Finding a Right to Privacy in Halakhah

Over the past year, controversies concerning the collection of user data by Facebook and other websites have raised questions concerning the preservation of privacy in the digital age. The increasing ubiquity of security cameras and the advent of the so-called Internet of Things—systems that allow household appliances, doors, heating systems, and so forth to be controlled by laptop and cell phone—pose even greater privacy concerns. Examining traditional Jewish law, or halakhah, for a concept of the right to privacy, Aviad Hacohen and Gabi Siboni suggest that secular Israeli law could learn from it in dealing with these challenges:

The ban on infringing upon a person’s privacy is specifically mentioned in Jewish law in many contexts. . . . For example, the Mishnah states, “A person must not create an opening [in his own house] opposite an opening [in his neighbor’s], or a window opposite a window. If his opening or window is small, he must not make it larger. If there is one opening, he must not turn it into two openings.” . . . In his commentary on the Talmud, Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir explains that the ban on creating a new opening opposite the opening to his neighbor’s yard (or even a yard shared by both of them) is designed to prevent damage caused by looking into another person’s property; that is, infringement on another person’s privacy.

[The contemporary scholar] Eliyahu Lifshitz explains that the Mishnah shows that damage to privacy caused by opening a window opposite a shared yard is relative and not absolute damage. For this reason, there is no requirement to conceal an existing window, even a large one; it is merely forbidden to create a new window or enlarge an existing one. If the window existed even before the neighbors moved in, they cannot force the window-owner to change his situation; rather, they must take their own measures to prevent the infringement of their privacy. . . .

Jewish law took a more significant step in protecting a person’s privacy regarding personal documents—such as medical records, letters, and, nowadays, material stored on a personal computer—based on a ruling by Rabbi Gershom ben Judah, the greatest Jewish sage in Germany in the 10th century. Among other things, he enacted a ban against any person who reads someone else’s letters without permission, since doing so invades the letter-writer’s privacy. . . .

The general prohibition against infringing upon privacy as well as the specific prohibition against accessing another’s records without that person’s explicit consent are therefore deeply rooted in Jewish law. Accelerated technological development, the weaknesses of cyberspace, and difficulties in security pose new and exciting challenges to Jewish law concerning the application of ancient principles to our times—pouring the fine old wine of Jewish law into the new container of the legal system in Israel, whose values are both Jewish and democratic.

Read more at Institute for National Security Studies

More about: Facebook, Halakhah, Israeli law, Law, Rashbam, Technology

What a Strategic Victory in Gaza Can and Can’t Achieve

On Tuesday, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant met in Washington with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Gallant says that he told the former that only “a decisive victory will bring this war to an end.” Shay Shabtai tries to outline what exactly this would entail, arguing that the IDF can and must attain a “strategic” victory, as opposed to merely a tactical or operational one. Yet even after a such a victory Israelis can’t expect to start beating their rifles into plowshares:

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. . . . This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.

In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, IDF