Comentario citado sobre Jeremías 2:34

ויקהל העם על אהרון. The people gathered around Aaron. The expression על אהרון needs further analysis. If it had been the people's intention merely to speak to Aaron, the Torah should have written: ויקהל העם ויאמרו אל אהרון, "the people gathered and spoke to Aaron." Perhaps the meaning here is that the people gathered in order to kill Aaron, that they said to him: "get up and make for us a deity or we will kill you." Our sages in Sanhedrin 7 have stated that the people had already killed Chur, and this would reinforce our assumption that the people gathered against Aaron. The reason that the text does not refer explicitly to the killing of Chur is so that this murder should not remain as a permanent memory for all future generations. G'd is protective of the good reputation of the Jewish people, and the only reason He recorded the details of the sin of the golden calf is so that if a community would commit a collective sin in the future they would be encouraged to repent using the fact that G'd forgave the Jewish people the sin of the golden calf as proof that their repentance too would be accepted by Him (compare Avodah Zarah 5). Perhaps the Torah did indeed allude to the killing of Chur in Exodus 24,14 where Chur together with Aaron is reported as having been left in charge of the Jewish people when Moses ascended the Mountain. The fact that Chur's name is not mentioned at this point begs the question of "what has happened to him?" Clearly he had been murdered. This matter is alluded to more forcefully in Jeremiah 2,34: גם בכנפיך נמצאו דם נפשות, אביונים נקיים, "also on your garments is found the life-blood of the innocent poor, etc." as pointed out in Vayikra Rabbah 10,3. According to that Midrash, the people killed Chur because he was unwilling to make an idol for them. The people may have interpreted Chur's unwillingness to comply with their request to make a substitute for Moses as proof that he himself had aspirations to take the place of Moses, i.e. to be the people's intermediary between them and G'd. It is quite possible that Jeremiah 2,35 supports the view that the people who killed Chur considered him guilty of the sin of wanting to take the place of Moses, something that made him guilty of a capital offence in their view. They actually considered a human being as an intermediary between them and G'd as a geater threat to monotheism than the appointment of a symbol such as a golden calf which lacked any faculties and any will of its own.

Concerning this, the Talmud says in [tractate] Shabbat, chapter two. A person’s children will die as a result of not properly observing the commandment of zizit, as the verse says, “moreover, on your garments is found the lifeblood of the innocent” [Jeremiah, 2:34]. That is to say, because of the zizit that one makes on the four corners, that one does not properly observe, it happens that your children will die. That is to say, zizit were given so that one should not pursue illicit sexual relations. When a person is not properly warned by the zizit, he ends up in illicit sexual relations. Therefore, the Holy One punishes him that his children will die. That is to say, measure for measure. He wants to pursue illicit sexual relations to have many children. That is why the Holy One takes away his legitimate children.⁸B. Shabbat, 32b.