Plumbing WikiLeaks From a Jewish Perspective
Nearly 1,000 years ago, a rabbi instituted a revolutionary ban that might have prevented the whole WikiLeaks shake up.
In medieval times, when Jewish writers wanted to keep documents private, they’d seal their scrolls with the acronym “B’ChaDRaG,” which meant “under the excommunication ban of Rabbeinu Gershom.” Rabbeinu Gershom, who lived in Maintz, Germany, ordered anyone who opened and read another’s mail to be shunned. Excommunication meant exclusion from community and synagogue life, business deals. Even small niceties, like greetings on the street, were verboten for anyone who violated the ban. With this change Rabbeinu Gershom, whose ban on Jewish polygamy remains in force today, broadened the Jewish definition of privacy.
When Rabbi Boruch Oberlander, director of Chabad of Budapest, considers the ongoing WikiLeaks scandal from a Jewish perspective, he thinks of Rabbeinu Gershom. “We are not allowed to disclose another person’s secrets,” he said. Rabbi Oberlander teaches a course on ethics to law students at Hungary University. They’re surprised by Judaism’s circumscribed right to know. In an age that proclaims “knowledge is power,” “information wants to be free,” it’s jolting to hear that Judaism’s position: Personal information is not a commodity to be passed along at will.
Once the seal was broken on the diplomatic cables, much of the contents were revealed to be gossipy in nature. There are descriptions of bacchanalian Russian weddings, lavish gifts exchanges, and the contents of medicine cabinets. From a Jewish perspective, “speaking about someone for a non-substantive purpose is not allowed,” said Rabbi Alexander Namdar, Chabad’s representative in Goteborg, Sweden. He pointed out that there comes a time when the negative must be said. Where the gossip isn’t just idle, but necessary. “If your friend’s daughter is about to start dating a serial killer, then it’s time to speak up. For something of substance, then those who should know, should be told.”
WikiLeaks indiscriminate dumping of information on the public at large continues to have repercussions. Will Namibia continue to allows Chinese immigration in exchange for loan forgiveness? Can Pakistan go on permitting U.S. drones to use its airspace? According to the London Daily Telegraph, Taliban leaders read WikiLeaks list of information, and now their courts are bent on punishing those who helped U.S. interests.
Armchair news junkies and pundits have been speculating what the final fallout from WikiLeaks will be. For most of us, who are not decision makers in the realm of international intrigue, the message of WikiLeaks is very personal. Despite the emphasis Judaism gives to privacy and to refraining from gossip, the world at large prefers to rip open the envelope, to expose rather than to protect.
The only way to protect ourselves from embarrassment is to act in private as we would in public. To be honest so that we don’t have to remember our cover stories. If that isn’t enough, it’s worthwhile to remember the proverb from Pirkei Avot, 2:4: Do not speak what should not be heard, for it will ultimately be heard . . .”
El
Reading this article helps me appreciate the well known quote from Alexander Pope:
“A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
(A small amount of knowledge can mislead people into thinking that they are more expert than they really are.)
Unfortunately there are many people who hear a Talmudic quote, and without doing any research or looking into it at all, assume that they know how to apply it to their daily lives.
The Rashba writes (Teshuvos Horashbo Vol I Siman 557,) that Rabeinu Gershom did not make his decrees to protect those who go against Torah, Halacha, or even ‘Midas Chassidus’. Just the opposite; they were established to ensure compliance with Torah, and to ensure that we act correctly. (The Rashba was asked whether Rabbeinu Gershom’s decree, not to divorce one’s wife without her consent, applies to a woman who committed adultery.)
Those who released these documents claim that these documents (and videos,) prove that many innocent civilians were killed by our government. If this is the case then certainly Rabbeinu Gershom would not advocate covering this up for the sake of ‘privacy’. The Gemoro in Sanhedrin (67a) says that Beis Din would send witnesses to hide ‘behind a wall’ and eavesdrop on the conversations of a Meisis (a person who tries to convince others to worship idols.) Rabbeinu Gershom would certainly not advocate ‘covering this up’ and allowing more innocent people to be killed.
Let me be clear: I’m not saying that our government did anything wrong. I didn’t read all the released documents so I will refrain from passing judgment until I do. However if it turns out that it is true then please don’t try to use a concept your Rebbi taught you in 1st grade to cover up on these terrible crimes. If the crimes were indeed committed then Rabbeinu Gershom would be the first one to release these documents and try to stop it from happening again.
As for your concern that these documents will harm those who helped US interests:
1) Wikileaks insists that they contacted the Department of Defense and asked them to redact any information that would harm our contacts on foreign soil. Our government refused to comply because they felt it was more important to cover up their crimes then to protect the innocent. Therefore if indeed someone is harmed as a result of these leaks then our government is the only one to blame for this. Our government vehemently denies this, and says that they were never given the offer to redact names. Once again I don’t have enough information to know who’s saying the truth, so I refrain from passing judgment.
2) During the 4 years that Wikileaks has been publishing documents there has been no credible allegation, even by (organizations) like the Pentagon, that even a single person has come to harm as a result of their activities.
In conclusion: I don’t know who’s right and who’s saying the truth, but I certainly won’t ignore the real issues and criticize people based on something I remember from 1st grade.
Sources:
1) Teshuvos Horashba Vol I Siman 557: http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfp…
2) Sanhedrin 67a: http://hebrewbooks.org/shas…
Moshe
El, you seem to fall in the trap of knowing a little but not too much.
Everyone knows that only a “Heter of Meah Rabbonim”, one hundred rabbis from 3 continents can decide when we can overrule the Cherem of Rabbenu Gershom.
Surely Mr. Assange and his left winger buddies are not considered 100 rabbanim.
He is a self procalimed Messiah that wants your secrets revealed, but goes crazy when his own secrets are revealed.
To #2
Moshe, It seems like you didn’t read El’s comment, or at least you didn’t check up the Rashba that he quoted.
The concept of ‘Meah Rabonnim’ is required to overrule Rabbeinu Gershom’s decree. But in this case we’re not overruling it; we’re merely trying to figure out in which cases it applies.
The Rashba said that the decrees of Rabbeinu Gershom were never established in cases where they would go against Halacha. The Rashba himself was not 100 Rabonim, yet he was able to rule that the decree of Rabbeinu Gershom didn’t apply in his case. 100 Rabbonim was not required because he was explaining Rabbeinu Gershom’s intent rather than overruling Rabbeinu Gershom.
Zalman
Moshe (#2), did you not read El’s comment?
El noted that those who released the documents claim to be trying to save innocent lives.
If Pikuach Nefesh can override a Biblical prohibition without a ‘Heter Meah Rabbonim’, (you don’t even need to ask 1 Rov in a case of Pikuach Nefesh [if asking a Rov will cause a delay that will endanger someone’s life.]) Then it can certainly override a decree of Rabbeinu Gershom.
Please read someone’s argument before disagreeing with them.
Moshe
It seems like that when you have an agenda, anything goes.
As soon as some leftwinger says that he is trying to save the world, we all have to dance kadosh kadosh, and allow him to reveal all state secrets?! Or as soon as it seems like he will tried for rape, he says that he will reveal more and more, is saving his reputation also pikuach nefesh?!
Do you intend erase the concept of meah rabbanim, which shows that we do not rely any ONE Rav, or even 99 Rabbanim, but you need 100, so is Mr. assange himself a self-proclaimed body of 100 Rabbanim?!