וירא העם כי בשש משה לרדת מן ההר, “when the people saw that Moses was tardy in descending from the mountain, etc.” This occurred on the 16th day of Tammuz. How do we arrive at this date? The Torah (Ten Commandments) had been given on the sixth of Sivan seeing that for six days commencing with the first day of Sivan the mountain had been covered in cloud (compare 24,16). On the sixth of these six days the revelation occurred. On the following day Moses ascended the mountain as the Torah wrote: “He (G’d) called to Moses on the seventh day (24,16). He remained there for forty days as we know from 24,18. “Moses remained on the mountain for forty days and forty nights.” When did all these days come to an end? On the 17th day of Tammuz, seeing Moses had told the people that he would return at the end of forty days at noon (according to Rashi). The people had made a mistake thinking that the day on which Moses ascended the mountain, i.e. the seventh of Sivan, was one of the forty days of which he had spoken. If that had been so, Moses should indeed have returned on the 16th of Tammuz. When the people noticed that by noon on that day Moses had failed to return they thought that someone had detained him and he would not return altogether.

The Midrash (Shabbat 89) says that Satan had brought darkness and confusion on to the globe at that time, and that he showed the Israelites an image of Moses lying on a bier. This accounted for the people saying: “arise let us make gods who will go before us, for this man Moses who brought us out from Egypt-we do not know what became of him.” Moses had spoken of 40 whole days not including the day on which he ascended the mountain. Accordingly, the people should not have expected him before the 17th of Tammuz. When the Torah writes (verse 6): “they rose early in the morning,” this was the 17th of Tammuz. It was ממחרת, “on the day after the 16th of Tammuz.” On that day they offered sacrifices to the golden calf. At noon on that day Moses returned and smashed the Tablets. On the day after that, the eighteenth of Tammuz, he burned the golden calf and convicted the people who had actively participated in the cult of the golden calf and commanded the Levites to execute these people. On the nineteenth of the month he ascended the mountain again pleading for forgiveness for the people, remaining there another forty days. He spent the entire period in prayer and pleading with G’d as he himself testified in Deut. 9,25: ”the forty days during which I threw myself down, etc.” These days came to an end on the first day of Ellul. On that same day, after having briefly returned to the camp, Moses ascended the mountain again after having been invited to do so by G’d, (34,2) and remained for forty days. This was in preparation of receiving the second set of Tablets. These forty days came to an end on the Day of Atonement, the tenth day of Tishrei. On that day the sin of the golden calf was finally forgiven; on the day following the day of Atonement the people began bringing their contributions for the building of the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle was erected on the first day of Nissan following, i.e. close to a whole year after the Exodus. All of this teaches you that the sin of the golden calf preceded the matters described in Parshat Ki Tissa. [The instruction to make sockets for the Tabernacle from the half-shekel contributions which were to atone for that sin would not make sense if the Tabernacle had preceded the sin of the golden calf. Ed.] This is merely another example of the fact that the Torah did not see itself as obliged to report matters in chronological order (compare Tanchuma Ki Tissa 11).

ויעשהו עגל מסכה, “he made it into a calf cast of gold.” Nachmanides writes that the fact that the mass of gold emerged in the shape of a calf was Aaron’s doing as the people had merely demanded: ”arise, make for us a deity, etc.” They had neither stipulated that the cast symbol be an ox, a sheep, or a goat. Aaron’s considerations in deciding to make a calf were based on the fact that the Israelites were in a desolate desert, and desolation and disaster are always perceived as emanating from the north (compare Jeremiah 1,14: ‘for from the north disaster will break loose’). When Jeremiah made this statement he did not only have in mind the impending invasion by the Babylonians who were situated north of the land of Yehudah. That this is true is evident from the text of that chapter seeing that in verse 15 G’d speaks about “summoning all the peoples from all the kingdoms of the north.” This is merely a symbolic way of telling us that the attribute of Justice always comes from the north to bring retribution upon the peoples of the earth in proportion to their wickedness. When you consider the visions Ezekiel saw when he portrayed for us the מעשה מרכבה in the first chapter of his book, you will find described that the face of the ox was on the left of the four chayot he saw (Ezekiel 1,10). Aaron believed that seeing that destructive forces emanate from the north and the calf symbolizes destructive forces, if, on the morrow, as he suggested, the people would declare a holiday dedicated to Hashem (verse 5), this would be a way to ward off evil and harmful influences. He hoped, as described in Isaiah 32,15 where the prophet describes a desolate place turning into a beautiful mountain like Mount Carmel, that spiritually negative forces could be sublimated into spiritually positive forces. After all, at this very Mount Chorev, his brother Moses had first become imbued with prophetic insights and had developed into the outstanding personality he had become. Our sages in Shemot Rabbah 3,3-42,8-and 15,9 have taught us the mystical dimension of all this when they commented on Exodus 3,7 where G’d told Moses ראה ראיתי את-עני עמי, “I have most certainly seen the afflictions suffered by My people in Egypt.” The Midrash quotes G’d as saying to Moses: “you Moses see only one single instance of such an affliction of the Jewish people; I, G’d see two such “afflictions” (this is why the wordsראה ראיתי were repeated). “You, Moses, see the people arriving at Mount Sinai and accepting My Torah, I on the other hand, can see how when I am about to give them this Torah they have many thoughts so that they even upset one of the four supports of My מרכבה, “My carriage,” so that they cause Me to become angry at them. (The Midrash quotes Ezekiel 1,10 and Psalms 68,18 in support of its illustrations). The word טטרא used there in the Midrash when it speaks about מטטרראמולין to describe a carriage drawn by four animals, (mules) means “four.” It is a reference to the four animals which Ezekiel saw in his vision, i.e. the מרכבה, the carriage transporting the glory of the Lord. Thus far the Midrash.

Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra claims that the word אלוהים in this instance (the one in verses 5 and 1) means that they wanted the attribute כבוד of G’d to rest in a stationary position in the form of a body, as a symbol of G’d’s Presence amongst them. If you will reflect on the first journey of the people in chapter 14,19 where the Torah describes the מלאך האלוהים which traveled first in front of the camp of the Israelites and afterwards behind them, you will understand the true nature of the people’s request. The stationary columns of cloud or fire were described as מלאך אלהים. [I have found this Ibn Ezra in his introduction to the episode of the golden calf. Ed.] Nachmanides disagrees with the Ibn Ezra he just quoted, seeing that none of the other reproductions of zodiac signs portrayed the golden calf as reposing. Thus far Nachmanides. The truth is that the whole point of making the golden calf was not to duplicate what the idolaters who construct a lifeless form do when they hope to imbue this lifeless stature or hewn image with some spirit and powers of prophecy. These idolaters expect the creation of their hands to have some form of life breathed into them by their counterparts in the cosmos, much as they imagined the first man to have had life breathed into him. When Aaron constructed the golden calf he intended for it to be a body which would receive divine input from the angel Mattatron, the one in charge of the universe and the powers assigned to the planets and their constellations in the sky. He thought in terms of the ox which is one of the four “animal-like faces” (concepts) supporting the throne (carriage) of G’d. He assumed that such insights would be provided by the ox seeing it is on the left side of the מרכבה, and it would show the Israelites the way so that it would counteract the negative northern influences. [The journey of the Israelites towards the Holy Land took them straight north. Ed.] At that time the Israelites found themselves within the domain of the planet Mars (as Pharaoh had already warned them about, see Exodus 10,10 compare Rashi). That planet derives all its celestial input from the attribute of Justice. Aaron hoped that just as the Israelites had been guided under the leadership of Moses by the attribute of Justice, so now, under the auspices of that attribute the Israelites would continue to receive celestial guidance. The calf merely symbolized which attribute of the מרכבה would guide the people. He misunderstood such verses as על פי ה’ ביד משה at the command of G’d by means of Moses (Numbers 9,23), as being something that could also apply to על פי ה’ ביד העגל, “at the command of the Lord by means of the ox.”. Aaron’s fatal error was to build an altar in front of this calf. Seeing he announced that the celebration on the following day would be in honor of Hashem (only), he had not become guilty of an act of idolatry by building this altar.

You have to realise that when the Israelites said: “these are your gods O Israel, who brought you out of Egypt,” there would have been nothing wrong with this if what they had in mind had been the same as what Aaron had in mind when making the calf. After all, we have already explained that Exodus 14,19 accorded the title “elohim” to a column of cloud and a column of fire; there was therefore nothing inherently wrong in the use of the word אלוהים or אלוהיך. The sin was prostrating oneself in front of such a symbol and in offering sacrifices to it (verse 8). Aaron’s intention had been that the calf, while representing the attribute of Justice, would not be removed from the domain of Hashem at all. The Israelites reversed what he had had in mind and turned the “body” of the calf into an independent deity by offering sacrifices to it and prostrating themselves in front of it. This is what the psalmist Psalms 106,20 had in mind when he wrote: “they exchanged their glory (G’d’s attribute כבוד) for the image of a bull that feeds on grass.” Aaron also explained to Moses in answer to his question that when he said: “I told them that whoever has gold?” “They removed it from themselves and I threw it into the crucible and there emerged this calf.” Aaron implied that his intention had been to address the attribute of Justice. Only in retrospect did it become clear that the people’s intention had been to idolise this calf, to prostrate themselves in front of it, and to offer sacrifices to it (based on 32,24). All of this was the reverse of what my intentions had been, i.e. to assure their continued support by the attribute of Justice.” Keeping this in mind there is no room for the question why Aaron chose gold rather than silver as the metal the people were supposed to bring him. Gold represents the attribute of Justice [compare author’s comments on 25,24 my translation page 1253] as its appearance resembles that of fire. Our sages (Yuma 45) said that the word Parvayim in Chronicles II 3,6 means that the gold came from a place called Parvayim, so called as its gold was similar in colour to the blood of bulls. The house in which the sacrifices were prepared (Solomon’s Temple) was all of gold as well as the altar of incense and the cherubs. The Mechilta Bachodesh, section 10 explains that if they had made parts of the Temple out of silver, this would have looked too similar to making deities of silver and gold, something prohibited expressly (see our author’s comment on 25,24.)

A Midrashic approach of the words ויעשהו עגל מסכה, (based on Tanchuma Ki Tissa 19): as soon as Aaron threw the gold into the crucible, the sorcerers amongst the recent converts came and used their tricks to ensure that what would emerge from the crucible would be a calf. Others say that a certain Michah who had been saved at Moses’s insistence as a baby when he was already in the form of a mud brick intended to substitute for a shortfall in the number of bricks produced by the Israelites on that day was to blame for the emergence of the calf. According to the Talmud, when Moses complained about the injustice of an innocent baby being killed, G’d taught him a lesson no to second-guess His wisdom. After sparing the baby’s life, Moses adopted him and he followed him everywhere. At the time of the Exodus when Moses could not find the coffin of Joseph and he threw a parchment with the holy name of G’d plus the words “arise ox” (a name applied to Joseph by his father) inscribed upon it into the river Nile, the coffin floated up. The boy [he must have been at least 60 by then] Michah dived into the river and retrieved this parchment. Now, after Aaron had thrown the gold into the furnace, this Michah threw in the parchment with the words עלה שור, signed with the tetragram into he crucible; thereupon the golden calf emerged from the crucible. After seeing this miracle, the Israelites who had observed it began to chant: “these are your gods O Israel.”

I have found in Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 45 that Aaron found amongst the golden jewelry contributed by the people a headband on which the tetragrammaton had been inscribed. It also had engraved on it the likeness of a calf. According to Rabbi Eliezer this was the only piece of gold Aaron threw into the crucible. He based himself on the fact that the Torah did not quote Aaron as saying ואשליכם באש, “and I threw them (the contributions of golden jewelry) into the fire, but he said: ואשליכהו באש, I threw it into the fire (verse 24). When the Israelites witnessed a golden calf emerging, this was perceived as a miracle especially since the calf was heard to low, to moo, and this is why they mistakenly ascribed prophetic or divine powers to this golden calf. Rabbi Yehudah said that Samael entered the calf and lowed, making the Israelites think that the calf itself was capable of mooing and therefore was alive. He bases himself on the verse in Isaiah 1,3 that “every ox knows its owner,” i.e. that every creature acknowledges its Creator by its mouth. Thus far Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer.

אלה אלוהיך ישראל, “these are your gods O Israel” Our sages in Sanhedrin 63 derive from this that these Israelites strove to have many deities. They derive this from the word אלה “these,” instead of זה, “this,” if they had referred only to the golden calf. We do indeed find the latter expression in Nechemyah 9,18: זה אלוהיך אשר העלוך ממצרים, “this is your god who took you out of Egypt.”

וירא אהרן, “Aaron saw.” The reason the Torah does not specify what he saw is that he saw many things. One of the things he saw was that Chur, the son of Miriam had already been murdered (for trying to stop the people from worshipping the calf). ויבן מזבח לפניו, “he built an altar in front of it.” He realised that someone had already been slaughtered before this calf (Chur). Perhaps Aaron was afraid that if he too were to allow himself to become a martyr, all of the Israelites would become guilty of death. We have a verse in Lamentations 2,2 אם יהרוג במקדש ה’ כהן ונביא, “if a priest and (or) prophet were to be killed in the Sanctuary,” which suggests that this is the ultimate crime. He preferred to personally shoulder the guilt than have all the people become guilty. Another consideration which might have accounted for Aaron’s conduct is that during the time it would take to build the altar, each Israelite bringing a stone, this would be accomplished very quickly. By undertaking to do the building himself he was stalling for time hoping that Moses would show up before too much spiritual damage had been done (compare Rashi). Still another reason prompting Aaron to act as he did was the fact that legally speaking the building of the altar was not something forbidden on pain of death requiring one to become a martyr rather than to respond to pressure. The prohibition to build such an altar per se is only in the order of the average negative commandment, possibly carrying a penalty of 39 lashes if performed with negative intent. The operative verse in the Torah is only “do not make for yourself a hewn image;” Aaron certainly did not make it for himself nor with intent to sacrifice to an idol.

לך רד כי שחת עמך, “Go, descend, for your people have become corrupt.” The grammatically correct form (passive) should have been כי נשחת עמך, “for your people have been corrupted.” Why did the Torah choose the strong active form of the פיעל construction? Actually, the Torah wanted to get across the point that not only did the people become corrupt on earth but their deeds also caused corruption (actively) in the celestial regions. The meaning of the word השחתה here is equivalent to the tearing down of a structure. The idolatry of the Israelites at the time ruined a spiritual facade in the celestial regions also. This is what our sages referred to as קצץ בנטיעות, “chopping off the young shoots.” There is no question that what the Israelites did at the time of the golden calf episode was similar to what Adam and Chavah had done when they ate from the tree of knowledge, when they sinned both in thought and in deed. [Compare author’s words on Genesis 2,9; my translation on the section “a Kabbalistic approach.” Ed.] Unfortunately, history repeats itself, the children not learning from the mistakes of their parents (Chagigah 14). This is what our sages alluded to when they reported that Adam offered a single-horned ox as sin-offering as he wanted to make his atonement fit his crime. (Compare what I wrote on Genesis 3,6 where I explained this statement of the Talmud Chulin 60).

A Midrashic approach (Pessikta Zutrata): the words of G’d to Moses to descend implied that His creatures had already caused Him to descend and inspect how rotten they had become more than once before. Just as G’d “descends” in a situation such as this as we know from Genesis 11,5, so now Moses too was told by G’d to “descend from his formerly lofty position.”

סרו מהר, “they have quickly departed, etc.” This term 'quickly' was most appropriate seeing that the people had apparently forgotten the miracles they had seen at the revelation only forty days ago and had committed idolatry at a time when the Shechinah was still present amongst them on Mount Sinai. Solomon paraphrased this when he said (Song of Songs 1,12 as interpreted in Shabbat 88) ”while the king was still at the table (Sinai), my nard gave forth its (foul) smell.” The words used by the Torah here have also been paraphrased by David in Psalms 106,13: “but they soon forgot His deeds; they would not wait to learn His plan.” The word עצתו, “His plan,” in that psalm refers to the Torah which Moses would bring with him on the morrow. Cf. Isaiah 25 for a similar usage of the word עצה.

The Midrash comments on this verse: Being unfaithful while under the bridal canopy is the ultimate insult by the bride to the groom, as it says ”While the king was still at the table, my nard gave forth its (foul) smell” — while the King of kings was at Sinai, my fragrance was tarnished with the sin of the golden calf.

עשו להם עגל מסכה, “they made for themselves a cast calf.” There are a number of surprising statements in this passage. 1) Seeing the Israelites had attained the spiritual niveau of the ministering angels at the time of the revelation by having heard G’d directly speak to them, how is it possible that they would request or demand from Aaron that he make for them an idolatrous image? 2) How can we understand the fact that they were now prepared to believe that the very earrings which they had worn in their ears had brought them out of Egypt, that they said concerning this gold: “these are your gods who have taken you out of Egypt?” 3) How is it possible that Aaron, second only to his brother Moses in his qualities as religious figurehead, could be prepared to go along instead of becoming a martyr when faced with the alternative of death at the hands of the people? Is it not a clear-cut rule that when it comes to a choice between committing idolatry and saving one’s life one must be prepared to give up one’s life rather than commit that sin? 4) How could Aaron say to Moses: “please do not be angry my lord,” shifting the blame to the people etc. (verse 22)? What other provocation would entitle Moses to become angry if not the commission of such a terrible sin?

The answer to all these questions is that they were based on the wrong premise. The last thing on the people’s mind was that Aaron should construct an idolatrous object for them; they did not demand a deity but a leader during their travels in the desert, just as Moses had been their leader. They said this clearly when they told Aaron אשר ילכו לפנינו, “who are to walk ahead of us (verse 1).” The “leader” was to show them the direction they were to travel in the desert. Up until now Moses had told them what route to take, and now there was no one to tell them in which direction to move. The words עשה לנו אלוהים, are to be understood as “make us a new leader seeing we have just lost our previous leader.” [They wanted a replacement for Moses, not for G’d. Ed.] The whole reason that Aaron involved himself in this project was to gain time, to procrastinate, in the hope that before he would complete it Moses would return so that the whole premise for the people’s request would collapse. The reason Aaron did not refuse and thereby risk becoming a martyr was that there was no need to do so for all the people wanted was a new leader to take the place of Moses. [In fact, refusing under the existing conditions could have been tantamount to suicide. Ed.] When Aaron remonstrated with Moses why the latter had become angry at him, he meant that seeing that the people had not demanded anything in the nature of idolatry there was no cause to get so excited. He added verbatim what the people had said to him, namely: “make for us an elohim who will walk ahead of us.” [Moses himself had been told by G’d that he would be elohim for Pharaoh (Exodus 7,1) and that Aaron would be his prophet.] Aaron added that the immediate cause for such a request in the words of the people themselves had been Moses’ tardiness in returning from the mountain. He implied the people’s readiness to immediately be led again by Moses now that he had returned. The proof for reading the mind of the people correctly was that they had not said simply: “make us a god,” but had said: “make us a god, for this man Moses, we do not know what became of him.” In other words, they wanted to replace Moses “the man,” not the Lord G’d. If the people had not had idolatrous thoughts when making their request, the idea that Aaron had assisted them in an idolatrous undertaking was preposterous! This is why Aaron had not hesitated to announce חג לה’ מחר, “tomorrow will be a festival for the Lord G’d.” Our sages (Vayikra Rabbah 10,3) point out that it is not written חג לעגל, “a festival in honour of the calf.” This proves that Aaron’s intention was crystal clear, oriented exclusively towards Hashem. Perhaps the most convincing proof that the people had not considered the calf a deity is the fact that when Moses proceeded to burn it [verse 20, before any of the people who had danced around it had been executed, Ed.] not a single Israelite is reported as trying to interfere with Moses attacking and destroying his deity. Had even a small group of people seriously considered this golden calf to have any divine powers, surely they would have stoned Moses to death for depriving them of their god! (Compare what Moses said to Pharaoh when asked by him to slaughter the lambs in Egypt instead of in the desert, Exodus 8,22). All of the above is based on Nachmanides.

Having read Nachmanides’ defense of the Jewish people and Aaron, the obvious question is why the people were punished so severely that we still suffer part of that punishment today whenever we are being afflicted for our personal sins? Why were the Levites allowed to execute 3,000 Israelites? Why did G’d dispatch a plague which killed many of the people (verses 27 and 35 respectively)? The answer is simply that whereas the whole episode with the golden calf began innocently enough as an error at worst, as it progressed it turned into deliberate acts of idolatry. This is why the Torah wrote that the people “prostrated themselves before the calf, that they offered peace-offerings to it, that they danced around it, etc. “(32,6; 32,19). Actually, at that time, the Israelites were divided into different groups. Some of them had pure motives when offering sacrifices; the Torah reflects this by writing (verse 6): ”they offered burnt-offerings and prepared peace-offerings.” The Torah did not write: “they offered burnt-offerings to it, and they prepared peace-offerings to it.” The ones whose motives were idolatrous were the ones of whom the Torah writes (verse 8): “they prostrated themselves before it, and they slaughtered offerings for it.”

Midrash Tanchuma (Ki Tissa 19) states explicitly that the mixed multitude (of Egyptian converts) who joined the Jewish people at the Exodus were the ones who made the golden calf. The Midrash proves this from the words אלה אלוהיך ישראל, “these are your gods O Israel.” Had the makers of the golden calf been natural born Jews they would have chanted: “these are our gods O Israel, who have brought us out of Egypt.“ This episode prompted our sages in Yevamot 16 to say that the process of assimilating converts is as much of an affliction for Israel as being struck with a form of skin eczema called ספחת on raw flesh, a dread disease, (compare Leviticus 13,2). On the same subject of accepting converts Shemot Rabbah 42,6 has stated that the reason G’d told Moses: “go on down for your people have become corrupt, was that Moses had accepted these converts at face value without having first obtained G’d’s permission to convert them. G’d reminded Moses that He had specifically said to him (Exodus 7,4) “I shall take out My hosts, My people, the Children of Israel. He had never mentioned taking out people who were not “Children of Israel,” whereas Moses had taken it upon himself to accept the mixed multitude. G’d now made it plain that He did not consider these converts as “My people.” In spite of what the Midrash writes, the fact remains that though these converts originated the disaster, the natural born Jews joined in of their own accord. This is why all of them were punished.

ויחל משה את פני ה’ אלו-היו, “Moses pleaded before Hashem, his G’d.” Moses pleaded with the attribute of Justice; the word פני when used in connection with G’d always refers to the attribute of Justice. To mention just a few examples: (Leviticus 20,5) ושמתי אני את פני באיש ההוא, “I shall set My face against that man;” or (Psalms 34,17) פני ה’ בעושי רע, “the face of G’d is set against evildoers. I have already dealt with this word in my commentary on Exodus 20,1. We are familiar with the meaning of the word ויחל from Malachi 1,9 חלו נא פני א-ל, “please implore the favor of G’d.” Alternately, the word may be derived from תחלה, “beginning, at first.” It would mean that Moses began something that would continue through to its end. He would implore the attribute בינה until he would reach the attribute דעה, which is above it. The description by Moses of G’d as אלו-היו is something that does not occur anywhere else in the whole Torah. It would normally indicate that Moses related to “his” G’d as no one else ever did or could and G’d acknowledged this during his life time. Nowhere else do we find that the Torah described G’d as specifically Moses’ G’d, such as we find frequently in connection with the patriarchs. G’d is often described as “the G’d of Avraham,” or as “the G’d of Yitzchak,” or as “the G’d of Yaakov.” Even in connection with David we find that Isaiah 38,5 quotes G’d telling Chizkiyah: “thus said the Lord, the G’d of your ‘father’ David, etc.” However, in Moses’ case this is the only time G’d associated His name with Moses and even then only by means of a pronoun, almost like an afterthought. I believe that the Torah’s intention was to give us a hint of G’d’s partial withdrawal from the Jewish people and even from Moses due to this grievous sin. This is confirmed by G’d describing the people to Moses as עמך, “your people.” He hinted that as of then they were not “His” people. How could they be, seeing they had been unfaithful to Him?

למה ה’ יחרה אפך בעמך, “Why, Hashem, should Your anger flare up against Your people, etc.” In Deut. 9,26 Moses elaborates in greater detail about this prayer he offered up pleading with G’d not to destroy the Jewish people. Our sages Shemot Rabbah 43,10, ask why Moses mentioned the Exodus at this time? They answer that Moses asked G’d to consider the background of the Jewish people, where they had been and under what circumstances He had taken them out of a land infested with all kinds of idolatry such as the land of Egypt. After all, it was probably not the first time Israelites had made a cast calf, though they could not make it out of gold because they were too poor.

זכור לאברהם ליצחק לישראל עבדיך “Remember for the sake of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yisrael Your servants;” If even Moses, the greatest of all our prophets had to remind G’d of the merit of the patriarchs in his plea to G’d in order to secure a favorable hearing, how much more so must we make such a reminder a pivotal part of all our prayers. G’d likes to be reminded of the patriarchs by us in all generations.

A Midrashic approach (Shemot Rabbah 44,1-2): the words “remember Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, tell us that Moses’ prayer did not evoke a response until he had mentioned the dead and departed; this explains why Israel has been compared to a grapevine as we know from Psalms 80,9 גפן ממצרים תסיע, “You plucked up a grapevine from Egypt.” Just as the grapevine is alive and remains alive even when attached to dead trees, trees which are far bigger than it, so Israel will remain alive and prosper by supporting itself by the dead (patriarchs).

You will note that whereas Elijah offered up numerous prayers at Mount Carmel, G’d did not respond to him until after he had mentioned the dead. When he pleaded ענני ה’ ענני, “answer me O Lord, answer me,” nothing happened until he added the words ה’ אלו-הי אברהם יצחק וישראל, “Lord G’d of Avraham, Yitzchak and Israel, today let it be known that there is a G’d in Israel.” As soon as he had concluded this particular prayer, fire fell from heaven and consumed the burnt-offering as well as the firewood and the stones. [I find this Midrash difficult as in the text you will note that Elijah mentioned the patriarchs before pleading ענני ה’ ענני. We may have to assume that the previous prayers are simply not recorded in the text (Compare Kings I 18,36)] Moses, likewise, remained on Mount Sinai for forty days to ask G’d’s mercy for His people for the sin of the golden calf and he was not answered until he mentioned the dead by saying: “remember Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov.” As soon as he did that, the Torah writes וינחם ה’ על הרעה אשר דבר לעשות לעמו “The Lord reconsidered the evil He had said to do to His people.” The whole episode helps us understand what Solomon referred to in Kohelet 4,2 when he said: “I praise the dead who are dead already.” He meant that such dead are even more effective in death than live and righteous people are while still alive. This is what the sages meant when they said that the righteous dead are greater in death than while they were still alive” (Chulin 7). Another approach to this verse in Kohelet: Solomon meant that the dead who were righteous during their lives long ago were greater in their lifetime than the righteous of the present generation in their lifetime (Shabbat 30,1). The proof is that the decrees handed down from the times of Moses are still being observed (though Moses has been dead a long time), whereas the decrees issued by kings nowadays, kings who are alive, are frequently not being observed. Moses himself had introduced numerous תקנות, ordinances, over and above the explicit laws spelled out in the Torah. To name but one: when the Torah writes in Leviticus 23,44 וידבר משה את מועדי ה’ אל בני ישראל, “Moses stated the laws about the festivals of G’d to the Children of Israel,” the Talmud Megillah 32 explains that Moses instituted the rule that the laws about keeping these festivals have to be expounded publicly on that day or earlier. We find that Ezra also added new such ordinances which are still being observed in our time (compare Baba Kama 82). All this is part of what Solomon had in mind when he praised the dead as being better off than the living as the ordinances of the living are often not accepted by their contemporaries.

ונחלו לעולם, “and it shall be their heritage forever.” What Moses meant was that the patriarchs would transmit that heritage forever. Even if the Israelites would be exiled from their land, no other nation would receive it as their heritage. This is the meaning of the words אחוזת עולם, “an eternal possession,” which G’d promised to Avraham in Genesis 17.8. Another meaning included in the words ונחלו לעולם is that the reference is to another, eternal world. When we think about that meaning of the word לעולם in Moses’ plea we would have an assurance in this verse, (or by Moses quoting G’d back to Himself) of G’d’s promise that the Israelites would exist forever, in this world as well as in the hereafter.

ויפן וירד משה מן ההר. “Moses turned and descended from the mountain.” Rabbeinu Chananel writes in this connection that Moses must have been facing the cloud during his descent. In other words, just as he had ascended facing the cloud, he now descended keeping his face towards the cloud, walking back-wards. The High Priest emulated Moses’ withdrawal from facing the Shechinah on the Day of Atonement when he also walked backwards out of the Holy of Holies after having offered the incense before the kapporet as well as some of the blood of the two offerings on behalf of the people, as well as on to the dividing curtain. The Mishnah Yuma 52 states: “in the manner he had entered he exited.” This is also the way Leviticus 16,24 “he exited and completed the ritual of his own burnt-offering as well as that of the people,” has been interpreted by our sages to mean that the wordלבמה , “to the altar” must also be read as מבמה, “from the altar,” when he was headed back to Jerusalem (Yuma 53). There is a precedent for this in Numbers 31,21, where the words הבאים למלחמה must also mean הבאים מן המלחמה, “the ones who were returning from the war.” In the present situation what happened was simply a putting into practice of the well known principle (Psalms 16,8) שויתי ה’ לנגדי תמיד, “I always keep the Lord (Shechinah) before my eyes.” How do we know that the Shechinah was on the mountain at the time Moses descended from the mountain? In Deut. 9,15 where Moses refers to his descent from the mountain, he adds the words: “and the mountain was burning in fire while the two Tablets of the covenant were on my two hands.” We have also been taught in Yuma 53 that any student taking leave from his teacher has to follow the procedure Moses taught us and depart facing his Rabbi until he can conveniently hide his face behind something between him and his Rabbi. All of Israel symbolically perform the rite of withdrawing from facing G’d while taking three steps backwards at the end of the central prayer, the עמידה. Thus far Rabbeinu Chananel

When you examine this verse together with the verse following it you will find a total of 108 letters, corresponding to the 108 handbreadths of the combined length, width, and depth of one of the Tablets. The two Tablets combined comprised 216 such handbreadths corresponding to the number of letters in the great name (based on the three verses in Exodus 14,19-21 being written one above the other giving 72 three-lettered “words.” Compare our comments on that verse). When these Tablets rested inside the Holy Ark they symbolised the fact that the great name of the Lord in all its permutations was contained in the Holy Ark. When you consider the number of letters between the beginning of Exodus 34,4-6 where the making of the second set of the Tablets is described, you will also find a total of 108 letters followed by the words: ויעבור ה’ על פניו, “Hashem passed before him (Moses).” This is all a clear hint that the presence of these measurements and letters symbolised the presence of the Shechinah. Moreover, the remarkable number of letters on both occasions in connection with the Torah describing the Tablets is a powerful proof for the way the Kabbalists have determined that there are actually a total of 216 letters which form the complete great name of the Lord. Moses had been taught all this explicitly while he was on Mount Sinai.

לוחות כתובים משני עבריהם מזה ומזה הם כתובים, “Tablets inscribed on both of their sides; they were inscribed on one side and on the other.” It was a great source of wonderment that the writing could be read from either side as if it had been written on that side originally. When we humans write, say on transparent glass, anyone standing on the other side while seeing the letters has to read them in reverse order for the writing to make sense to him.

It is possible to explain the words משני עבריהם as meaning that any word in the Torah has two kinds of meaning. There is the obvious meaning, called נגלה, and the hidden, mystical meaning, called נסתר. Solomon alluded to this in Proverbs 25,11 when he wrote: “a word properly spoken is like a golden apple in a silver setting.” We also have a verse in Job 11,6: “for there are multiple aspects to wisdom.” Torah is a source of wisdom on different levels. In addition to its plain meaning, the פשט, there are still worlds of hidden wisdom. In Psalms 62,12 David refers to this by saying: G’d has said one thing, but I have heard two (messages) out of the one thing.”

והלחות מעשה אלו-הים המה, “and the tablets were G’d’s handiwork.” The reference is not to G’d’s “manually” having made the Tablets, but that they came into existence at a verbal directive of G’d just as the world came into existence by verbal directives of G’d, i.e. בדבר ה’ שמים נעשו, “by the word of the Lord the heavens were made” (Psalms 33,6). A similar expression is used in Genesis 2,4: ביום עשות ה’ אלו-הים ארץ ושמים, “on the day the Lord G’d made earth and heaven.”

והמכתב מכתב אלו-הים הוא, “and the script was the script of G’d.” Nachmanides writes that the verse praising the distinctive features of the Tablets should by rights have been written earlier, right next to 31,18 where the Torah reports G’d giving the Tablets to Moses, that they were made of stone and written with the “finger” of G’d. The reason the details written here have been delayed is to draw our attention to the fact that what Moses was about to smash was something so extraordinary that the very idea that he would smash it is mind-boggling. This is how Nachmanides accounts for the positioning of this verse at this point. While this makes sense, the bigger problem is how Moses, the trusted servant of the Lord, could initiate such an act of deliberately destroying G’d’s handiwork without having obtained G’d’s permission to do so. If, due to Israel’s sin, they had forfeited the right to receive the Tablets, Moses should have returned them to G’d! Alternatively, he should have asked G’d what to do with them. When a mortal king dispatches a sealed document to someone by means of a messenger and the messenger is unable to make delivery because the recipients do not want to accept said document, a loyal servant brings the document back to his king explaining that he was unable to deliver it. He would most certainly not treat it disrespectfully by tearing it up! The reason that Moses smashed the Tablets was that he had observed that the letters on it had already flown away (Shemot Rabbah 46,1) as soon as he was approaching the area where the calf was positioned, an area which had become defiled by the calf’s very presence. In other words, continuing with our parable, the king’s seal had already disappeared, so that the rest of the document was no longer of any value.

We may compare the Tablets themselves and the writing on them to the relationship between body and soul. The Tablets were the body, the writing was the soul. Once the soul has departed the body is of no value whatsoever. Such a dead body deserves to be buried under the earth. This is why Moses’ mind told him that the proper thing for him to do was to bury the Tablets beneath the mountain. The proof for our sages’ statement that the letters had flown away is found in Berachot 8 where the rabbis warn of treating scholars who have forgotten their learning due to some accident such as sickness or economic hardship without respect. They meant that even the broken pieces of the first set of Tablets were deemed worthy to be placed inside the Holy Ark. Even the stone devoid of script was not considered as having lost all sanctity. The scholar who had once been a receptacle of Torah knowledge deserves to be treated with respect even when he can no longer disseminate his knowledge (provided his present condition was due to an accident beyond his control). This is also what our sages had in mind when they said that Moses did not smash the Tablets but they fell out of his hands. As long as the letters were on the Tablets they supported not only themselves but “carried” the entire weight of such massive stone cubes. Once the letters had flown off, it was quite impossible for mortal man, even a giant such as Moses, to carry such a weight. The text supports our approach for as long as the letters were on the Tablets the Torah reports Moses as carrying both Tablets בידו, in one of his hands (verse 15). As soon as he saw the calf and the dances, he could not even carry the Tablets with both his hands (verse 19). We find something parallel with human beings. As long as the body contains a soul, i.e. is alive, it weighs less than after the soul has departed. Even a piece of iron which is white-hot weighs less than the same piece after it has cooled off, i.e. after the “life, the fire” has gone out of it. In halachic terms (Shabbat 94) this is the meaning of the principle החי נושא את עצמו, “that living people or animals carry themselves,” i.e. that one does not incur a penalty for carrying living people on the Sabbath [providing they could have walked if they had not been carried. Ed.]

את קול העם ברעה, “the sound of the people in its shouting;” the final letter in the word is the letter ה although it should have been the letter ו seeing that the subject is masculine. However, we may see in this an allusion to five different sounds or voices such as described in connection with the idolatrous cults performed in front of the golden image Nebuchadnezzar had made (compare Daniel 3,7). We are told there about five different sounds, “horn, pipe, zither, lyre, psaltery, bagpipe, and more.“ Another meaning of the word ברעה may be that the wordרעה is an allusion to the planet Mars of whose negative and destructive influence on the Israelites Pharaoh had already warned Moses as we pointed out repeatedly, based on Exodus 10,10. This is also why the Israelites (worshipping the calf) used the musical instrument מחול as the music produced by it is reputed to counteract harmful radiations from Mars. This is also why Aaron said to Moses: “you know that the people are ברע,“ i.e. are under the influence of that planet.

Joshua had not ascended the mountain with Moses, neither had he remained in the camp during the entire 40 days Moses had been on the mountain. The word וישמע, “he heard,” rather than “he saw,” is clear proof of that. While waiting for Moses at the base of Mount Sinai, a special portion of manna descended for his benefit, as basically, no manna fell on the mountain. Our sages in Yuma 76 have explained the expression לחם אבירים אכל איש, (Psalms 78,25) as applying to the special portion of manna G’d made it rain around the site where Joshua had positioned himself. The Torah (G’d) refers to Joshua as איש in Numbers 27,18 where He responds to Moses’ request to appoint a successor for him by mentioning that Joshua was suitable, that he was -in the words of Moses- a man with the right kind of spirit.

וירא את העגל ומחלות, “and when he saw the calf and the dances, etc.” Of all the various musical instruments which were being used at that time, the Torah identifies only the מחלות, The fact is that you find that Scriptures lists a total of seven varieties of musical instruments each one corresponding to one of the seven fixed stars (galaxies, which formed the basis of astronomy and astrology until Copernicus). The instrument known as כנור corresponded to the planet Saturn, whereas the instrument known as תוף, drum, corresponded to the planet Jupiter. The instrument known as עוגב corresponds to the planet Venus; the instrument known as צלצלי שמע corresponds to the planet Mercury. The instrument known as צלצלי תרועה corresponds to the moon, whereas the instrument known as מחול corresponds to the planet Mars. The instrument known as מנים corresponds to the planet Sun. In Psalms 150 there is a list of nine different musical instruments corresponding to nine planets (galaxies). The experts of music know how each of these instruments match the specific nature of the planets and zodiac influences they are to represent or counter, respectively. The שופר and נבל which are unaccounted for in our list but have appeared in Psalm 150 each have their cosmic function also. The שופר represents an all-embracing planet, one that orbits all the other planets, whereas the instrument known as נבל, corresponds to the eighth planet the sphere within which all the stars we observe are orbiting. The reason that in connection with the golden calf the instrument מחול is singled out for special mention is that in the desert the influence of the planet Mars is exceedingly potent. You will note that already after the Israelites had been saved by walking through the sea whereas their pursuers the Egyptians perished in that same sea, Miriam and her companions took two instruments with which they accompanied their song of praise to G’d, namely the מחול and the תוף (compare Exodus 15,2). In that connection the Torah mentioned that Miriam was the sister of Aaron, a fact familiar to every reader of the Torah. It appears that some of the ladies banging the drums at that time directed their thanks-giving at the planet Jupiter, the planet to which this instrument corresponds. In order to offset such erroneous כוונות the Torah (Miriam) mentioned that her brother Aaron represented צדק seeing that he was such a perfectly righteous and lovable person. This thought about Aaron would deflect what could otherwise have been a serious theological error on the part of the women playing the drums.

A Midrashic approach views the expression מחולות as derived from מחילה, “pardon, forgiveness.” According to this view when Moses looked at all the musical instruments being used in these festivities, none evoked within him any hope of these people being forgiven eventually, until he saw the מחולות. As soon as he saw that instrument, he regained confidence that there was hope that G’d would eventually forgive them for this grievous sin and he immediately proceeded to burn the calf, etc. This whole matter is an illustration of the old adage of our sages that סימנא מילתא הוא, that one must not dismiss symbols as of no consequence and not related to the essence of a matter, but that on the contrary, any symbol may trigger something which will prove to be very important (compare Horiot 12). When Moses sprinkled the ash of the golden calf on the water and made the Israelites drink the mixture, he did so in order to disgrace them as they would excrete this in the form of diarrhea, not as urine. Compare Isaiah 30,22: “who says of idolatry and its remains: ‘you will cast them away like a menstruous woman.’” Another thought which motivated Moses was to examine the Israelites just like women who are suspected of infidelity against their husbands, סוטות. If the faces of the people drinking this mixture would turn green (like the face of a guilty סוטה), it would become public knowledge who amongst them had enjoyed watching the dancing and the festivities around the golden calf. The people who had participated in the golden calf cult in deed and had been witnessed and identified as such had already been condemned to die by tribunal; the identity of those, however, who had committed the sin only in their hearts had not been known and became known only as the result of their drinking this water with the ash of the golden calf. This is what our sages meant in Yuma 66 when they said anyone who had slaughtered a sacrifice or offered incense to the golden calf was executed by the sword. The ones who had merely kissed the calf died at the hands of G’d. Those who had enjoyed the proceedings without participating actively except with their hearts were struck by dropsy. Another source distinguishes between the ones who had been legally warned of the penalty they would face and those who had not been warned. The former were executed by the Levites, the latter died at the hand of G’d. Those who had participated actively but had not been seen by valid witnesses nor been warned properly would die at the hands of G’d. Had G’d performed a miracle and the people guilty only in their hearts would have been struck by dropsy without having drunk from the water with the ash of the golden calf, the people might have said that the afflicted person while dying because of a sin he had committed did not die on account of his enjoying the cult of the golden calf. Having first drunk from this mixture made it reasonable to attribute their dropsy to a sin connected with the golden calf. The reason the Torah reported Moses as “grinding” the gold was to achieve as near a replica of the Sotah procedure when earth is taken from the floor of the Tabernacle and mixed with the water before the Sotah is given it to drink (compare all the details in Numbers 5,17.)

ואשליכהו באש ויצא העגל הזה, “I threw it into the fire and there emerged this calf.” Our sages called whatever has been mentioned in connection with the calf up to this point, “the first calf.” The story from this point on, i.e. Aaron’s personal account is known as the “second calf.” This is important to realize as our sages have said (Megillah 25) that the portion of the “first calf” may be read from the Torah as well as translated into another language, whereas the part commencing here may be read in public only in Hebrew. The reason our sages gave for this difference is that they were concerned with the image of Aaron. Anyone who does not know Hebrew well may draw the wrong conclusion from the translated version.

We need to consider that although the episode has been described impersonally by the Torah as well as in Moses’ own words in verse 8 where he said: “they have made for themselves a cast calf, etc.,” in the eyes of our sages verse 4 and verse 8 are all considered as part of one story. This is why both these verses may be read in public in translation. Here, however, where Aaron tells of his own involvement it became important to insure that he would not be accused of sinful action which he had not in fact been guilty of. To give just one example. The words ויצא העגל הזה when read in translation and out of context give the impression that Aaron wanted to whitewash his part in the affair saying the calf had come out by itself. It might also give the impression that if it had walked out by itself, it was alive, another wrong impression.

לשמצה בקמיהם, “to disgrace amongst those who rise up against them.” Both Rashi and most other commentators understand the word לשמצה as meaning the dissemination of evil reports. Our sages use the word in this sense when they speak about שמץ פסול in Pesachim 50. Moses said: “Aaron was the cause that future generations will spread evil reports about the generation of the Jews at this time, saying that all of them had been of an idolatrous mind at the time. Evil gossip would take hold amongst all those who would rise up against the Jewish people at a future time. It would disgrace the people in the eyes of their adversaries.”

The correct interpretation of these words is what Nachmanides writes, i.e. that the word לשמצה is a word denoting “reduction, diminution.” A Biblical parallel is found in Job 4,12: ותקח אזני שמץ מנהו, “my ear caught just a little bit of it.” Another example where the word is used in a similar fashion is Job 26,14: ומה שמץ דבר נשמע בו, “the mere whisper that we perceive of Him.” According to this approach what Moses meant here was that Aaron’s part in the golden calf episode would diminish the ability of the Jewish people to stand up against their adversaries whenever the occasion would arise as they had fewer merits going for them. This same thought is also expressed in Ezekiel 29,15: “I (G’d) shall diminish them so that they shall not rule over the nations.” [The prophet describes the re-emergence of the state of Egypt as a greatly reduced world power. Ed.] Jeremiah 10,24 speaks of a “reduction” in the amount of G’d’s wrath when disciplining the Jewish people.

כה אמר ה’ אלו-הי ישראל, “thus has said the Lord G’d of Israel, etc.” We do not find that G’d’s instruction by word to Moses of this matter is recorded in the Torah other than that Moses quotes G’d. Nonetheless, he did receive such instructions. Moses refers to the Lord as אלו-הי ישראל in order to teach us that even the makers of the golden calf intended to offer their sacrifices to the “G’d of Israel,” (not to the golden calf). Still, the attribute of Justice decided to punish these people as true heretics as the Torah has taught us (Deut. 1,17) that המשפט לאלוהים הוא, the “judgment,” i.e. the evaluation of our deeds is something that G’d has reserved for Himself. This is the way Nachmanides explains these words. We find something analogous in Numbers 16,9 where Moses tells the Levites that אלו-הי ישראל, “this attribute of Justice has separated, (distinguished) the Levites from the remainder of the community of Israel.” This was another example of G’d exercising His right to evaluate the deeds of men. In that instance it meant that the performance of service to אלו-הי ישראל in and around the Tabernacle would be reserved for the tribe of Levi. Seeing that it had been the members of this tribe who had sanctified the Lord’s name in public, they were rewarded by sanctifying the Lord’s name on a regular basis. The moral lesson is that that the appropriate way to atone for desecration of the Lord’s name publicly is to sanctify it publicly.

אנא חטא העם הזה, “I implore!” This people has committed a grievous sin.” This is the source for the High Priest in the Yom Kippur service introducing the various confessionals with the word אנא. Our sages in Yuma 35 say that the prayer resulting in the granting of atonement was derived from Moses’ prayer at Mount Sinai when he said to the Jewish people (Exodus 32,30) “perhaps I can achieve atonement for your sin.” Hence it is fitting that the formula used by the High Priest on the Day of Atonement introducing the confession leading to atonement should be one that has proven effective in times past. Furthermore, the Talmud there queries the need to mention the holy name of G’d in the confessional. It concludes that seeing this is done in the case of the עגלה ערופה, the heifer that gets killed as atonement for the possible indirect involvement of the people in a town near which an unsolved murder occurred (Deut. 21,8), it is most certainly appropriate for the High Priest on the Day of Atonement to invoke the holy name of G’d for sins which most certainly have been committed by unknown parties and which require atonement.

It is customary nowadays (when there is no Temple or High Priest) to invoke the name of the Lord when reciting a prayer beginning with the word אנא. Examples are such prayers as אנא ה’ הושיעה נא, אנא ה’ הצליחה נא. This parallels the prayer of the High Priest which commenced with the words אנא ה’ כפר נא לעמך ישראל, “please O Lord forgive Your people Israel, etc.” When Samson appealed to G’d to restore his physical strength to him one last time (Judges 16,28), he also invoked the name of the Lord saying: אדני ה’ זכרני נא וחזקני נא אך הפעם, “My Lord G’d remember me and grant me my strength only this one time, etc.” If nonetheless, we find that Moses in our verse did not add the name of the Lord after saying אנא, it is possible to explain this by saying that Moses was simply ashamed to utter the name by means of which the Torah had been given to the Children of Israel, the same people who had now violated this Torah in such a gross fashion. Even though Moses did not explicitly mention the holy name of G’d on this occasion, it was alluded to in the very word אנא, the numerical value of its letters being 52, i.e. twice the number of the holy name of G’d, i.e. the attribute of Justice as well as the attribute of Mercy. That very name, referring to both attributes is mentioned at the beginning of the list of the thirteen attributes of His which G’d revealed to Moses in Exodus 34,6.

It is also possible to explain the absence of the name of the Lord in Moses’ prayer at this juncture by the requirement to immediately spell out the precise nature of the sin for which atonement is being sought. This is why Moses said immediately “they made for themselves gods of gold, etc.” It would have been inappropriate to invoke the name of G’d which symbolises Unity, at a time when the sin for which forgiveness was being sought symbolised the very opposite of Unity, i.e. diversity. Moses acted in line with a famous saying of our sages in Pessikta Zutrata on Exodus 5,2: “what business does a king have in a slaughter- house, and what business does a priest have in a cemetery?” Indeed, we find (Exodus 33,7) that as soon as the Israelites had constructed the god of gold the Shechinah withdrew from their midst as Moses henceforth was obliged to leave the camp if he wanted to communicate with G’d.

מחני נא מספרך, “blot me (my name) out from Your book, please.” According to the plain meaning of these words the “book” Moses spoke of was the Torah. A Midrashic approach: The word “from Your book” which Moses uttered here as simply a possibility, teaches that the curse of a Torah scholar, even if only conditional, is apt to come true. This is based on what Moses said here. Even though the essence of his prayer, namely forgiveness of the sin of the Jewish people, was accepted by G’d, Moses’ name does not appear in the entire portion of תצוה as a direct consequence of his uttering the words מחני נא מספרך. Whereas G’d forgave the grievous sin of the golden calf, He did not ignore these words of Moses which He considered as out of place.

A more rational/investigative approach: The word מספרך, is a reference to the horoscopes, something known as the “book (handbook) of the Lord.” Just as a book consists of impressions of letters and pictures, etc., imprinted in order to be a permanent record, so the stars in the sky represent a similar book of reference of the Lord in which He predetermined the fates of all those who do not qualify for His personal supervision of their fates, i.e. the book of horoscopes. Such a book contains a list of the life spans of each individual before he is born, as well as other data relevant to his life on earth. King David already referred to this in Psalms 139,16: “Your eyes saw my unformed limbs, they were recorded in Your book.”

Man’s potential in the celestial spheres (what is inscribed in that book) enables him to accomplish whatever it is that he will accomplish while alive on earth. When this potential is erased in G’d’s book, this means that he will die here on earth forthwith. In other words, the essence of Moses’s prayer was that unless G’d would forgive the people their sin, he, Moses, would not want to live. He simply could not bear to watch the misery that would befall his people if G’d were not to forgive them. On another occasion Moses phrased the same sentiment more directly when he said הרגני נא הרוג אם מצאתי חן בעיניך, “please kill me (now) if I have found favor in Your eyes” (Numbers 10,15). This is a typical expression used by the righteous when they experience mental anguish and despair of the usefulness of their lives. The prophet Elijah used similar language after the failure of his demonstration at Mount Carmel, when he had walked for forty days to Mount Chorev and said to G’d that He should take his soul as he had not proved more effective than other prophets who had preceded him (Kings I 19,4). Another prophet who used similar language as a death wish was Jonah who said to G’d: “please take my life for it is better that I die than that I live (Jonah 4,3). The reason Moses added the words אשר כתבת, “which You have written,” is a reference to something new, a recognition that G’d had been the one who called the universe into existence. Anything “new” testifies to the existence of the One who created something new, just as the written word testifies to the fact that there was someone who did the writing. Moses implied that seeing it had been G’d who had initiated all these forces it was also within His power to cancel such evil decrees at will. G’d answered him that He reserved the right to erase the people who had sinned from His “book,” not the ones who had not. The fact that G’d did not even name the sinners, i.e. the Jewish people, reflects the depth of G’d’s anger at them (32,33). G’d said to Moses in effect: “You are not deserving of any punishment seeing that you have not sinned at all. However, all those who have sinned are the ones who are in line for being erased from My book.” G’d meant that He would nullify the potential of these sinners’ power as predetermined in the handbook of G’d which we described earlier. It is in line with verse 10 where G’d exclaimed that “My anger has flared against them and I will destroy them within a moment.”

A Kabbalistic approach: the word מספרך, is equivalent to מן הספירות, “from the list of emanations.” It is as if Moses had said that he wished to be erased from the lower six of these emanations. They represent G’d’s activity when beginning to create the universe. It is a reference to the six extremities of the universe which are also known as the מלאכת שמים וארץ, “the work of (constructing) heaven and earth.” This is also the mystical dimension of Psalms 69,29: ימחו מספר חיים, “may they be expunged from the ‘book’ of life.” David also referred to these emanations, calling them ספר.

This enables us to understand a statement by the sages (Rosh Hashanah 16) that three “books” are open before the Lord on New Year’s day. One contains the names of the fully righteous people, one contains the names of the definite sinners, whereas the third contains the names of the people who fall into an in-between category, being neither considered righteous nor evil. The three books referred to may also be understood as חסד, דין, רחמים “loving kindness, Justice, Mercy.” G’d relates to the totally righteous with loving kindness; to the wicked He relates with Justice. To the category which has not yet crystallized as either of the former two, He relates with “Mercy.” The attribute of Mercy is called upon to decide to which category to consign these people who by reason of their deeds are not yet properly categorized. The מלך, “King” whom we address on Rosh Hashanah deals with all three categories on that day.