Last week a retired Supreme Court Justice discussed the issue of mehadrin buses. In essence, Justice Dorner supported the right for the haredi community to have mehadrin buses, as long as alternative buses were available for people who do not want to ride on the mehadrin buses. As a method of pressuring the Ministry of Transportation to resolve the issue, Justice Dorner called upon the secular public, and everybody else who is against being forced to use mehadrin buses, to get on mehadrin buses and sit in the wrong seats. Women should sit in front, men in back, etc. She said this should be done by groups of people, as individuals would probably not have the strength to withstand the pressure of the people who will scream at them (or worse).

Dorner's call to action is a bit extreme, and the haredi press went to town on it vilifying her for her statements.

The truth is they really misread her, as in general she supported their right to separate transportation even though it goes against all human rights. All she wants is that wherever there is a "mehadrin" line, there should be an alternative as well for people who don't want the "mehadrin" rules.

So, the haredi press and forums all call her anti-haredi for her call to action.

Yet, I seem to recall that signs were plastered all over Jerusalem (and I think in Bnei Brak as well) about half a year ago, by the people running the ocmmittee dealing with the mehadrin buses, calling on haredim to put facts on the ground and whatever bus they get on they should sit in a "mehadrin" style - women in back and men in front. Even on buses that are not mehadrin and are not part of the attempts to make mehadrin.

So, it is ok for them to call on their public to "take over" other lines and implement policy with facts on the ground, yet when other people do the same exact thing, they are suddenly vilified as being anti-haredi and not as liberal as they purport to be.

In this week's Mishpacha newspaper (Hebrew edition - only the Hebrew edition has the newspaper section) there were a couple of interesting articles.

One of them was an interview with Rav Menachem Kenig - the Director of the Committee for Mehadrin in Eretz Yisrael. They deal with working out mehadrin bus lines and the like.

R' Kenig claims that when they started their work petitioning Egged to put in mehadrin bus lines, they had the support of the general Haredi public. He says over time they have lost much of that support. For that he blames the "kannoim" - the fanatics, extremists, zealots.

Sounds funny, doesn't it? You would think he is one of those, as his work is to separate the sexes on buses and we think of his goal as one of a kannai.

Yet, he says, his goal was to offer mehadrin buses to the religious/Haredi public. This would sort of shelter the average religious person from the general Israeli public. When the average haredi fellow rides a bus that is not mehadrin and goes through non-religious neighborhoods, his sensitivities are assaulted by decadence, immodesty and things this person would never see. The affect on such a person can be very detrimental to his spiritual growth.

Kenig says that his intentions in establishing mehadrin buses was to include family seating. The buses were never meant to be completely separate.

What then would make the buses "mehadrin" if there would not be separate seating? I would guess, as he does not say anything specifically addressing this point, that the general atmosphere would be more chareidi friendly with people dressed modestly, as the overwhelming majority of riders would be chareidim... Also, maybe there would be means seating in front and womens in back, for those traveling sans family.

The problem is when the kannaim get involved and say that is not good enough. Then they began forcing full separation of the sexes. That is when people stopped supporting the push for mehadrin buses. People do not want to sit separate like that. They want to sit with their families.
The most interesting part of it is that he says refraining from "family seating" is only a minhag chassidut (custom of extreme piety) and among many groups who are careful in every aspect of halacha that minhag is not kept and they are fine with family seating.

As an aside, I guess you can add "minhag chassidut" to my growing list of halachic terms that are ambiguous... I do not know what his source is that completely separate seating would be minhag chassidut.

Anyways, he also adds that, "We have no right to stand up and tell people what chumros (stringencies) to keep and which minhagei chassidut to keep. We simply want to fix a problematic situation for the chareidi public...."

Needless to say I was shocked when I read that. The perception is completely different. The perception, at least the one I have, is that they are trying to tell us what to keep. But it seems that that is not their goal, but the concept was hijacked by extremists who are ruining it for everyone, as they feel the moral validity to tell people what to do.

Maybe they need to change their methods to win back supprot of the chareidi public. If their goal is just to make it available and offer the "kosher" alternative to the public without being too imposing on people, that is something that could be successful and beneficial. But they need to find a way to keep the kannaim out of it. People get upset and reject things when they feel they are being told what to do. If R' Kenig realizes that and says he has no right to tell people what to do, he is already on the right path.

(BTW, as I am concluding the writing of this piece, I have decided to keep the other interesting article for a separate post - maybe tomorrow if I have time, as this one got longer than originally intended)

The issue of the operation of public transportation on Shabbos in Tel Aviv has really taken on a life of its own. I don't know if it will be possible to prevent it or to curb the momentum of this movement.

Some of the interesting points made in the discussion about the issue:

• On a radio program discussing the issue on Galei Tzahal, Avri Gilad (a local television and radio broadcaster) said he is opposed to turning Shabbos into just another day. He said that he, as a secular Jew, wants to enjoy a Shabbat atmosphere that does not include the diesel pollution of buses. He does not want it to be another day where all the stores are open and buses are running.
  
  Gilad also said that the push to operate the bus lines seems to be not initiated on its merits, but as a reaction, an act of revenge so to speak, for the recent spike in the need for mehadrin buses,  which he also calls a reaction of sorts.
  
  
• 
  Avishai Ben-Chaim, also a broadcaster who is a correspondent on haredim, who was talking with Gilad, said the issue isnt his but needs to remain completely an issue to be decided by the secular - they should fight about it and they should decide. Ben-Chaim said he hopes they decide against it, but the haredim need to undergo some introspection and realize that through Bet Shemesh and mehadrin buses, the operation of public transportation on Shabbos came about.
  Ben-Chaim added that this is specifically the fault of the mehadrin buses and whoever among the haredim say "why do the secular care how we live, they should just leave us alone and not interfere with how we travel" cannot come along now and say they have the right to interfere in how the secular live and travel on Shabbat.
  
  
• Mayor of Tel aviv Ron Huldai spoke on Menachem Toker's radio program about the issue. Huldai said "the general public in Israel wants public transportation on Shabbat. Judaism was always sensitive to the needs of the more needy people. Many people want to go on Shabbat to the beach or to visit relatives. if there would be a Sanhedrin today, it would find a way to permit public transportation on Shabbat... Anyways the streets are full of cars on Shabbat. Whoever can afford a car is out driving. There is nothing written in the Torah about "status quo" - as well, the mehadrin buses are also a breach of the status quo.
  
  
  
  In a different interview Huldai said that in Haifa public transportation has been operating on Shabbat for a long time and has never caused any problems.... He added that he is in favor of all the stores being closed on Shabbat, but he is in favor of the operation of public transportation. Many residents in Tel Aviv, Huldai said, need to travel to shul on Shabbat and they cannot because there is no transportation available. Currently they have to go by foot or by private car.
  
I find it interesting that he tries to justify the decision as if halachically, or from a Jewish perspective, it is ok to break desecrate Shabbos for these reasons.
• 
  In Tali Farkash's column in Ynet (Farkash is a haredi journalist), she explained that in her opinion the haredim should not mix into this discussion. Let the secular have their buses on Shabbos. Mixing in will only make the haredim look bad, as if they are trying to control the secular and how they live. Anyway the streets are full of cars and the stores are open, so the buses don't really add anything. Tel Aviv will never be a suburb of Beni Braq, so what is there to fight about - for Shabbos in Tel Aviv which is already not kept?
  
  I do not disagree with Farkash, though I think voicing a protest is also important. I would say perhaps political power should not be used to stop it, but some form of protest must be made, as this is a major issue.

The following Letter to the Editor in this past week's Hamodia struck my fancy..

On Mehadrin Buses

To the Editor:
I would like to recall a historical fact that can be checked out by anyone.: If you remember, a few years ago it was frightening to ride on buses in Eretz Yisrael. Suicide bombers would get onto buses packed with innocent people and blow themselves up, killing and maiming hundreds. Nothing could be done about them; the army was helpless.
Then it was decided to launch mehadrin buses. As soon as these chariots of kedusha started running, the suicide bombers stopped.
unfortunately, the Supreme Court came out against mehadrin buses. Whereas before, women could enter through the back doors of the bus, now they have to enter through the front door, making it necessary for them to pass through the men. At one point, I read in Hamodia that Rav Kav "readers" (like they have on trains) would be installed on buses so women could enter through the back, but this never came about. Why don't we insist on this?
Also, there are signs on every bus saying that one traveler cannot tell another one where to sit. I have been told that one can end up in jail even for politely asking people to move. But why should anyone have to be told to move in order for the bus to be modestly segregated? The mehadrin buses pass through "our" neighborhoods, and each individual should be looking out for the kedusha of Am Yisrael, concerned about protecting his family and neighbors.
How long does a bus ride take? Must couples sit together when it is compromising the security of everyone, including themselves? (You can always talk when you get home.)
Please, I beg you, men sit in your part of the bus and women sit in yours. The safety of our nation depends on this.
May we be zocheh - in the zechus of showing Hashem that we care about His Torah and His having asked us be kadosh - that the redeemer should come to Tzion in mercy, very quickly.
With Torah blessings,
Rav Shmuel Littmann

Rav Yuval Sherlo, the Rosh Yeshiva of the Hesder Yeshiva of Petach Tikva and a rising, though sometimes controversial, star in the National Religious Rabbinate weighed in with interesting thoughts on two topics.

1. On the topic of the recent geirus controversy - Rav Sherlo wrote a column in which he lays the blame completely on the National Religious public.He wrote that because the National Religious leadership removed itself from the public leadership, by declaring in advance that it would sit in the opposition and not join the Olmert government, it removed itself from being in position to lead rabbinicly. The decision was legitimate, but it has ramifications. By staying in the opposition, it means that its Rabbis would lose out the appointments to the Chief Rabbinate and as city Rabbis. the Haredim win those positions now because their parties are in the right positions.
   Also, the National Religious Rabbinate never held a serious discussion to come up with Halachic methods, that are acceptable lechatchila, for conversions, converts and how to deal with them. What is considered "acceptance of mitzvos", how much follow up there must be, how much ibvestigation must be conducted to reveal deception, and the like. Because they have not determined their positions on these matters, the National Religious public should be looking inward and should blame themselves. Until they came up with their own halachically acceptable decisions and positions, they cannot spend their time blaming others [i.e. the Haredim].
   
   Rav Sherlo says that the National Religious should leave the Haredim alone, not lay blame at their feet for the situation, not complain about the Haredim. Rather, they should be working to fix the problem. They should be formulating positions and working on their own plans. When the time comes, he says, "We will return and will take the responsibility for those Torah issues, and that will strengthen the Israeli nation in the ways of halacha.


2. Rav Sherlo was asked for a psak by a female correspondent how she hsould relate to the phenomenon of Mehadrin buses.
   She writes that the bus she takes to work is a mehadrin bus. It is not clear whether Egged has a right to make such a segregation, and the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the situation in the case pending before it. She writes that she personally has a problem with it. Her problem is two-fold:
   1. the idea of it is degrading to her and the extremism involved distrubs her.
   2. She is prone to motion sickness and sitting in the back, nearer to the engine, increases her discomfort.
   So she asks Rav Sherlo what his position on these buses is, does she have to respect the religious extremism of others and sit in the back even though it increases her discomfort, if the back of the bus is full but there are seats available in the front half - can she sit there, and is there a difference for a pregnant or older woman?
   Rav Sherlo responds that he belives there is great importance in keeping the public forum a place that is tzanua, not having immodest advertising signs up for example, and that we should live with tznius. But, Rav Sherlo writes, "I am against the mehadrin buses. These buses are mehadrin in shaming other people. in dealing with tznius in an immodest fashion, and more." Rav Sherlo continues that he thinks "that a person should not do it specifically, just to oppose it, and get on the bus in the front. One does not need to start a war over this, at this point. But if you are doing it not just to oppose - "Davka" - but for a purpose, such as your motion sickness, or when there are no available seats in the back, then you can sit wherever you want. And those who change things, they have the lower hand" .
   

Many are taking the words of Transportation Minister Yaakov Katz in support of unofficially mandating the mehadrin buses operation as a sign of success.

As I mentioned then, it is simply the statement of a position. It is not up to the Transportation Ministry to decide. It is up to the courts. Katz's opinion might have weight in the decision, but it alone is not a decision.

There is a feeling in the Haredi press that Katz's words are the final say. In this week's Eidah weekly newspaper, for example, their article on the issue states that the mehadrin buses have won the battle and those who oppose them have lost.

They will be disturbed to hear that in a meeting today in Supreme Court about the mehadrin bus situation, one of the judges on the panel responded to the government representative, after the rep stated the ministers position on the matter and that signs could be placed around telling people where it is recommended they sit, very sharply. he cynically asked if they could also put up signs telling people not to get violent if someone sits in the wrong area and if that would solve all the problems with the mehadrin buses....

While no decision has been made, it is way too early for anyone to celebrate (one way or the other) thinking themselves victorious. At least one judge on the panel seems to be against it...

I did not do my own investigation into this, nor confirmation, (am way too lazy for that right now) but am translating (mostly paraphrasing) something that was posted on the Hebrew Bet Shemesh board in the Bechadrei forums.

If you live in RBS/BS, you might have noticed the new brown buses driving around the city with the company name "Mehadrin B'Tnuah" across the side. Even if you are not from Bet Shemesh, the background of this might interest you.

So these new buses cater to the people who want mehadrin bus service - separate seating, no radio, payment is collected not by the driver but by someone else (thus getting around the problem of not being allowed to operate a bus service), etc.

The previous company employed by the kitzonim who have fought for mehadrin service and against Egged (even when they wanted to provide the mehadrin service) in the past was called "Movilei HaVradim" stopped working with this group after deciding it was no longer financially worthwhile, along with some other disputes. After a number of years they decided to call ti quits in this market and the kitzonim had to look for a new provider.

The only compnay that agreed to operate under the difficult conditions of the "mehadrinn" format was a company from Kiryat Gat called "Metailei Lachish", and they bought new buses for this project.

They agreed to change the name on their buses used for the "mehadrin" operation in Bet Shemesh to "Mehadrin L'Tnuah" because they are a company that does not keep Shabbos and the kitzonim operators could not allow the real name to be used and displayed publicly under their authority.

How does sitting separately yet at the same time supporting chillul shabbos make a bus "mehadrin"? Is it ok, according to them, to eat in a restaurant that is mechalel shabbos - can the restaurant still obtain a mehadrin hechsher? Is chillul shabbos not a problem when money is involved? Is the "ideal" of sitting separately so overwhelmingly important that it even trumps such basics as Shabbos?

My friends wife and 17 year old daughter went to a dentist in the Kiryah Haredi neighborhood in Bet Shemesh the other day. They finished and caught a #11 to return to RBS-A. The Superbus #11 route is a "mehadrin" line (As far as I know it is unofficial, because it is illegal, but it is recommended behavior for that community that benefits most from the 11, because they wish it to be so). So it is a "mehadrin" bus by custom.

As they entered through the front door and tried to pay the driver (and they were not the only women doing so), an 11 year old boy stood up and started screaming at them to get to the back of the bus.

This continued every few stops as females got on the bus. Finally after a while the bus driver told him to shut up, which didn't help.

So here is the result of being makpid on mehadrin buses - separate seating on buses. A chumra whose validity is questionable at best:
We have 11 year old boys telling 40 year old women what to do, just because they are male.

However, there is a revenge from the women against Superbus. Both my friends wife and daughter said that of the women who entered through the rear, most did not pay. Some who had an older male child with them did, as they sent their child with the money or card to the driver. Whether due to worries of, G-d forbid, entering the "men's" section, just the hassle of going up front, or an intentional response to being in the back, my friend's wife and daughter said that over 50% didn't pay. Add in the children with them and the numbers are much higher.

So not only do we have an unofficial mehadrin line where 11 year olds rule over the women, but the bus company gets to absorb the cost of 40% of their passengers riding for free.

Egged has a similar situation, but they deal with it differently - they were not going to allow 40%-50% of passengers not pay.... On the 418 line, another mehadrin line by custom, after the bus has left the charedi neighborhoods the driver sometimes pulls off to the side of the road, parks the bus, then goes to the back of the bus with his puncher and change machine and processed payment for all the women and their children in the back. On other occasions one of the men in the front volunteer to do the same, then take the driver's punch and change and go do so (why is he allowed to do this on a mehadrin bus??). Clearly this wouldn't work on a local bus - perhaps Superbus should simply run a mens-only and womens-only #11 buses for communities that want mehadrin, but in a mixed community I cannot see that working.

Regarding the 11 year old, if any of us finds ourselves on a bus with such a situation, we are obligated to stand up to it and stop it. Otherwise this is only going to get worse.

Some people are just pious idiots who would teach children to not respect elders - an aveira in the Torah - a d'oraisa- in the name of a chumra on top of a chumra.

A few people, between Thursday and Shabbos, have asked me what I thought about the mehadrin bus situation in Jerusalem that led to a protest in Meah She'arim and a bus stoning.

Some background: Egged has the sole license for bus routes in Jerusalem, along with most of Israel, giving them virtually a monopoly. The haredim want a certain line to the kotel to be run according to their guidelines for a mehadrin line - men in front, women in back, and some way to arrange payment, or at least bus card clickers, in the back for the women. Egged refused, so the haredi groups involved started their own line.

They started a free line to the kotel, hoping this would avoid their need to get a license. The financial backing for this is strange, as they have collected donations of $100 (per month?) from each of 1000 newly married young couples. Don't forget - these are people living on welfare and minimal kollel stipends. People are going door to door collecting for newlyweds in these communities because they have no money to live on. Yet they have money to donate so other people can ride the bus for free. But if that is what they want to spend their money on, I guess they have that right.

Egged protested to the Transportation Ministry who immediately forced the free line to stop running. The people did not like that - either provide us with our needs, or let us provide them for ourselves. They staged a protest rally in Meah She'arim that turned violent when an Egged bus showed up driving its route. They started stoning it, causing some damage, yada yada yada.

My feeling is that Egged should be considerate of its customers. If they have a community that wants, and considers it a need, mehadrin buses, they should provide it for that community. As long as they also provide regular buses for people who don't want the special line. They obviously don't have to, but good business would suggest that they should.

In the meantime, regardless of Egged's customer service, creating an alternate bus company is illegal. So like it or not, nobody can do it. While it can't hurt to try, Egged successfully got it canceled.

The thing is, whether or not Egged is right for not creating a new mehadrin line (whose legal status is still questionable at this point), whether or not they are wrong for not heeding the requests/demands of a community under their service provision, that does not justify violence. You want a new bus line, go ahead and try to convince Egged of the need, the financial viability, whatever. Work with them, persuade them etc. Throwing rocks at people and buses is not an acceptable method.

Aside from physical damage to buses that is going to cost somebody money to fix (who gave anybody a hetter to damage Egged property?), when rocks are thrown people can also get hurt. No desire, or justification, for a mehadrin line can justify that.

The level of "bus fare avoidance" on the mehadrin lines is in the news again.

The supporters of the mehadrin bus lines every now and again publish advertisements reminding, or encouraging, riders to be sure to pay the bus fare even when they get on at the back of the bus. There are regular complaints about the high percentage of riders who use the cover of the mehadrin bus line honor system to ride without paying. At a transportation committee meeting in the Knesset two years ago the director of Superbus claimed that on mehadrin bus lines 30% do not pay. While that number seems impossibly high to me, that is what Balilius claimed at the time.

In this past week's Chadash newspaper, the issue came up again. Superbus drivers regularly catch people who did not pay. They decided to make an example out of someone they repeatedly have caught not paying when getting on the bus. They figure, they say, that they have been screaming until they are blue in the face to no avail, and if they now make an example of someone it will go a long way to ensuring riders pay.

How are they making an example of one rider?

Superbus is suing a female passenger that did not pay when she got on the bus using the back door. Superbus has installed "smart card readers" next to the back door for the "mehadrin" buses and by the honor system riders boarding in the back are meant to swipe their card. The article says they plan on suing for thousands to tens of thousands of shekels for damages.

Superbus responded, when asked, saying that they spent a lot of money installing systems to make it possible, all out of desire to respect the wishes of the community that wanted it, while trusting that the riders in the haredi community would be careful to pay. After investing a lot of money in machines that are easy to use, instead of making it easier for everyone involved, it has become a source of a breach in the system, allowing people to not pay and causing them a lot of loss of fees and has become a tremendous bother for them.

Superbus has admitted that the lawsuit being filed is in order to teach a lesson so that others will begin paying and not be prone to such suits of their own. Riding without paying is illegal and each time it is done it is subject to a fine worth thousands of shekels. Suing one person, they say, will hopefully cause others to decide to start paying for their rides.

Who would have ever thought that riding with separate seating was more important than theft? With the knowledge that this has been going on for years and all their encouragement to pay, a significant enough percentage of people (whatever the actual percentage is, it is clearly significant enough) still do not, the rabbonim and askanim should simply cancel the mehadrin lines. They should say that enabling theft is not an acceptable byproduct of sitting with gender-segregation, and if people are going to continue not paying for their rides they will make everyone get on in the front of the bus and pay the driver directly.

We don't blow shofar when Rosh Hashana falls out on Shabbos out of concern of one ignorant fellow that might carry the shofar in a place he isnt allowed to. We have many takanos in our religion to prevent people from getting anywhere near sinning inadvertently, or to prevent temptation of sin. Here we have a situation that is causing the temptation of theft - if theft is rampant on these buses, the mehadrin status should be cancelled by the rabbonim who have backed them until now.

------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------

In this latest installment of updates in the gender-segregation fight, also known as the removal of women from the public sphere fight (we really have to come up with a good general name for this - ideas anyone?) we have some interesting issues:

• Aryeh Deri spoke up recently criticizing the "mehadrin bus movement". He said, in addition to other things, that a shul is a place where men cannot sit beside women, due to the holiness of the place. But in a bus? We have turned the bus into a shul! Aryeh should watch his comparisons, as I have been on plenty of buses and trains that were literally turned into shuls with minyanim and people davening. 
• The voting in Geula for the local council was a disaster. Kikar reports that at a certain point, after the mayor and other reps left the site, the sikrikim showed up and vandalized the entire place, screaming at the women for destroying the fences of tzniyus. They also broke into the ballot room and destroyed the box containing the ballots already voted. Various haredi municipal reps criticized the Iryah (themselves as well) for not being sensitive to the situation and for not preparing properly in advance. 
• Rav Elyashiv was widely quoted the other day by one of his askanim/bneibayit/handlers, and the quote was picked up by the national press pretty quickly, saying that while mehadrin buses are fine, it is not an issue to be forced on anyone and is not something that should be pushed for in the public domain. I didn't quote it because I was suspicious the entire story was not yet out, and more has come out now, and it is interesting enough to mention. After the initial quote made the waves it made, another handler spoke out denying Rav Elyashiv's original quote, saying Rav Elyashiv
  
  supports the mehadrin bus lines, and people should use it whenever possible. And then, sure enough, another one of Rav Elyashivs askanim spoke up denying the denial, saying that rav Elyashiv has said many times that he supports the idea of mehadrin, but there is a difference between a good idea and forcing it on the public. He says Rav Elyashiv supports private bus lines that would be mehadrin, and when such lines exist people should use those rather than the public bus lines. However, the mehadrin should not be forced into the public bus lines. I see the main story here as being that once again nobody knows what the gadol said because each handler quotes something exactly the opposite of the other.
• A group has arranged an event for January 1, 2012 at which hundreds, or thousands depending on how many sign up, of volunteers will show up in Jerusalem to the various bus lines that have been designated as mehadrin, unofficially of course, and will ride the bus provoking responses. So far 500 volunteers have signed up. Clearly they did not read the item in the JPost the other day in which a woman told her tale of spending weeks riding a mehadrin bus while sitting in front and encountering no harassment or violence.

I would be remiss if I did not write about the recent court decision regarding mehadrin bus lines, even though it happened when I was offline on Thursday.

The courts finally came to a decision, after a long period of deliberations and listening to arguments, regarding the legality of mehadrin bus lines. The decision is that mehadrin bus lines can continue to operate as a voluntary arrangement. Egged (or other bus companies) will have to post signs in the relevant buses stating that the bus is mehadrin and men are requested to sit in front and women in back, and that nobody can be The Mechitza: Maintaining the Sanctity of the Synagogueforced to do so. The  ministry will then allow a trial basis for 30 days to ensure that there is no coercion taking place and things are operating well. if all goes well, they will finalize the decision and make it a permanent arrangement.

What's funny is that every side is seeing this as a victory, which I guess is good. The kannoi-haredi community that pushed this sees it as a validation that the State supports their desire to have separation. The opponents see it as a victory that the courts said it is voluntary and if not it will be canceled.

What is a shame is that this was presented as a fight between haredi and conservative movements. Many haredim do not support this arrangement, but with the fight being waged by the Conservative Moevment, they have no choice but to support the separation. There was an article the other day I saw about the haredi reps having said "off the record" that despite the victory in court they regret that this battle was brought public and fought, as it only harms the interests of the haredi community and that is why they kept a  very low profile and never spoke about it publicly, and only certain reps assisted on it.

An issue raised was that women, even secular, support separation because in times of overcrowding buses there is very inappropriate contact between genders, due to the crowds. That really is a problem, but the solution should have been limiting (and there are limits already in place, they just need to be reinforced) how many people can be on a bus and not let it get so crowded that people are smashed up against each other. Even without the groping and touching, that type of mass crowding should not be allowed to happen. It is dangerous and disgusting, even when men are rubbing up against men, with no women in the picture.

What I see from this case is that the court took the easy way out. Everybody feels like a winner, but no real decision was made. On any bus in the country nobody is telling anybody where to sit. If women wish to sit in the back, nobody is stopping them. To not allow mehadirn bus lines, what would the courts have said - women are not allowed to sit in the back of the bus? People can sit where they want, and if a community commonly gets on the buses and the men go to the front and women to the back, they can sit where they want, and they have always been able to.

With the system voluntary alone, if they sit separately and I get on the bus I can choose to sit in the front or the back, depending on wherever I feel like sitting, and nobody can tell me otherwise, just like the courts cannot tell the women to sit in the front.

To support mehadrin bus lines, they would have had to allow a certain level of "coercion", which they did not do. To oppose mehadrin they would have had to say women must sit in the front with men and men in back with women, which is ridiculous. Their decision is basically a no-decision allowing people to choose where to sit, just like on any other bus in the country.

There have been a number or protests recently against the mehadrin bus arrangements. The court has recently given the State 60 days to respond regarding why they have not recommended how to stop the violence on the bus system and what their plans are for the future if it would be allowed, as per the recommendation of the Ministry of Transportation.

In a protest against the mehadrin buses, in which they hung signs on mehadrin buses in various areas around the country, one of the organizers of the protest said something very interesting. he said, "The separate lines exist in many cities around the country and between many cities, and not just within haredi population centers. We are protesting the statement of the Minister of Transportation Katz and Egged ignoring the degrading treatment of women that are sent to the back of the bus - sometimes with the use of violence, both verbal and physical. The mehadrin bus lines are serving the general mixed public and not just the Haredi public, and that separation is being forced upon the general public." (source: Ynet)

If he is to believed, it sounds like even those opposed to it are really ok as long as it is limited to internally within a specific haredi community. The problem is when it spreads out to areas that are more mixed and then the general public is affected.

In a new campaign, an organization is trying to get haredi women to call in, anonymously I presume, and "report" incidents in which they felt discriminated against, mostly on the buses but also in any other place - shuls, kotel, mikvas, etc. (source: NRG, Ynet, Kikar)

What they don't get is that no matter how opposed a haredi person is to such things like mehadrin buses, and I think most "normal", moderate, haredim are (not including the Mea Shearim type and some hassidic groups) against the mehadrin buses (no scientific research to back this assumption, just based on my perception of articles read and forums participated in), they will generally not participate in such a campaign.

There might be a few exceptions, and a few women who will call the hotline and "report" incidents, but the overwhelming majority will not.

Haredim will not take part in a secular, or Reform movement, attack against haredim, even if they too are opposed to the subject of the attack and technically on the same side as the secular. haredim keep the fight in the community and consider it abhorrent to join forces like that. They will swallow their pride and prefer to remain submissive and discriminated against, rather than participate in a fight on the side of the secular against haredim.

So I hope they are not expecting much of a response, and not basing their position on the idea that so many women will call their hotline as proof of discrimination.

translation: No entry for dogs or policemen, or Egged buses #'s 417 and 418.

Background: Today, the city municipality decided it was time to remove signs it deemedto be illegal. Many stores have [been pressured to] put up signs declaring the neighborhood as chareidi and people coming to shop in the neighborhood should dress accordingly...

These signs were fairly large and no store had received a license to put them up. The Irya has let it slide for some time, but recently decided to remove them. Today was that day.

In RBS A they removed the signs with only slight altercations. After about 15 minutes the whole show was over (so I am told).

In RBS B there were riots, and they have been going no into the night. The residents have been fighting with the police, and blocking the roads, and throwing bricks at cars and buses, and overturning garbage cans, etc...

the reference on the above sign to not letting Egged in is a long standing fight the residents have with Egged regarding Mehadrin buses. I never really understood that fight. First they were upset that Egged did not provide them with a mehadrin bus line. Then when Egged converted the 418 line to mehadrin, the residents were upset that Egged did provide a mehadrin line because it put the local macher running a private line out of business. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

There are lots more pictures out there, some of which can be seen here..

The following pashkevil was distributed around much of BS/RBS last night. It is an old flyer that has now been rehashed. I guess the issues never change, as they have all these old flyers they just keep re-using....


It is prohibited to use Egged bus services because we have, in BS, mehadrin buses [RG: aren't the mehadrin buses run by Egged?]. By using Egged, one is actively harming the kosher bus services. one who puts efforts and prayers towards the success of the kosher lines is mezake the rabbim, etc...
Signed by Ravs Kopshitz and Rottenberg

Ynet (Hebrew) is reporting in the name of the Yated Ne'eman (which I have not yet seen) that the "Rabbinic Committee for Transportation" has found a new way to advance its desire to increase the mehadrin bus lines.

That is, they are instructing Bais Yaakov girls that need to travel on non-mehadrin lines, that they should still be careful to only sit in the back of the bus. By doing this, they say, they will turn non-kosher bus lines into kosher ones.

the idea is by creating facts on the ground, by making it de facto mehadrin, Egged will find it easier to speed up the process and declare those lines mehadrin.

In the letter to the Bais Yaakovs, the committee writes, "Those girls that are careful in tznius will find this a great merit, and will urge their friends as well to sit in the back of the bus. By guarding the rules of holiness and tznius, we will merit the Divine Presence with health, satisfaction, sustenance and fortune."

Furthermore, with the Jerusalem Light Rail project finishing soon, the Haredi community has set it eyes on the next project - working to make the light rail mehadrin.

They say that many bus lines to and from frum neighborhoods will be cancelled because of the light rail. Many of the cancelled bus lines will be mehadrin lines. Another problem is that because of the light rail, many bus lines will be altered, causing many bus lines to be diverted to new routes going through Geula and Mea Shearim neighborhoods. That means all these non-mehadrin lines will go through Geula, and bring many secular people through the neighborhood. This will be a "spiritual destruction of the neighborhood", they say.

On the other hand, instead of looking at it as destruction of their ways, they could look at it as an opportunity to make a Kiddush Hashem on people they would otherwise never have come in contact with.

I found a copy of the pashkevil:

Actually I do not know if the decision will be today, but the court hearing for the status of the mehadrin bus lines is going to be today.

To remind you, after a number of instances in which violence was used to "enforce" the status of mehadrin buses, sometimes it was used even on non-mehadrin lines, a group of women led by Naomi Ragen and Miriam Shear filed suit to declare the mehadrin bus lines illegal as being discriminatory and promoting inequality among the sexes.

The hearing is set for today. I think they will come to a settlement of some sort, as the state will do everything in its power to not get involved in what many will call anti-religious activities, by canceling all mehadrin lines, which is really the only legal decision the courts can take.

If they get canceled, I will shed no tears. I have no problem with communities that so desire to establish such lines. The problem is when they over step their boundaries and try to force it on other people. They used violence and in the process shot themselves in the foot. So, they made their beds and now might have to end up sleeping in them.

We are waiting to see what the courts do...

While this is not yet a final legal decision, it could have a lot of weight in influencing the decision that should be forthcoming in a month or so.

Minister of Transportation Yaakov Katz announced that his position is that Israel will allow mehadrin bus lines to continue to function, but with no ability to enforce. It would have to be completely voluntary. They should be able to hang signs explaining the mehadrin aspect of the bus, but if a rider would choose to not listen, they would have to live with it. And while it could be accepted unofficially, it cannot be officially mandated.

The courts might accept this sort of compromise position, but it is not definite. While such a compromise might be acceptable to the government, the courts might still say they cannot allow an illegal policy on public bus lines. It is clearly illegal, even according to the government, as they said they cannot mandate officially.

Another month or so and we should have the final decision by the courts.

A group of chilonim are upset at Minister Katz. They say he is a traitor to the secular cause, he has sold them out to pander to a minority of haredim, etc. Katz has no obligation to support a secular viewpoint in every decision and I don't believe that is a factor here. I am not in favor of mehadrin buses, but that does not obligate Katz one way or the other. As long as alternatives are available for those who do not want the mehadrin lines, such a compromise can be acceptable for those who do want it.

The real problem is the issue of enforcement. Katz said there is no way mehadrin guidelines can be enforced. If a woman sits in front or a man sits in back, the other passengers have to sit quietly and not make the rider move. We all know that is unlikely to happen. there are hotheads and generally nobody puts them in their place. So even if most of the time people might be akin to ignoring the occasional transgression, there will be instances where some try to force it on others.
Katz should say that if some try to force it violently on others, the whole arrangement will be canceled and they will lose his support.

The [haredi] newspaper HaMevaser is reporting, as quoted on BHOL, that Justice Elyakim Rubinstein has decided to reject the petition of the "Reform" against Egged mehadrin bus lines.

The decision to reject the appeal is based on the Ministry of Transportation saying that these arrangements are really informal - nobody (officially) tells anybody where to sit, and people by their own choice decide to sit with men in front and women in the back. Rubinestein accepted this claim and therefore decided to reject the petition.

I think Rubinstein made a decent decision. If a community wants to live a certain lifestyle, no matter how much I disagree with it, they should be able to. They want buses like that, let them have buses like that. I don't want them to force me to live according to their lifestyle, but I have no problem with them living according to their lifestyle. They should be allowed to, just like anybody else is.

The problem is, and I do not know if Justice Rubinstein addressed this in his decision (it does not say so in the brief article) is what to do when it is not seating according to the people's will - meaning if someone sits in the wrong seat what happens? Rubinstein accepted the claim that it is not official and is not enforced by the ministry. So if a woman were to sit in the front, technically nobody should be able to tell her to move - it is a willful decision to sit in the back and not official arrangements. So, if this is left vague, it will leave a lot of room for fighting - they will claim it is mehadrin and push women to the back even against their will, and the women (and their husbands sitting with them) will say it is only an unofficial arrangement and they cannot be forced to move.

Leaving this vague based on such a claim by the MOT is leaving it open for future friction.

In a similar note, Egged made a smart move by altering the arrangements on another bus line. The bus from Maale Adumim to Jerusalem used to make local stops in Jerusalem dropping off passengers, and would also allow passengers to get on the bus and ride locally.

This led to some trouble, as the bus made a number of stops on Bar Ilan street - a haredi stronghold. It seems they would get on the bus and start telling passengers, from the RZ community of Maale Adumim who had been on the bus in their seats form the beginning of the ride, to move to the back or that they should dress more covered up etc. This caused friction, and Egged and the MOT received a number of complaints about it.

The decision was to not allow passengers to get on in Jerusalem and treat the route like a local route. This means those haredi passengers would no longer be using this bus and causing friction with the original passengers.

It is situations like this that we will see more and more of now that Justice Rubinstein made his decision. I have no problem with them having separate buses in their community and on their routes. If that is how they want to live, who am I to tell them otherwise? But when they start telling other people, that is where the problems begin.