Seperate burial coming to Bet Shemesh

A recent debate in the local Bet Shemesh press has been the issue of the dead. That would be, where to bury them.

The local BS cemetery has been around for a long time. Since the beginning of Bet Shemesh. All local residents automatically get designated a plot upon death in the BS cemetery. if you want a specific plot, you have to pay extra, and that includes if you wish to reserve the spot next to your plot for your spouse, or if you want to be buried in a certain area, etc. if you don't want to take the chance of where you might be buried, you might purchase a plot in a different cemetery in the area of your choosing.

City Councilman Shmuel Greenberg (UTJ) recently proposed the concept of establishing either a separate section in the BS cemetery for those who are shomer shabbos, or establishing a new cemetery for shomrei shabbos.

Greenberg's proposal was not well received by all. It started a battle in the local press. Without dealing directly with the issue, David Louk, perhaps the most widely read columnist in Bet Shemesh who writes for the Tmura newspaper, wrote about how the haredi have come and divided the city and have now proposed a divisie proposal. now not only in life do we have to be seperate but also in death. He described how the haredim are the least unified of all people, with each sub-group requiring their own schools, styles of dress, etc. They come to a city that was unified and peaceful and have divided it in life and now try to divide us in death as well.

Another point I remember from the column was that until now none of the rabbonim of Bet Shemesh have ever found it necessary to work to designating seperate burial for shomrei shabbos, so what right does someone have to come to the city and push such an agenda where previous great rabbis did not deem it necessary. One more point was where will it end? Who will decide who is shomer shabbat [enough] and who is not? After shmirat shabbat, they will then find other ways to seperate even further....

Shmuel Peppenheim wrote a response this week in the Chadash (haredi) in which he spent something like 2000 words making just two points. 1. That the halacha mandates it. 2. "Unity" or "peace" is not the ultimate goal. Bringing honor to hashem's name is, and peace/unity is one method of acheiving that, but not the only method - sometimes disagreement is necessary as well.

The truth is that in this whole debate it is highly likely Greenberg is right and perhaps a seperate section should be designated for shomrei shabbos. the halacha and our tradion both mandate it. If you look in any of the large cities in Israel, there will be sections in the cemetary for shomrei shabbos (along with sometimes further distinctions as well). As well, I agree with Peppenheim that "unity" does not trump everything else. If something is being done just for the sake of unity, but is not correct, it should be corrected.

Is it absolutely necessary? Probably not. Does halacha absolutely require it? no. Does the halacha prefer it and mandate it? yes.

Perhaps Greenberg should have proposed it differently. Maybe he should have waited longer so as not to give the impression he is trying to immiediately turn the city around against the old-timers. Perhaps there are other ways he could have broached this subject. But at the end of the day there is room for this proposal, whether previous rabbis pushed it or not.