Fans of the American sitcom, Curb Your Enthusiasm, will probably be familiar with the “The Anonymous Donor” episode in season six.
In it, Larry is very pleased with himself when he donates a wing of a museum upon which the words “Donated by Larry David” are written. Meanwhile, his friend, Ted Danson, who donated the adjacent wing, merely writes “Donated by Anonymous” on his, while telling everyone that he is the anonymous donor, and insisting that he “doesn’t want the fanfare.”
Larry is annoyed when he finds this out, particularly when, at a ceremony, Senator Barbara Boxer toasts him for donating a wing and then toasts “anonymous” while winking at Ted, and someone in the crowd shouts, “Yeah Ted!”
I was reminded of this episode earlier in the week when I visited Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem where donors’ names appear on each wing of the hospital, as is customary in Israel. Inside, smaller, more discreet plaques bearing the names of lesser-known donors and supporters could be found all over the hospital.
So, on the face of it, who’s right in this situation? Larry or Ted?
With this in mind, I looked into the Jewish ethics of naming buildings after donors and found out that, as with many things in Jewish law, it’s not so simple.
What Jewish tradition says
JEWISH TRADITION states that “It is proper and even desirable to acknowledge the generosity of donors by perpetuating their names.” (“The Jewish Ethicist: Name Game” by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, at Aish.com)
This stems from the message of one of the greatest Jewish legal authorities of all time, the medieval Rabbi Shlomo ben Avraham ibn Aderet, known as the Rashba. When asked about a man who had donated a synagogue to the community, and who then wanted to write his name on the entrance against their wishes, Aderet replied that naming donors “is a trait of wise and experienced people, in order to give a reward to those who perform good deeds. Even the Torah itself adopts this trait, for it records and publicizes those who perform good deeds.”
In short, the rabbi confirmed that there is nothing unethical or shameful about putting your name on a building. He even goes one step further, saying that it is appropriate and even desirable to give people credit for their contributions.
The problem, however, is when a person “shows off” about their good deeds or draws excessive attention to them. As The Jewish Ethicist states, intention is what matters the most, not the act itself: “The Talmud tells us that a person who gives in order to boast is in danger of losing all the merit of his gift; charity needs to be given in order to provide for the needs of the community.”
It then goes on to say that “A person who is giving out of a desire to boast and exalt himself is not only missing the point, he is accomplishing the exact opposite of the true object” of giving charity: “to open our hearts as well as our wallets and identify and commiserate with the recipient.”
While being humble to the point of obscurity may appeal to some donors, there is nothing wrong with a donor asking for “reasonable recognition,” although this should be forthcoming in any case as an acknowledgment of a donor’s generosity is important.
So, what counts as “reasonable recognition?”
THE RASHBA decreed that it was perfectly acceptable for donors’ names to be placed on buildings. Since medieval times this custom had been adopted by Jews across the globe.
But names don’t just appear on walls outside buildings such as synagogues or hospitals, or on plaques inside. Careful consideration is given to “naming opportunities,” as this popular custom is known. The online news publication eJewish Philanthropy (eJP) gave some insight into this fascinating, yet little-known world, of which only the very rich can be a part.
A “naming opportunity” refers to the placement of donors’ names on the building, rooms in the building, special facilities, or equipment, it says. “The decision has to be made on what is the appropriate level [of] contribution for each naming opportunity.”
In addition, eJP states that gifts to the capital campaign “can be recognized by creating a donor wall at the entrance to the facility. This is a list of all the names of the donors who supported the project. When planning a donor wall it is common to assign titles to the levels of the contributions received. Titles such as ‘Founder’, ‘Builder’, ‘Supporter’, ‘Contributor’ and ‘Friend’ can be used to indicate the level of the gift.”
Although each naming opportunity depends on the amount of cash a donor has to splash, the big question is, should that opportunity be taken, or is it better to go anonymous?
The answer very much depends on whether the donor wants people to know about it, like Larry in Curb, or whether he’d rather keep it quiet, like Ted.
It’s a very personal decision and one which, frankly, I don’t imagine I’ll be wrestling with any time soon.
As far as I’m concerned, however, as long as the end justifies the means, that’s enough. Even where a donor’s intentions are selfish, if the donation itself has a positive effect on the community or even the world at large, then who are we to criticize!?
The writer is a former lawyer from Manchester, England who now lives in Israel and works as a freelance writer, including at The Jerusalem Post.