Sin of the Golden Calf/2

Sin of the Golden Calf

Exegetical Approaches

Foreign God

The nation viewed the calf as a god and worshiped it either together with or instead of Hashem.

Sources:PhiloThe Special Laws, III XXII:125About Philo, BavliSanhedrin 63aAvodah Zarah 53bAbout the Bavli, TanchumaKi Tisa 19Shemini 4About the Tanchuma, Targum Pseudo-JonathanShemot 32:3-6About Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer45About Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer, R. Saadia GaonCommentary Shemot 32:1-6About R. Saadia Gaon, RashiShemot 32:1-6About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, Lekach TovBereshit 32:1About R. Toviah b. Eliezer, R. Avraham b. HaRambamShemot 32:4-9Shemot 32:22About R. Avraham Maimonides,

"עֲשֵׂה לָנוּ אֱלֹהִים" – These sources understand the word "אֱלֹהִים" to mean deity.  However, they disagree whether, in building the calf, the nation was totally forsaking Hashem in favor of a new god,¹ or if they were planning on worshiping the calf together with Hashem (שיתוף).‎²

Why does Moshe's delay spur the sin? R. Avraham b. HaRambam claims that the Israelites believed that only someone as perfect as Moshe could access Hashem and that without him, they did not have the power to do so.  As such, when they assumed that Moshe was not coming back,³ they decided to return to the idolatry they had known earlier.⁴

Why a calf? Philo and R. Avraham b. HaRambam assert that the choice was intentional as a bull held significance for the people from their time in Egypt:⁵

• Egyptian god – Philo maintains that the people chose a bull to imitate the Egyptian God, Typhos, with whom they would have been familiar.⁶
• Astrological sign – R. Avraham b. HaRambam cites his father who posits instead that the people might have asked for a calf thinking that it was under the influence of that astrological sign that they left Egypt.  Thus, they refer to it as, "אֵלֶּה אֱלֹהֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלוּךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם".

"חַג לַי"י מָחָר" – This position must explain why Hashem's proper name is used here, if the people were looking to the calf as an alternative god:

• For replacement god –This approach could understand this phrase to mean that "tomorrow there will be a feast for the god who is replacing Hashem".
• For Hashem – Rashi, however, asserts that, in contrast to the nation, Aharon had no idolatrous thoughts, and really was speaking about Hashem Himself when he said "חַג לַי"י מָחָר".  He was certain that by the morrow, Moshe would arrive and the people would return to serving Hashem.

Offering sacrifices – The fact that the people bow down⁷ and offer sacrifices before the calf supports the idea that they were worshiping it as a god.

"וַיָּמִירוּ אֶת כְּבוֹדָם בְּתַבְנִית שׁוֹר" – According to this approach the honor of the people referred to in this verse is Hashem.  The psalmist, too, reads the sin as one of foreign worship, claiming that in building the calf the nation replaced Hashem with the likeness of an ox and bowed down to it.

Breaking of the Luchot – According to Rashi, after Moshe saw how the people had betrayed Hashem he considered them unworthy of receiving the Torah.  This position might also suggest, like Ibn EzraShemot Short Commentary 32:19About R. Avraham ibn Ezra below, that the tablets were like a marriage document; when the people proved unfaithful it was torn up.⁸

Drinking of the calf's ashes – Rashi, following R. Yose in Bavli Avodah ZarahAvodah Zarah 43b-44aAbout Bavli Avodah Zarah,  asserts that this was comparable to the test of a suspected adulteress (sotah).  Moshe used the water to test who had been unfaithful to Hashem.

Role of Aharon – These sources agree that Aharon did not worship the calf, but defend his active role in different ways:

• Test the people – R. Saadia compares Aharon to Yehu, who gathered the people to worship the Baal so as to test who was guilty and then kill them.  So, too, Aharon only acquiesced to the nation's request so as to determine who was guilty of idolatry.
• Delay tactics – Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer and Rashi, instead, maintain that throughout Aharon tried to delay the people, hoping that Moshe would arrive before they sinned.  Thus, he asked the women specifically for their jewelry, assuming they would not give them up so easily,⁹ and pushed off the feast until the next day.

Sinning so soon after Matan Torah

• Influence of mixed multitudes (ערב רב) – Tanchuma, Rashi and R. Avraham b. HaRambam (in the name of his grandfather) attempt to defend the people by suggesting that the idolatry was not really their initiative, but that of the mixed multitudes who had joined the nation upon leaving Egypt.  Tanchuma claims that it was their magic which produced the calf and animated it leading the people to believe in it.¹⁰  As support, Rashi points to the fact that the people say "אֵלֶּה אֱלֹהֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל", speaking from the perspective of outsiders and non-members of Israel.¹¹
• Influence of Satan – Tanchuma, Rashi and Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer also suggest that the Satan further negatively influenced the nation, leading the people to believe that Moshe had died, or helping to create the calf.
• Slow to change – Alternatively, it is possible that the people had never really forsaken the idolatrous beliefs they held in Egypt.¹² One time miracles, even on the scale of Hashem's revelation, are not enough to change a person's mindset for good.  To instill long lasting belief the people needed continuous education and miracles.¹³  Thus, as soon as Moshe left, without a teacher to guide them, the people naturally fell back into their old ways.

Aharon's self  defense – R. Avraham b. HaRambam asserts, in the name of his grandfather, that Aharon was blaming the ערב רב.  Aharon's words, "כִּי בְרָע הוּא" are understood to mean that the nation was mixed with evil people.

Severity of punishment – According to this approach, Hashem's initial desire to wipe out the nation is understandable, as they sinned severely.  Both Rashi and R. Avraham b. HaRambam also suggest even after Moshe's prayers, many people were punished by death. Though only 3,000 were killed by the Levites,¹⁴ many more died at Hashem's hand through the plague.

People's perception of Moshe

Graven Image of Hashem

The people viewed the calf as a means through which they could worship Hashem.  They did not transgress the command of "you shall have no other gods besides me" but only the prohibition against making a graven image, even one which represented Hashem Himself.

Sources:Kuzari1:97About R. Yehuda HaLevi, Ibn Ezra,Shemot Long Commentary 20:19About R. Avraham ibn Ezra RadakMelakhim I 12:28About R. David Kimchi, CassutoShemot 32:1Shemot 32:4About Prof. Umberto Cassuto,

Why does Moshe's delay spur the sin?

Symbol or throne?

• While R. Yehuda HaLevi maintains that the calf was supposed to represent Hashem's Presence.
• Cassuto suggests instead that the nation looked to create a throne for Hashem's providence, similar to the role played by the Keruvim in the Mishkan.¹⁵ 

Why a calf?

• Image of Hashem seen at Sinai – Lekach TovShemot 32:4About R. Toviah b. Eliezer posits that the people chose a calf since that was the image of Hashem that they saw at Sinai.¹⁶  This was thus the logical choice of a means to represent Him. 
• Hashem's choice of "throne" – It is also possible that in building a throne for Hashem, Aharon decided to make "כרובים",‎¹⁷ as this is what Hashem Himself had set as the site of his presence in the Mishkan.¹⁸ R.  Bazak  points to the parallel verses in Yechezkel 1:10 and 10:14 to prove that "שור" and "כרובים" are identical¹⁹ and to the entire vision there which suggests that these were meant to be Hashem's "chariot" and the pedestal of his throne.
• Convention  of the time – N. Sarna²⁰ points out that throughout the Ancient Near East, deities were often depicted as satnding on pedestals of beasts, often a bull. Aharon might have simply copied the standard artistic convention, with the important difference of not adding any mage of Hashem Himself atop the pedestal.

לֹא תַעֲשׂוּן אִתִּי אֱלֹהֵי כֶסֶף – Ibn Ezra understands this prohibition to mean that one cannot make forms even for Hashem's honor and to be intermediary by which to access the Divine. It was this commandment that Aharon and the people transgressed.

"עֲשֵׂה לָנוּ אֱלֹהִים" – These sources understand the word "אֱלֹהִים" to refer to Hashem.  The people were not requesting that Aharon create a new deity, but a vehicle through which they could access Hashem.

"אֵלֶּה אֱלֹהֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלוּךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם" – They refer to the calf as the one who took them out of Egypt because the calf was representative of Hashem who did in fact do so.²¹

"חַג לַי"י מָחָר" – As Aharon and the people never intended to worship anyone but Hashem, Aharon naturally announces that there will be a feast for Hashem tomorrow.

Offering sacrifices

"וַיָּמִירוּ אֶת כְּבוֹדָם בְּתַבְנִית שׁוֹר"

Breaking of the Luchot

Drinking of the calf's ashes

Role of Aharon

Sinning so soon after Matan Torah

Severity of punishment

Biblical parallels

People's perception of Moshe

Purpose of the mishkan

Guide in the Wilderness

Bereft of Moshe's leadership and his connection to the Divine, the people looked for an alternative to guide them in the wilderness.

Sources:Ibn EzraShemot Long Commentary 32:1Shemot Short Commentary 32:1About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorShemot 32:1-8Shemot 32:20Shemot 32:25-26Shemot 33:7Shemot 34:30About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RambanShemot 32:1About R. Moshe b. Nachman, RalbagShemot Beur HaParashah 31:18Shemot Beur HaParashah 32:1About R. Levi b. Gershom, AbarbanelShemot 32:1-7About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, R. Eliezer AshkenaziMa'asei Hashem Ma'asei Torah 11Ma'asei Hashem Ma'asei Torah 12About R. Eliezer Ashkenazi (Ma'asei Hashem), ShadalShemot 32:4Shemot 32:8-9Shemot 32:27About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto,

"עֲשֵׂה לָנוּ אֱלֹהִים אֲשֶׁר יֵלְכוּ לְפָנֵינוּ"

Polemical motivations

Tehillim 106:19-20

"אֵלֶּה אֱלֹהֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלוּךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם"

Drinking of the calf's ashes

Sinning so soon after Matan Torah

Biblical parallels

Combination

As the nation was not a homogeneous group, it is possible that while some people viewed the calf as an alternative god, others believed that it was simply a tangible representation of Hashem and yet others looked to it to guide them in their travels.

¹ See Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer who claims that they "forgot Hashem".

² R. Yochanan in Bavli Sanhedrin points to the plural form of the statement, "אֵלֶּה אֱלֹהֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלוּךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם" to prove that the people still believed in Hashem, but had just added another god to their pantheon.  R. Shimon b. Yochai, in contrast, says the plural form does not lessen the sin's severity but rather intensifies it, as it implies that the nation desired multiple gods even beyond the calf.  See Rashi who explains similarly, but picks up on the plural form of the verb "יֵלְכוּ" in the pharse "עֲשֵׂה לָנוּ אֱלֹהִים אֲשֶׁר יֵלְכוּ לְפָנֵינוּ".

³ Cf. Rashi who asserts that the Satan had brought chaos and darkness to the world, leading the people to conclude that Moshe had died.

⁴ R. Avraham b. HaRambam suggests that Hashem calls the nation an "עַם קְשֵׁה עֹרֶף" because they had turned back towards the idolatry of Egypt.

⁵ According to Rashi, Aharon had no intention of making a calf specifically but the  mixed multitudes which had joined from Egypt (הערב רב) used their magic to make this form.

⁶ Cf. Hoil Moshe who connects the choice to Apis, the bull-deity of Egypt.

⁷ Though this is not mentioned in the narrator's description of the event, when Hashem tells Moshe what the people have done, he includes their bowing.

⁸ One could similarly say that the tablets were representative of the covenant between the nation and Hashem; once the people transgressed its conditions, the covenant was nullified.

⁹ Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer even asserts that the tactic should have worked since the women refused to hand over their jewelry and even told their husbands that they were planning on building something with no power to save.  The husbands, however, did not listen and gave of their own jewelry.

¹⁰ Cf. Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer which has the Satan play this role.  The midrash points to the verse in Tehillim 106 which describes the calf as "תַבְנִית שׁוֹר אֹכֵל עֵשֶׂב" to show that they enabled it to eat.

¹¹ As further support, Rashi also points to Hashem's choice of language when speaking to Moshe about the nation: "כִּי שִׁחֵת עַמְּךָ".  He explains that Hashem was chastising Moshe for having accepted the Erev Rav into the nation; it was only "Moshe's nation" that sinned, not Hashem's.  R. Avraham b. HaRambam similarly claims that Hashem pointed to the "אספסוף" as being n Moshe's charge.

¹² For more about the people's beliefs while in Egypt, see Religious Identity in Egypt.

¹³ See N. Leibowitz, עיונים חדשים בספר שמות (Jerusalem, ):399-400, who develops this idea.  See also R. Bachya regarding the request to leave Egypt or  A Three Day Journey,  who claims that originally Hashem had planed on gradually moving the nation into belief of Hashem.

¹⁴ According to Rashi, these were the people who had been warned and whose actions had been viewed by two witnesses.

¹⁵ Just as the Keruvim were where Hashem's presence descended, the calf would serve as a pedestal for His glory.

¹⁶ Cf. A. Bazak, "The Ideological Basis of the Sin of the Golden Calf," who connects the nation's vision of "מַעֲשֵׂה לִבְנַת הַסַּפִּיר" (Shemot 24) with Yechezkel's prophecy of the chariot, in which he saw "כְּמַרְאֵה אֶבֶן סַפִּיר".  There Yechezkel describes the four headed creature that he sees as having "the legs of a calf" (וְכַף רַגְלֵיהֶם כְּכַף רֶגֶל עֵגֶל), suggesting that at Sinai, too the people saw a calf.

¹⁷ See R. Bazak in the article cited above and R. Kasher, Torah Sheleimah, Volume 21 (Jerusalem, 1992): 206-208 who both develop this general idea.  R. Bazak claims that the people wanted to model the calf after their vision of Hashem at Sinai, which was idnetical to the vision of Keruvim mentioned in Yechezkel.

¹⁸ See R. Kasher cited above who attempts to defend Aharon by suggesting that Aharon assumed that if Keruvim were allowed in the Mishkan, they would be allowed outside as well.

¹⁹ Yechezkel 1:10 lists the four faces of the beast of Yechezkel's vision as being man, lion, ox, and eagle.  The parallel verse in 10:14 lists, cherub, lion, man and eagle, suggesting that the ox and cherub must be synonymous.
Cf. Cassuto who distinguishes between the form of the cherubs and that of the calf, claiming that the former were fantastical creatures.  It was for this very reason that they were allowed in the Mishkan; they could not be mistaken for a real animal which could eventually come to be worshiped in place of Hashem.

²⁰ See Exploring Exodus (New York, 1996): 217-219.

²¹ Cassuto also raises the possibility that despite the original intentions, at some point people mistook the calf for an actual god. The people who had erred and begun to view the calf itself as a god were the ones who cried, "אֵלֶּה אֱלֹהֶיךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלוּךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם".  Their plural language suggests that although they did not forget Hashem, they thought that the calf, too, deserved to be worshiped in its own right.