القدس مدينة ذات وجه إنساني
د.جعفر هادي حسن
لمدينة القدس اهميةُ دينيةُ لدى المسلمين منذ ان أصبحت جزءا من الدولة الإسلامية، وتاتي هذه الأهمية من أنها كانت القبلة الأولى لهم،وأن لمسجدها ذكرا في القران الكريم في قوله تعالى “سبحان الذي أسرى بعبده ليلا من المسجد الحرام إلى المسجد الأقصى الذي باركنا حوله” ، وكذلك لقصة معراج الرسول الأكرم إضافة إلى الأحاديث النبوية التي تؤكد على مكانة هذه المدينة وقدسيتها في الإسلام.ومنذ فترة مبكرة اعتنى المسلمون بها وكان لها مكان خاص في وجدانهم فكانوا يسافرون إليها ويقبلون على زيارتها ويتبركون بمسجدها حتى كان الالاف منهم يجتمعون فيها في وقت واحد في بعض المناسبات الدينية. وقد ذكر الرحالة ناصر خسرو أنهم كانوا يتجمعون في القدس في شهر ذي الحجة بالالاف وهو يذكر أنه في عام 1040 للميلاد كان هناك عشرون ألفا منهم. ومن مظاهر اهتمامهم بها أنهم أخذوا يبنون فيها المدارس والرباطات والمساجد والسبل ويذهبون للدراسة فيها والتعلم على يد أساتذتها وفي فترة من فترات تاريخ هذه المدينة المقدسة كان هناك مايقرب من خمسين مدرسة للدراسات الإسلامية والعلوم الأخرى لمختلف المذاهب. كما أن علماء كبارا كانوا يذهبون لزيارتها او للدراسة فيها أو الإستمتاع بروحانيتها. وربما كان أشهر هؤلاء العلماء أبا حامد الغزالي الذي توفي في بداية القرن الثاني عشر الميلادي،وهو قد سافر إليها وبقي فيها لإثراء تجربته والتمتع بأجوائها الروحانية. وهو نفسه يذكر أنه كان يذهب كل يوم إلى مسجد قبة الصخرة للتعبد والتهجد، وهو ربما اعتقد أن قدسية المدينة وروحانية أجوائها التي تحيط بها وعبقها المتميز وما اضفي عليها من تكريم في الإسلام وما قيل في حقها من أقوال واحاديث قد يساهم في إيصاله إلى راحة الإيمان الراسخ واطمئنان اليقين وانفراج أزمته الفكرية التي كان يمر بها كما هو معروف. وهو كان قد كتب رسالة خاصة في علم الكلام عندما كان مقيما فيها عنونَها باسم المدينة واسماها الرسالة القدسية. كما أن هناك أكثر من عالم من العلماء المعروفين ينتسبون إليها ويسمون بالمقدسي. وقد تميزت هذه المدينة بانسانيتها وبانفتاحها على الشعوب والأديان الأخرى ولم تغلق الباب أمام أي منها ولم تمنع من يريدون السكن فيها بل كانت مفتوحة للآخرين من خارجها يأتونها من أماكن بعيدة.فالمقدسي (ت حوالي 990م) يذكر بعض المهاجرين إليها من المسلمين من أماكن بعيدة.ولكن العيش في هذه المدينة لم يقتصر على المسلمين بل كانت شعوب أخرى تاتي إليها من أماكن مختلفة كما يذكر ذلك لنا الحاخام اليهودي القومسي الذي عاش في القرن التاسع.فهو قال عندما خاطب اليهود وحثهم على المجيئ إلى القدس ، “اليست الشعوب الأخرى تاتي من جهات الأرض الأربع إلى أورشليم ، في كل شهر وفي كل سنة ، خشية من الله ورهبة منه ، إذن ماذا دهاكم يا اخواني اليهود ؟ وهو يمدح حكم المسلمين ويثني عليه ،ويقول ولكن بعد ما جاءت مملكة اسماعيل(المسلمين) أصبحت الأمور أفضل ، لأن بني اسماعيل يساعدون اليهود القرائين دائما ، لتطبيق شريعة توراة موسى ، ولذلك علينا أن نباركهم من أجل ذلك. والآن أنتم في وسط مملكة إسماعيل….إذن فلماذا تخافون الحاخامين؟ وأكثر من هذا فالمسلمون لم يكونوا ليقبلوا ضغوط الدول الأخرى لمنع أتباع دين من الأديان، للسكن في القدس والعيش فيها ،نعرف ذلك مما يذكره عالم وحاخام آخر هو يافث بن إيلي من القرن العاشر الميلادي عند شرحه لعبارة في المزمور11-2 التي جاء فيه “فإن الأشرار يشدون قوسهم وعلى الوتر يسددون سهمهم” يقول “إن هذا يعني أن البيزنطيين يكتبون إلى العرب دائما يطالبونهم بطرد اليهود من أورشليم، ولكنهم لم ينجحوا ، وقد تبين بكل وضوح أن هؤلاء كانوا يقومون بذلك ، منذ فترة طويلة”وهذه فيما أرى شهادة مهمة في حق المسلمين،وفي طريقة معاملتهم لأتباع الأديان الأخرى.ويذكرنا هذا بما قام به الخليفة عمر بن الخطاب،الذي سمح لليهود بالسكن في القدس بعد أن كان الرومان قد منعوهم، وكان رئيس الكنيسة غير راض بالسماح لهم ويضغط من أجل عدم إرجاع اليهود.ومعروف أن المسيحيين أيضا كانوا يعيشون بسلام إلى جنب المسلمين منذ دخول المسلمين إلى فلسطين ،ولهم كنائسهم وأديرتهم كما هو معروف وكانوا يأتون من بيزنطة أيضا لزيارتها كما يذكر ناصر خسرو، وربما كان هناك أتباع أديان أخرى.
ولأن هذه المدينة لها موقع مركزي في وجدان المسلمين ودينهم فقد بذلوا كل ما لديهم لإعادتها إلى ماكانت عليه بعدما احتلها الصليبيون في نهاية القرن الحادي عشر واخرجوا منها ممن بقي فيها من اليهود والمسلمين وجعلوها مدينة مقتصرة على المسيحيين وحدهم ، ولم يهدأ للمسلمين بال إلى أن استرجعوها وأعادوا إصلاح ما خربه الصليبيون من مساجدها ومدارسها فعاد إليها طابعها الإنساني المميز.
ولكن هذه المدينة المقدسة ذات الوجه الإنساني التي انفتحت على الآخرين ورحبت بهم وتقبلتهم واستقبلتهم كما راينا ترزح اليوم ومنذ عقود تحت حكم استعماري قاس بغيض لايرحم سكانها من غير اليهود ولايهتم بالقوانين الدولية ولا بحقوق الإنسان وإنما له هدف واحد خطط له منذ العام 1948 ويعمل على تحقيقه وهو إحكام السيطرة على هذه المدينة وجعلها مدينة يهودية خالصة بعد القيام بتزوير تاريخها.
وأنا الآن لا أريد أن أخوض بما تقوم به إسرائيل من عمليات تهويد لهذه المدينة من بناء للمستوطنات فيها وحولها،وتهديم بيوت الفلسطينيين وتركهم بلا مأوى ومن سحب لهويات المقدسيين منهم والغاء جنسياتهم واسكان اليهود في أحيائهم وممارسة الترهيب والترغيب لبيع ممتلكاتهم.فهذه الأعمال لكثرتها وتكررها أصبحت للناس معروفة، وإسرائيل لاتخفيها ولا تخشى الحديث عنها ولذلك بدأ احرار العالم منذ سنوات بسبب هذه الأعمال اللاإنسانية حملة لمقاطعة لإسرائيل يشترك في تنظيمها اليوم شخصيات عالمية معروفة كان آخرهم الفيزيائي العالمي المعروف ستيفن هوكنغ.ومما يدعو إلى التفاؤل أن هذه الحملة أخذت تاتي اكلها ولو ببطئ.
وبودي أن أختم هذا الحديث عن شيئ من تزوير إسرائيل لتاريخ هذه المدينة. وهذا التزوير يتمثل في عدة أمور منها تغيير أسماء الشوارع والأحياء العربية إلى أسماء عبرية وربطها زورا بتاريخ اليهود ،ومنها استعمال مصطلحات كاذبة تزور التاريخ مثل مصطلح إعادة توحيد القدس وهذا يوحي بأن المدينة كانت تحت سيطرة اليهود مع ان العالم يعرف بأن اليهود لألفي سنة لم يكن لهم دور في إدارة المدينة لا من قريب ولا من بعيد بل إنهم كانوا خارجها لقرون طويلة إلى أن أرجعهم المسلمون إليها
وإلى جانب التزوير في العصر الحديث هناك تزوير للتاريخ القديم لهذه المدينة
خاصة فيمايتعلق بالهيكل اليهودي واصرار إسرائيل أن مكانه كان في موقع الحرم القدسي الشريف .ومعروف أن إسرائيل منذ احتلالها للقدس الشرقية لم تبق حجرا على حجر في البحث عن دليل لوجود هذا الهيكل والعثور على أثر تاريخي له والذي حدث بهذا الخصوص أنها ادعت اكتشاف آثار تقول انها تثبت ما تريد ولكن الذي تبين فيما بعد أنها اكتشافات مزورة.وبودي أن اذكر هنا بعض الأمثلة باختصار. فمن هذه لوح حجري أعلن عنه عام 2003 بعد أن أطلع عليه بعض الخبراء قبل هذا التاريخ ووثقوه بأنه أثر اصيل . ويحوي اللوح كتابة من عشرة أسطر/ خمسة عشر سطرا تتضمن تعليمات يفترض أن الملك يهواش بن الملك حزقياه ملك يهودا (836 ـ ق.م798) قد أمر بها لإصلاح هيكل سليمان. وهذه التعليمات قد وردت في العهد القديم في سفر الملوك الثاني وما وجد على اللوح يشبهها كثيرا لغة وأسلوبا ومضمونا..وقد قيل عن الاكتشاف في حينها إنه أهم دليل حتى اليوم على وجود ما يسمى بالهيكل الأول. وقد أشيع أن اللوح عثر عليه قرب المسجد الأقصى ولذلك أعلنت بعض المنظمات اليهودية المتطرفة أن النقش يثبت وجود الهيكل ويجب إعادة بنائه مكان الحرم القدسي الشريف من دون تأخير.وبعد أن فحصت اللوح لجنة من المختصين في أكثر من اختصاص توصلت إلى أن اللوح قديم(المادة التي نقشت عليها الكتابة) ولكن الكتابة مزورة وقدعرض تلفزيون “بي بي سي” برنامجا وثائقيا عن هذا اللوح وشكك في مصداقيته. وكان ممن اشترك في تزويره استاذ في جامعة حيفا.
ومن هذه الآثار المزورة قطعة صغيرة على شكل رمانة صغيرة من عاج اعتقد أنها رأس صولجان كبير كهنة المعبد، وقد نقش عليها عبارة “مقدس للكهنة، هيكل الإله يهوه”. وكان المتحف الإسرائيلي قد اشتراها في الثمانينات بـ500 ألف دولار واعتقد وقتها أنها الشيء الوحيد الذي يعثر عليه إلى اليوم يتعلق بموجودات هيكل سليمان. والغريب أن بعض المختصين هم الذين قالوا إن اللقية حقيقية قبل أن يشتريها المتحف. وطبقا للتوراة، فإن الرمان استعمل في تزويق هيكل سليمان. وقد ظلت هذه اللقية معروضة في المتحف الإسرائيلي لفترة سنوات وقد رفعت كثيرا من معنويات اليهود حيث اعتقدوا أنها تؤكد وجود هيكلهم في القدم ، وأخذ كثير منهم بعد سنين من عرضها يؤكد أن شيئا من فترة الملك سليمان قد عثر عليه. ولكن المتحف سحبها من العرض وأعلن أن النقش عليها حديث بعد أن قررت لجنة من المختصين ذلك. وقد كان لي نقاش حاد في أحد المؤتمرات الدولية في لندن مع الخبير المختص الذي برر أصالتها .
ومن الأشياء التي تبين أنها مزورة ختم حجري قيل في حينها إنه للملك منسه ملك يهودا (القرن السابع ق.م.) حيث نقش عليه “منسه ابن الملك”. وافترض أنه نقش يعود له قبل أن يصبح ملكا. وكان في حينها قد عرض على جامع آثار بمبلغ مليون دولار.
كما عرض أحد تجار الآثار “شمعدان” (منوراه)مصنوع من الصخر على أنه خاص برئيس كهنة ما يسمى بالهيكل الثاني وكان قد طلب مبلغا ضخما ثمنا له وقد تبين فيما بعد أن الشمعدان مزور.
ومن هذه اللقى قطعة من إناء فخاري عليها كتابة قيل إنها تعود لفترة مملكة يهودا، وقد تبين أنها مزورة كذلك. وقد اتهم في ذلك شخصان أحدهما خبير سابق في متحف إسرائيل. وبسبب كثرة التزوير في الآثارقال أحد الخبراء في هذا الحقل إن أي لقية من فترة العشرين سنة الماضية لا يعرف مكان العثورعليها في إسرائيل يجب أن تعتبر مزيفة”..ومن الكتب المهمة عن تجارة التزييف هذه كتاب المؤلفة نينا بيرليه بعنوان “التجارة غير المقدسة: قصة حقيقية للعقيدة، والطمع والتزوير في الأرض المقدسة”. وتستعرض المؤلفة ـ وهي أميركية لها عدد من المؤلفات ـ قصصا تتعلق بتزوير الآثار في إسرائيل والطرق المتبعة فيها والتقنيات المستعملة في ذلك والمجموعات المشتركة فيها.وبودي أن أشير هنا في ختام حديثي هذا، إلى كتابين مهممين من تاليف الأستاذ شلومو زند وهو استاذ جامعي إسرائيلي احدهما عن تزوير تاريخ اليهود كشعب كما يقول وعنوانه اختلاق الشعب اليهودي والآخر عن تزوير أرض فلسطين كما يذكر وعنوانه اختلاق الأرض المقدسة ،من المفيد الإطلاع عليهما وما ورد فيهما من معلومات.
The Zionist Movement and its Relation with the Parties to the Conflict (in the 1st World War)
Dr Jaafar Hadi Hassan
During the years leading to the first world-war, the Zionist Movement was not a monolithic organization, in fact it was of different strands that were distinctive in their views, such as cultural, religious, practical, political and other. Each one of them had its own leader or leaders, and the loyalties of the Jewish communities around the world at that time, were also divided between the warring parties. These loyalties were influenced by a number of factors, including regional location, or treatment of the Jews by the state, where they took residency. Many Jews including those in the United States and Palestine supported Turkey, and were anti- Russia, whereas the supporters of the Allies (mainly England, France and Russia) were said to be in the minority. This situation created acute and complicated problems for the Movement.
One of the early problems the movement faced, was that the seat of the Zionist executive at the break of the hostilities was in the capital of one of the major warring powers, Berlin, and, because of that, it was considered pro-German, while the branches in other countries supported at least partially, the Allies. The critics of the pro-German Zionists argued that such close cooperation with German political warfare would jeopardise millions of eastern European Jews particularly since the activities of the committee, remained no secret; these activities later served as justification for the anti-Jewish measures taken by the Russian government 1914- 1915.
It is true that the Zionist German federation supported Germany in the war, and announced that it expected all its young members to volunteer for military service stating that Germany was fighting for “truth, law freedom and world civilisation against darkest tyranny and bloodiest cruelty as represented by tsarist disposition”. Some of them called the war alongside Germany, “holy” stating that “we know that our interest is exclusively on the side of Germany”; they also said that Germany was “strong” and would “liberate the oppressed” 
In addition there was the community of the Jewish settlers in Palestine, which was part of the Ottoman Empire. Most of these Jews were European citizens and the Turkish government demanded that they become Ottoman citizens or leave the country. Above all, there was the issue of the postwar settlements. Because of problems such as these, it was decided soon after the start of the war, to establish a Zionist liaison office in a neutral country. When this proposal was put for discussion, an argument erupted among the members; some preferred the United States which was neutral at that time, but others suggested otherwise. In the end they settled for Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark. Some of the leaders of the movement were displeased about this decision and decided to disconnect their relations with the Bureau. One such prominent and highly influential figure was Chaim Wiezmann who, soon after the Bureau was opened, cut himself off the European Zionists.. Weizmann – who was very active in preparing the ground for the Balfour declaration and developing the chemical acetone, leading to the production of 30,000 tonnes used by the British in the war – states in his book ‘Trial and Error’ that he wrote to the Bureau asking that no mail be sent to him. When he was invited to attend the first important war time meeting of the Actions Committee, he refused to attend and wrote to his friend Dr Shamarya Lvin – who was described as the most effective propagandist of the movement – ‘I shall not go to the conference and I cannot do this either as a Jew or as British subject’; furthermore, to Lewis Brandeis , head of the American Zionist branch he wrote ‘Taking into account the present political situation , I cannot help thinking that the conference at Copenhagen would prove absolutely useless for our movement, and acutely harmful for the future. Weizmann gives the reason for his actions by saying ‘In breaking with Copenhagen Bureau, I wanted to make sure of clean record, for though I was violently anti –Russia , I was just anti-German and pro-British”. As a result Weizmann kept his talk with British statesmen very much to himself. Frequently he did not inform even close friends, let alone the Copenhagen bureau or Berlin. Each side, was in the dark in 1917 about the achievements and failures of the other.
Interestingly Weizmann complained bitterly about his colleagues, who, he says, they looked upon him as a crank and Anglo-maniac, and he further states that this attitude continued among certain groups, even after the war. He adds that he was also accused by some Zionists of being ready to sell the movement and this was for him hard to bear.
The Zionists in America on the other hand, were critical of the British Branch for their involvement with the British government on behalf of the movement. In a strongly worded letter, sent to the Zionist leaders in England, Dr Judah Magnes – secretary of the American Zionist Federation, who later became president of the Hebrew University – and Dr Shamarya Levin, wrote that the activities of the Zionist leaders in England were responsible for the persecution of the Jews in Palestine and that they should stop these activities immediately (Ibid p.216). According to them not only did these actions harm the Jews in Palestine, who, after all, were under Ottoman rule, but they believed that they also go against the neutrality of the Zionist movement which was one of the principles agreed upon by the movement in Copenhagen.
In contrast to the Zionists in America, Baron Edmond de Rothschild, famous for being a strong supporter of the Zionist activities – pouring money for its projects for decades – and so called father of the Yishub (Jewish emigrants in Palestine), urged the leaders of the movement in 1914, following Turkeys entry into the war, to stop being cautious in their Zionist activities in ‘Eretz Israel’ (Palestine) and work openly to demand the establishment of a Jewish State.
However, the Zionists in Palestine had a different stance to this. They endeavoured to seek settlement within the Ottoman Empire, and appease the government. According to D. Vital in his book, Zionism, The Crucial Phase, Zionists in Palestine harboured a powerful tendency to seek accommodation with the Turks, in the hope, that their contributions are recognised by the Ottoman Empire and their requirements met. This instinctive tendency for accommodation was tested when the Italian-Turkish war broke out, and the Zionist leadership were torn between avoiding involvement and what seemed an opportunity to demonstrate loyalty to the Turks. Whilst discussions took place to form a legion to fight with the Ottomans, this did not get off the ground. A more serious proposal to form a medical detachment, to serve the wounded under the auspices of the Red Crescent, was also not enacted due to financial constraints. In the end the Zionists in Palestine did no more than express their sympathy.
As for the Russian Zionist Jews, they were against the Allies and in support of the Germans according to Ronald Graham of the foreign Office in Britain. This is stated very clearly in a letter sent by him to Belfour in 25 October 1917. The letter states that information from every quarter shows the very important role which Jews are now playing in the Russian political situation. At the present moment these Jews are certainly against the Allies and for the Germans, but almost every Jew in Russia is Zionist, and if they can be made to realize that the success of the Zionist aspiration depends on the support of the Allies and the expulsion of the Turks from Palestine, we shall enlist a most powerful element in our favour.
Another good example of the different loyalties of the Zionist groups, is the plan for the formation of the Jewish battalion which, became to be known later as Zionist Mule Corps. This idea originated mainly with Vladimir Jabotinsky (founder of revisionist Zionism and Bitar movement) and few of his Zionist colleagues. This group thought that one way of making sure, that Jews would be taken seriously at peace table, was to organize a Jewish military unit to fight on the side of the Allies.
But as soon as the plan was known to the other Zionists, it faced very strong opposition not only from ordinary Zionists in Britain (with rare exception) who even attacked Jabotnisky physically, but also from the official Zionist bodies, which were committed to neutrality. The Copenhagen Bureau denounced the plan with strong words, and violently rejected Jabotinsky proposition. Not only did the movement forbid all the Zionists to take an active part in it, but it also warned Jabotinsky that ‘if he does not cease his activities, he will bury the Zionist enterprise for ever’ (The Jewish Agency for Israel website).
The Actions Committee of the organization also resolved that the Jewish battalion project stands in deep contradiction to the principle of the Zionist activities. In fact some members of the Committee called the project a ‘criminal offence’. Jabotinsky refused to heed the committee’s statements and replied to them by saying that they were thoroughly mistaken, and added they had come to neutral Denmark from blind Germany and sick Russia; he adds that he had no doubt at all that Germany was incapable of winning the war and that Turkey would end by being smashed to pieces. He suggested a compromised proposal to the committee which was refused. Despite objections by the majority of the Zionist leaders, he moved to London where he continued to work towards the establishment of a battalion. The corps was formed and fought at Gallipoli, and at the end of it the British disbanded it and many of its members were moved to England becoming the nucleus of a newly formed Jewish Legion with Jabotinsky as the main figure. This legion later participated alongside the British army, fighting in Palestine.
It is important to note that after the war, and in particular the Balfour
Declaration, differences amongst the Zionist regional parties remained; essentially, two divergent concepts emerged that were different in ideology and approach. On one hand, the American Zionists led by Brandeis who were critical of the political Leadership in London, believed with the Belfour Declaration, the main political tasks of the movement had been accomplished, and that from now on energies had to be devoted to the building of Palestine. They advocated complete focus on Palestine with respect to funding and efforts demanding that “contributions should be devoted only to projects in that country”; they were “not in favour of diaspora nationalism and refused to pay for Zionist activities outside Palestine”. On the other hand British and European Zionists led by Weizmann were critical of the American Zionist approach claiming they lacked a “Jewish heart” and stating that Brandeis’ policy was “Zionism without Zion”. In contrast to Brandeis, Weizmann and the Europeans made the argument that Palestine could not be colonised in the same way as America, and that international efforts for Zionist causes everywhere should be supported.
In summary, the above examples show, that the Zionist movement at the time of the conflict (and beyond) was not unified in its position in relation to the warring parties, rather, there were contrasting, and contradicting stances taken by the members, in different regions. This paper is not aimed at providing an exhaustive review of these varied views and their implications, but is designed to highlight some of the key stands taken by prominent and leading figures of the movement. Finally, despite the spectrum of different allegiances and loyalties among the members of the movement which we referred to, they were all striving and manipulating to reach a key mutual objective, which was the establishment of a Jewish state. The achievement of the infamous Balfour Declaration was the basis of establishing this state but, unfortunately, this same declaration has been the cause of great calamity for the Palestinian People, who continue to suffer from its repercussions until today.
 Walter Laqueur, The History of Zionism,p.174
 Ibid, p172
 Walter Laqueur,op.cit p.178
 Trail and Error,pp. 211-212
 pp. 83-84
 Ibid p.289
 Encyclopeadia Judaiaca, Zionism
 The Jewish Agency for Israel Website
 David Vital, Zionism, The Crucial Phase,p.149 and The Jewish Agency for Israel Website
 David Vital, op. cit,p.149
 Walter Laqueur,op. cit.,pp. 458-459
Encyclopeadia Judiaca (1972), Zionism
The Jewish Agency for Israel(website)
Laqueur,Walter (2003), The History of Zionism (European Jewish puplication Society
Vital,David,(1987) Zionism, The Crucial Phase,(Clarendon Press.Oxford)
Weizmann,Chaim,( 1949),Trail and Error,(Hamish Hamilton, London)
Several thousand Ethiopian Jews demonstrated last year against the discarding of blood they had donated, an action carried out by the Israeli Ministry of Health in fear of its being infected with AIDS. The Ethiopian Jews who call themselves ‘Beta Yisrael’ and are called by other Ethiopians the ‘Falashas’, which in one of their languages, Ge’ez, means the ‘exiled, aliens’, number around 65,000 and were brought to the State of Israel (SI) in two stages. The Falashas have had to face many obstacles from the date of their arrival. This last protest was not a protest against the scandal of discarded blood only but a protest against all the other problems which they have had to endure.
Before we look at some of the problems faced by the Falashas we shall first briefly review their history, their beliefs and the state in which they were before arriving in the SI.
Many scholars believe that the Scottish traveller James Bruce was the first to meet and report to the world the existence of the Ethiopian Jews when, in the mid-eighteenth century, he published his book ‘Travels to Discover The Sources of The Nile’. Bruce spoke in detail of his discovery of the Jews he called the Falashas, their customs and habits and some of their history as related by them. But Bruce was not the first to have met and reported the existence of the Falashas, because the Arabs had done so more than two centuries before him when they contacted the Falashas and got to know them closely.
We shall report two such documented encounters. The first, Shihab ad-Diin Ahmad bin Abdel-Qadir al-Jizani, known as ‘Arab Faqih’ (d. c.1543), in his book ‘Tuhfat az-Zaman, Aw Futuh al-Habasha’ where he detailed the conquests of Imam Ahmad bin Ibrahim, as follows:
“The land of Sumain was owned by the Jews of Ethiopia, known in their tongue as the Falashas. They believe in Allah, but have no Prophet or Righteous Leaders. The people of Bahr’anba have enslaved them for 40 years, during which they used them to plough their lands. When the Imam defeated Archbishop Saul, the Falashas poured in their masses from all directions – from the caves where they used to live – and said to the Imam, ‘There has for the last forty years been an enmity between the people of Bahr’anba and ourselves. We shall fight the people of Bahr’anba now that you have defeated them and taken their castles. You stay in your place and we shall treat them as it may please you’. After the Imam had supplemented their army, they marched to the mountain and brought down the people of Bahr’anba in chains to the Imam who stayed there until he conquered Sumain”. 
The second is the historian al-Hami from the seventeenth century. He reported in his book ‘Sirat al-Habasha’ the following: “After seven stages, we reached the land of the Falashas which was formed by a great valley, called ‘aghna’, under a mighty mountain called Sumain. Sumain is the greatest of Ethiopia’s mountains and may even be the greatest of all the world’s mountains..… This tribe, called the Falashas, is the biggest of Ethiopia’s tribes following the Jewish religion and the Shari’a Law of the Torah. They used to be out of the control of the king who had often attacked them from all sides as their land was surrounded by Christian land, until he defeated them and brought them down from their castles, whereby they submitted to his authority and obeyed his orders voluntarily. The king handed over their land to his Wazir, and most of the Falashas became Christians except for a few”. 
Scholars are not in agreement on the origins of their Jewishness. Some believe that they are the descendants of the Jews who came from Yemen in the sixth century when the king of Aksum invaded the land of Himyar which was ruled by the Jewish king, Dhu Nawas. The Christians of Himyar had earlier sought the assistance of the Byzantine Emperor, Justin 1, to save them from Dhu Nawas. Justin called on the Ethiopian Christian king of Aksum to liberate the Christians. The king of Aksum occupied the land of Himyar and defeated Dhu Nawas in 525 AD. The king brought with him some Jewish prisoners. The proponents of this theory believe that the Jews of Ethiopia are the descendants of those prisoners, suggesting that Judaism had entered Ethiopia in the sixth century, following the adoption of Christianity in the fourth century. 
Some scholars believe that Judaism entered Ethiopia from Yemen earlier than Christianity through wars, trade or other routes, as Judaism was one of the religions of the Arabian Peninsula.  But the Ethiopian Jews relied on the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Torah) which was translated in Egypt (c 2nd century BC), and there is no evidence that this version was known in the Peninsula.
Yet others believe that the Ethiopian Jews constitute an ethnic and religious group descended from the lost Jewish tribes, of which large groups immigrated to Ethiopia and intermarried with the indigenous people. They argue in favour of this theory that the skin of these Jews is not as dark as that of other Africans and their features are distinctly non-African, which according to them is conclusive evidence that they could not have descended from an African origin. However, the colour and the features of the Ethiopian Jews generally are not different from those of the rest of the Ethiopian population. Furthermore the blood test carried out on the Falashas indicated that their blood groups are different from those predominant among the Eastern Jews. 
Some of those who believe that Jews immigrated to Ethiopia suggest that only a few Jews, and not thousands of the lost tribes, had entered Ethiopia before Christianity, and converted some of the inhabitants. Today’s Jews are the descendants of those early converts 
There are others who believe that Ethiopian Jews came from an island in the Nile situated opposite present-day Aswan and known in ancient Egyptian as ‘Yeb’, the name retained in Aramaic. The Greeks called it ‘Elephantine’ which is a true translation of the early Egyptian. The significance of this island is that it was the city of the God Khnum and was a military fortress to defend Egypt’s southern borders against the Nubians who used to attack the Nile valley. 
During the Persian rule of Egypt around 525BC Elephantine became a large military base inhabited by many mercenaries from different ethnic origins. Among those mercenaries were Jews who had their own “temple”, as is revealed from papyrus letters written in Aramaic from the fifth century. It is clear from these letters that some of their customs were different from those observed by other Jews in matters such as mixed marriages and sacrificial rituals.
When the Persians were driven out of Egypt during the fifth century BC the position of those Jews was weakened and they started to complain of their treatment by the Egyptian priests who were pressurising and assaulting them. When their position deteriorated further, they left the island. It is believed that some of them went to present-day Ethiopia. To support this theory, its proponents cite the Greek historian Strabo, who lived in the first century BC. When writing on Abyssinia, Strabo referred to a settlement of Egyptians living on an island far up in the Nile who had gone to Meroe (Ethiopia) as “exiled by Psammetichus and are called Sembritae as being foreigners”.  This is the meaning of the word ‘Falashas’ in the Ge’ez language.
But the Ethiopist Ullendorff rejects this and says: “Even if this referred to the time of Psammetichus II (593-588BC), it would clearly be too early to have any connection with the Jewish military garrison at Elephantine”. He then puts forward the idea that the Falashas are “descendants of those elements in the AksumiteKingdom who resisted conversion to Christianity..…Their cult embodies a curious mixture of pagan-Judaic-Christian beliefs and ceremonies…..Their so-called Judaism is merely the reflection of those Hebraic and Judaic practices and beliefs which were implanted on parts of South-West Arabia in the first post-Christian centuries and subsequently brought into Abyssinia.” To support his theory Ullendorff mentions the fact that the Falashas do not know any prescription outside the Pentateuch: Mishna and Talmud are unknown to them. They have no knowledge of Hebrew, and the language of their prayers is Ge’ez as is the case with their Christian compatriots. The feasts mentioned in the Pentateuch are observed by the Falashas in a manner often materially different from that of Jews elsewhere. Post-exilic feasts are not celebrated by them. The Sabbath is observed with considerable strictness, and the prescriptions regarding ritual cleanness are practised with great zeal, both features which exist among very many other Ethiopians. In common with their monophysite neighbours the Falashas carry out circumcision on boys and excision on girls.” 
The Ethiopian Jews themselves believe that they originated in Palestine. They cite a story reported in ‘Kebra Nagast’ (Glory of the Kings: the Ethiopian national saga), a book which was written in the 14th century detailing the stories of the kings of Ethiopia. According to this book the kings of Ethiopia descended from King Solomon and Mekida, Queen of Sheba, who gave birth to a son called Menelik on her return to her land after her visit to Solomon. When Menelik grew up, he went to visit his father. Before his return to Ethiopia, King Solomon requested the heads of other tribes to send their eldest sons with Menelik. The High Priest Zadok declared Menelik a king in Ethiopia. When they departed to Ethiopia, Menelik and his companions took with them the Israelite ‘Ark of the Covenant’ from the Temple of Jerusalem and installed it in Aksum. The Ethiopian Christians say that after the Ark was moved the Holy Spirit left Israel and set down in Ethiopia. The Ark was placed in a holy site in Aksum known as the ‘Second Jerusalem’, where access is allowed to one priest only who serves the site. It is customary to see a model of this Ark in ordinary Ethiopian churches.
The priests of the Christian Ethiopian church believe that they are the descendants of Levi and so do the priests of the Falashas. They also believe that the Ethiopians, and not the Jews, are the ‘chosen people’ because they possess the Ark.  However, the Jews of Ethiopia say that they are the descendants of those people who accompanied Menelik from the kingdom of Solomon to Ethiopia. The origin of this last theory is traced to two references in the Old Testament where, in the First Book of Kings 10 1-13 and in the Second Book of Chronicles 9 1-12, the story is told of the visit by this Queen to King Solomon and his warm reception of her. In Kabra Nagast extra details, not present in the Old Testament, are added to show how the kings of Ethiopia were descended from King Solomon. Many scholars are doubtful of this theory because the kingdom of this queen had not been identified in the story. She had been called in the Old Testament ‘Queen of Sheba’, and the Qur’an calls the kingdom ‘Saba’, which is related to Yemen more than any other land.
I believe that the Ethiopian Jews took some of their religious beliefs and customs from the Jews who came to Ethiopia, not necessarily from Yemen, before the arrival of Christianity and then mixed their beliefs and original customs with them. They subsequently, on the arrival of Christianity, adopted some of its beliefs and finally on their contact with modern Jews during the last century their Jewish beliefs were strengthened.
The Judaism of the Ethiopian Jews distinguishes itself from that of common Jews in both belief and practice. Their Torah includes books that are not present in the Torah of common Jews, such as the Book of Enoch, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Book of Jubilees, Baruch, Tobit and others. These books are called “apocrypha”, and their inclusion makes their Torah consist of 46 books. They, like the Qaraites and the Samaritans, but contrary to common belief among most other Jews, do not recognise the Talmud. (The Samaritan Sect separated itself from mainstream Judaism before the compilation of the Talmud).
They resemble the Samaritans but differ from the rest of the Jews in that they offer sacrifices on the Passover and on other occasions.  Most Jews had ceased to offer sacrifices following the destruction of the Temple. The Ethiopian Jews pray seven times a day  and not three as the rest of the Jews do. They have their own liturgy, read in Ge’ez and not in Hebrew or Aramaic, and their place of worship is called a ‘Mesjid’, which means mosque in Arabic. 
They, like the Qaraites, do not celebrate Purim or Hanukkah which are feasts ordained for other Jews but not prescribed in the Old Testament. At the Feast of Tabernacles they celebrate without building booths. The religious ceremony of ‘Seged’ is peculiar to the Falashas. Its main feature is the ascent to a hill or a mountain led by their priests. They, like the Qaraites, do not practise the blowing of the shofar ‘trumpet’ at the beginning of the year and on other occasions and do not separate milk from meat.  The Falashas practise monasticism , unlike any other Jewish group today. According to some, this practice was introduced in the fifteenth century.
When a woman is menstruating she is kept in a hut outside the village until she is clean and allowed to return after dipping into flowing water. A similar treatment is given to a mother following childbirth who is kept in an isolated hut for forty days if she gave birth to a boy and for eighty days if she gave birth to a girl. After the expiry of that period she has to shave her hair and wash her body and clothes before she is allowed back home. The hut used for these women is called the ‘blood hut’ and is usually burnt after its use. 
In their country of origin the Ethiopian Jews lived in isolation from the rest of the Ethiopians and only contacted them in need. There are several reasons for this isolation. One of the main reasons is that they considered themselves better than the rest of the Ethiopians in their practices and faith and thus derided other groups. They usually lived in isolated areas close to flowing water. They did not enjoy travelling because they were very careful about their food, as they do not eat the food of the rest of the Ethiopians. They would wash if they touched a non-Jewish person.
This isolation which they believe is imposed by their religion has been aggravated by their undertaking of what the other Ethiopians consider to be mean professions such as pottery and smith craft. All this led the Ethiopians to become wary and suspicious. They came to call them the ‘Tib’ which means the evil spirit that reincarnates into another and hurts other people. 
The Ethiopians believe that the Falashas turn into hyenas at night, digging up graves and eating corpses; at one time the Ethiopians went out to hunt hyenas and ended up killing a large number of them. In some parts of Ethiopia they were considered as sorcerers and cannibals who would eat people in a very mysterious and magical fashion. 
The link between smithcraft and sorcery is not new. It is reported that one of the Ethiopian kings sentenced all the blacksmiths to death because he found them to be sorcerers. A similar fate was meted out in the seventeenth century. This belief has entered Ethiopian literature and prayers. And until recent times a blacksmith was considered a servant for everybody and when enlisted in the army he was not really considered as one of its members and had no opportunity of promotion. 
Among the popular beliefs in Ethiopia is that the Falashas were born in hell, spit fire and have to be isolated. Despite the attempts by the Falashas to dispel these charges they seem to be entrenched beliefs continuing to recent times, which the Falashas brought to the attention of Haile Selassie, the last Ethiopian king, in one of their letters (1958-59) saying: “We are falsely accused of sorcery and legerdemain and of turning ourselves at night into wild animals like the hyenas. The accusation is that we do not only kill our neighbours and eat them but that we dig out corpses and eat them.” 
The Falashas did not maintain a good relationship with the kings of Ethiopia. With some, especially those who forced them to adopt Christianity, they had real conflict. It is worth pointing out here that the Falashas were not persecuted for being Jews, because the kings of Ethiopia took great pride in claiming descent from King Solomon. Both Menelik the Second (d.1913) and Haile Selassie added the title of ‘Lion of Judah’ to their names. But the kings of Ethiopia oppressed all religious communities, especially those living in isolation, whose beliefs differed from the Ethiopian church. Among the groups persecuted were the Muslims, the Protestants, the Catholics and some other small Christian communities.
Jewish interest in the Falashas grew in the nineteenth century after they heard that missionaries had gone to Ethiopia following the publication of James Bruce’s book.  The Jewish Alliance posted Joseph Halevy, orientalist and a Semitic languages scholar, to Ethiopia to contact the Falasha Jews there. He left for Ethiopia in 1867 and lived among the Falashas for several months. When he returned he brought back with him one of their young men to study Judaism in Europe.
Halevy submitted a report about the Falashas and their condition. He estimated their number to be around 150,000 which was less than the number estimated by James Bruce. At the beginning of this century J. Faitlovitch, one of Halevy’s students, travelled on a mission financed by the tycoon Rothschild. He subsequently made several other trips to Ethiopia and carried with him much aid. He established a special Jewish school in Addis Ababa and several mobile schools. This had an adverse effect on the missionaries’ campaigns which were at their peak among the Falashas. Faitlovitch established a committee for the defence of the Falashas. 
After the death of Faitlovitch the Ethiopian Jewish leaders started writing and seeking the assistance of the Jews in the West. An American society was formed for the purpose of providing aid. When the SI was created this society demanded the transfer to the Falashas to it, but the Ethiopian government was not willing to let the transfer take place. Thus when some of the Ethiopian Jews asked an Israeli diplomat for his assistance he suggested that they should convert to Christianity to solve their problems.  Israel Yeshi’yahu, the Knesset speaker in the 1950’s, declared that it was best for the Falashas to convert to Christianity as it would please the Ethiopian government and benefit the Falashas. He was strongly supported in this by Israeli officials. 
In 1955 the government of the SI agreed to accept twelve of them between the ages of 11-17 for training, but made it clear that it was not a recognition of them by the government. When they arrived in Israel the religious establishment demanded their conversion to Orthodox Judaism because their Jewishness was suspect. They carried out the rituals of conversion to Orthodoxy and returned to Ethiopia after the end of their training course. 
The Israelis carried on refusing to transfer them to Israel. When Golda Meir was Prime Minister she said that the Falashas would live a miserable life in Israel and be a subject of ridicule and abuse. She expressed her fear that they might unite in solidarity with the Sephardim.  It is reported that she had said that “we have enough problems without needing those blacks.” 
In 1973 one Israeli diplomat said that “Israel did not recognise that the Law of Return applied to the Falashas. If any member of them wanted to visit Israel he would be treated like any other Ethiopian visiting Israel. The attempts of the Falashas to immigrate to Israel would be adverse to their interests as the Israeli government was not very enthusiastic to receive them.” 
When Ezer Weizmann, the then Israeli Minister of Defence, was asked, during a student conference in 1979, about the Falashas, he responded: “Do you want to trouble me also with the problem of the Falashas? Is it the most important problem we have to face today? 
Some Ethiopian Jews entered the SI as individuals and requested the government to assist their brethren in Ethiopia but were faced with threats of imprisonment. In 1979 Menachem Begin formed a committee to study the Falashas’ case, but the committee failed to reach any conclusions. However, the government changed its mind following the changes of international conditions and the growing need for more immigrants. Several thousand were transferred in December 1984 and January 1985 in ‘Operation Moses’. A second stage in the transfer took place in 1991 in ‘Operation Solomon’.
Since the arrival of the Ethiopian Jews through ‘Operation Moses’ they have faced problems with the religious establishment. First among those was the non-recognition of their Jewish identity when they were asked to undergo the ritual of conversion to Orthodoxy. The Chief Rabbi’s office attempted to explain the reason for this request in that the Falashas had long been isolated from other Jews and had totally lost contact with Jewish laws (implying non-recognition of the Talmud). The consequences of this break had been that most of their marriage contracts were not recognised by Orthodox Judaism and so neither were their divorces. That also meant that they were ‘memzerim’ (illegitimate children) and consequently could only marry ‘memzerim’, illegitimate like themselves. 
It added further that in order to prevent problems in the future they had to convert to Orthodox Judaism. Among the requirements for conversion to Orthodoxy is circumcision, which the Falashas had executed but in a manner not recognised by the Chief Rabbinate in Israel. There were other rituals which they had to undergo and observe. Some of them accepted and conformed to this conversion, but the majority of them rejected it and considered it to be insulting and humiliating. Some of them declared it to be pure racism that bore no relation to Judaism. They insisted that they had observed Moses’ laws for centuries as they understood them from the Torah. One of them is reported to have said: “We are Jews and have paid heavily in order to come to Jerusalem. Yet we have been treated with discrimination by the white Jews”. One of the Falashas’ Rabbis said: ” This is not a human treatment. It is a great shame that this kind of treatment is carried out in the name of Judaism.” 
Another is reported to have said: “We, the Ethiopian Jews, have isolated ourselves from the aliens more than any other Jewish group so that we do not get assimilated and lose our identity. We have struggled for long against problems and obstacles to keep our faith and apply the Torah to the extent that we sacrificed our lives for it. Until we discovered the Jewish world, we believed that we were the only Jews in the world. We still carried on with preserving with care the practice of our religious duties. We demand justice and equality because a man is either a Jew or a non-Jew. This humiliation must stop now and forever. All the Falashas must be respected like any other Jewish group.” 
Another had said: “When I came to Israel I felt I was a free Jew. It was a surprise for me to see the Jews driving their cars and listening to the radio on Saturdays. But despite these violations they ask me to convert to Judaism. When I was in Ethiopia I sought to feel like a Jew in everything. I practised all the rites according to the Torah, but they tell me that I am not a Jew. Then what good were all the years in which I practised Judaism in the past?” 
The Falashas threatened to demonstrate and to return to Ethiopia via Egypt to highlight their plight.  Some of them threatened to commit suicide. They complained to the government and met the then Prime Minister Peres when they told him that they had been Jews for centuries and asking them to convert, carry out purification, circumcision and other rituals was humiliating and degrading. They informed Peres that some members of their community had committed suicide. Peres promised to look into the matter and respond in a few weeks.
Peres met both Chief Rabbis in Israel to discuss the matter. After the meeting he announced that the purification ritual was not necessary, but that each case had to be studied individually. The announcement included the statement that religious courts should consult the Ethiopian Rabbis. However, immediately after the announcement one official in the Chief Rabbi’s office declared that every immigrant to Israel who wanted to get married must prove his Jewishness, which meant the Ethiopian Jews had to convert to Orthodox Judaism because the Rabbis had no proof of their Jewishness. The Falashas protested and demonstrated for one month in front of the Chief Rabbi’s office. They were supported by some other Israelis from among the reform Jews and the conservatives who are not currently recognised by the religious establishment. 
The Chief Rabbi’s office had informed them that it would recognise their Jewishness and all the rights that would follow from such recognition. The Falashas thought that their problem had been solved, only to be disappointed when the Chief Rabbi’s office issued orders to the registry not to register any marriage unless the applicant undertook to abide by the religious regulations and execution of purification by dipping into water and circumcision before the Rabbis. The woman would have to accept the religious regulations and dip her body into water before witnesses. If the applicant could show that he had been properly circumcised then he was required only to accept the regulations and dip into water. 
Peres had to intervene again to resolve the dispute. A new agreement was reached between Peres and the Chief Rabbi, but this agreement was similar to the previous one which had been rejected by the Falashas. It left the determination of the identity of Ethiopian Jewishness to the religious court but without the requirement of purification in water. But the Falashas wanted the determination in case of doubt to be done by their own Rabbis. The agreement also covered the establishment of an institute within the Ministry of Religion to study the affairs of the Ethiopians. Among the functions of this institute was advice on marriage and divorce. However, when the institute was established not one Falasha became a member of it. 
The religious establishment kept to its demands and the Falashas kept to their refusal to conform. They approached the Rabbis of the Reform Jews to supervise their marriages and divorces , but these Rabbis are not recognised by the establishment either.
The Falashas demonstrated again in 1992 in front of the Prime Minister’s Office. They called for improvement in their living conditions in the absorption camps which they said were in a dire state. They were met by two ministers who tried to convince them to stop their protest, but failed. Some of them tried to force their way into the Prime Minster’s Office. One of them said: “Those people treat us the same way they treat the Arabs. We want to be recognised as Jews of complete Jewishness according to our beliefs. The religious establishment has deprived the Ethiopian Rabbis of any authority. We do not understand the reason why the government and the public do not care for us.” Adisu Massala, who worked with the Jewish agency, says that in 1985-87 some 30 Falashas committed suicide due to the refusal of the authority to recognise their marriages. 
One of the biggest problems which the Falashas had to confront was that of housing. Several thousands of them still live in mobile houses. And until recently many of them were living in crowded hostels where families were packed in one or two rooms without any ventilation or cooking facilities.
The Falashas marched in 1992 on foot from Ashkelon to Jerusalem to demonstrate against the miserable state in which they were living. People of all ages took part including the old, children and pregnant women. After some 20 km of marching when some began to show signs of exhaustion, they were met by the Minister of Absorption who tried to persuade them to call the march off. They complained about the deteriorating condition of their housing where the houses they lived in were no more than small suffocating cardboard boxes insufficient for a family of eight or more. The officials in charge of these mobile houses refused to assist. They asked for permanent houses and the Minister promised to solve the problem in three years’ time. One of the demonstrators told the Minister that if the problem was not resolved in three years the Falashas were going to explode in rebellion. He also informed the Minister that “we have not learned any lessons from the mobile houses of the 1950s (referring to the Yemenite Jews’ problems) and the people do not know the scale of the problems which our children have to face in schools because they are placed in separate schools for years on their own. There is so much discrimination against the Ethiopian Jews generally and there are many stories about their diseases.
The Director of the Ethiopian Jews Society told the Jewish Chronicle on 2/2/1996 that the Ethiopian Jews are scattered all over the country in many isolated locations. There may be several thousands of them in one location without a place for worship near to them. He accused the government of spiritual negligence.
One of the main complaints of the Falashas is education, because of the discrimination against them in this field. From their first arrival in Israel the majority of their children were put in religious schools. They were not put in normal schools but had special classes made for them. The Director of the Ethiopian Jews Society said that around 80% of the Ethiopian teenagers study in special schools that teach Orthodoxy with a programme concentrating on the Hebrew language, which enables them to obtain lower jobs only. In these schools they have no opportunity to mix with other children. And when some other children are included in these special schools, they are usually from families which have problems and cannot cope with their children. This only goes to compound the problems of the Ethiopian children. Adisu Massala said: “The Ethiopian children are placed in the worst schools where they only meet underdeveloped children”.
When the Ethiopian children are put on a vocational course, they find real difficulty in getting into the job market. In 1992 some 35 boys graduated from the Hadassa Niorim school after three years of studying and training. They applied for work through the Ministry of Absorption. Three local authorities initially committed themselves to employing them but then retracted their offer.
The latest statistics issued by the Ethiopian Jews Society indicated that only 7% of Ethiopian students passed the high school general exam which is half the percentage of the Arab students.  This is the lowest percentage among all the Jewish minorities. One member of the society indicated that the government has failed in bridging the gap between the Ethiopian children and others in the field of education.
There are other social problems facing the Falashas, such as public discrimination against them. There have been many incidents which the Falashas regard as indicating this. Thus when in 1993 a plan was put to transfer the Falashas to a village called Nishir near Haifa, the inhabitants demonstrated violently and blocked the roads to prevent such a transfer. They declared that they strongly rejected the idea of settling the Falashas near them and complained that the prices of houses would drop if they were to be housed there. The Russian Jews also objected to housing the Falashas near them in the upper Uqnai’am. 
Some schools refused to accept Falasha pupils as had happened in Haifa in 1992, when the mayor refused to accept some Ethiopian pupils. The Director of the Ethiopian Jews Society summarised their relationship with the Israeli public in saying: “The Israelis say that they like us but they do not like us to live near them. They are disgusted with the smell of our food and hate the look of our African clothes. 
The Falashas also complain about the discrimination in the Israeli army which has resulted in some soldiers committing suicide. According to the Jerusalem Post International Edition (5.4.1997) ten Falasha soldiers have committed suicide since 1993. In one month alone this year, three more killed themselves. One of the, Alene Tamene aged 22, said to his niece a day before he killed himself: “Every morning when I get to the base, six soldiers are waiting for me who clap their hands and yell “the Kushi (Blackie) is here'”. According to Shlomo Mula, Secretary of the Ethiopian Jews Organisation, when Tamene complained to his commander about the name calling he was told: “What’s the matter, don’t you know you are Kushi? What are you complaining about?” Mula said of the recent suicides: “This is terrible. I can’t believe this could happen. Every week we go to funerals.”
Also this year an Ethiopian soldier, Avi Asemere, was denied treatment in an army medical clinic by a Russian-born Israeli Major who told him it was “off limits to Kushim”. Adisu Massala – who is now the only Falasha Kenesset member – said that he had received numerous complaints from the immigrants in the army about racist remarks and mistreatment.
The Falashas also protested recently against awarding the Israeli prize for journalism this year to the Ma’ariv columnist Shamuel Schnitzer, claiming he is racist. Scnhitzer said in an article in August 1994 entitled ‘Importing Death’ about the Ethiopian Jews brought to the SI, that they are “thousands of apostates carrying dangerous diseases”. When he was asked to apologize he replied “I am not going to accept a prize with conditions attached. I am not sorry about a single word I wrote and I am not prepared to lie”. (Jewish Chronicle 11/4/1997)
Among the entrenched social problems faced by the Ethiopians is unemployment. A large proportion of them live on social benefit and unemployment reaches 50% among some sections of them, such as in Ashkelon. As the social benefit is not sufficient to live on some of the Falashas have converted to Christianity in order to be supported by the missionaries. The Jerusalem Report reported on 10/8/1995 that seven Ethiopian families from Upper Nazareth had converted to Christianity in order to save themselves from the misery they were in.
Divorce among the Falashas is two to three times as common as among the Israelis. One of their problems was the enforced separation between members of the same family resulting from the break in ‘Operation Moses’. Many of those left behind were asked to wait in Addis Ababa for a short period. However, the delay lasted for six years. It is reported that half of the children became orphaned during that period. Many women who arrived without their husbands gave birth later to illegitimate children who were not registered owing to the objection of the religious establishment. 
Among the problems faced by the Ethiopian women had been the custom of dipping into a river following menstruation and giving birth. It has not been easy for them to find a river to execute this ritual. 
The Ethiopian Jews are warning against further deterioration in their social conditions. Shlomo Mula, who is now the Secretary of the United Ethiopian Jewish Organisation, asserts that if there is no real and rapid change, the Ethiopian Jews will resort to what the Blacks do in the US. 
Vasel Lagasa, one of the leaders of the Ethiopian Jews Society, said: “The social problems are increasing and worsening. We are facing a state of explosion because the number of those disenchanted is increasing. It is sad that after several generations of dreaming of coming to Israel, many of our young men are deserting their roots”. 
This last comment relates to the fact that many young Ethiopian Jews are shunning Judaism in general and Israelis in particular and have begun looking for a culture of a mixed African and Caribbean type to identify with. They began to cut their hair Rastafarian-style; make it into twists and dress in similar colours. They have begun to talk about Black Nationalism, stating their belief in that rather than in Judaism. Many of them frequent a place in Tel Aviv, called Seweto, where they come from all over Israel to meet and dance. They say that this place gives them a feeling of being at home where they are masters, as they have discovered in it some links to their African culture. 
It is believed that this behaviour is a reaction to the failure of Israeli society to absorb the Falashas and assimilate them. The Ethiopian Jews are attempting by this behaviour to fill the vacuum created by uprooting their traditions and replacing them with religious education which they were forced to accept.
There is a possibility that the disappointment of the Ethiopian Jews with the Israeli government and society will in the future manifest itself in more violent and bitter protests against the government, especially after Israel achieves its peace with its Arab neighbours and the external threat disappears which has been used by the SI to prevent the emergence and surfacing of such problems.
3.D. Kessler, The Falashas, The Forgotten People of Ethiopia, p.64
- D.Ross, Acts of Faith, p.153
- J. Quirin, The Evolution of the Ethiopian Jews, p.8
- Ibid, pp.8-9
- Encyclopaedia Judaica, Elephantine
- D. Kessler, op.cit. pp.46-47
- E. Ullendorf, Ethiopia and the Bible, pp.116-117
- T.G. Wagaw, For Our Soul, Ethiopian Jews in Israel, p.7
- W. Leslau, Falashas Anthology, p.xxvi
- D. Ross, op.cit. pp.148-149
- D. Kessler, op.cit. p.68
- Ibid. pp.68-70
- W. Leslau, op.cit. p.xxv
- D. Kessler, op.cit. pp.69-70
- T.G. Wagaw, op.cit. p.20
- J. Quirin, op.cit. p.142
- Ibid. p.145
- D Kessler, op.cit. pp.151-152
- H. A. Stern, Wandering among the Falashas, Introduction
- S. Messing, The Story of the Falashas, p.197
- J. Quirin, op.cit. p.195
- R.S. Feuerlicht, The Fate of the Jews, p.206
- L. Rappart, The Lost Jew, pp.196-197
- M. Waldman, The Jews of Ethiopia, pp.66-68
- R.S. Feuerlicht, op. cit. p.206
- L. Rappart, op. cit. p.195
- D. Ross, op.cit. p.160
- R. S. Feuerlicht, op. cit. p.208
- T. G. Wagaw, op. cit. pp.112-113
- T. Parfitt, Operation Moses, p.129
- Ibid. p.130
- D. Ross, op. cit. p.160
- T.G. Wagaw, op. cit. p.114
- Ibid. p.115
- Barrie Shemesh, ‘Suqut Israel’, p.242
- T.G. Wagaw, op. cit. p.180
- Ibid. pp.118-119
- Jerusalem Post (International Edition), 29.8.1992
- Jewish Chronicle, 2.2.1996
- Jerusalem Post (International Edition), 16.4.1993
- Jewish Chronicle, 8.12.1995
- T. G. Wagaw, op. cit. pp.87-88
- Ibid, p.88
46.Jewish Chronicle, 8.12.1995
- Barrie Shemesh, op. cit. p.235
- Jerusalem Report, 15.12.1999
The Middle East Book Review Vol 6 Nos 1&2 1997