Six hours have already come. . . I.e., the word בשש connotes באו שש (six have come).

And taught us the way. . . Rashi is answering the question: First it is written עשה לנו אלהים אשר ילכו לפנינו . Accordingly, it should then say כי זה משה האיש שהלך . This way it would convey: “Moshe, the man who once went before us, has now died. Therefore, make us gods who will go before us.” Why is it written אשר העלנו מארץ מצרים ? Therefore Rashi explains that אשר העלנו מארץ מצרים is not to be understood literally; rather it means that Moshe taught us the way to go.

The meaning of unloading a burden. . . Thus Rashi later explains that את נזמי means מן נזמי . This is because the ת [of ויתפרקו ] makes it a reflexive verb [denoting “they unloaded themselves”]. But had it said ויפרקו , [a transitive verb,] Rashi would not need to explain את נזמי as מן נזמי . In addition, I found [an alternative explanation:] they had a small ring in their ears, on which their jewelry hung. [Accordingly, the verse means: “They unloaded the jewelry from the small golden rings.”]

He had come out of the foundations. . . Explanation: when the Israelites were in Egypt, building Pisom and Ramseis, and they failed to complete the amount of work they were told to do, the Egyptians came and took their children, put them into the wall being built, and placed stones around them and on them — thereby completing the amount of work. Moshe said to Hashem: “Master of the World! Why should the children be punished by such a death?” Hashem answered: “These children will not end up good. They will go in evil ways when they mature. Better they die while they are worthy.” Moshe went and removed a child who was crushed (nimach) in a row being built. He was called Michah.

And he threw it into the melting pot and out came the Calf. Since “Arise ox” was written on it, the Calf arose, for it was a [young] ox.

And afterwards misled. . . Therefore it says: “These, Yisrael, are your gods who brought you up.” I.e., the riffraff said this to the Israelites.

As it is said, “in the form of an ox eating grass”. . . This refers to the Calf.

He thereby saw that the Satan’s act succeeded. . . Satan caused disorder in the world at the sixth hour, and his deeds succeeded, for he achieved his aim.

Chur reprimanded them, they killed him. . . Explanation: Chur reprimanded them for making the Calf, and they killed him. Thus Aharon was afraid to reprimand them, lest they kill him. You might ask: Rashi explained above, “‘He built an altar’ — so as to stall them.” Rashi comments on this, “That is its plain meaning.” [Yet the midrash says, “Through my **building it and procrastinating in my work, in the meantime Moshe will come.”] If so, is the midrash not saying the same as the plain meaning? The answer is: [At first] Rashi is answering the question: Why did Aharon build a new altar? There was one already built, as it is written at the end of parshas Mishpatim. Thus Rashi explains, “So as to stall them. . . that is its plain meaning.” Whereas the midrash’s interpretation answers the question: Why did Aharon build the altar, and not someone else?

A term of harshness. . . However, וידבר ה' אל משה לאמר is not a term of harshness, because וידבר is followed with לאמר . Thus, וידבר is the general [act of speaking], and לאמר specifies [what is spoken]. But here לאמר does not follow afterward. And it is written וידבר instead of ויאמר . Perforce it is a term of harshness. (Re”m)

Can there be a thought of jealousy, unless it is. . . Rashi is answering the question: Was it not right for Hashem to be angry with them for having made the Calf? Perforce, Moshe meant: “Can there be a thought of jealousy. . .” But above, on אנכי ה' אלהיך (20:2), Rashi explains [our verse differently]: “Why is it in the singular form: אלהיך ? This was meant to give an opening for Moshe. . . This is what is meant when he said: “Hashem! Why should Your wrath blaze against Your people?’ [Meaning:] ‘It was not to them that You issued the command: You shall have no other gods, but only to me.’” Both [of Rashi’s explanations] are correct.

Formulate another plan. . . I.e., act for them, and change from a thought of evil to a thought of good. [Rashi knows it means this] because the term ניחום always denotes [changing to] another thought.

Their father Avraham. . . [Rashi knows that Avraham “has not yet received his reward”] because otherwise, why does it say, “Remember Avraham”? He already received his reward for his righteousness, and Hashem is no longer obligated on Avraham’s account to help his children.****

Remember Avraham who offered himself. . . [Rashi knows all this] because otherwise, why are all three mentioned? Mentioning just Avraham alone is sufficient. (Re”m) Alternatively, Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written, “Remember Avraham, Yitzchok and Yisrael, Your servants, to whom You swore”? [Ostensibly,] Hashem is being asked to remember what He swore, and what He swore is written in connection with Avraham, as it is written: “‘By My Self I have sworn,’ says God.” So the order of the verse should be reversed: “Remember what you swore to Your servants Avraham. . .” Thus Rashi explains: “Remember for Avraham the ten tests. . .” I.e., Hashem is being asked to remember Avraham’s righteousness, not what He swore. Then Rashi answers the question: According to this, what is there to be remembered for Yitzchok and Yaakov? Thus he explains: “If by burning. . .” We need not ask: Why does Rashi mention the ten tests for Avraham? Perhaps [the verse is referring] only to the test of burning. The answer is: Since Avraham has both merits, and neither is more excludable than the other, [therefore both can be included as the verse’s intent].

Certainly a chair with one leg. Some ask: What is the logic of this argument? Moshe also has the forefathers’ merit, for he is their descendant, as seen from (Bamidbar 14:12): “I shall make you into a greater nation,” where Rashi explains, “It is not written, ‘I shall make your descendants into a greater nation,’ because you are descended from the forefathers.” They offer an answer: Had the people not sinned with the Calf they would have entered the Land, as Hashem promised Avraham (Bereishis 12:7): “To your descendants I will give this land.” But now that He will destroy them, we see that the sin prevented the promise to Avraham from being fulfilled. If so, how do we know the promise to Moshe will be fulfilled, that his children will be a great nation? Perhaps his children too will sin, and this promise also will not be fulfilled. And if we argue that Moshe’s merit will persevere in any case, even if his children will sin, this claim is against logic: If the merit of three forefathers did not shield them from sin and bring them to the land, certainly the merit of Moshe alone will not.

A work of miracles. Explanation: [The letters were readable but ran in opposite directions on each side. The word נבוב ,] for instance, was read as בובנ . And so with all the words. The miracle was that the writing was carved through both sides, including the ם and ס — and with them, the middle part was not connected at any point, yet it did not fall. But the Bereishis Rabbah explains that the writing was readable in the same direction on both sides, and this was indeed miraculous.

The foot of the mountain. Rashi is answering the question: Does “Beneath the mountain” not imply that the mountain had an interior cavity? Thus he explains, “At the foot of the mountain.

He intended to test them as are women suspected of adultery. . . The reason being that he who strays after idolatry is like a married woman who strays from her husband by having relations with an adulterer, as is stated in the Midrash on Shir Hashirim 4:5 that Rashi cites. That is why Moshe tested them in the same manner as women who are suspected of adultery are tested.

As an idolatrous city when there are many involved. . . I.e., the death of the city dwellers is by the sword, as opposed to an individual idolater whose death is by stoning.

How much pain did you endure. . . This is a rhetorical question: How much pain they must have caused you, that you were coerced into making them the Calf! Moshe said this to emphasize the point, that [in truth] they did not cause you any pain.

They are always going. . . Rashi is answering the question: Why is it not written it say כי רע הוא , [instead of ברע ], if it refers to the Bnei Yisrael? He explains that ברע refers to the evil way. And Rashi adds the words “they are going” because “going” is the term that is associated with “way.” And Rashi adds the word “always,” because otherwise Aharon seems to be speaking of this [specific] way on which they intend evil. But this cannot be, because if Moshe had known of this [as the verse says, “You know,”] he should have taken preventative measures at the onset, before they did evil. Therefore Rashi adds “always,” to convey that in all their deeds they are always on an evil way.

One thing. . . [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, the whole sin would be Aharon’s. I.e., Aharon did not say, “Remove them,” but just said, “Who has gold?” and they hurriedly removed [their gold ornaments].

I did not know that this calf would come out. . . I.e., this calf came out without my forming it with an engraver’s tool. ]Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why did Aharon say, “And this calf emerged”? If he threw it in the fire and shaped it into a calf with an engraving tool, obviously this calf would come out. Re”m writes: Scripture testifies that Aharon said, “Remove the rings of your wives” (v. 2), and that “he formed it with an engraving tool” (v. 4). If so, how could Aharon say, “I said one thing to them”? And how could he say, “I threw it into the fire,” intimating that it emerged by itself, when in fact he took the gold and “formed it with an engraving tool and made it into a molten calf” (ibid)? It seems [the answer is:] He said a lie because he feared Moshe. But this is difficult [to say], for how could Aharon, Hashem’s holy one, say a lie? See Nachalas Yaakov.

“Come to me.” Meaning: he who is for Hashem, i.e., he who fears Him, should come to me. The word “come” is missing [from the verse, but implied. Rashi knows it means this] because otherwise it would be saying: he who is for Hashem and fears Him is [already] close to Me. Why would it then say, “All the sons of Leivi gathered to him”?

“His brother” — having a common mother, and he is an Israelite. Rashi is answering the question: If the entire Tribe of Leivi was righteous, [as Rashi stated above], why does it say that each man [of Leivi] should kill his brother? He answers: “His brother — having a common mother,” for [such a brother] is not a Levite but an Israelite.

By this act you will install yourselves. . . Explanation: Originally, the firstborn were priests to Hashem. But then they sinned with the Calf and sacrificed an offering to idolatry. Therefore you are to kill them, and you should become priests to Hashem in their stead. Rashi says, “You will install yourselves,” because מילוי יד means installation to a position that one will hold from then on, as Rashi explained in parshas Terumah.

“For each man” amongst you will be installed [as a result of what each did] to his son. . . In connection with the actual killing, it mentions only an Israelite brother, relative and friend, [but not a son]. Nevertheless, here it says, “His son,” in order to emphasize the point. It conveys that each man would have killed even his own son to sanctify Hashem’s Name.

Wiping away and a covering in front of your sins”. . . Explanation: Rashi holds that every instance of בעד in Scripture means “in front of.” But here, this meaning does not fit [if אכפרה ] means “atonement.” Therefore he explains that here, אכפרה does not mean “atonement”, but “wiping away” and a “covering.” Accordingly, “in front of” is fitting.

“You are the One Who caused this to happen to them. . . Rashi is answering the question: Why did Moshe say, “A god of gold,” and not simply, “A god”? Perforce, he meant: “You are the One who caused this to happen to them.”

From the entire Torah. . . Although [all] the Torah had not yet been given, Moshe already wrote from Bereishis until the giving of the Torah, as previously explained (24:4). Alternatively, [Moshe was referring to] the Torah he was destined to write.

Here is an instance where לך is used connected with the verb דבור in the place of אליך . . . Explanation: לי , לך and להם , when following דבור , usually mean “about me,” “about you” and “about them,” [rather than “to me,” “to you” and “to them”]. This was explained in Bereishis 24:7. Nevertheless, לך here means “to you.” [Rashi knows this] because nowhere does it say that God spoke to someone else “about” Moshe. And so with [ לדבר לו ] written about Adoniyahu (Melachim I 2:19). There too it means “to him,” not “about him.”

But not I. Rashi is answering the question: Hashem’s intention is to punish them. But is it not good for them that “My angel will go before you”? It should say only: “Go, lead the people to [the place] which I have spoken to you. However on the day when I take account. . .” Therefore Rashi explains, “But not I.” In other words, this was bad for them, for the Shechinah itself was previously with them, [and now they will have only the angel].