Ki Tisa – Exodus 30:11-34 – Relationships, Substitutes and Gold

In Ki Tisa, as we near the end of the Book of Sh’mot (Exodus) the narrative picks up where it left off in Chapter 20, with the giving of the Ten Proclamations (I know they’re usually called Commandments, but they’re not all commandments, technically speaking).  After a multi-chapter detour through the construction of portable sanctuary and the outfitting of the kohanim (priests), the story-telling resumes in Chapter 32, with the infamous narrative of the Golden calf.

Sometimes we get distracted when the Torah is talking about stuff, instead of people, and in our desire to make sense of the details, and the reasons for the details, we forget, if only temporarily, that the Torah is really about relationships, and that often the details are meant to help us clarify or repair or establish relationships.  Since the publication of Rabbi Ron Wolfson’s book, Relational Judaism last year, it has been the subject of scores of Jewish organizations’ staff meetings and leadership retreats, but I think Torah has always been about relationships.  When the wilderness sanctuary is described, or the priestly garments or the sacrifices are described in detail, the Torah is really talking about our relationship with God, how that communication will take place, and where, who will facilitate it and how those facilitators will appear to us. It’s always been about relationships.

When we look at the incident of the Golden Calf, I think it also fascinating to analyze it through the lens of relationship.  It is a complicated drama, with lots of actors and lots of preexisting relationships:  God and the People, the People and Moses, Moses and God, Moses and Aaron and the People and Aaron. Each of these relationships affects and is affected by the drama of the narrative.

The People have been out of Egypt for only a few months; they are insecure, they are unused to freedom, they are afraid and they need a lot of handholding.  Up to this point, they have looked to Moses to provide those things, even though Moses himself is a bit insecure and needs some handholding, and that role has been played by God, with moral support from Aaron, but that dynamic has mostly played out in the background and the people seem to be unaware (or unimpressed) by God’s role in their care and feeding.

Now Moses has been absent for over 6 weeks, and God, occupied with tutoring Moses, seems to the people to also be unavailable.  The people go to Aaron, Moses’ substitute, to get some sense of security, in the form of the Golden calf, which they intend to have as God’s [representation] substitute.  In violation of one of the proclamations the people had heard from God only several weeks earlier, they offered sacrifices to the God-substitute and bowed down before it.

God (who, at least in the literary narrative also appears to be a bit insecure) tells Moses, “They have been quick to turn aside from the way that I enjoined upon them.  They have made themselves a molten calf and bowed low to it and sacrificed to it. . . . Now, let me be, that my anger may blaze forth against them and that I may destroy then, and make of you a great nation (Sh’mot (Exodus) 32:8, 10).” God trusts the relationship between him and Moses.  God is not pleased with his relationship with the People or how they relate to him (this is an ongoing concern, which, for the most part is unresolved in the Tanach (Hebrew Bible), though it admittedly cycles between a loving and angry relationship).

Then Moses takes a turn to play both conciliator and press agent; he intervenes between God and the people, reminds God of his relationship with the patriarchs and says something to the effect of “How will it look to the Egyptians that you did all these things to rescue the Children of Israel from Egypt only to kill them all in the wilderness (32:11-13)”?  God relents.  Moments later, in verse 19 Moses sees the goings-on and gets so angry himself “that he hurled the tablets from his hands and shattered them at the foot of the mountain.  He burns the idol, grinds the remains into a powder and makes the people drink.

Then Moses turns to Aaron, whose response to the questioning of the angry Moses is both flippant and knowing of what Moses has suffered with them, “You know that this people is bent on evil (v. 22)”.  You weren’t here and I did what they told me to do.  I took their gold and threw it into the fire and out came this calf (v.24).

Following this, chapter 33 contains an intimate encounter between God and Moses, following which, in Chapter 34, Moses is instructed to carve two new tablets (God had carved the first), and God, as if s/he had not Godself gotten angry with the People says to Moses that this was necessary because Moses [in his anger] had shattered the first set (34:1).  It amazes me that God adds this detail; he was ready to destroy the people, before Moses intervenes; now he is saying a second set of tablet is necessary because Moses couldn’t hold his temper.  The God/Moses relationship is complex indeed.  The portion ends with a reiteration of the basics of Passover observance and includes the injunction about boiling a kid in its mother’s milk.

The people settle in; their relationships with Moses and God continue to be contentious.  Moses continues to struggle as a leader, and God is often disappointed by the lack of faith the people exhibit.

For discussion:

1.         The people were afraid in Moses’ absence; have you ever done something you regret when the person you normally ask for advice isn’t available?

2.         Do you think Moses used a good strategy to save the people from God’s anger?  Could you role play that conversation differently?

3.         If Moses retired, would you apply for his job?

4.         Why is it so hard for people to learn from their mistakes?

Steve Kerbel, Director of Education of Congregation B’nai Tzedek, is Chair Emeritus of the Education Directors’ Council of Greater Washington and a national vice president of the Jewish Educators Assembly.