How do we account for Ohr Somayach’s success? In the early 1980s, a young and recently ordained Larry Shain sought the opportunity to spread his knowledge and promote outreach.49 After being approached by Abramov to join him in South Africa, Shain decided to confer with Rabbi Mendel Weinbach. The latter encouraged him to accept the offer, and provided several reasons for doing so. In retrospect this advice goes some way to explaining Ohr Somayach’s subsequent success. A prime reason for promoting outreach in South Africa, Weinbach told Shain, was the fact that the country then was undergoing political upheaval.50 Unlike their counterparts elsewhere in the anglosphere, the Jewish youth could ill afford the luxury of patiently mapping out their future. This compelled them to think seriously and made them open to alternate thoughts and philosophies, especially religious ideology with its well-defined goals. This does not mean, as critics have argued, that religion serves as a crutch during a time of political and social uncertainty. Indeed, many in outreach strongly disagree with this diagnosis. Yet it cannot be denied that Ohr Somayach benefited from the political situation.51 Its first home was built in the shadow of the 1985 State of Emergency at a time when violent resistance to the Apartheid regime was met with brutal police suppression. The ensuing situation resulted in physical insecurity, international isolation, and economic instability, causing many Jews to emigrate.52 Ohr Somayach’s rapid success so soon after
48 https://olami.org/organizations/, accessed on 9 December 2021.
49 See Shain, interview. This entire paragraph is based on that interview.
50 This is not the place to discuss the culpability of the Orthodox leadership vis-à-vis the political situation. For a discussion on the role played by the rabbinate see Shimoni, Conscience and Community, 140-149.
51 See Rabbi Yossi Goldman, interview by Gideon Shimoni, where Goldman denied the return to religion has anything to do with a “panacea for the insecurity.” Independent scholar Claudia Braude suggests Tatz’s shiurim provided a distraction from political events, (see Braude “From the Brotherhood of Man to the World to Come”); See also Roberta G. Sands and Dorit Roer-Strier, "Ba'alot Teshuvah" Daughters and Their Mothers: A View from South Africa,” Contemporary Jewry, 21: 1 (January 2000): 55-77, where the authors state: “Political instability in South Africa provides a…context for the emergence of Teshuva,” (at 72).
52 The results of the turbulent 1980s on Jewish emigration from South Africa has been documented by many writers and commentators on South African Jewry, see for example: Shimoni, Community and Conscience, 124- 125, 151; Mendel Kaplan, “Envoy” in Kaplan and Robertson, Founders and Followers, 253; Shimoni, “South
160
its establishment is therefore reasonably attributable, in part at least, to the turbulent political climate and its effect on the Jewish community. Indeed, the fact that this
organization provided a troubled student body with the benefits of an intense community spirit, mental support, and philosophical clarity, cannot be overlooked.
According to Weinbach, another reason that augured well for the success of outreach efforts in South Africa was the country’s “separate development” policy which encouraged the Jewish community to remain a strong and independent sector within the white
population.53 Unlike the accommodators’ approach, and more in line with that of the
traditionalists, Ohr Somayach teaches Jewish specialness and particularity while undermining universalism. This approach features prominently in mystical works, and was likely
emphasised by Tatz, an alumnus of both Kollel and Ohr Somayach Jerusalem.54 Unlike those in more liberally oriented and ethnically integrated countries, many Jews who grew up in Apartheid South Africa would have had few problems with such particularism and
parochialism. A third reason Weinbach gave Shain for going to South Africa was because the latter was born and bred there. Weinbach felt this was an appealing feature that would endear Shain to others and would establish a rapport between him and those he taught. As noted, Ohr Somayach, in contradistinction to the Kollel and Chabad, was from its very beginning staffed by South Africans who had mostly come from irreligious homes and had themselves returned to religion. Their ability to relate to their fellow South Africans and to empathise with their spiritual journey was obviously a boon to the movement.
Fourthly, it was Weinbach’s understanding that the South African community was a very homogenous Litvish community. Despite not being religiously observant, they respected learning and were drawn to it. Indeed, Ohr Somayach Johannesburg in its early years
imported the speakers from overseas using the resources of its international branch. Later it was able to select the most qualified local speakers. This apparently high level of
African Jews and the Apartheid Crisis,” American Jewish Yearbook, 88, 1988, 47; Sergio Della Pergola, “South African Jewry- A Sociodemographic Survey,” American Jewish Yearbook, 88,( 1988), 68, 75. The effects of emigration on the community were and have been manifold. It has left the community with fewer financial supporters, many of whom have left the country. On the other hand, many indigent Jews who cannot afford relocation have been left with fewer sources of charitable support. This has led in some cases to a siege mentality, and has perhaps affected those who seek a spiritual refuge. In any event this aspect deserves an independent study, beyond the scope offered here.
53 This view is not a justification of this policy and the disclaimer above, in note 52, applies here with equal force.
54 See Shaul Magid, “It’s the Spirituality Stupid,” Times of Israel 1 July, 2012
(https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/its-the-spirituality-stupid/, accessed on 12 December 2021), where he suggests a mystical education gives rise to “parochialism.”
161
scholarship, packaged in a savvy and accessible manner, was a distinguishing mark of this movement. More than any other institution, Ohr Somayach has succeeded in placing itself in the appealing middle ground between the less demanding Chabad movement and the Kollel’s strictures and intensive learning. This balancing act, and ability to evolve with the times, probably accounted for it being an appealing option for those who sought a serious intellectual challenge while retaining a modern lifestyle, and remaining firmly within a religious comfort zone.
Over and above the local conditions explaining the fairly rapid growth of Ohr
Somayach in South Africa, the growth of the movement also occurred in a broader context.55 As was noted earlier, the modern Baal Teshuva movement dates back to the middle of the 20th century. Hassidic movements such as Chabad, which started systematic outreach
activities in the 1950s, appealed mainly to those attracted to its countercultural message. The same was true of non-Hassidic movements in the United States and in Israel. Those who purportedly eschewed materialism and had attached themselves to the hippie movement were most receptive to the teachings of the various emissaries and Yeshivas that were geared towards outreach.56 This phenomenon appears to have changed over the decades so that by the early 1980s the movement’s adherents came from successful and upwardly mobile populations. The latter were drawn to religion through synagogue rabbis who themselves had often experienced a “return” through the original outreach Yeshivas and were using their training to attract new followers.
The strength of the movement was observed in surveys taken in 1982 that indicated that as much as a quarter of Orthodox Jews residing in the New York metropolitan area had not been raised observant.57 Interestingly, by the mid-1980s the upsurge in, and attraction to, Orthodox observance by many successful New Yorkers caught the attention of the secular press.58 By that decade the typical Baal Teshuva candidate in the United States, and to some
55 See generally, M. Herbert Danzger, “The “Return” to Traditional Judaism at the End of the Twentieth Century: Cross‐Cultural Comparisons” in Jacob Neusner, Alan J. Avery-Peck (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Judaism, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 495 – 511. For a broader discussion of the impact of outreach in the United States, within the context of American Jewry in general, see Jonathan D. Sarna, American Judaism: A History, Second Edition, New Haven: Yale University, 2019, 326-329, 356-390; Jeffrey Gurock, Orthodox Jews in America, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2009, 312-323.
56 For an excellent essay on the attraction to Judaism by a spiritual seeker see Ellen Willis, “Next Year in Jerusalem,” Rolling Stone, April 21, 1977, https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/next-year-in- jerusalem-51482/).
57 Danzger, “The “Return” to Traditional Judaism”, 496.
58 See Natalie Gittelson, “American Jews Rediscover Orthodoxy,” New York Times Magazine, September 30, 1984, https://www.nytimes.com/1984/09/30/magazine/american-jews-rediscover-orthodoxy.html; Cathryn Jakobson, “The New Orthodox,” New York Magazine, 17 November 1986: 52-60.
162
extent in Israel, was no longer the typical spiritual seeker of the late 1960s. This same pattern was mimicked in South Africa where by the late 1980s yuppies had replaced hippies as the primary participants in the turn to Orthodoxy. The Kollel and Chabad, which were once powerful magnets for those drawn to their non-materialistic message in the 1970s and early 1980s lost momentum by the middle to late 1980s. Instead, the centre of the Baal Teshuva movement was in the wealthier parts of the city and drew upon those who were well integrated into the secular community. These newcomers to Orthodoxy were initiated into Orthodoxy by rabbis who, a decade earlier, had undergone a similar religious transformation.
These outreach rabbis shared with the returnees a South African attitude and mentality.
Moreover, whereas the first generation Kollel fellow, and to a lesser extent, the Chabad emissaries, had practiced kiruv as untrained novices, those leading Ohr Somayach were entering a field that had become considerably professionalized. This in turn made the latter more adept at attracting new recruits. It is this broader context which may also go some way in explaining Ohr Somayach’s achievements during the period from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s. As we have noted, by the end of the 1990s, the organization had to reinvent itself, and to an extent has been successful in finding local solutions that continue to the present day.