A.
There is not a single Israeli who does not know about the great charity work "Yad Sarah." We said Israeli, and not necessarily Jewish, since we know the great empire that includes over a hundred branches that Uri Lupoliansky founded with his ten fingers - from the "Silwan" neighborhood in East Jerusalem to Majdal Shams, which borders Syria. Even today, when the "Gamachim" gimmick is gaining momentum and every third house has an Optica Gamachim and a Lost Children Gamachim, "Yad Sarah" still seems like a real empire.
Compare to yourself, then, what Yad Sarah was like a decade ago and a half ago. Not only human beings, but also government hospitals are managed budget-wise according to the equipment available at Yad Sarah. Hospitals officially send patients who depend on technological means home, according to the inventory available in Yad Sarah's warehouses. Everyone knows that there is no point in purchasing any medical device when its use is temporary. That is precisely why Yad Sarah was established, for the needs of ordinary people who need inaccessible medical equipment. Certainly not for the future livelihood of Uri Lupoliansky.
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
on.
As a resident of Jerusalem, I have the opportunity to pass more than once on the road leading to Beit Vegan. The magnificent 'Holyland' towers, towering above the head and visible from the slopes of the Gilo neighborhood, have always seemed to me to be the crowning glory of progress and the splendor of Israeli creation. Four huge buildings built as one piece with masterful bridges connecting one building to the next, are certainly an extraordinary architectural creation. With every glance, I would be satisfied with whether I was obligated to some kind of blessing said over works of art. All this until about five years ago, when the 'Holyland affair' exploded with a great noise.
The newspaper headlines about "monstrous construction in exchange for bribes" slowly made me drift with the tide, and loathe, quite literally, the rough stones that cut through the landscape of Jerusalem. And let's not get it wrong, I am not fickle (at least formally) and I do not change my opinions once a week. But the words and the words and the words that were said in those days are what instilled in my mind the fact that I am probably not "a great connoisseur of art." [For those who have difficulty understanding, I recommend waiting a little and keeping deep in your heart your current feeling that the "Bridge of the Wires" is the glory of Israeli architectural creation. Wait a little, until the next episode.]
third.
Do you know the famous Yad Sara building in the capital? Opposite Shaarei Tzedek Hospital is the main building of the Agudat HaChesed. From there, between a light rail station and morning traffic jams, hundreds of people leave every day with one medical device or another in their hands that was given to them free of charge and without any compensation. Just like that. I mean, not really just like that, there is real charity here. And yet if you ask, if there is no flour, there is no Torah, and if there is no money, there is no building? The answer is clear, dozens of people are raised from among the people - some of whom have been helped by Yad Sara and some may be helped in the future - who have been fortunate enough to be among the givers and not among the recipients, they are the ones who raise their donations, some more and some even more, for the purpose of maintaining this great enterprise.
D.
And what about Holyland and Yad Sara? So, this week, two former Jerusalem mayors - Ehud Olmert and Uri Lupoliansky - were convicted of accepting bribes in exchange for granting permits to contractors for construction that was disproportionate and unconstitutional in the Holyland project. While the former is convicted of siphoning money directly into his own pockets, Lupoliansky is accused, note this, of accepting excess donations for Yad Sara.
I am not a judge and I do not pretend to understand the laws of the Gentiles. And yet, please allow me to wonder and complicate a simple question. Let's assume that a mayor did indeed permit a contractor to build a building that was disproportionate, but in no way took anything in return for the permit. Would the approving mayor then also be accused of bribery? Apparently not. At most, with creativity. So where does the problem begin then? Of course, with consideration. "Regard" is the dirty word in the whole story.
the.
Now, can I ask one last, small, innocent question? What if, in exchange for the permit, the mayor were to receive an old woman from Dimona or the elderly mother of a respected judge, necessary, life-saving medical equipment? Would we still be able to call the donation "return"?
The judges have the solutions.
