The Sinful Aftermath: Clinging to Bad Ideas
Weeping uncontrollably, a distraught mother one day paid a frantic call to a Chassidic Rebbe. “Rebbe,” she exclaimed, “It’s my son; he’s acting really strange; I think he needs a psychiatrist!”
“What’s the matter,” inquired the Rebbe, visibly concerned.
“The matter?” cried the woman, “He’s behaving like a lowlife! He has been seen dancing with gentile women and dining on swine, SWINE! I’m telling you, he went Mishuga.
The Rebbe pondered the crisis for a quiet moment. “My dear lady,” he then declared: The good news is that your son is far from Mishuga.” The bad news is that he has become a vile and hedonistic young man.
“You see, if your son were to dance with pigs and dine on women, I’d say that he is indeed insane, but that’s not what you describe. What you present are the characteristics of unabashed ‘Sinfulness.’”
“No, no; your son is not crazy. He is rather crude and lascivious, and trust me, there’s nothing crazy about it. ”
————————————–
Yankel appeared in Shul one day with both his ears heavily bandaged. “I was ironing a shirt when the phone rang,” he sheepishly explained. “That explains one ear,” blurted a fellow congregant, “What about the other?” “My luck,” came the reply, “The guy decided to call back.”
————————————–
The afternoon of the day that the Torah was given, Moshe ascended Mount Sinai for forty days of solitude. He spent his time studying the newly received code with its Divine author. Waiting impatiently at the foot of the mountain was the Jewish nation, who mistakenly anticipated Moshe’s arrival on the thirty ninth day.
According to their miscalculation, Moshe had tarried in his return from the mountaintop. His absence led them to conclude that he was no longer alive and that they would never see him again. Convinced that they were left abandoned and leaderless in the desert, the Israelites, edged-on by the “Mixed multitude” (the Egyptian converts who joined the Jewish nation at the time of the exodus), panicked and completely lost their footing.
The people proceeded to press Aharon, who was left holding the bag, demanding that he produce for them “A G-d that will go before us.” Sensing the danger of the rebellious and volatile atmosphere, Aharon attempted to stave off an outbreak of anarchy and idol worshiping bacchanal, by stalling for time.
He requested that they donate their most prized possessions; the gold and silver garnered from the Egyptians, which now adorned their women and children. Yet, instead of the anticipated reluctance and procrastination, not a minute of time was wasted.
In a most unexpected response to Aharon’s appeal, the men gave of their highly cherished gold; the gold that represented their first taste of freedom in 210 years. They did not even bother with their spouses, as Aharon had anticipated; they used their very own stash. And give they did; generously and passionately.
Aharon took the gold and heaved it into a large fire, with the unsolicited help of a few sorcerers, a Golden Calf emerged. Aharon set-out to build an altar before it. Then, hoping to buy some more time, he declared “A celebration for G-d tomorrow.” Perhaps by then Moshe will have returned.
But once again the people wasted no time. They arose early in the morning, brought sacrifices and began to celebrate. They danced around their newly created deity(s) and shouted, “These are your gods which brought you up from the land of Egypt!” (Exodus 32:8)
And so came about the most precipitous plummet from grace and splendor in the history of mankind. From the zenith of holiness and purity slipped a nation into the pit of sin and impurity – from the ultimate Divine embrace, to the depth of spiritual dearth and abyss. This no doubt, was the epitome of human decline.
Yet, grave as it might be, sin is after all human and at times is somewhat explainable. There can, for example, be many explanations for the dramatic downfall of the Jewish nation after their remarkable rise.
It may well be argued that after experiencing the highest level of Divine revelation and ecstasy during the giving of the Torah, the nation, having been forced back so drastically to a more mundane reality – made to wait 40 days without setting eyes on their revered leader and prophet – found themselves particularly susceptible and overwhelmed.
Their desire to draw close to G-d, one can imagine, was exceedingly powerful. Since Moshe had become the facilitator of this passion, every moment waiting for Moshe was like eternity. Another moment was just too long.
Additionally, they were subjected to the mixed multitude factor. Great people as they were, moved to follow the Jewish Nation into the wilderness; to face an unknown future and fate, these folk were exceptionally vulnerable when confronted with the trying experience at hand.
Having lived in relative comfort in Egypt; always under the hegemony and protection of a so called god, they fared the worst. They quickly lapsed into their old habits and wavered in their commitment.
It can hence be understood how the Children of Israel would fall prey to the hysteria of this internal influence. Given the above, why was this sin considered so insidious? And what is it about sin in general that is so despised in the eyes of G-d? Considering our human vulnerabilities, sin seems somewhat natural, perhaps even inevitable?
The answer is that while sin may be human, sinfulness is certainly an abrogation of our higher human character and potential. Sin may be born out of simple weakness of character or error of judgment, but it quickly loses its innocence and inadvertence. The misjudgment soon becomes an obvious wrong and the weakness soon becomes advertent wanton.
The perpetuation of the sin at that point is no longer even a little excusable. When sin turns in to “Sinfulness,” it becomes a far more sinister act of rebellion and willful indulgence.
This phenomenon is precisely what is described in this week’s Parsha, Ki Sisa: “On the next day,” states the verse, “They arose early, offered up burnt offerings . . . And the people sat down to eat and to drink, and they arose to ‘Make-merry’.” Rashi notes that the word “Make-merry,” connotes sexual misconduct as well as bloodshed. (A brave and righteous man named Chur, who rebuked the people in hope of putting a halt to the orgy, was slain at the hands of the incited mob).
According to this description, it is rather obvious that the rebellion has spiraled into something far more sinister then from where it has all begun. As is typical with sin, what may have started as a somewhat explicable human weakness and misjudgment, has before long degenerated into blatant insubordination and defiance of the most cardinal transgressions; adultery, idol worship, and bloodshed. At this point there were no excuses. It was more than apparent that what was happening was wayward and rebellious.
It’s not what initiated the sin of the Golden Calf that constitutes its gravest and ultimate transgression; it was rather the fact that they proceeded to cling to this bad idea well after it’s malevolence and defiance was apparent as day.
How familiar is this pattern? How little has mankind learned from its own history? How often do we commit an improper act because we failed to withstand the temptation and in order to relieve our feelings of weakness and guilt, we defend our behavior with an assortment rationalizations and justifications, stubbornly standing by our misconduct? Yet denial of wrongdoing that comes after a sin is worse than the original sin, as it often leads to its repetition and even its permissibility.
Much as with the prototype of transgression; the sin of the Golden Calf, there have been a plethora of bad ideas and ideologies throughout the ages that have been stubbornly embraced by numerous peoples and cultures well beyond their perceived usefulness.
Many modern ideologies, such as Communism, various destructive forms of Socialism and secular Zionism, as well as some distorted forms of Judaism, which may have well been conceived in purity or innocence – or at the very least weakness and confusion – have been cleaved to, well after they have proven to be very bad and destructive ideas.
It is not their original inspiration that has made them so harmful and destructive, it is rather because they have continued to be embraced well after their ruinous and harmful nature has become exposed as the light of day.
Although weakness, or ignorance, cannot be condoned, especially when it results in harm to humanity and the violation of moral and Torah law, still, one who admits he has sinned at least has the opportunity to correct his behavior and minimize the harm. This is not possible when one defiantly rationalizes, justifies and otherwise cleaves to his blatantly erroneous ways.
No wonder that the prophet Jeremiah exhorts: “For this I will judge you, for saying ‘I have not sinned.” Rarely are our sins a matter of conviction, yet out of a sense of pride, stubbornness and convenience, we tend to cling to them, even when the spirit of folly and the fog of temptation has long worn off.
If only we had learned the simple lessons from the prototype of transgression – the sin of “The Golden Calf” – how different the course of history may have been.
It’s not too late!
May G-d awaken us with a spirit from above and open our hearts and minds to the truth of our misguided ways and to complete repentance. Our self honesty and repentance will certainly help bring an end to this bitter exile and hasten the coming of the righteous Moshiach BBA.
GREAT!
may we witness self honesty and true t’shuvah and bringus moshiach speedily, .S.M.K.
A different take
The story of the Golden Calf is one of the great, seminal episodes in the Torah and in many ways just as important as the events preceding it, the receiving of the Torah on Mt. Sinai. It was through the events of the golden calf that they and more importantly, their leaders, learned a painful lesson on what would be needed to see the commandments they had just received implemented correctly.
In the traditional understanding of the story, the Jews are seen as having ill intentions, at best, and desirous of idolatry, at worst. Aaron’s actions are viewed as a delaying action knowing their ill intent. And Moses is viewed as an arch-defender of his people, his actions viewed as utter selflessness.
However, the episode leaves us with many questions:
• Why would the Jews have resorted to idolatry so soon after receiving divine revelation?
• Based on the language, it is obvious they did not want an actual God, so what were they asking for that would induce Aaron to actually suggest an action that could have led to Avodah Zarah? Were there no other activities he could have used?
• Why did the gold turn into, of all things, a golden calf?
• Why did Moses use what the Egyptians would say as a reason not to destroy the Jewish people?
• Why did God accept Moses response?
In order to answers these questions, we must adjust the prism with which this whole episode is viewed. Traditionally, it has been accepted that this this is a narrative revealing the first episode where the Jewish people stumbled and rebelled inducing God’s wrath. While this obviously reflects poorly on the Jewish nation, it actually provides much greater insight into the responsibilities of Jewish leaders in attending to the instruction of their people and what transpires when that guidance is lacking. Interestingly, this explanation of the story is strongly supported by the actual language of the text.
The first question may be the most problematic, as the story serves as such an immediate and inappropriate response from an elevated people who had just received a direct revelation of Godliness. It is almost inconceivable that anyone would so quickly turn to idolatry while still camped at the mountain where they had just interacted with God.
At the beginning of the chapter, the Jewish nation having received the Ten Commandments eagerly await Moses return. The verse states, “The nation saw that Moses had not come down from the mountain”, which requires some analysis. Why would the verse need to state from where Moses had not returned? It could have simply stated “The nation saw that Moses had not yet returned” – why the need to specify from where he had not returned? Perhaps we can say that the problem here was that their problem was that their leader was still “up there”, communing with God and had not yet “come down” to commune with the people. When leaders are not amongst their people providing instruction, in Moses case for 40 days, bad things can happen.
Seemingly, this concern was a valid one. The Jewish nation had just received the word of God, but had yet to receive the instruction on how to apply it, how to serve God as a newly minted nation with a new set of commandments. This however was their downfall. Without the knowledge and instruction of how to properly serve God, their request was bound to be improperly constructed having now entered a new era with newly minted guidelines for serving God.
Looking at the verse, we see that the Jewish people were not asking for an actual God. What they were asking for was the pre-Mt. Sinai leader who would “go before them” and Moses did in “elevating us from the land of Egypt”. This means to say, they wanted someone who would do the avodah for them as opposed to them doing the actual work themselves and this was their ultimate mistake. Their request, was well intentioned, but it was based on a previous framework that no longer applied as the purpose of the Torah was to require service of each member of the people.
This helps us understand another major dilemma with this story: how could Aaron suggest they do something that could have led to idolatry. Much is made about Aaron’s being a delaying tactic, but this is truly problematic: was there no other activity that Aaron could have suggested to simply delay them? Even if a calf would not have emerged, certainly a golden object of some shape would have then been available which could have been worshipped.
However, if we keep in mind who Aaron was, an optimistic lover of the Jewish people, we can understand how he may have given the people the benefit of the doubt with their request. In other words, Aaron agred that there was a need for a leader but he assumed that their request was based on the right understandings of God’s new requirements. This unfortunately, was the first mistake of leadership in not recognizing the make-up and needs of his flock. They were not like him, who could take the word of God and directly translate that into a new set of actions. This is why Moses at the end of the episode says to Aaron “How could you expose the Jewish nation (to this)” – that he should have known that the people were incapable of even forming the right requests, let alone doing the right things on their own, and it was this failure that led to the events that followed.
We can understand now what Aaron requested, what the Jews did and what emerged from their actions. Aaron, believing their request to be sincere (true) and based on the right understandings (false), suggested they bring their gold. Why specifically gold? Because this was the reward that they had taken from Egypt, seemingly their most precious physical treasure. It was this that Aaron wanted them to elevate the gold into something holy, something that could serve as an intermediary until Moses returned. This was a stop gap measure, not a delaying tactic. And perhaps, if the intentions would have been correct and the Jews would have done the proper service in fulfilling the request, they may have received such an intermediary from their gold.
Unfortunately, instead of going home and bringing all their gold, they brought the easiest and quickest gold they could grab, their jewelry. In other words, instead of fulfilling the request to their fullest capabilities, they did a minimal amount, assuming again that they were in an era where Moses “would take them up”. What emerged from the first was a reflection of nature of their initial request and their improper fulfillment of the task. The result was a golden calf, a true reflection of their animalistic selves unchanged through service of God. As opposed to an actual calf that could be sacrificed and elevated to God, this calf was incapable of elevation being that the intentions and work put into it were incorrect and lacking.
And now we can finally understand what follows the story in the dramatic exchange between Moses and God. Why did God need to point out to Moses what the people were doing? To remind us that It was because Moses had not yet descended to his people that this had all transpired. When Moses is informed of the sins of his people, he resorts to a very curious line of reasoning for why God should not destroy the people “…the Egyptians will say that you took them out and raised them to the mountains to kill them.
There are several obvious questions: why would God care what the Egyptians, specifically, would say? What bearing would that have on the fact that they had just sinned? Perhaps we can say that Moses’ argument was as follows: “you, God, put them in lowly Egypt and the Egyptians can testify better than anyone as to what they were exposed to there. For you to take them from there, and to raise them to the heights with this new service was setting them up for failure.”
Was is left unsaid, however, is of far greater importance. Without the presence of Moses himself amongst them people, this sort of mistaken activity would be bound to occur because of the spiritual impurity that they had acquired in Egypt. These were not the forefather who were “Chariots” of God. These were people who required the instruction of the Torah and the guidance of a leader, Moses, on how to execute those instructions. This was now their post-Egypt weakness and they were now Moses responsibilities. His request to be removed from the book was an acknowledgement that their failure was ultimately his and was less selflessness than taking responsibility.
And this is why God responds to Moses that he would not destroy the Jewish people, “for they are a stubborn people”. God acknowledged Moses’ point and agreed that the people were now one of bad habits and were incapable of directing their own service. The one condition God applied to Moses was that he was to descend and deal with their people himself, a reasonable requirement considering the fact that this was all due to Moses being absent from his people.
The lesson is thus: For the Jewish people have new obligations for which they are responsible for. These responsibilities require real work and sacrifice. More importantly, for the leaders, they must understand that for their people to do so successfully, they need both constant guidance of their leaders (Moses) and to be honest in assessing their flock and not wait for them to make the suggestions for service (Aaron). Lacking those, they are liable to resort to the bad habits that they picked up in Egypt.