Framing matters. The context in which a story is told is part of the story itself. Take, for example, the story of Megillat Esther that we have just read. Imagine, if instead of beginning, “It was in the days of Ahashverosh, he was Ahashverosh who ruled from India to Ethiopia… (he) made a feast,” it read, “It was in the days when Jews had returned to build the second Temple… Ahashverosh made a feast.” Both would be true and could continue to describe the same events. Yet, they would tell very different stories. In this week’s parashah, the Jews build the “עגל הזהב-the Golden Calf”. A mere thirty-nine days after they were gifted the Torah by God Himself on Mount Sinai, they serve an idol. This event, shocking in its own right, is framed in a puzzling way.

The story appears to start at the beginning of Chapter 32:

וַיַּ֣רְא הָעָ֔ם כִּֽי־בֹשֵׁ֥שׁ מֹשֶׁ֖ה לָרֶ֣דֶת מִן־הָהָ֑ר וַיִּקָּהֵ֨ל הָעָ֜ם עַֽל־אַהֲרֹ֗ן וַיֹּאמְר֤וּ אֵלָיו֙ ק֣וּם׀ עֲשֵׂה־לָ֣נוּ אֱלֹהִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֤ר יֵֽלְכוּ֙ לְפָנֵ֔ינוּ כִּי־זֶ֣ה׀ מֹשֶׁ֣ה הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר הֶֽעֱלָ֙נוּ֙ מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם לֹ֥א יָדַ֖עְנוּ מֶה־הָ֥יָה לֽוֹ (שמות לב:א)

The people saw that Moshe had delayed in descending the mountain. The people congregated upon Aharon and they said to him, “Get up and make us a god/power that will go before us. For this man, Moshe, who took us up from the Land of Egypt, we do not know what happened to him.” (Shemot 32:1).

This is indeed the beginning of the chapter, but it is not the beginning of the story. The chapters of the Torah are not of Jewish origin. In the Torah, this story begins one passuk earlier:

וַיִּתֵּ֣ן אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֗ה כְּכַלֹּתוֹ֙ לְדַבֵּ֤ר אִתּוֹ֙ בְּהַ֣ר סִינַ֔י שְׁנֵ֖י לֻחֹ֣ת הָעֵדֻ֑ת לֻחֹ֣ת אֶ֔בֶן כְּתֻבִ֖ים בְּאֶצְבַּ֥ע אֱלֹהִֽים: (שמות לא:יח)

And He (God) gave to Moshe, when He finished speaking to him on Mount Sinai, the two Luchot (tablets) of Testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God. (Shemot 31:18).

The story of the Golden Calf is introduced with reference to the Luchot, the Tablets of Stone. They have, at least at this point, no relevance to the story. The Jews have not yet been given, nor will they be given, these Luchot. They are up the mountain with Moshe. They will be smashed when he descends. Yet, they are chosen as the introduction to this story.

This theme of Luchot continues throughout these tragic events: As Moshe descends from the mountain to confront the Jews, the Torah pauses the dramatic narrative to give a detailed description of the Luchot:

וַיִּ֜פֶן וַיֵּ֤רֶד מֹשֶׁה֙ מִן־הָהָ֔ר וּשְׁנֵ֛י לֻחֹ֥ת הָעֵדֻ֖ת בְּיָד֑וֹ לֻחֹ֗ת כְּתֻבִים֙ מִשְּׁנֵ֣י עֶבְרֵיהֶ֔ם מִזֶּ֥ה וּמִזֶּ֖ה הֵ֥ם כְּתֻבִֽים: וְהַ֨לֻּחֹ֔ת מַעֲשֵׂ֥ה אֱלֹהִ֖ים הֵ֑מָּה וְהַמִּכְתָּ֗ב מִכְתַּ֤ב אֱלֹהִים֙ ה֔וּא חָר֖וּת עַל־הַלֻּחֹֽת: (שמות לב:טו-טז)

Moshe turned around and descended from the mountain, with the two Luchot (tablets) in his hands, Luchot written on both their sides, they had writing on this (side) and this (side). (And) the Luchot (tablets) were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the Luchot (tablets). (Shemot 32:15-16)

The theme continues: When Moshe sees the Golden Calf, his first reaction is to smash the Luchot (Ibid. 19). When the Jews are eventually forgiven, God commands Moshe to reascend the mountain with new Luchot (34:1). The Luchot are definitely significant and important, but, at face value, they would not seem to be the central point of this story. Had the Jews served the Golden Calf, having not been given the Luchot, it would have been just as tragic and as shocking. This leads to three questions:

First, why are the Luchot chosen as the frame of the story of the Golden Calf?

A second, broader question: Why is this whole story here in the first place? We are three and a half parshiyot on from when the Torah was given at Sinai, the chronologically appropriate place for this story. We have just read two and a half parshiyot detailing how the Mishkan and its contents should be built. We will continue with two further parshiyot, which describe how the Jews actually built the Mishkan. Yet, we interrupt that storyline with an already out-of-place story?!

The final and most fundamental question: why on earth did the Jews build the Golden Calf?

These three questions are all enormous, and each deserves, and has received, much attention. We will suffice with exploring just one approach, with which all three questions can be answered.

Ramban[1] and Ibn Ezra[2] disagree on much but share a thesis of why the Jews built the Golden Calf: The Jews never intended to replace God, only to replace His messenger. Moshe, appearing ever more godly by the day, had disappeared. They were left in the terrifying wilderness alone. God had indeed taken them out of Egypt but had done so through an emissary. In the absence of Moshe, they wanted an intermediary. Ramban and Ibn Ezra underline that the people ask for the godly figure because the “Moshe the man” had disappeared. They asked for something that would “go before them.” The calf would fill the gap between them and God. This is still a grievous sin according to Jewish law, which outlaws all idols and does not believe in any intermediaries between Man and God, yet still less severe than what we may have thought.

This approach makes a lot of sense. There was a void when Moshe left. The people sought to fill it. But why did they do it in this way?

The answer lies within the framing: There is a big difference between the first set of Luchot and the second. The first, as described above, were made by God. The second were made by Man. This point is emphasized clearly in the text above, and later: God specifically tells Moshe (34:1), “פּסל לך שתי לוחות אבנים-carve out (for) yourself two tablets of stone.” Yet, despite the latter’s human origin, the first were smashed and the second survived. Man’s handiwork succeeded where God’s did not. This is counterintuitive, but its explanation is seen in lived life. People are far more committed to something that they have taken responsibility for. There is nothing like commitment (in act) to engender commitment (in heart). Ask any experienced educator: Command one’s students to do something, the obedient will listen, but the independents will not. Inspire them to take initiative and the obedient will obey, and the independents will take responsibility. The first Luchot were given to Man, the second were made by them.

Until this point, the Jewish people had been passive; they watched God and Moshe do everything for them. They were helpless without them. Moshe smashed the Luchot for this reason. As long as they were the work of God and not Man, Man would wait rather than work. The only thing that could stop people from needing an intermediary to reach out to God, would be if they learned to reach out themselves. There would be no void to be filled if they learned to fill it.

This also explains why this story is placed in the very center of the narrative of the construction of the Mishkan; after the command to build the Mishkan, but before the Jews take the initiative and build it themselves. The construction of the Mishkan is an antidote to the disease of passivity that plagued the Jews into making the Golden Calf. However, it only acts as a cure when it transitions from a Divine command, to human activity. The command to build it precedes the story of the Golden Calf. The Jews taking responsibility to turn it into reality, succeeds it both in narrative and in concept.

God leaves space for us to grow into.

[1] Commentary on Shemot 32:1

[2] Commentary on Shemot 32:1

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)