Few Biblical stories capture our imagination in quite the same way as does this week's Torah portion, Parashat Ki Tissa, the narrative of the Golden Calf. Moses ascends the mountain, promising to return. Time passes, and Moses does not return. The longer the people wait, the more anxious they became. Moses, their leader and the architect of their escape from Egypt; Moses their representative to God and valiant freedom fighter; Moses their teacher and lawgiver was nowhere to be found. So, when the people saw that Moses was late in coming down from the mountain, they gathered against Aaron and said to him, "Arise, make us a god who will go before us." Aaron tells them to collect the gold earrings and pendants and he makes for them the Golden Calf and declares a day of sacrificing and festivity.
For centuries, biblical commentators have examined this passage, wondering why, when so much points to the success of the Jewish people in escaping Egypt and moving towards freedom, the people would have been so eager to donate their jewels to build an idol. Many commentators, however, blame Aaron, not the Israelites, for the sin of the Golden Calf. After all, this sin is so great that it prevents him the opportunity to enter the Promised Land. Condemning his behavior, they claim that as a leader, he should have known better. He could have and should have said no and prevented the building of an idol.
So, just for a moment, let's consider that it was indeed Aaron's responsibility and his fault, and it is he who truly brought idol worship to the people. Why then is his punishment not more severe? After all, among the three cardinal Jewish sins for which the penalty was death, idolatry stood first. (Talmud Pesachim 25a and parallels) Moreover, just last week, we read of the death of Nadav and Avihu, whose major offense seems to have been that they dared to offer a spontaneous offering of their own design to God as an alternative to the specific sacrifices designated by the Torah. If they died for their offense, one intended not as an alternative to God, but as a way of reaching closer to God, would not it make sense to question how it is that Aaron is spared for having committed a greater offense - the sin of idolatry?
Some interpreters, modern and classical, explain that Aaron's sin was not one of idol worship, but of failure to calm the fears of the people. Instead, in an overly compromising act, he indulged idolatry for the sake of peace (see Exodus Rabbah and Adin Steinsaltz). Both the 12th century and 13th century French commentators, Bechor Shor and Hizkuni understand that the function of the golden calf was to replace Moses as the leader of Israel. Aaron, they say, was not interested in the power struggle that would surely occur upon Moses' return and was concerned that it would lead to a division amongst the people. So, to avoid conflict and to avoid betraying Moses' he decided to create a harmless figurehead which could be disposed of with little opposition when Moses would return.
Still other commentators read Aaron's actions very differently, explaining that he did not simply build the Golden Calf. Rather, they say, Aaron really intended to act for the sake of Heaven. Rashi declares that Aaron actually did everything he could to avoid the deed. Firstly, he points out that Aaron asks the people to "Take off your gold rings that are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters and bring them to me" (Exodus 32:2), after which the "all the people unburdened themselves of the golden rings that were in their ears" (verse 3). Rashi imagines Aaron saying to himself, 'The women and the children are protective of their jewelry, perhaps the matter will be delayed, and in the meantime Moses will return.' Moreover, Rashi explains (quoting Midrash Vayikra Rabbah) that Aaron first built the altar before the calf, on his own, dragging out the process - another delay tactic. Finally, Rashi points out that the reason Aaron declares 'Tomorrow shall be a festival of the Lord' (verse 5)' to mean not today, giving Moses yet more time to return. In other words, Aaron engaged in one delay tactic after another, all designed to give Moses time to get back and assume his rightful leadership.
Certainly Rashi paints a different picture of Aaron leading to his later comment on Aaron's statement to Moses, "I threw [the gold] into the fire and this calf emerged" (Exodus 32:24). Rashi points out that the calf was made by itself, without Aaron's effort.
But, I want to take Rashi comments one step further. Perhaps, it is the influence of Purim having been celebrated this week, but I came across a Hasidic text, Oznayim LaTorah, that had me considering turning this whole incident on its head. Says the Hasid, the people asking Aaron to 'make us a god' is a reflection of their desire to have their great leader Moses replaced not by another person, but only by a god. That, he says, is the way amongst people - if a leader departs, they praise him and say that only God could replace him.
So, what if Aaron really did have a plan and knew what he was doing? What if he understood that leaders do depart - and some are great; and, what if he wanted to teach us that though those leaders deserve some praise and honor, deifying them and/or assuming that no other person can lead in the future is a form of idolatry? And, worse, even when a leader isn't so great, we are so resistant to change that we can dig in our heals glorifying what has always been, declaring that any new innovation is impossible.
We know this; we witness it all the time. In our jobs, in our country, in our organizations, schools, synagogues - in every facet of our lives - leaders come and go. And, the danger of deifying them still exists. Or, we 'keep our jewelry on our ears' and say no to building our own Golden Calf. We can seek truth and growth by demonstrating faith, participating in the process, assuming our own leadership roles, and embracing change, knowing that tomorrow will be different than today.
Shabbat shalom