119
In concluding this outline of Chabad’s history and founding, it is important to revisit an aspect unique to Chabad that was not found in any of the other Orthodox camps in
Johannesburg.137 This was attachment to the Lubavitcher Rebbe. As mentioned, his outreach philosophy accounted for the movement’s emphasis on reaching as many Jews as possible.138 The attachment each emissary feels toward the Rebbe (who passed away more than a quarter of a century ago) is a source of major division between Chabad and the other organizations.
The heads of the non-Hassidic movements have all had their mentors, whom they
occasionally cite as inspirations. Lipskar and Hazdan, by contrast, constantly remind their audiences of the continued impact that their relationship with the Rebbe has had on them.139 Goldman has even argued that the Rebbe’s assurances that South Africa would remain a hospitable place for Jews was responsible for sustaining Jewish life in the Republic
throughout tumultuous 1980s and 1990s.140 In the sections which follow, where we analyse the general impact of the pioneering innovators on the broader community, the Rebbe’s shadow looms large in all controversies involving Chabad.
120
Hebrew and Zionism, he demanded that the final arbiters of Jewish education be the Chief Rabbinate and independent rabbis.141 Echoing these sentiments a year later, Chief Rabbi Casper, proving more critical of the Board than his predecessor, called for more rabbinic input into Jewish education.142 In 1968, Bernhard and Casper, among other rabbis, opposed proposed plans to hold the Board’s 1969 three-month standard 9 Israel Ulpan (Hebrew Learning Course) at the secular Sde Boker College in the south of Israel.143 The rabbis felt Jerusalem would be more appropriate as it was the religious and cultural heart of Israel and would leave a deeper impression on the Ulpan’s participants. While the Chief Rabbi, as was his wont, expressed his displeasure tactfully, using proxies to convey his message, Bernhard adopted a more confrontational approach.144 As he had done three years earlier when
announcing his new school, Bernhard used the occasion of Yom Kippur to attack the proposed plan and to criticize the Board for its disregard of the “rabbis’ opinions and
Orthodox sensibilities.”145 This caused Ivan Greenstein, chairman of the Board and member of Oxford synagogue, to register his protest by leaving synagogue midway through the sermon. Sympathising with his actions, his colleagues at the Board declared Bernhard persona non grata for his fiery talk.146 It appears that the S. A. Jewish Times once again sided with the Board and condemned the rabbis for acting as “demigods.”147 Judging from the letters printed in the paper, its readership also opposed Bernhard’s’ antics, with some
wondering why he did not return to the United States.148
A few weeks later, Rabbi Baruch Zaichyk, another American import and firm traditionalist associated with Mizrachi, attacked the United Hebrew Schools (UHS) which was in charge of its Talmud Torah [afternoon school]. Describing the leadership of the latter institution as “potbellied, cigar smoking ignoramuses,” Zaichyk expelled the UHS from his synagogue and established an independent Cheder.149 Following suit in the early 1970s, Bernhard, who was not only director of the Menorah Oxford School but also head of
Oxford’s afternoon Cheder, seceded from the UHS, replacing its teachers with fellows from
141 “Record crowd hears problems facing the modern Jew,” S. A. Jewish Observer, August 1966.
142 See Katz, “History of Jewish Education,” 458-460.
143 Ibid. 459-460. Despite the fact that religious facilities were available, it was felt this did not provide an overall religious experience.
144 See letter from Archie Peck, director of the Federation of Synagogues, Open Forum, SAJT, 15 November 1968.
145 See John Hurwitz, “Our rabbi has the right to speak,” (open Forum), SAJT, 1 November 1968.
146 “Board of Education declares Rabbi Bernhard persona non grata,” SAJT, 15 November 1968.
147 “Putting our spiritual house in order” (editorial) SAJT 15 November 1968.
148 See “An Open Letter to Rabbi Bernhard”, SAJT 15 November 1968; Archie Mirvis, “Mr. Greenstein’s courageous action”, SAJT, 15 November 1968.
149 “Emmarentia breaks with United Hebrew Schools,” SAJT, 22 November 1968
121
the Kollel.150 Among those hired were Rabbis Avraham Hassan, Jeremy Abramov (the future founder of Ohr Somayach Johannesburg), and Mordechai Fachler. The interaction between the Kollel fellows and the pupils bore fruit a few years later when this Cheder’s graduates, many of whom came from the northern suburbs, entered university, and assumed leadership positions in the Jewish student movements. Some maintained a close relationship with their Kollel mentors.151
In 1972 the Transvaal Education Department produced a syllabus for the compulsory teaching of Christian religious education in government schools. Acceding to the requests of the Chief Rabbinate, specific permission was granted to any non-Christian student to be excused from these classes.152 Problems arose over the next few years when the exempted Jewish students were left with no structured programme during religious instruction periods.
To remedy that situation, Chief Rabbi Casper established the Department of Religious Education under the auspices of the Office of the Chief Rabbi. He appointed Rabbi Chaim Shein as director of this department. As mentioned earlier, Shein was the first South African- born fellow of the Kollel, and he strongly associated with its ultra-Orthodox mission. To Casper’s credit, he recognized Shein’s creative talents and his keen understanding of his fellow South Africans to the extent that he overlooked Shein’s Kollel associations. For his part Shein respected the chief rabbi and the working relationship was a warm one. By 1977, through Shein’s efforts 2,000 students in over 12 high schools, primarily in Johannesburg, were receiving printed assignments monthly.153 This Department was initially assisted by the Pedagogic Centre of the South African Board of Jewish Education whose facilities were used to print the materials. In July 1978, owing to the Department’s growth, it merged with the Pedagogic Centre and Shein was appointed Director of the combined organisation. Informal education, provided under one umbrella to both the government and Jewish schools was now effectively under the direction of an enthusiastic product of one of the innovator movements.
It would be wrong to assume Shein had a completely free hand in designing the syllabus, and there is reason to believe he deferred to the Chief Rabbi and to the Board. At the same time, it is unlikely that his worldview did not colour the assignments set by him, and it is noteworthy
150 See “United Hebrew Schools file,” (SAJBD archives); Hassan, interview; Jeremy Abramov, interview by author, (Jerusalem, May 2017). While Emmarentia referred to their afternoon school as a Talmud Torah, and Oxford as a Cheder both were formerly under the United Hebrew Schools and were essentially taught the same curriculum.
151 See Hassan, interview.
152 Katz, “History of Jewish Education in South Africa,” 636-637.
153 Ibid at 639, citing Shein, HM, “Report of the Activities of the Department of Religious Education.”
122
that in contrast to the heavy emphasis laid on teaching Hebrew in the King David syllabus, the Hebrew language does not feature in the Religious Education syllabus.154
The Kollel was not the only innovator movement to have impacted informal Jewish religious education. In the late 1970s, South African-born Rabbi Julian (Yaacov) Katz, who was a member of Bnei Akiva in his youth, was recruited from Israel to serve as the head of the newly inaugurated Jewish Studies department for the King David Schools, and to be in charge of both formal and informal education. Having sent his children to the Lubavitch Torah Academy school he struck up a relationship with Chabad House director Rabbi Yossy Goldman who he enlisted to produce many of the department’s informal education
materials.155 The influence that the innovators had on Jewish education would only expand in the next decades, but already during the 1970s and early 1980s they were indirectly impacting a new generation of school pupils.
Yet the most consequential influence of the ultra-Orthodox movements on education came through the establishment of their own institutions. Originally, Bernhard’s Menorah Oxford catered primarily for Adath Yeshurun members, with Rabbi Salzer acting as the unofficial Halachic [Jewish law] guide for the school.156 In 1976, a decade after Menorah’s establishment, its student population was evolving. Six years after the Kollel’s
establishment, and four years after Lubavitch was introduced, the school now catered to children from the Adath/ Kollel community, children from the Chabad community, and a third group of nominally religious local Jews. This mixed student body generated tensions.
Purportedly Salzer and his Adath congregation opposed a split, preferring to view the school as a “multifaceted religious community with legitimate variations.”157 Less accommodating was the Kollel camp, who worried that Bernhard’s move to Chabad would mean that their children would be fed a Lubavitch diet.158 They also disapproved of the number of irreligious children allowed admission, worrying that they would negatively influence their own
children.159 Following tense meetings between representatives of these factions, the school gradually divided into two. The new Lubavitch-run Torah Academy maintained the premises
154 The five-year syllabus consisted of eight topics on Jewish History, nine on Jewish Festivals, seven on Jewish Symbols and Concepts, eight on Israel and eight on Jewish Thought, Past and Present (Ibid. at 640, note 5).
155 Professor Yaacov (Julian) Katz, interview by author, (Alon Shvut, Israel, December 2019).
156 Bernhard, “Original Notes of Hesped for Rabbi Salzer.”
157 Ibid.
158 Exceptions in the Kollel camp’s agitation against Menorah, included Hassan who sympathized with Bernhard’s attempts to accommodate the Kollel community, and avoid a split. (see Hassan, interview).
159 Bernhard, “Mini Conference Torah Academy 1991.”
123
at Oxford, while the Kollel-affiliated but independent Shaarey Torah school relocated to a house next-door to the Kollel’s Frances Street Beis Medrash.160
This split paved the way for Chabad’s role as an independent player in the field of education, emboldening it to expand. In 1981, Bernhard together with Lipskar purchased a 22-acre property in the upmarket Jewish suburb of Orchards.161 To fund payment of these new premises, the Chabad movement engaged in an ill-timed scheme involving borrowing foreign currency at low interest rates and reloaning it at higher interest rates. With the Rand’s collapse a year later, the scheme proved disastrous and although it almost resulted in financial ruin Chabad tenaciously held on to avoid foreclosure.162 Since its inception and in contradistinction to Shaarey Torah, Torah Academy has billed itself as a “school for all Jewish children,” and, true to its motto, has maintained a very liberal admission policy as far as the observance of its student body is concerned.163At the same time, it has educated a whole generation of home-grown Lubavitch rabbis, some of whom have become emissaries overseas while others have served the South African Jewish community. Similarly it
produced a crop of educators who were schooled where they now teach.164 Torah Academy and Shaarey Torah continue to thrive decades later; the latter has been taken over by Ohr Somayach, Johannesburg.