Dr. Scott Silverman on Tzedakah as Justice: Dignity, Anonymity, and Accountability in Jewish Giving
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2026/02
Scott Silverman, EdD, is Dean of Noncredit & External Programs at Santa Monica College in Culver City, California. He leads adult and noncredit education, workforce training, community outreach, and student development initiatives that expand access beyond traditional degree pathways. Silverman is known for program building, data-informed forecasting, and practical student-engagement strategies, and he frequently speaks on higher education management and the evolving workplace. He also teaches, mentors staff, and partners with local organizations to support older adults and re-entry learners. His work blends service, accountability, and a campus-centred belief in human potential while keeping equity and dignity at the center.
In this interview, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Dr. Scott Silverman about why tzedakah is framed as justice rather than discretionary charity. Silverman argues it is a moral obligation woven into Jewish formation and ethics, extending from the Golden Rule toward a “Platinum Rule” that centers on recipients’ needs. He emphasizes dignity through anonymity, reducing coercion, dependency, and awkward power dynamics. Drawing on Maimonides’ eight levels of charity, he explores how communities should balance individual discretion and communal responsibility, vet and audit funds, and prioritize both emergency relief and long-term sustainability. He also considers how digital giving reshapes trust and access.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Why is tzedakah defined as justice rather than optional charity?
Dr. Scott Silverman: Tzedakah is almost an expectation in Judaism. We are expected to give to charitable causes, and this is literally woven into the weekly expectation at Sunday School. It is a moral obligation rooted in the Torah….do unto others as you would have done unto you, Golden Rule. The Platinum Rule is better… but a more modern invention. I want to think it still applies: do unto others as they would want done unto them.”
So do not hurt people if you do not want to be hurt, and help people if you would want help… or help people, but treat them the way they would need/treat people, the way they would want to be treated.
Jacobsen: What does dignity require from givers and recipients in practice?
Silverman: Dignity requires anonymity. Dignity and anonymity are critical. It prevents a lot of awkward conversations… the recipient trying to latch on to the donor, the donor wanting to stop giving after a single failed effort with the recipient, etc. Teaching someone how to fish so they can take care of themselves and not be dependent on others. For your information, though, you must be familiar with Maimonides’ Eight Levels of Charity:
Jacobsen: How do you balance individual discretion with communal obligation?
Silverman: Tzedakah is a “yes, and” for me…meaning I want people to give what they can, when they can, both to the collective efforts, and to things on their own or as a family. Giving is infectious. Volunteering to put together a bag of toiletries may even be more lasting than donating $5 to cover the cost of 1 bag. I would almost want to see how Maimonides would update the 8 levels of giving for today’s world. Where would ordering a bulk pack of toothbrushes on eBay or Amazon fit in? What about recurring, set-it-and-forget-it donations versus intentional estate gifts? What would the levels even teach fundraising professionals…
Jacobsen: Where are the lines between tzedakah, gemilut chasadim, and tikkun olam?
Silverman: Tzedakah – justice/fairness
Gemilut Chasadim – acts of loving kindness
Tikkun Olam – repairing the world=
Giving tzedakah IS an act of gemilut chasadim, and every act of loving kindness we perform brings us closer to repairing the world. Tikkun Olam is built on gemikllut chasadim.
Jacobsen: What accountability and transparency standards should communal funds meet?
Silverman: Spitballing here:
The person administering funds to those in need should conduct some vetting to ensure that those receiving the funds are not going to use them nefariously (drugs, booze), but that they will be used as intended.
Donors will want to know they have made an impact… and it can be done without saying “this is the specific person you helped” or “this is the person who helped you”.
Jacobsen: In the community, who audits this power?
Silverman: The Board of the Temple, or of the nonprofit, would hire an auditor… but the report would also help with future fundraising pitches.
Jacobsen: How do you decide between emergency relief and long-term economic sustainability?
Silverman: Jewish Free Loan Association is such a great example. They offer short-term interest-free loans.
The goal is always to teach a person how to fish… but some need help recognizing the mental capacity and bandwidth to get the next meal. Take care of the basic needs without becoming that person’s sole source – or you will not be able to have a broader impact.
Jacobsen: How do communities reduce stigma, handle confidentiality, and avoid “deservingness” tests?
Silverman: Having a fully transparent set of criteria, but leaving wiggle room, and/or a discretionary fund that can be given out without adherence to the criteria, can get you out of the deservingness game.
Jacobsen: How are digital tzedakah and public policy reshaping Jewish giving if at all?
Silverman: Tzedakah used to be so focused through the Temple. Even over the last 20 years, when digital giving has existed, most people still gave through the Temple, aside from big gifting, up until about 2015, when Charity Navigator and so many other vetting services became much more well-known. SO that you did not need to have a nonprofit vetted by the Temple before you supported it, this was accelerated by the pandemic, when there was no way to gather for so long. Digital giving has made it possible for anyone to give at any time. Some, like https://dollaraday.co/, have made it so painless that it is easy to give whatever you can. Maimonedes would say something about this for sure – giving but automating it, where does that fall into the ladder of tzedakah?
Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Scott.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 