On Thursday, 21 October 1976, Tamás Lőwy, a student at the rabbinical seminary, let out a yawn. This in itself would not have been a severe issue, but the involuntary mouth movement happened during a social studies class taught by Chief Rabbi László Salgó. The topic of the lesson was the Congress of the Patriotic People’s Front and the resolutions of the latest session of the National Assembly. Upon seeing the yawn, Salgó remarked: ‘I am very sorry that I cannot make the class interesting enough for Mr Lőwy.’ The student attempted to respond, but Salgó sternly silenced him; at that point, Lőwy stood up and left the room. We know all this because, following the incident, Salgó wrote a letter to the leadership of the strongly pro-Communist MIOK (Magyar Izraeliták Országos Képviselete, National Representation of Hungarian Israelites), complaining about the insult he had suffered.[1]
According to a letter written five days later, the situation quickly escalated and drew in the emblematic director of the Rabbinical Seminary, Sándor Scheiber. According to Salgó: ‘I wrote a written report about the above to the director of the Institute. Since I received no response, on the morning of 26 this month, in the office of the Institute, in the presence of Chief Rabbi Dr József Schweitzer and secretary Mrs László Kátai, I said to the director: “I wrote you a letter about what happened during the class, but I received no response.” To this, he replied: “It is better not to deal with the matter because then we would also have to address the statements you made during the class.” To this, I responded: “I always take responsibility for my actions and words, but it seems that you no longer consider me worthy of holding a teaching position, so I will leave and no longer teach.”’ In light of the incident, the leadership of MIOK—which was, during the transitional period between the death of Géza Seifert and the election of Imre Héber, represented by Secretary-General Dezső Bárdi and Vice President Imre Kulcsár—turned to Scheiber, requesting in writing that he inform them of the status of the matter within two days.
Here, it is worth taking a brief look at Bárdi’s background. Born in 1922 under the name Bleier, he was conscripted into forced labour service during World War II. From 1946, he served as the chief accountant of the Budapest Israelite Congregation (BIH) and later of the MIOK, before becoming the Secretary-General of MIOK-BIH on 6 June 1971. He was a trusted comrade, receiving the Peace Movement Honorary Badge from the Communist National Peace Council in 1975, followed by the Gold Medal of the Order of Labour of the Hungarian People’s Republic. According to recollections, he was an unpleasant figure—a dog breeder in private who typically communicated with MIOK employees by shouting. His obituary states that he passed away in December 1997. His persona became inseparable from the atmosphere—and tone—that prevailed in the Budapest Jewish community during the Kádár-era, a glimpse of which is provided below.[2]
‘Dr Sándor Scheiber stated that he would not go to the presidency, nor would he write a letter’
A note prepared at MIOK on 26 October indicates that Bárdi called Scheiber on the phone, who, during an irritated conversation, told the Secretary-General that what had happened was an internal matter of the Rabbinical Seminary and did not concern the leadership of MIOK. ‘Dr Sándor Scheiber stated that he would not go to the presidency, nor would he write a letter, and that Dr László Salgó should apologize to him unconditionally…Since this did not happen, on Wednesday, 27 October, Vice President Dr László Harsányi called Dr Scheiber at 10am, who again refused to come to the MIOK presidency to clarify the matter.’ Finally, Harsányi and Bárdi went to Scheiber’s apartment. There, the director stated that if the leadership of MIOK ‘wants something from him, the presidency is very welcome at the Rabbinical Seminary, but the MIOK presidency cannot interfere in the matters; it has nothing to do with them because the events were internal matters of the Institute.’ He also mentioned that he had not gone to Síp Street at the invitation of the former MIOK presidents, the late Endre Sós and the late Géza Seifert, either, so why would he go at the request of this presidency?
To interpret the above, it is essential to understand that Sós and Seifert had previously been highly influential presidents of MIOK, as were Salgó and Bárdi, who were also closely tied to the Communist regime. To refuse their will in such a tone was a bold move on Scheiber’s part. Apparently, only Scheiber’s wife Lívia Bernáth was more determined than him in this matter. According to a lengthy, denouncing letter Bárdi wrote to the Communist State Bureau of Church Affairs (ÁEH): ‘On 28 October, Thursday at 3:20pm, Dr Scheiber’s wife called me on the phone, expressing a desire to speak with me.’ Bárdi accepted the meeting, which took place that same day. There, Mrs Scheiber informed him that she was aware of the conflict between her husband and Salgó and tried to intervene. Bárdi insisted that ‘Scheiber appear before the MIOK presidency to clarify the matter’. She indicated that her husband’s health was poor, and therefore, she requested that he not be required to stand before the MIOK presidency lest he become too agitated.
According to Bárdi: ‘I told her that, even considering all the circumstances she presented, this is completely out of the question. Regardless of the merits of the issue, any leader or institution of MIOK is required to appear in response to the summons of the MIOK presidency, even if he finds it insulting and is upset as a result. Of course, the appearance—I said—does not affect the substance of the matter. Dr Sándor Scheiber can say whatever he wants at the presidency, as everyone is entitled to express their opinion, but I am not willing to accept that he refuses the invitation extended by Dr László Harsányi and me personally. As long as I and the members of the presidency are in our positions, we are the bosses, and he is obliged to comply fully with our orders.’
Scheiber’s wife also mentioned that Bárdi is nine years younger than Scheiber and that this is something her husband resents. ‘I told her that nowhere in the world, in no country, is the boss’s age more important than his position because by virtue of his position, he is the boss, and not because of his age. This cannot offend Dr Sándor Scheiber, just as it does not offend many other hundreds of millions of people around the world.’ According to Bárdi’s letter, he responded to her further arguments in this way: ‘I told her that I may be a completely stupid and limited person, without any judgment, but as long as I am in my position and am the MIOK Secretary General, Dr Sándor Scheiber is obliged to fulfil my requests, wishes, and even my orders—of course, also the requests, wishes, and even orders of the other members of the presidency—and to carry them out.’
They then turned to the conflict with Rabbi Salgó. According to Bárdi, Scheiber’s wife stated that her husband’s issue with Salgó was that the latter once declared: ‘There is no patriotic education taking place at the Rabbinical Seminary.’ In response, Bárdi told Scheiber’s wife that the two issues—Tamás Lőwy’s behaviour towards Salgó and Salgó’s statement about the Seminary—were not connected. Bárdi explained that it was Scheiber’s ‘duty’ to ensure that Lőwy apologizes to Salgó. The conversation then took a different direction: Scheiber’s wife raised the question of why the introduction of gas heating at the Seminary was progressing so slowly, to which Bárdi defended himself by saying that he could show the letters he had written to the Technical Department about the issue, but otherwise, ‘I believe that, apart from fulfilling Dr Sándor Scheiber’s wishes, I have other responsibilities (too).’
‘Even at that time, there were some who stood up for themselves against the regime’s functionaries’
‘Mrs Sándor Scheiber then repeatedly stated that her husband should not have to come to Síp Street 12 [the MIOK seat house] and that I, along with the members of the presidency, should give up on this, and in the matter of Lőwy, the letter sent by her husband to Dr Salgó László today should be considered as the matter concluded. I responded with a very firm NO, stating that Dr Scheiber’s appearance before the presidency and the conclusion of the matter there, in our conviction, is in Dr Scheiber’s paramount interest, and I stated that I am willing to put my word on this conviction.’ Following this, as Bárdi admitted: ‘we had a completely pointless argument about whether Dr Sándor Scheiber or I was sicker and which of us was harmed more by the excitement.’
The matter ultimately came to a less-than-cathartic conclusion: on 28 October the leadership of the MIOK discussed the issue, and the opinion was formed that ‘Dr Sándor Scheiber will consider this (Bárdi’s demands) as coercion; he will resign from his position, as it does not serve the interests of Hungarian Jewry.’ By this time Salgó had already withdrawn his threats, and Scheiber communicated to the MIOK leadership in a short message that ‘Tamás Lőwy, the rabbinical candidate, this morning apologized to Dr László Salgó, the Chief Rabbi and teacher at the Rabbinical Seminary, and this was acknowledged and accepted by his teacher. The matter can, therefore, be considered concluded.’
Lőwy was finally ordained on 18 February 1979 and later served as a rabbi in Debrecen and then in the Hegedűs Gyula Street Synagogue. He left for America in September 2013. The above story not only demonstrates how the communist dictatorship of the Kádár regime could function without the use of force but also that even at that time, there were some who stood up for themselves against the regime’s functionaries.
[1] For Salgó’s letter and all other quotes, see, unless marked otherwise: Magyar Nemzeti Levéltár Országos Levéltára (MNL OL), XIX-A-21-c, 89, box.
[2] MNL OL XIX. A.21.a, ÁEH Presidential papers, 68, box. M-11-1/1982. See also: Naftali Kraus, Az áldozat visszatér…, Bp, PolgART, 2002, 79.; and Népszabadság, 23 Dec 1997.
Related articles:
