In the book of Numbers, the Gentile prophet Balaam delivers an extended, divinely inspired blessing to the people of Israel, which includes the verse, “How fair are your tents, O Jacob; your encampments, O Israel!” Drawing on traditional rabbinic interpretations of this verse, Ari Berman sees in it lessons for the current moment, where modern technology and a culture of exhibitionism have led to serious ethical concerns about privacy:

The rabbis of antiquity [understood the words “How fair are your tents” to refer to] the manner in which the Israelites had arranged their tents; namely, the tent openings did not face one another, thus preventing peering eyes from seeing into a neighbor’s home. In Jewish law, in fact, privacy is not simply a matter of personal preference. It is rather a formal legal category, such that peering into another’s private space is considered a form of injury. . . .

But at the same time, consider the verse’s second clause, in which Balaam praises the Israelites’ encampments. . . . The classical Jewish commentators . . . taught that whereas the word “tents” refers to the Israelites’ private dwellings, “encampments” refers to public spaces dedicated to collective, communal endeavors. Balaam offered praise for these places as well, for there are enormous advantages to cultivating an integrated, active public square. . . .

Taken as a whole, then, the rabbinic interpretation of Balaam’s ancient words highlights the importance of . . . cultivating both a virtuous private life and a virtuous public life. This is a crucial message as we think about educating the next generation.

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.