
With the high holy days approaching, the rabbinate wanted to reach
some agreement so that the Ethiopians would move. Short of com
plete cancellation of the provisions, however, the Ethiopians would
not budge. They maintained their camp in front of the rabbinate for
thirty-two days. The event became extremely acrimonious.
As the confrontation intensified, even thoughtful secular Israelis
became very concerned. Writing in the Jerusalem Post, Elizer Jaffe of

Page 137 - [see page image]

116
FOR OUR SOUL
Hebrew University thoughtfully noted that there was a lack of mutual
intelligibility among the Ethiopians, and Israeli society. On the part of
the Ethiopians there was little grasp of Israeli politics, the rabbinical
establishment, judicial procedure, bargaining tactics, and the role of
Diaspora Jews in Israeli society. There is no doubt, Jaffe noted, that
the immersion-conversion issue “is mortally insulting to most Ethio
pians and that they equate immersion with the baptism that hated
Christian missionaries tried to force on them in Ethiopia. This is a
life-and-death issue for many of them, and it has nothing to do with
‘outside agitators,’ as claimed by naive Israeli observers.” He thought
that rather than confronting the rabbinate in a head-on collision,
the Ethiopians could use other tactics, as some have suggested in pri
vate, such as quietly obtaining marriage certificates from liberal Or
thodox rabbis, working toward the ordination of Ethiopian rabbis,
making sophisticated use of the courts, and conducting joint Israeli-
Ethiopian symbolic immersions in the Kinneret (Sea of Galilee) or the
Mediterranean.
By this time, the organizers were demanding the rabbinate’s un
conditional surrender. Jaffe continued, “they are joined by many Re
form and Conservative Jews who for years have been desperately
seeking recognition for their rabbis and for their religious innovations
and communal religious autonomy.” Jaffe felt it was predictable that
anticlerical forces in Israel and left-leaning political parties would join
camps with the Ethiopians. “Without disrespect for the claims of
those who are feeding on the Ethiopian plight,” Jaffe noted, “I cannot
commend them for their present disservice to the Ethiopians. For in
stead of encouraging mass aliyah of Conservative and Reform Jews in
order to strengthen their own case and numbers in Israel, instead of
pursuing their own legislative activity in the Knesset and in the courts,
and instead of providing realistic, honest counsel to the Ethiopians,
these opportunistic political groups have chosen to take a ride on the
Ethiopians’ backs, and exploit their plight.” 32
Jaffe also thought the power struggle between the Ethiopian lead
ership and the chief rabbinate was very closely related to the internal
communal struggle for control over the Beta Israel community. For
whoever delivered the goods would enjoy the popular support of
the community. There were respected veteran olim whose leader
ship could be utilized for the good of the community but who had
not cast their lots so far with the Beta Israel leadership strug
gling to emerge.

Page 138 - [see page image]

117
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
Earlier in July, the Abba Eban of the Labor Party and member of
the Knesset had taken the occasion of the controversy to address the
larger issues of the state and religion in democratic Israel. Eban
pointed out that the collective memory of the Ethiopian Jews reached
back to the dawn of Jewish history, long before the establishment of
the chief rabbinate with quasi-legal power in Israel. He noted that the
chief rabbinate was the creation of the Turkish-British period and
had only quasi-legal standing in the eyes of Halakah. As such, he
added, the rabbinate should not exercise coercive, executive power.
Rather, its powers should derive from excellence in learning and
piety, from respect and acceptance by the people of Israel following
the tradition exercised by luminaries such as Rabbis Avraham Kook
and Isaac Herzog. He added that the giants of modem Zionism such
as Herzl, Nordau, and their political followers were “totally unaf
fected by Halakah.” Eban further asserted that “national freedom,
democracy, social justice, and scientific rationalism were the ideologi
cal roots of modem Zionism.” It is true that religious faith has pre
served Jewish identity in exile, but that preservation would not have
continued were it not for the political and pioneering initiatives taken
by secular Zionism, beyond and often against the religious establish
ment. Although eventually religious Zionism became a respected and
organic part of political Zionism, “it was never the leading part.” The
religious establishment should not press opinions and interests that go
beyond what is reasonable and acceptable. “The more so,” Eban
added, “since there is no absolute truth in the judgments or enact
ments of any particular religious institution; in many cases, including
that of the Ethiopian Jews, for every rabbi with a Halakic opinion
there is contrary Halakic judgment by another rabbinic authority.”
The Ethiopians, now living in a democratic country, he said, had a
right to take their case to the elected legislature and government. It
was the duty of the government to help them resolve the issues. Eban
saw the immersion-conversion issue as primarily political, calling for
political solutions. 33 Obviously, this kind of approach led the chief
rabbinate to dig its Halakic heels in even deeper.
For Prime Minister Shimon Peres, what Eban said might have been
logical. But as a consummate politician, he could afford only to say
that the Ethiopians were indeed Jews and citizens of Israel; when it
came to Halakah, he was no expert. 34 By publicly deferring to the re
ligious Orthodox establishment, he eventually was able to forge some
agreement between the strikers and the chief rabbis during the first
week of October 1985.

Page 139 - [see page image]

118
FOR OUR SOUL
When at last it came, the agreement was communicated to Peres,
who was acting as the mediator, in a letter from chief rabbis Shapiro
and Eliahu. Peres then sent a letter to the striking Beta Israel. The ten
ets of the agreement were similar to those the rabbinate had proposed
on the eve of Rosh Hashanah which the strikers had rejected. 35 The
agreement left final determination of the Jewishness of Ethiopian
couples seeking marriage in the hands of a special rabbinical court
which would be made up of rabbis who consider the whole Ethiopian
community to be Jewish and in no need of symbolic conversion.
However, the strikers wanted their own religious leaders or kessoch
to be the judges when an Ethiopian’s Jewishness was in doubt. On
this count the Ethiopians lost. The Jerusalem Post noted: “The defeat
on this crucial point must be laid in no small measure to the vocifer
ous support of the well-wishers on the nonreligious left and in the
Reform movement. When these two groups, in pursuance of their
own aims, took a ride on the back of the Ethiopians, who view them
selves as Orthodox, it was a safe bet that the chief rabbis would re
spond by digging in their Halakic heels and refusing to budge another
inch.” The editorial went on to say: “This is historically an absurdity,
even if laid down by the assemblage of historical scholars [the posi
tion taken by this body]. It implies that the rabbinical marriage regis
trars were right to insist, from the start, that any Ethiopian couple
must produce certificates of conversion through ritual immersion be
fore they can be considered marriageable. Moreover, it means that
the chief rabbis will be bound—if only to prove freedom from preju
dice—to fling the same collective charge of dubious Jewishness in the
faces of the next large group of immigrants from antireligious Soviet
Russia, where the encouragement of the ‘intermingling’ of Jews with
non-Jews is state policy.... It is a frightening prospect.” 36
The agreement further stipulated that an institute would be estab
lished within the Ministry of Religious Affairs to study the communi
ty’s conditions. It would make recommendations about marriages, di
vorce, and the like. It took a long time before the ministry established
the institute, and when it finally did, its membership did not include
Ethiopian kessoch. The Ethiopians considered this another breach of
faith. In the meantime, the rabbinate stipulated that any Ethiopian
wanting to marry must follow the process of conversion. The Ethio
pians continued to oppose this vehemently. Since that time, liberal
rabbis and kessoch have officiated over marriages, though some have
complied with the conversion requirements. For the majority of the
people, especially those who are not married, and for the rabbinate it-

Page 140 - [see page image]

119
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
self, the issues of conversion are still outstanding. The issue has gen
erated a lot of discussion, most of which has been very bitter. 37 It has
negatively affected the attitudes of many on both sides and has spilled
over into other areas of social and political life.
THE NAMING GAME
Among the many obvious differ
ences between the Ethiopian immigrants and the Israelis were the
Ethiopians’ names. To make them more Hebraic, to simplify the reg
istration and accounting processes, and perhaps to forestall name-
linked discrimination in the future, the Israeli authorities took a num
ber of steps. From the start, a policy was adopted to rework the
naming process for the olim. As it turned out, the task proved very
complicated, controversial, and in the end unsatisfactory to many of
the olim.
In the Ethiopian context, names usually are loaded with signifi
cance. Before assigning a name to a child, parents and relatives con
sult one another and deliberate over the possibilities. A child may be
given several names—one by the father, another by the mother, still
another by grandparents, uncles, and significant others. These names
signify some special meaning, some hope, or some kind of wished-for
relationship between the child and the name giver. This is especially
true for the first male child or grandchild in a family. There is always
one dominant name by which the individual is known throughout
life. This is the first (given) name. The second name, the father’s first
name, is referred to when double identification is called for. For ex
ample, the name of Yakov is given to a boy at birth. Yakov’s father’s
full name is Legesse Nadew. The boy then becomes known as Yakov
Legesse, but Yakov is his principal name. Later, when he grows up, he
becomes Ato (Mr.) Yakov, Dr. Yakov, Kes Yakov, and so on. When
Yakov marries, his wife, Almaz Mazengya, retains her maiden name;
she only adds the designation “Woizero” (Mrs.). Ato Yakov and
Woizero Almaz Mazengya have a son and a daughter. The boy is
given the name Menelik, and the girl Sara. The full names of Yakov’s
children then become Menelik Yakov and Sara Yakov Legesse, their
grandfather’s first name or their father’s last name, is dropped alto
gether. The father’s first name becomes the second name of his chil-

Page 141 - [see page image]

120
FOR OVR SOUL
dren. Family lineage, then, cannot be traced through family names;
there are other ways to trace lineage, however.
When an Ethiopian moves permanently to another society, the
naming system creates a number of problems. The names of Ethio
pian authors, for example, are listed differently in different library
systems; when one tries to consult a particular work, it is often neces
sary to consult the librarian or the author to know how he or she is
classified. It was only after numerous correspondences that I per
suaded the librarian at the U.S. Library of Congress to use my last
name to catalog my publications. When I was in Ethiopia, my works
were entered under my first name, following the Ethiopian system.
My family and I also have experienced some confusion at a more per
sonal level. We have lived in two communities since coming to the
United States. One community was very familiar with the Ethiopian
custom; the other was not. We decided our children would carry my
second name (my father’s first name) as their last, while my wife kept
her maiden name. We thought this would simplify recordkeeping in
schools, banks, and municipal offices. Other Ethiopians 1 have
known, now living in the United States, have adopted various other
strategies to simplify name-linked identification. To date, however,
no single system of naming has been devised that is acceptable to all
Ethiopians living abroad. 38
Given the complex tradition, one can appreciate the problems the
Ethiopian olim and the Israeli authorities confronted. The Israelis de
cided to adopt what they thought was the easiest system: assigning to
each newcomer a Hebrew name. The meaning of the new name was
to correspond, as much as possible, to the original Ethiopian first
name. A second name would be adopted for the whole family—fa
ther, mother, and children. Since many Ethiopian names are similar to
biblical or Hebrew names, this seemed to be a workable approach.
For instance, such names as Yakov, Yishak, Sara, Avraham, Yoseph,
and Rachel presented no problem. Some other names, such as Mihret
(female) or Mihretu (male) could be translated quite readily to Ra-
hamim (“Mercy”). For last names, either a new Hebrew name was as
signed to the family, or, in most instances, the name of a dead ances
tor, the father or grandfather of the male head of the household, for
instance, was adopted. According to this procedure, everyone in the
family would have the same last name, including the wife. In most in
stances, with the assistance of some veteran Ethiopians, names were
worked out before the olim arrived. The people were informed of
their new names at the initial sorting centers.

Page 142 - [see page image]

121
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
At first, there was little resistance to the name changes. But resent
ment slowly developed as the olim came to see it as another ploy to
deprive them of their authentic identities. For instance, when one
man was asked how many children he had, he said that when he ar
rived he had eight children, three boys and five girls, but now he had
only three. The other five, he said, were lost to the family when they
married and assumed different names (they carry their husbands’
names). To many of the olim, the name-changing process is part and
parcel of the resocialization process. They resent the fact that this
kind of resocialization was deemed necessary. The veteran Ethiopians
say it was a mistake to impose this additional burden on the commu
nity. The Hebrew names are beautiful and significant; had the people
been properly consulted, they probably would have consented to the
idea. But they were not consulted. No other olim have ever been
asked to change their names en masse, although many decided for
themselves to adopt Hebrew names. Their individuality and freedom
of choice were never in question. To a certain extent, Israeli authori
ties have recognized their mistake. One group of sixty Ethiopian fami
lies who arrived in 1987 was not asked to change their names and did
not volunteer to do so. Perhaps in the future, things will be different.
For those who have gone through the experience, the misgivings may
last for a while. 39
LEADERSHIP AT BAY
It is inevitable that leaders emerge
from an immigrant group during the absorption process. 40 In the case
of the Beta Israel, the need for strong, informed, and authentic lead
ership was obvious, but it was not until the battle lines were drawn
between the religious-political authorities representing the absorbing
society and the Beta Israel community that the need for leadership
became urgent.
Whenever possible, it is preferable that the leadership come from
within the group. Anchored in the community, they are more likely
to represent the community’s aspirations and have their support.
Ideally, the leadership also should be conversant with the language
and culture of the absorbing society; having lived in the country for
some time and having received some education or training there

Page 143 - [see page image]

122
FOR OUR SOUL
would increase the likelihood that they understand and have the re
spect of representatives of the absorbing society. Recognized as au
thentic and credible by both sides, such leaders could act as effective
cultural broken.
For a number of reasons, it took a long time for such leadership to
emerge from the Beta Israel community. Many of the leaders in the
Ethiopian context became, for all practical purposes, dysfunctional in
Israel. Vatikim (veteran Beta Israel immigrants) were also few in num
ber, and most were not prepared to assume leadership positions, were
out of touch with the migrant community and did not know what the
migrant community needed, or did not want to become involved. For
their part, the religious and secular authorities of the absorbing soci
ety failed to identify, cultivate, and encourage leadership. In all likeli
hood, the political and religious leadership of the absorbing society
was not convinced that continuation of traditional leadership among
the group would be in their best long-term interests: it could hamper
their absorption and socialization in the new setting and compromise
Israel’s indivisible, Euro-centered conceptualization of absorption.
The weaknesses of this approach, however, overshadow any useful
purposes. According to this philosophy, the few seasoned and highly
educated Beta Israel leaders, including Yona Bogale, who was inti
mately knowledgeable about the olim and Israeli society and fluent in
Hebrew, Amharic, Tigrigna, English, French, and other languages and
had made significant contributions to the Beta Israel community in
Ethiopia, were practically ignored in Israel. 41
In the context of traditional Ethiopian and Jewish values, age is re
vered. In village and family matters, the shemagile (“elderly man”)
and, in some respects, the baltet (“elderly woman”) are held in high
respect, listened to, and often obeyed. Traditionally, when it comes
to the governing and control of younger members, there exists an
ever-present threat of irgman (“curse”) which the shemagile can use
against errant youth. When a curse is made, if the object does not
make timely amends and is not forgiven, it is believed to cause un
timely death or some other misfortune. Parents and village elders are
serious about the proper upbringing of children. At the village level,
the shemagiloch, especially the kessoch, served as leaders in matters
related to religious life, administration of justice, and spiritual guid
ance. According to Leslau, “the priest is not only the confessor but
the counselor and the spiritual authority of the entire community.” 42
In addition, every person has a ynefis abat (“soul father”) who is inti
mately knowledgeable about the individual and family.

Page 144 - [see page image]

123
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
Once in Israel, the traditional leadership lost much of its signifi
cance because its institutions and religious bases were rendered obso
lete. 43 But their influence already had begun to decline before they
left Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, especially since the early 1960s, schooled
young people have grown increasingly restless, politically radicalized,
and defiant toward the established order—family, religion, and gov
ernment. Primarily as a result of sustained challenges and attacks
against the old regime and all the institutions that supported it, the
schooled youth undermined the authority and efficacy of the mon-
archial system (Kebuae Egziabher, or “anointed of God”) in the eyes
of the traditional public and even the military. 44 When the Haile Se
lassie government and the thirty-century tradition of imperial rule fell
in 1974, it was replaced by a military junta, the Derg, comprised of
young military personnel. Eventually, some of the Ethiopian Jews
found themselves in Israel. In many respects, the experience of the
young leadership that emerged in Israel derived its inspiration from
these developments in Ethiopia. So when some Israeli politicians ex
pressed their opinion that some Beta Israel organizers were trained in
“communist camps,” they were not far from the truth. 45 As a result,
there emerged in Israel strong rivalries among a dozen or so organiza
tions led by the youth who were vying for recognition. For a time,
this led to confusion among the rank-and-file Beta Israel as well as
among the political and religious leadership of the absorbing society.
Nevertheless, in the absence of any alternative, the organizations
did serve some good purpose in providing a platform on which the
Beta Israel could articulate their concerns and convey them to the
Israeli authorities.
In terms of the generation and education gaps among the Beta Is
rael, the community can be divided into two broad categories. On the
one side are the older, more conservative, religious, and mostly non
literate members. On the other side are the younger, more secularly
oriented, schooled, and politically active youth. 46 Since the 1940s, the
differences between the two groups have increased. As the educated
members moved on to find further educational and employment op
portunities, the young people became increasingly aware of the need
for schooling and responded enthusiastically to Jewish and public
schools. But because resources were limited in Ethiopia, particularly
in the regions where the Beta Israel lived, students traveled long dis
tances for their education. In most instances, they resided in far-away
towns or cities where they came in contact with young people from
different backgrounds. These experiences and contacts inevitably

Page 145 - [see page image]

124
FOR OVR SOUL
influenced their outlook on religion, nationality, and ethnicity. At
least in the earlier decades, the traditional Jewish community tried to
exclude these young people from effective participation in religious
activities in synagogues for fear that they had become contaminated
by their association with Gentiles. These were additional factors that
contributed to the gaps. 47
During the first phase of my fieldwork, there were at least a dozen
Beta Israel associations, and the Jewish Agency and some government
officials complained there were so many that they did not know
which ones they should do business with. By the time of my second
visit in 1986-87, there were only four organizations left, and two of
these were not active. The two active organizations were bona fide
Ethiopian grass-roots groups. Most of the previous organizations had
been organized and operated by non-Beta Israel groups on behalf of
the Beta Israel community (one was run by a Christian church). The
latter might have served some useful purposes, but they were con
demned by the Ethiopians and urged to cease and desist. 48
Of the two associations competing for leadership, one was called
Beta Yisrael. Located in Ramat Gan, where there was a large group of
immigrants, and, at least in the initial years, financially supported by
the Canadian Association for Ethiopian Jewry, this organization was
more aggressive, more tightly organized, and, according to Jaffe,
tended to be “autocratic, isolationist and loath to compromise. One is
either with them or against them.” 49 This was also the organization
that mobilized and led the strikes against the conversion requirements
during the months of July through October 1985.
In contrast, the Israel Association of Ethiopian Immigrants, funded
for the most part by the Association of Americans and Canadians in
Israel and the Zahavi Association of Large Families, has its headquar
ters in Jerusalem (previously in Haifa) and has branches in many parts
of the country. This organization is less aggressive, is more demo
cratic, and assumes no leadership roles in the strikes. Although it sup
ported the goals of the strike, it hoped to achieve the same ends by
resorting to the courts. The Beta Yisrael was certified in December
1984, the Israel Association for Ethiopian Immigrants in September
1984. These two organizations overwhelmingly represented the Beta
Israel from the Gondar region, with only a few members from Tigray
and Wollo. 50 Both organizations resented the non-Ethiopian organi
zations that tried to speak on behalf of the community. Both strongly
opposed immersion and insisted on the unconditional recognition of
the Ethiopians as Jews. Both groups also acknowledge the lack of ed-

Page 146 - [see page image]

125
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
ucation among the leadership and their supporters. 51 They differed on
tactics, organizational structure, and long-range goals. 52
Beta Yisrael was the stronger of the two. It had been in the fore
front of the battle during the conversion controversy and was instru
mental in organizing the community for other purposes, such as reu
niting families and defending the rights of immigrants to choose
which schools their children attended. A number of thoughtful Is
raelis charged that Beta Yisrael was confrontational rather than con
ciliatory. Although this might be true, one must look closely at the
complex situation of immigration and settlement of the Beta Israel to
understand the reasons. Writing in October 1985, at the height of the
confrontational period, Jaffe lamented the approach taken by the
leadership but thoughtfully pointed out: “Leadership will emerge that
is capable of presenting their case in a constructive manner, without
losing the identity, pride and respect of this fascinating Jewish com
munity. Only such internal leadership can, over time, prevent ex
ploitation, paternalism, and degradation of the Ethiopian community
in Israel.” 53
Now let us turn our attention to the views of the leadership, in
particular Addisu Messele, the head of Beta Yisrael since its inception
and recognition by the Ministry of Interior since 1984. Addisu Mes
sele is often in the national news, and nearly anyone with some
knowledge of the Beta Israel knows the name and reputation of this
man. I interviewed him on three different occasions, once in the sub
urb of Tel Aviv where he lives and twice in Jerusalem. I was also pres
ent at two rallies and demonstrations his association organized. One
was to demand that the Israeli government increase its efforts for re
union in Israel of relatives left behind in Ethiopia. The other was to
commemorate those Beta Israel people who lost their lives in refugee
camps while trying to reach Israel. The latter was staged in the pres
ence of high government officials, including the president of Israel.
Addisu Messele is approximately thirty years of age; he is tall, has
an aristocratic bearing, wears his hair long, and, except on important
public occasions when he wears Ethiopian garb, he does not wear the
ubiquitous kippa (headgear worn by nearly all Beta Israel males since
their arrival in Israel). He uses his Ethiopian names instead of the He
brew ones that were assigned to him. He received the equivalent of a
twelfth-grade education in Gondar. He is articulate in Amharic, He
brew, and English. He remains attached to the land he left but la
ments the discrimination, personal and communal, that some of the
people in what he refers to as “our country” had perpetrated against

Page 147 - [see page image]

126
FOR OUR SOUL
the Beta Israel. He does not regret that he came to Israel. He ex
pected, as a matter of right, much better treatment for his people
in Israel.
When he was in Ethiopia, Addisu Messele was an active member
of EPRP (Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Party). He fled the coun
try when the Derg disbanded the group and began to persecute its
members. He went to the Sudan without knowing where he would go
from there. In the Sudan, he learned that the government of Israel
was allowing the Beta Israel into the country. Eventually, he found
his way to Israel. His father came later, but his mother and siblings
are still in Ethiopia. Like other Beta Israel who came to Israel during
the same period, he went through what he calls ttilmat (religious im
mersion, or mikveh) and gizret (symbolic circumcision, which he de
scribed as painless). He says that when he was in Ethiopia he was very
religious. Like most other Beta Israel, he did not even consider drink
ing coffee made on Sabbath.
After familiarizing himself with the country and the language, he
busied himself in Israel. He was employed by the Jewish Agency of Is
rael to assist in the processing and settlement of those Beta Israel who
came after him. With time, he and others became acutely aware that
the policies pursued by the absorbing society, such as the conversion
requirements and the changing of names, were wrong. He wanted to
change the procedures. Failing in his efforts to influence policy, he
began to go to the receiving centers to urge the newcomers to refuse
to comply with the demands. At registration time, he said, the Beta Is
rael were presented with stacks of papers containing their new names.
Nobody even bothered to ask them what they wished to be called or
to explain why it was necessary to change their names. It was all arbi
trarily determined by a group of bureaucrats, he said. He told the new
arrivals to refuse the name changes. He also told them of their rights,
including the right to refuse the conversion demands. Eventually,
when the authorities of the Jewish Agency found out what he was
doing, he was removed, though he continued to send his representa
tives to carry out the mission. From that time, on Addisu Messele
fought for what he calls the rights of the Beta Israel as Jews and Is
raelis. He felt that all “this humiliation” was directed at the Beta Is
rael because they were considered ignorant, powerless, and poor. It is
pure and simple politics; it has nothing to do with religion. He main
tains that the rabbinate would not dare to do the same thing to the
Russians, who were more suspect of intermarriages and other irregu
larities than the Beta Israel.

Page 148 - [see page image]

127
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
Addisu Messele thought his people, the Beta Israel, were under tre
mendous stress, for social, religious, and family reasons. They had
thought of Jerusalem as mystical, complete, beautiful, and righteous.
Upon arrival, they saw Jewish people doing all sorts of things on the
Sabbath. He asserted that the older Beta Israel were disillusioned,
while the young had become more sensitized to the political condi
tions. The conversion demand alienated many of them, he said. As a
result, they were willing to join calls for rallies and demonstrations at
a moment’s notice. The calls were so frequent that once, when he
went to the town of Natanya to organize the immigrants against cer
tain actions taken by the authorities, the social worker called him
an alien and locked him up in a room. He broke out through the
windows. After he had gone a couple of kilometers, the police caught
up with him. He told them he was carrying out his duties as a citizen
in a democratic society and had not violated any law. Despite his
pleas, the police took him to the station. While he was there, two
hundred Beta Israel showed up to demand his release. To this day,
he has a three-inch scar on his arm from crawling through the
broken window.
Comparing the spiritual condition of the olim now and before,
Addisu Messele is of the opinion that “the Ethiopian community,
young and old, men as well as women, are of a very highly religious
background. The older people are still very religious. But the young,
for the most part, are totally alienated.” The stress and alienation, he
said, appear in different guises. One symptom is the phenomenon of
suicide. From 1984 to 1987, at least thirty-two Beta Israel people had
taken their own lives. The reasons were attributed, in the first in
stance, to the religious controversy which had created much despond
ency among the group. The second suspected cause was the feeling of
inadequacy. Young people were placed side by side in learning situa
tions or at work with other people whose language and culture were
that of the absorbing society. When failure ensues, young people be
come desperate and take drastic actions. The third element was sepa
ration from other members of their families. The young came to Is
rael; many of the old, infirm, women, and children were left behind.
Addisu Messele felt compelled to speak up about the many ills af
fecting the Beta Israel. If he didn’t, no one else would. He said he did
this at the expense of his own family. He maintained that the psychol
ogists, social workers, and other service providers who were knowl
edgeable about the objective conditions of the immigrants but were
paid their salaries by the government or the Jewish Agency were not

Page 149 - [see page image]

128
FOR OUR SOUL
at liberty or would not dare to speak out in public against the short
comings of their employers. For instance, he said, before he appeared
on a national television show with a psychologist who had studied
the mental health conditions of the Beta Israel immigrants, to discuss
the issues affecting the community’s health problems, the psycholo
gist told Addisu Messele that he was not willing to raise the issue of
immigrant suicide problems. Instead, the psychologist suggested that
Addisu Messele bring up the issue.
I invited him to discuss the charges that have been leveled against
the immigrants—that they are not punctual, loyal, or very productive
in the workplace. He told me that as farmers and artisans, the Beta Is
rael are used to hard labor. But in their traditional context they were
at relative liberty to organize their own work and time. The farmers
and artisans also allowed themselves time to attend weddings and fu
nerals and to visit relatives and friends. Working as an employee of a
firm in Israel, laboring at menial tasks for eight hours a day, day in
and day out, was very monotonous and tiring. So some would take
off to attend weddings or funerals. Supervisors became angry; the tre
mendous linguistic and cultural obstacles did not make things any
easier. The supervisors turned on the workers and called them lazy,
unreliable, disloyal, and all the rest. The immigrant workers, in turn,
blamed the supervisors because they only demanded punctuality and
productivity without understanding the many problems and tragedies
in the community. The workers also complained that the wages they
received were inadequate. The veteran workers blamed their Beta Is
rael colleagues for being aloof or unfriendly at the workplace. At the
root of the complaints leveled against the Beta Israel, said Addisu
Messele, is the absence of shared cultural values.
He thought his organization enjoyed the support of 95 percent of
the Beta Israel immigrants. 54 Because of the role he was playing on
behalf of the Beta Israel, he said he was fully aware that the Jewish
Agency and some departments of the government would like to keep
him away. But some of the left-wing or liberal political parties
courted him to join their respective ranks. For the time being, he
wanted to remain nonpartisan, as far as the established parties were
concerned. He evaded discussion of the charges some politicians
made that he was a communist. 55 At the personal level, he said he was
fatigued. He said it is not easy to lead a community of people who are
not sophisticated in matters of politics and personal or group rights
and responsibilities in the new setting. He also felt his efforts were
not fully appreciated by the immigrants and that the establishment

Page 150 - [see page image]

129
Crisis in Communal Integrity and Identity
did not wish him well at all. In addition, his father, who was already
in Israel, was applying pressure on him to work in league with the
Jewish Agency so that they might bring Addisu’s mother, brothers,
and sisters to Israel. He said the Jewish Agency was helping many
other families in similar circumstances, but he thought it was unlikely
that they would do the same for his family.
SUMMARY
The receiving society, through its
secular and religious representatives, assumed that the Ethiopian olim
were making aliyah for religious reasons. To that end, whatever was
done on their behalf to lighten their burdens in the social, cultural,
and religious spheres was assumed to be in the best interest of the
group. Realizing the good intentions, the olim would welcome such
actions. Based on these assumptions, processes of reconversion or
conversion and the changing of names were carried out. Later, these
came to be viewed by the olim as injurious to their self-identity, self-
respect, and group solidarity. Eventually, when rectifications were
suggested, positions already had solidified. Dialogues, which were in
tended to lead to meaningful compromises, became acrimonious, and
the issues remained unresolved. On the whole, the assumptions
proved untenable and the actions unsupportable. The people them
selves, through their traditional leaders, the kessoch, should have
been consulted at every stage. But these consultations were rare. In
the end, each side developed negative attitudes toward the other,
complicating problems relating to the adjustment of the immigrants
in Israel and the receptivity of the larger society. Lack of experience
on the part of the young emerging leadership among the community
might have contributed to the delays that occurred before solutions
to the many challenges confronting the community were found.

Page 151 - [see page image]

130
CHAPTER SEVEN
♦
Primary Education
Both the immigrants and the Is
raeli society consider education the single most important enterprise
in the absorption process. In its variety of forms and organization,
education is also the single most important enterprise nearly all Beta
Israel are participating in. From the youngest child in the nursery
school to the oldest person (as old as eighty-five), men and women,
regardless of previous experiences or conditions, all are engaged in
learning languages, participating in organized cultural and socializa
tion activities, learning skills of various kinds, and in general prepar
ing themselves to meet the tremendous challenges confronting them
in their new environment. We cannot document all the varieties of
educational and training activities engaged in by the olim, but this and
the next two chapters present analyses of some of their major aspects.
Learning, by its very nature, is a problem-solving activity. But it also
generates frustrations, anxieties, and frictions among and between
providers and receivers. The normal challenges to learning are com
pounded many times over by the many differences between the lan
guage, culture, and broad social and psychological makeups of the
Beta Israel and the service providers.

Page 152 - [see page image]

131
Primary Education
STRUCTURE
To get some perspective on the
structure and philosophy underlying the system of primary education
in Israel, I interviewed several high-ranking officials as well as school
inspectors and field representatives. The first was David Pur, head of
the secular education division of the Pedagogical Service of the Min
istry of Education and Culture. Of Polish descent, Pur was bom and
raised in Israel. We met in his very modest office on King David Street
in Jerusalem.
With respect to the structure of primary education, Pur explained
that there are three distinct systems (branches) operating under the
general direction of the Ministry of Education and Culture: the state
secular, the state religious, and the independent. About 75 percent of
all primary-school-aged children are enrolled in state secular schools,
20 percent in state religious schools, and 5 percent in independent
schools (4.6 percent are controlled by the Hasidim; the remaining 0.4
percent are controlled by the Orthodox wing).
The two state-sponsored systems receive most of their support
from the central treasury. The independent system has unusual fea
tures. Although it is administered by the ultra-Orthodox (Agudat Is
rael), which does not recognize either the efficacy of Zionism or the
State of Israel itself, it receives some government subvention. But the
Ministry of Education and Culture has very little or no regulatory
powers vis-a-vis this system. It has its own unique conceptions, ap
proaches, and methods of teaching and enjoys the power to accept or
reject students based on its own criteria. The three systems certify
their teachers through the Ministry of Education and Culture, though
each has its own teacher-training institutions. At the secondary level,
the training and certification responsibilities fall upon the several
universities. 1
The state secular and state religious systems of curricula and matri
culation examinations are quite similar. Their differences lie in the
biblical, historical, and Talmudic studies, where they differ in inclu
sion, emphasis and method. For instance, the state secular schools
present biblical studies and literature humanistically and in historical
context, whereas the religious wing presents them from the perspec
tives of revelation or divine guidance. In addition, the religious

Page 153 - [see page image]

132
FOR OUR SOUL
schools include instruction in religious customs and rituals such as
meal preparation, holy day observations, and so on. Moreover, stu
dents participate in daily worship and other religious activities and are
expected to wear appropriate attire (no jeans or short skirts for girls;
boys must wear the yarmulke). One will generally find more girls than
boys in the religious schools. However, in the yeshivot, or elite reli
gious academies, males predominate because, according to tradition,
religious vocation is restricted to men.
Among Israeli Jews, more than 70 percent are secular. The pioneer
Zionists, Pur explained, were products of the Enlightenment of eigh
teenth- and nineteenth-century Europe. They were either atheists or
otherwise nonbelievers in religion. This process of secularization
which affected Europeans was wholly absent from the experiences of
the Orientals, and this difference in historical experience is manifestly
reflected in present-day Israeli society. The 30 percent religious mi
nority draws a significant number of its members from the Oriental
population (of Third World background). The majority of students
enrolled in the religious schools are from religious homes and are
from the Sephardi and mixed sectors of society. 2 Females are also
highly represented in religious schools. This group is generally disad
vantaged in income, employment, and educational achievement.
In recent years, there has been an observable shift even among the
Ashkenazim toward religion and conservative political outlook. 3
However, as far as the schools are concerned, the trend is in the
opposite direction. Enrollments in religious schools are declining as
more and more parents send their children to state secular schools.
The competition these days is not so much between the secular and
religious schools as it is between the Zionist and the anti-Zionist reli
gious schools. Both would like to see religious education become the
center of educational activity, but they disagree profoundly when it
comes to their attitude toward the state. A trend toward theocracy is
apparent among the people from northern Africa and the Middle
East. These olim are susceptible to religious dogmas and charismatic
personality cults. Israel is an island of democracy (within the Green
Line or pre-1967 borders and for the Jewish population). 4 But, Pur
added, the danger for Israel does not arise from the mentality of the
Jewish people (Orientals) but from where people live and the period
of time people are living in. s The secular schools are striving to teach
students the efficacy of democratic values, but in the religious schools
it is something else, 6 by which Pur meant that the religious branch
conducts classes on the bases of divine revelation and guidance, with
little if any account given for the human, political dimensions.

Page 154 - [see page image]

133
Primary Education
We talked about the differences in national and world views
among graduates of the various educational systems. Pur admitted
that there are differences similar to those found among the general
population. Israeli society is pluralistic. Even within the religious,
wing there are extremes—extreme nationalists and extreme leftists.
Research has demonstrated that those who graduate from the reli
gious schools tend to be conservative. I asked whether such divisions
worry him. Pur simply responded, “It is a fact of life.” On the other
hand, he pointed out the important unifying role played by Jewish
tradition, the Hebrew language, holy days, and celebrations. These
reflect shared values and encourage some common perspectives
which may help bind Israelis together as a national community, he
said. He illustrated his point with the example of his membership in a
particular kibbutz. Although the kibbutz is nonreligious, its members
do celebrate Passover and other holy days. In addition to these tradi
tions, he said, all share a common destiny.
More than 90 percent of Ethiopian children and youth attend reli
gious schools. To get an understanding of the structure and goals of
the state religious administration, I interviewed Ben Yashar, assistant
to the head of the state religious education system. Yashar is also in
charge of field supervision of the Ethiopian children in state religious
schools. He reiterated that the concepts of immigration as under
stood in the United States and in Israel are entirely different things. In
Israel, the concept is better represented by the term aliyab, which in
Hebrew means “ascent,” a return to one’s home to reunite with a
family. The term immigration, on the other hand, connotes eco
nomic, political, or other instrumental motives. In other words, he
said, in the United States immigrants are looked upon as a burden to
be borne; in Israel, the immigration process is a reunion and an op
portunity for both the immigrants, and the receiving society. These
differences, he said, are very significant, and the education programs
that have been forged for the Ethiopian immigrants are grounded
in a set of beliefs and assumptions about their homecoming and
shared benefits.
In Israel’s history of waves of aliyab, no group has ever been the
target of so much special concern as the Beta Israel. Recognizing the
special nature of the Ethiopian olim, the field unit Yashar supervises
came into being specifically to address their needs. For the first time,
he said, they formulated special curricula and trained teachers for
special tasks. In the course of preparations, they consulted the kes-
soch. They also took into account the knowledge left by Emmanuel

Page 155 - [see page image]

134
FOR OUR SOUL
Tamrat, Halevy, Faitlovitch, and others (the list included people who
wrote about the religious aspects of the Beta Israel but not historians,
anthropologists, and linguists who have written voluminously about
Ethiopia and the Jews). Yashar reiterated that 90 percent of Beta Is
rael education is in the hands of the religious wing, of the Ministry of
Education and Culture (including the Youth Aliyah, which is specially
coordinated with the Youth Department of the Jewish Agency). The
decision to incorporate them initially into the state religious system
was made by the Knesset after consultation with Beta Israel leader
ship. The rationale was to mitigate or lessen the cultural and religious
shocks and facilitate their smooth adjustment on the one hand and,
on the other, to give the olim as much knowledge of the Hebrew lan
guage and modem Judaism as quickly as they could absorb it. The
special arrangement was to last for a period of one year (until January
1986). Yashar explained that the law stipulates that parents should be
given information about the different types of schools so that they
can decide where they would like to enroll their children after the
first year. To date, most Beta Israel children continue to participate in
the religious system.
Reports Yashar had received thus far from teachers, administra
tors, and others who knew the children were very encouraging. The
children were very highly motivated to learn. They often asked teach
ers for more homework and even remained after school to do addi
tional work. They worked hard. They performed well in basic arith
metic. The problem areas for them were language, literature, reading
comprehension, and abstract thinking. Yashar was fairly optimistic
that if financial subvention for special tutorials continued, the schools
would be able to accelerate their progress. Each child in the primary
schools was entitled to 1.8 hours of extra tutorial help per week. At
the secondary level, it is 2.2 hours per week. The special tutorials
took place outside regular classroom hours. The tutors were either
the regular classroom teachers, teachers brought from other schools,
or adult volunteers drawn from the community. The school principal
had some leeway to make arrangements.
When I asked for Yashar’s impressions of Beta Israel response to
religious teachings, he said that most insisted on maintaining their
own traditions. “We can’t do much to force them to go contrary to
their wishes,” he said. Talmudic and other mainstream Judaic learning
were coming very slowly. The young people who lived in the religious
dormitories were doing better because they were surrounded by reli
gious precepts and rituals. Those in the grade schools were not pro-

Page 156 - [see page image]

135
Primary Education
gressing as much. The reconversion controversies did not affect the
teaching-learning efforts (as far as Yashar’s office was concerned). “In
our guidance to all our teachers and administrators,” he said, “we
stress that as far as we are concerned, all Jews are equal.” Regarding
the goal of full integration of the Beta Israel children, Yashar said that
the inhibiting factors were housing and employment availabilities.
Parents settled where there was housing and jobs. As a result, the
Beta Israel were concentrated in certain communities and absent in
others. High apartment vacancies may indicate instability in the com
munity, and so, Yashar said, they had to be very cautious. Within the
schools, Yashar observed that there were problems in that some vet
eran Israeli parents did not want to send their children to study with
Beta Israel children. These were usually parents of the lower socio
economic sector of society.
At this juncture, I turned to David Stahl, our interpreter. Stahl,
originally from New York, had come to settle in Israel in 1984. I
asked him how he thought race relations in Israel compared to those
in the United States. He said there was no comparison. In Israel, prob
lems were very mild. In New York, people talked differently—hypo
critically—even when their feelings were against you. The people in
Israel, especially the sabra, or native-born, may seem hard, rude, and
thoughtless on the outside, but inside they were soft and gentle. This
included their approach to race relations. Even when they seemed to
be talking tough, they did not mean it.
NURSERY AND KINDERGARTEN
Israel has one of the most ad
vanced systems of preschool education in the world. Although atten
dance is voluntary, nearly all three- and four-year-old children attend
some government-sponsored, quasi-govemmental, or nongovernmen
tal nursery school. The fees are nominal. Together with their veteran
counterparts, the Beta Israel children participate in these programs
beginning at an early age. My informants report and my own observa
tions confirm that as far as absorption and socialization processes are
concerned, this generation of children will be much better off than
the older generations. Other things being equal, one can expect that
their early exposure to cognitive and social experiences will enhance

Page 157 - [see page image]

136
FOR OUR SOUL
their readiness to participate fully in later training opportunities. This
may in turn open up other opportunities for social mobility, the at
tainment of good jobs, and other measures of status and respect.
Whether young Ethiopian children come from an intact home or are
orphans, these educational enrichment and socialization programs are
likely to prove of significant benefit to them in their development.
PRIMARY LEVEL
At the primary level, attendance is
universal and compulsory. Special arrangements have been made for
the newcomers. Education during their first year in Israel is provided
either at the absorption centers or in special classrooms in nearby in
stitutions. During that year, intense attention is given to Hebrew, per
sonal hygiene and health, and a variety of socialization experiences.
Mornings are typically devoted to classroom instruction. Under the
supervision of adult volunteers, the children spend their afternoons
engaged in games, study, or tutorials.
During the second year, pupils attend community schools with
other Israeli children. Within these schools, however, the vast major
ity remain segregated as a group. All Ethiopians are assigned to the
same class. They still need intensive support and tutoring in all as
pects of the curricula. They also need plenty of exposure to the cul
ture of the school environment—rules and regulations—how to re
late to children of different backgrounds, how to play following
game rules, and so on. These experiences prepare them to cope better
when the time arrives for integrated learning.
SIZE AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL POPULATION
Table 2 shows the number of Ethi
opian students enrolled in kindergarten and primary classes in Israel’s
six district as of 1987.
In addition, there were approximately twenty-five hundred high-
school-aged students who resided in forty-four Youth Aliyah villages

Page 158 - [see page image]

137
Primary Education
TABLE 2
Number of Beta Israel enrolled in primary schools by district, 1987
District
Kindergarten
Grades 1-8
Total
Jerusalem
26
235
261
Tel Aviv
—
104
104
Central
70
439
509
Haifa
200
577
777
Northern
550
1,229
1,779
Southern
402
1,030
1,432
Total
1,248
3,614
4,862
Source: Ministry of Education and Culture, State Religious Department,
February 1987.
and another sixty who attended state-sponsored secondary schools
outside the Youth Aliyah system. Another eight hundred students
whose ages ranged from eighteen to twenty-eight participated in the
Youth Administration Project. Preuniversity programs included 169
Beta Israel, and approximately one hundred fifty attended universi
ties. All told, about eighty-five hundred Beta Israel or 53 percent of
the entire Beta Israel population, were attending school on a full-time
basis. Kindergarten through grade eight accounted for 57 percent of
the total enrollment. Of the approximately sixteen thousand Ethio
pian Jews in Israel in 1987, 30 percent attended primary school.
With this background on the structure and philosophies of the
state secular and state religious systems of education and the size and
distribution of enrollments, let us now proceed to the field to exam
ine the operation of the schools and the performance of the Beta Is
rael children. While the cases presented were not randomly selected,
they are representative examples of the state-sponsored schools ob
served.

Page 159 - [see page image]

138
FOR OUR SOUL
SINAI SCHOOL
Before my first visit to Sinai
School, a state religious school in Ashkelon, I interviewed Eli Dayan,
the mayor of that town. He is a young politician of Moroccan origin.
He wears a kippa and is considered a rising star in the Labor Party. 7
Although he spoke good English, his assistant, Ruth Greenman, a
woman of South African background, sat nearby to assist. Rami Dav-
idi, also of Moroccan background, the city’s coordinator of immi
grants, was also present. According to the mayor, the majority of
Ashkelon’s sixty thousand residents were of northern African origin
—primarily from Morocco, though other groups are also repre
sented. There were approximately one thousand Beta Israel. Ashke
lon was one of the few municipalities with budgetary provisions for
ethnic and cultural activities. Efforts also had been made to follow a
housing policy that would fuse or integrate the diverse communities.
But housing shortages made this difficult. Availability was a stronger
determining factor than the need to locate people in certain buildings
or neighborhoods to achieve the goal of integration. In spite of policy
declaration and political and ideological beliefs in the desirability and
efficacy of an integrated community, the economic realities of the
country continued to favor the “ghettoization” of the immigrants. Ef
forts to achieve integration also were frustrated by the fact that most
Beta Israel wanted to live as close as they can to their relatives and
were therefore unwilling to accept the city’s assignments, which were
based on quite different criteria. The patterns of enrollment in the
schools reflected these realities.
Sinai School was thirty years old. The school principal, Shlomo
Kabesa, had served as principal for thirteen years. Like most of the
teachers and counselors, he was originally from northern Africa.
Since it was one of the first schools to take Beta Israel children in
1980, Sinai School was relatively experienced in working with Ethio
pian children and their families. Some of the students had attended
for six years. Eighty of the three hundred students attending Sinai
were Beta Israel. As was the case with most other schools in this re
gion, the majority of students were Sephardi, primarily of northern
African background. With the exception of one class of students who
arrived during Operation Moses, the majority of Beta Israel children

Page 160 - [see page image]

139
Primary Education
attended classes with their veteran peers. In each class, 25 to 30 per
cent of the students were Beta Israel. To supplement classroom in
struction, the Beta Israel children received approximately one hun
dred fifty special tutorials per year to help them catch up with their
veteran classmates. Materially, the school was very poor. There were
chalkboards, the classroom walls were adorned with posters and por
traits of current political leaders (President Herzog and Prime Minster
Shamir), chief rabbis, the flag of Israel, and some historical Jewish fig
ures. The library, which served also as a study center, was very mod
est. “We depend on donations and gifts [for the library],” said Sara
who had a master’s degree in ethnic relations and filled in as part-time
school counselor and librarian. The qualifications of the teachers ap
peared not to be high. Almost all the teachers were Sephardi women.
Both administrators (the principal and assistant principal) were men.
Either together with the regional supervisor (of Ethiopian origin)
or by myself, I had many occasions to observe the students inside and
outside their classrooms. Those Beta Israel children who arrived in
the early 1980s related well to their predominantly Sephardi peers.
The teachers reported that at first they were quiet, gentle, and soft-
spoken; but now they were as boisterous, rowdy, and carefree as their
veteran classmates. They mixed with the other students and joined in
the pushing, shoving, and hollering unselfconsciously. In the class
rooms, the seating arrangements were random and mixed, perhaps
without deliberate effort on the part of the classroom teacher.
Before the first group of Beta Israel arrived in the 1980s, the teach
ers and counselors were oriented to the task by psychologists and an
thropologists. According to the principal, Sinai School, by virtue of its
long experience in working with Beta Israel children, prepared hand
books covering such topics as the games Beta Israel children prefer
and holiday observations for distribution to other schools. The
school personnel also used the children as interpreters to communi
cate with the parents. Although such experience may boost the mor
ale of the children, it may humble the parents.
Although boys and girls did not share the same benches, the ambi
ance in the classroom was generally quite casual. In the higher grades,
children moved freely in and out of the classrooms without asking
permission. At all grade levels, students and teachers addressed one
another using first names. 8 This latter aspect of informality is cer
tainly alien to Ethiopian upbringing and may be the reason why one
hears young people using the Amharic informal or familiar appella
tion of anta or anchi when addressing their male and female elders,
respectively, rather than the expected polite form of irsewa.

Page 161 - [see page image]

140
FOR OUR SOUL
When the school personnel assessed the progress of the Ethiopian
students and the advantages their school offered, they tended to
stress the social outcomes. The consensus among the teachers and
other school personnel was that the Beta Israel children were better
off learning with Sephardi children. The Sephardi environment, they
said, was especially supportive of the newcomers. As they saw it, the
Ethiopians shared more similar cultural values and norms with the
Sephardi population than with the Ashkenazim. They did not raise
the question of cognitive stimulation that may come from more aca
demically challenging peers who are usually from higher and middle
socioeconomic backgrounds, which often translates to mean of Ash
kenazi background. But on the whole it is true that classrooms in the
southern region, where this school was located, are much more inte
grated than in any other region, even after the time of arrival from
Africa is taken into consideration. Also, the Beta Israel children
seemed to be relatively at ease in their relations to classmates. If inte
gration also means progress in learning, this is indeed a big achieve
ment. But there is more to learning than that.
Considerable progress had been made in achieving the objectives
of socialization and integration. Most of the Beta Israel children who
arrived before Operation Moses were relatively at ease with them
selves, with their veteran classmates, and with the school environ
ment. Those who arrived later were not yet attending classes with
non-Beta Israel students. Their social adjustment may reflect that
they had been there for some three years, that their teachers and vet
eran classmates were of similar backgrounds, and that there was some
proximity in culture and color of skin. 9 Even so, this kind of mixing is
very unusual in the annals of Ethiopian Jews in Israel.
The concern was whether these children were placed in classrooms
or schools that would facilitate their cognitive development as well.
The answer is that while the general environment was relatively con
ducive to social integration, cognitively it was weak. The ways in
which classes were organized and taught were not conducive to opti
mal learning. When observed in the classroom, the children did not
seem to be stimulated, and they were not paying attention to the task
at hand. The selection of books in the library was meager and the
teaching aids were dull.
Perhaps there was a trade-off for every decision. In the southern
region of Israel, and in the religious schools in general, the majority
of the population were of Third World background. The region and
the schools were administered, for the most part, by first-generation

Page 162 - [see page image]

141
Primary Education
immigrants from northern Africa. This segment of society had been
unable to find a place in higher positions by following the regular
channels and was now aligning itself with the right-wing religious par
ties. As one Ashkenazi psychologist from the city of Afula observed,
“the religious wing of Israeli society generally breeds narrow concepts
and fanatical approaches to life in general and education in particu
lar.” Further, the northern African political-cultural background in
cluded a dictatorial form of governance without separation of state
and religion. Charismatic personality was more important than com
petence, power more important than compassion. Individual or group
perceptions of God were more important than logic, verified knowl
edge, or reality. This, then, was the environment in which the Beta Is
rael children were being nurtured. As Chaim Adler observed, the in
tellectual climate for the Ethiopians was not conducive to rapid
cognitive development. 10 The children of the Beta Israel might have
been relatively well-off in their social interactions, but cognitively,
and for their long-term interests in Israel, they would benefit from an
intellectually more stimulating environment. One may argue that the
Beta Israel children only shared what existed and that they were no
worse off than their veteran classmates. This is true, except that the
others were second-generation children who were by comparison rel
atively well established and well acculturated. In all likelihood, the
Beta Israel children would carry a larger burden than the others be
cause they were first-generation immigrants and they were black.
MOREA SCHOOL
Morea School is a religious, coed
ucational institution, and as far as the Beta Israel are concerned, sup
posedly an “integrated” one. It covers kindergarten to sixth or eighth
grade. Located on the highest point of the town, the school has a
commanding view. The elevation also means colder temperatures
during the winter months (my visits were in the months of November,
December, and April).
The gymnastic classes as well as the others were integrated, ac
cording to the instructor, but he said the Ethiopian children had some
specific problems. On my visits, I did not observe much integration.

Page 163 - [see page image]

142
FOR OUR SOUL
Accompanied by Yafa Chase—a female leader of volunteer social
workers from Connecticut who speaks some Amharic and Hebrew,
very well trusted by the immigrants of the community, and who had
been working for a couple of years in that capacity—I visited the kin
dergarten class and grades two and three. There were about twenty
students in the third-grade biology class I observed. As I sat in this
class some of the Beta Israel students rushed in with grass all over
their heads and clothing. They were returning from gymnastic activity
outdoors. Their appearance may have indicated improper grooming
habits or lack of personal pride in looking tidy and attractive." I was
told that this class was integrated, but there were only five non-Ethi
opian students out of twenty-two. The seating pattern in this class
room was interesting; the Beta Israel gravitated to one side of the
classroom and sought out one another’s company.
Based on what I had heard earlier about resistance to integration
of the Beta Israel in this community, I asked how long the fear that
integration would retard the progress of their children would persist
among the veteran parents. The teacher answered, “Maybe a couple
of years.” She told me of her experience the year before with a group
of Beta Israel ages seven to nine. At first, she said, it was hard com
municating with them. But they worked hard from eight to twelve
every day, and they received additional help from volunteers in the af
ternoons. That brought them to the level where they could function
adequately in Hebrew. “They had motivation; that’s why they suc
ceeded,” she says. This was so despite the fact that they were unable
to start school until October on account of the religious strike. She
observed that the group of Beta Israel students she taught the year be
fore was more responsible and mature than the one with whom she
was presently working.
At the kindergarten level, Beta Israel children would not work
without close supervision and encouragement by the teachers. But
now they could initiate their own activities. This habit (waiting for
adults to give directions) was a carry over from the home, where there
was very little a child could do to express himself or herself and
where any kind of learning was adult-initiated. The child was accus
tomed to receiving orders, and, in turn, he or she also learned to give
orders to the younger ones. At home, the overriding concern was
with the physical security of the child rather than the free expression
of self through play or other activities. In the nursery school, on the
other hand, safety was provided by the standard regulations govern
ing play equipment and the like; the major concern was to provide an
environment that encourages free play of the imagination.

Page 164 - [see page image]

143
Primary Education
I next visited a kindergarten and a second-grade class. The latter
was comprised of students with a wide range of abilities and notice
able differences in their readiness to learn. There were some ad
vanced students who should have been promoted to a higher grade
and others who had arrived from Ethiopia only a couple of months
earlier and had no grasp of what was going on in the classroom. The
newcomers did nothing but clown to amuse themselves and others.
This class included students with emotional or learning problems.
One child, for reasons unknown, refused to read, write or even open
a book. One time he did look over at the book of a seat mate, but the
moment the teacher took notice of his action, he withdrew into him
self again. Despite the efforts of the classroom teacher, Miriam Avra-
ham, these twenty-two students were not progressing.
The teacher herself was Sephardi. There was another woman as
signed to the classroom to assist, but she did not do much during the
several visits I made there. After my last observation of this class
room, I felt miserable about the poor quality of the learning environ
ment—the range of problems among the learners, their apparent lack
of motivation, and their untidy appearance. Moreover, three of the
best Beta Israel students who would benefit from advancement to the
next class were being held back for administrative and public rela
tions reasons. The teacher herself felt helpless in the face of the ad
ministrative obstacles. The school principal refused to group the chil
dren according to their special needs and abilities. When the class was
over, I went to meet with the school principal, Avraham Dagan. I was
accompanied by Yafa Chase; a few minutes later, the classroom
teacher joined us. I briefed the principal on my observations and ad
vanced some recommendations which included the promotion of
three Beta Israel students to the next grade and the need to have more
teachers in the classroom to attend to the differing needs of these
children. The teacher talked to him in Hebrew with much animation.
It was not until later that I learned she was agreeing with my assess
ment of the situation and expressing her dissatisfaction with his inac
tion or unwillingness to take steps to tackle the problems he himself
acknowledged.
The principal concurred with most of our observations and added
his own to the list, including the following. Many of the teachers
were there because they could not go anywhere else. There were too
many Ethiopians in one school—60 percent of the student body were
Beta Israel, which hampered integration. The hygiene and personal
appearance of the Beta Israel were problems—they arrived at school

Page 165 - [see page image]

144
FOR OUR SOUL
untidy, their clothing and shoes were dirty and torn, and they often
arrived wearing sandals in winter. They were smelly, he said; they
shaved their heads, and came to school without lunch. They often
had runny noses and sometimes came to school when they were sick.
They did not bring pencils, pens, pencil sharpeners, or gymnastic at
tire. The Ministry supplied money for basic textbooks, but the par
ents were supposed to supply the rest. The students told their teach
ers that their fathers did not give them money. When the teachers
took the matter directly to the parents, they got some results; other
wise, the parents did not volunteer to provide even the most basic
things their children needed to do their school work. As an incentive,
some teachers told the children that if they brought one notebook,
the school would supply another. But, one teacher commented, “the
parents don’t care because they don’t know the importance of learn
ing. The parents don’t know what is important and what is not. They
go to the stores to buy sweets and fancy stuff, but are not willing to
buy notebooks.” The principal planned to talk to the parents on the
subject, the teacher added, but the trouble is that “all Ethiopians are
like one family. They eat together, decide together, and the like. So I
learned that if I can talk to one parent he will tell the others. This
means they are ‘group-think.’ Even then the Ethiopian parents respect
the teachers more than they respect the administrators at the absorp
tion centers. When I talk to them, I illustrate what I mean by drawing
pictures. Everything begins with the home. The place they come from
is very primitive. Every day 1 tell them how important cleanliness is; I
tell them about washing, and with the good weather and sunshine it is
easy to wash clothes and get them dry. Sometimes they come to
school in winter wearing sandals and without appropriate covers
while it is raining. In time, change will come; they will be like the
other Israeli children.”
Another problem was punctuality. Often children came late to
school. The excuses they gave included “Mother wanted me to mind
the baby” or “Mother sent me to the store to buy some bread.” An
other issue was that the Ethiopian children were shy, timid, with
drawn, suspicious, and violent. Referring to the shyness, the teacher
remarked that this behavior was sometimes nice.
The resistance of the veteran community to the integration of Beta
Israel with their children in the classrooms was a major dilemma. Ac
cording to the principal, migrant parents wanted to see their children
learning in the same classrooms with others, but the veteran Israeli
parents refused. Highly segregated classes were maintained because,

Page 166 - [see page image]

145
Primary Education
when pushed, the veteran parents withdrew or threatened to with
draw their children from the school. 12 In addition, the school was
worried that it would get a reputation for catering primarily to the
needs of disadvantaged children. As a result, most Beta Israel chil
dren, even those who came earlier, continued to attend segregated
classes. When the volunteer social worker pointed out to the princi
pal that some of the Beta Israel needed promotion, he said, “To
what?” When told to the next higher class or the fast track made up
of children from veteran Israeli families, he replied that he would not
do it. The classroom teacher repeated the names of the children who
should be promoted, but he still refused to consider the proposal. He
maintained that the promotion of even the best Beta Israel students
might make the veteran children feel they were being held back, and
that would hurt the reputation of the school. In addition, he rea
soned, to stimulate higher achievement, the class needed the presence
of these students as models. This was, of course, circuitous reasoning.
If a few Beta Israel children were doing so well, they should not be
held back with the slow learners, nor should they stay to serve as
models for the others. The principal either needed to create a special
class for these students or promote them to the other classes made up
wholly of veteran Israelis. This is a place where the Beta Israel com
munity needs a strong, knowledgeable advocate. At present, there is
no such person.
The dynamics of the triangle involving the school, the home, and
the children are very complicated. A major assumption underlying the
above complaints conveyed by the principal is that the Beta Israel
community—the parents as well as the children—are aware of what
the school requires, expects, or demands of them. Is this assumption a
fair one? I do not think so. It is important to reiterate that the Beta Is
rael are mostly of rural origin, nonliterate, and conservative. Since
coming to Israel, up to this point they have been sheltered from the
outside influences of the new world, perhaps too much and for too
long, as one government report pointed out. 13 Until the authorities
decided quite suddenly to push them out, the Beta Israel had lived in
the protective environment of the absorption centers. With little ad
vance notice or preparation, they were expected to establish them
selves in apartments, send their children to community schools, antic
ipate the requirements of the school culture, and provide for the
material, social, and psychological needs of their school-going chil
dren. Former care providers and counselors who might have assisted
them during this transition already had been dismissed by the Jewish
Agency.

Page 167 - [see page image]

146
FOR OUR SOUL
School administrators and classroom teachers were also not pre
pared properly for the Beta Israel. Had they been prepared, the prob
lems of transition would have been expected and the behaviors that
led to the complaints of school personnel would have been more un
derstandable. But this is not what happened. The school personnel
are also victims of ignorance. They know very little about the back
ground of the migrants or the circumstances that led them to their
present situation. The principal agencies responsible for their arrival
in Israel and involved in their adjustment during the first year should
have been actively involved in the selection of schools for the chil
dren. Neither the parents nor the schools were knowledgeable about
placement. And, for a period of time, these agencies should have pro
vided guidance and kept tabs on student progress or lack thereof.
That such preparation and continuity in services were not provided
during the transition phase is a tragedy.
The problems of the migrants as pinpointed by school personnel
may be divided into two categories: material and cultural. The Beta
Israel migrants live on two types of income: pensions from the gov
ernment of Israel or wages from employment. The pensions are a very
important source of income and are generous. But they are inade
quate for the many needs of the people. Incomes from employment
are also very limited. Most Beta Israel who find work are in menial
jobs that pay the lowest wages. They are beginning from nothing to
set up their homes, and there are many things they must buy to fur
nish their apartments. There is usually not enough money to buy
items such as washing machines considered necessary especially dur
ing the winter season, the type and amount of clothing deemed neces
sary by the school for the children, and the like. On the cultural side,
the migrants or their children cannot be expected to have a full grasp
of the numerous and intricate expectations, requirements, or de
mands of the schools or of the society in general. Most are unfamiliar
with the requirements of modem schooling; a few have had some
previous experience, but it is in the context of the society they have
left behind. At the same time, the school is under pressure to satisfy
many conflicting demands. On the one hand, it is to meet the diverse
social and educational needs of the migrants without challenging
community perceptions that they are compromising the quality of
education provided to the veteran children. Meanwhile, they are
trying to guard their turf vis-a-vis the state secular educational system,
which is ready and willing to accept the challenge of providing educa
tion to Beta Israel students. Up to now, they have had limited oppor-

Page 168 - [see page image]

147
Primary Education
tunity to do. In the absence of mutual knowledge and understanding
at the institutional level and without an appropriate central coordi
nating body capable of providing the requisite guidelines, these com
peting demands and conflicting expectations inevitably lead to misun
derstandings, mistrust, and misgivings as well as the concomitant
recriminations and wastes of energy and resources we are witnessing.
However, even at the central level, state religious and state secular
systems of education do not see eye to eye. Hence, even if it is deter
mined that some children would benefit more from the pedagogical
programs provided by the state secular system, it is not easy for
school counselors or social workers in the religious system to concur
or agree to transfer students. In fact, for political reasons, it may be
virtually impossible for them to do so. The few volunteer social
workers who worked with the Beta Israel in the absorption centers
and who have earned their trust and are still available cannot advise
Beta Israel regarding school placement even when they are convinced
that they know which would be better for the child. They fear that
they would be intimidated by those in the religious school system
who may think their interests are under attack.
RAMOT SCHOOL
Ramot, a secular school, is near
Morea. The school principal, Yacov Azulos, completing his doctoral
program at Hebrew University, was a religious person. He was the
only religious person in the country to hold such a position in a secu
lar school. It was true that religious teachers do teach in secular
schools (although the reverse was seldom true). This prompted Azu
los to comment that “we teach more religion in the secular system of
education than they teach in the religious one. The second grade re
ceived the Torah here the other day.” The religious system is more
politics than religion, he said. He is a proponent of secular education.
On the whole, he sounded totally different in his sensitivity to the
needs of the learners and his openness in talking about the subject
from his counterpart in the school several miles away.
With a total of four hundred students at Ramot School, only five
were Beta Israel. Azulos would have liked to enroll more Beta Israel
students, especially the little ones, in his school, but unless the

Page 169 - [see page image]

148
FOR OUR SOUL
parents took the initiative he was unable to do so. Besides, if he took
the Beta Israel, the other school would become empty. The deter
mined efforts of some social workers, led by an American volunteer,
convinced some parents that their children would be much better off
attending the secular school. The Morea personnel were angry when
the transfers materialized.
The residents in the vicinity of Ramot School were of high socio
economic status. Because of the large hospital located nearby, the
parents of children who attended the school were doctors and other
hospital workers. Thus, the school was considered one of the best
in the large town—perhaps even in the country. The interaction of
the Beta Israel children with their veteran peers was described as
excellent.
The principal thought the questions raised by the Beta Israel par
ents before they made the decision to enroll their children were
thoughtful and intelligent. With the assistance of capable social
workers, he hoped more Beta Israel parents would come to visit in
the future and inquire about the school. Once enrolled, the Beta Is
rael students received tutoring from American volunteers over and
above the 1.8 hours provided by the government. He said that, as a
group, the Beta Israel children had excellent skills in mathematics
where there was no language involved. It was in the area of language
—Hebrew and English—that the five children experienced the great
est difficulty. However, with the help of volunteers from English-
speaking countries, they were making progress.
All five Beta Israel students in this school were girls. I talked to
three of them as a group and then individually. One of them, Offir
(her Hebrew name), said the school that she and the others attended
the year before had not provided enough challenge. “We did not
progress very much,” she said. “This year we are happy.” I asked her
what language she used at home. She told me that since their parents
did not speak much Hebrew, they used Amharic. But to help their
parents learn, they sometimes spoke Hebrew with them. At other
times, when the children were together, they spoke Amharic so they
would not lose it.
Offir experienced many hardships in the Sudan after she left Ethio
pia. She had been in Israel for nearly two years. She was the daughter
of one of the most articulate members of the Beta Israel community,
who had been a man of high status before he left Ethiopia. Her
mother looked much younger than her father; this is probably his sec
ond marriage. Offir may have been the only child of her parents or at

Page 170 - [see page image]

149
Primary Education
least the only one in Israel. She was very close to her parents and very
concerned for their well-being. I saw a letter she had written in He
brew on behalf of her parents to the regional director of housing. The
director said the letter was of high quality and very touching. On the
whole, she appeared articulate, pleasant, and mature for her age. The
director of housing commented that young people like her sustain
hope for the future of the Ethiopian Jews in Israel.
ASSESSING THE SOCIOECONOMIC MILIEU OF THE SCHOOLS
The Morea and Ramot schools
presented here are located in one of the two towns where there are
large concentrations of Beta Israel and people of northern African
background—primarily from Morocco. The mayor and most of the
top officials are of Moroccan background. In my effort to under
stand the character and dynamics of this community and how these
may affect the schooling of the migrants, I interviewed community
leaders, department heads of the municipality, the head of the com
munity activities center, and a psychologist. The following portrayals
of the situation are based on these interviews.
One of the complaints of the Morea School staff was the lack of
psychologists who could assess the conditions of the student body.
Next door in the secular school, there was no such shortage. I invited
one of the school psychologists at the secular school to describe the
psychological environment of the schools and the community. The
psychologist was a woman of Hungarian origin; she spoke fluent Eng
lish. Since we had met on several other occasions during my previous
visits, we felt at ease with each other. The dialogue began in the
school and continued in the coffee shop downtown.
She agreed that the paucity of psychologists was a very real prob
lem in the schools, especially in the smaller towns. Problems were
compounded in communities where the Beta Israel were concen
trated. Most psychologists served several schools. In the school sys
tem where she worked there was one school that enrolled Beta Israel
students. Although she had occasion to visit two of the classrooms in
the religious school, she did so with great reluctance. She said she
didn’t want to touch the problems of the Beta Israel students “even if
they hung them.” To begin with, she explained, there were no appro-

Page 171 - [see page image]

150
FOR OUR SOUL
priate test instruments to evaluate the kinds of problems the Beta Is
rael presented. Even pencil-and-paper tests that required the child to
draw a figure or some object may not be valid for this population. In
addition, “there are so many problems with this population that it can
drown you. One can devote one’s life and still not solve any prob
lems.” Another problem confronting the psychologist was that the
ages of the children were generally not known, and it was difficult to
determine social or psychological criteria for assigning students to
appropriate groups. In some respects, the treatment of the Ethiopians
was not exceptional. Numerous other aliyah had been received nega
tively. The Romanians, the Hungarians, the Moroccans, the Egyp
tians, and the Yemenites had all experienced the effects of discrimina
tion. Although the Russians fared better, the Georgians had some
problems; they did not mix with others.
Another problem, she said, was that the teachers in the religious
schools were inferior. “I do not work with them,” she said. “I would
not come near that. The teachers in the religious schools are Se
phardic; their qualifications are lower than those held by teachers in
the secular schools. They are teaching darker and darker generations.
Educational levels get lower and lower with each succeeding genera
tion and succeeding aliyah. We are still reaping the fruits of the 1950s
[the coming en masse of the Orientals]. Now the darker people get to
power through the religious institutions. Many of the secular institu
tions and avenues are closed to them. Therefore, they need to create
and enlarge their power through the religious institutions.” In the ma
jor cities, the schools were of higher standard, but not in the towns
and settlement centers. Speaking of the language problem for each
succeeding aliyah, she said, Bialik, the famous Israeli poet, summed it
up well when he said that “Hebrew is the only language taught by
children to their parents.”
HOME AND SCHOOL
Chapter 4 dealt extensively with
the major issues confronting Beta Israel families in their new home.
Some major issues impinged on the efforts of the schools as well. To
begin, it is important to remember that, over the past forty years in
Ethiopia, a general awareness was developed among rural and urban