ייִדישער מחשבֿה אויף תהילים 106:7

(1) The first message from G'd to Moses was to tell him, that although on occasion, death can be due to the concept of bi-krovay ekadesh, that death need not occur due to a mortal sin, there had been mortal sin in the case of the death of the sons of Aaron. The cause had been the sin as spelled out in the Torah at this point. The second communication by G'd to Moses, though related to him at a later stage, is coupled here with the former, in order to make the point that access to the holy of holies is restricted even to the High Priest, and that G'ds Presence does not appear in public, only wrapped in a cloud. (2) Even amongst the good people, the physical usually outweighs the spiritual. The High Priest who personifies the most favourable mix of the physical and the spiritual, is nonetheless mostly matter. His sin offering is described already in Leviticus 4,4, and consisted of a bull. Most of this bull was burned outside Jerusalem, only a small part being offered on the altar, (verse 12 there) The ram, symbolising man's spiritual part, which becomes olah, a total offering, i.e. fit for consumption by the altar in its entirety, is the other half of the High Priest's offering. Since the majority of the people are guilty of very fundamental errors, due to their yetzer hara, evil urge, the he-goat for the azzazel does not qualify for being offered on the altar itself. The fact that even the he-goat was presented in front of the tabernacle first, alive, is to show that even the kind of person represented by this he-goat will be granted forgiveness on the Day of Atonement. This is a tribute to the fact that a good part of their erroneous conduct had been due to the nature of the human condition, i.e. their being physical beings, something over which they had not had any control initially. The lots to be drawn symbolise the very fact that no choice existed prior to one's having being born into this world. (3) Use of the device of drawing lots to determine anything at all, appears to be an outright denial of G'ds Providence, since the result that emerges after the drawing of lots will be viewed as coincidence. The fact is however, that the cumulative effect of the lot falling again and again on the same person, lends it significance. If until the time of Shimon the Just, the lot "for the Lord" was always drawn by the he-goat placed on the right, that surely tells us something about the meaning of the word "right." (the time frame under discussion is about fifteen hundred years!) Indeed, once that pattern had been broken, due to the fact that the Jewish people could not produce a High Priest who was a tzaddik, and whose merits would counterbalance the sins of the masses, the lot would have become meaningless even if it had fallen on the he-goat that had been placed on the right. When Pharaoh had dreamed the same dream twice, that fact told Joseph something about whether the dream had any significance, or whether it was merely a matter of coincidence. The very repetition enabled Joseph to draw some conclusions. This is even more so, when the repetition occurs more than once. This is the reason the sailors "threw lots" (plural) and not just one "lot" before they were satisfied that the storm that threatened to sink their ship was really on account of Jonah. (Jonah 1,7) Since the lot fell on Jonah each time they repeated the procedure, they were certain that they were not condemning an innocent person on the basis of a "chance" lot. There is an element of chance concerning which person turns into a sinner, since natural endowments have a great deal to do with the likelihood of someone being able to overcome such strikes against him as he has been born with. Hence, if the he-goat for the azzazel becomes the scapegoat by means of the lottery, we might all breathe a sigh of relief and say "here but for the grace of G'd, go I." For that reason, the halachah, Jewish law, requires that the two he-goats must look so totally alike, that they are indistinguishable from one another. When the Tanna Ben Heh Heh says that reward is in accordance with the pain and effort incurred in securing an objective, (Avot 5,23), that he who has to overcome strong natural impediments rates a special reward, he does not mean that lack of this special effort totally forfeits one's chance of rehabilitation. The "scapegoat," though unfit to be presented on the altar, does accomplish this rehabilitation even for persons who have not made a special effort to surmount handicaps they were born with. (4) The procedure of offering incense, required a special skill, and therefore the full concentration of the High Priest during its performance. The reason for this could have been the need to counter the natural tendency to get "a glimpse" of the shechinah, Divine Presence. After all, the Torah did say "for in the cloud, I will become visible on the lid of the holy ark." (Leviticus 16,2) The Talmud tells of a High Priest, who was a member of the sect of the Sadducees, who when performing the rites of incense, put same on the pan prior to entering into the holy of holies, (contrary to hatachah ) and who boasted about having seen the shechinah. He died shortly after coming out of the sanctuary .The Pharisees saw in this a punishment for his disobedience. The Saducees felt that it was bad manners to enter the holy of holies without having everything ready, whereas the interpretation of the Pharisees of the verse "for through having made the cloud, My Presence over the lid can become revealed" was that they considered the exact composition of the correct quantities and ingredients of the incense as being vital. Placing of the incense on the pan, however, is to take place only "in front of G'd," as per verse 13. The sprinkling of the blood inside the holy of holies was to atone for errors concerning the laws applying to the temple itself, whereas the placing of the hands on the he-goat was to atone for other sins. The fact that the he-goat was used, also demonstrated that it was not a deity, (as some nations believed) This is the reason there had to be a special injunction "they shall no longer sacrifice to the he-goats." (Leviticus 17,7) There was no better date to proclaim the unity of G'd symbolically, and the futility of worshipping anyone or anything else, than the Day of Atonement. This symbolic statement helped to obtain forgiveness for other sins also. Whoever would observe that the scapegoat was thrown from the rock, would realise that it had not been an object of worship. Even Satan, the perennial accuser before the throne of G'd, would have to admit that the Jewish people were quite unequivocal in their service to the Lord. This is the meaning of a statement in Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer that we should present a bribe to Satan on that day. The sacrifice of the original Passover lamb in Egypt, was a similar statement of unequivocal commitment to G'd Therefore, the "great Sabbath," the Sabbath preceding the Passover holiday is conceptually related to the day of Atonement. For that reason Yom Kippur is also called Shabbaton The order of the confession, which according to the view of Rabbi Meir mentions the unintentionally committed sins first, and the intentionally committed ones last, was quoted in that order by Moses after the sin of the golden calf, when he remonstrated with G'd. Since Israel, at that time, had already done penitence, Moses made the point that due to the repentance, intentional sins had already been reduced to the status of unintentional sins. However, the normal process as found in the Bible on many occasions, is to first confess the intentional sins, including the ones that represent acts of rebellion against G'ds authority.

It is in this context that we must understand the repeated references Moses made to the Jewish people at the burning bush, when he said to G-d that the Jewish people would not believe in him or his mission. Moses expected the same reaction from his own people that he had expected from Pharaoh. This is why he said "when they ask me for Your name, what shall I say?" (Exodus 3, 13) The miracle had been needed to demonstrate the existence of such a G-d. Whenever things went well, the people believed in G-d, Moses and his mission. Whenever difficulties arose, they saw in this proof that there was no free G-d, no Personal Providence, only superior showmanship by Moses, presently revealed as inadequate. Proof of all this lies in the fact that whenever they refer to the Exodus from Egypt, they ascribe it to Moses the man, not to G-d. (compare Exodus 14, 12; 16,3; Numbers 16, 12) Their admiration of Moses was based on Moses being an outstanding man rather than Moses as an instrument of G-d. (1) As soon as Moses was out of sight, not having announced when he would return, (possibly he had not known when he would return) the people wanted to see if they themselves could do what Moses had been doing all the time. Therefore, they had lots of time at their disposal to urge Aaron. The fortieth day was in fact only the last of many days that Aaron had been under pressure. (2) These people believed that the configuration of the ox might hold the secret of Moses’s power. Therefore they traded their own horoscope (that of the lamb) for that of the ox. This is the meaning of Psalms 106,20 "they themselves chose this trade, exchange." It was not Aaron's doing. No doubt, during those forty days the pressure on Aaron had been increasing steadily, the murder of Chur being part of that pressure. Had the Torah reported all this in detail, the impression that Aaron co-operated reluctantly would have been created, and the golden calf would have been viewed as the triumph of the belief in witchcraft over those who believed in G-d and His leadership. Now, that the text seems to suggest Aaron's enthusiastic co-operation, the whole episode can be seen as the creation of a symbol representing the ultimate that human art was capable of. (3+4) In this way, once the impotence of that symbol would become evident to one and all, the illusion that man could fashion a deity would be debunked once and for all. This was Aaron's reasoning when he decided to co-operate. He had no way of knowing that as soon as the calf would emerge, some Jewish lowbrows would commence dancing around it and proclaiming it as their new deity. When that happened, Aaron quickly built an altar for G-d, and tried to allow reason to prevail by postponing the celebration until the morrow, and by dedicating the altar to the Lord. He hoped all the time, of course, that in the interval remaining, G-d would tell Moses to return to the people in order to forestall tragic consequences. Even so, only three thousand people were enthusiastic enough to actually worship this idol before it had demonstrated powers equal or superior to those demonstrated by Moses. (This is why the rest of the nation was not punished by death) We see from all this, that far from precipitating or even participating in the sin, Aaron had used his best efforts to teach the people a lesson of faith in the Lord. This is why, at a later stage, G-d was able to say to Moses "You shall cause your brother Aaron to come close to Me, to be My priest" (Exodus 28, 1) (5) G-d indicated to Moses that if the latter were to pray, He would not then become angry, since the action of a fool acting out of foolishness does not warrant his master's anger. Nonetheless, even fools must repent and confess their errors. Psalms 25,8, and Hoseah 14,2 are some of the sources in scripture for the need to expiate. Sieverity of a sin is measured by three criteria. 1) The manner in which the Torah describes a sin, is a good indication of the view the Torah holds concerning such sin. Expressions such as "abomination, immorality" are used for acts which are especially serious. 2) Any kind of misdemeanour when committed by a person of high rank, becomes more serious, since the sinner's stature should have precluded such conduct on his part. 3) When the disobedience is directed against a supreme lawgiver, it is more serious than disobedience against a man made law. (10) Moses, admits in his confession, that "this nation" had come closer to G-d than any of its predecessors, and should therefore have known better. When he refers to "this great sin," he confesses that due to the people's elevated stature their sin had assumed an added degree of severity. He confesses the heinous nature of the sin when viewed objectively, when he refers to "the golden deity" that this nation had made. While confessing all this, Moses manages to inject powerful arguments about the extenuating circumstances surrounding this crime. Shemot Rabbah 28, clothes Moses’s arguments in the following words: (6) Moses to G-d "Your children have made an assistant for You, and You are angry? Did You not Yourself make the sun shine, and the latter bestows some of its light on the moon? (making it an assistant) Did You not make rain, which in turn promotes the growth of plants etc?" To this G-d replied: "You too are in error, since the golden calf is not capable of doing anything." To this, Moses replied: "in that case why do You get angry over a mere nothing?" Philosophically speaking, Moses presents the golden calf as incapable of offering competition to G-d, and therefore not deserving His concern. Concerning the second criterion for measuring the severity of a sin which we have mentioned, Moses refers to "this people." He refers to their having come out of Egypt. He implies that it is unreasonable to expect high standards of faith from a nation that had just left a country in which it had absorbed a totally wrong way of looking at the world for several hundred years. The Midrash describes it in this way. A father put his son in charge of a perfumery situated in a red light district. Naturally, both the location of the store and the type of customers he dealt with, combined with the son's personal character weakness to corrupt him. When the father finds out and is enraged and threatens to kill his son, the father's friend has to intervene. This friend berates the father, saying: "you have lost him because you have failed to teach him a trade that would bring him into contact with the upper classes of society. Not only that, but you have made him reside amongst harlots. How can you be surprised at the outcome?" Finally, since it was G-d’s declared purpose to use the Jewish people to aggrandize His name, and to make Egypt aware of this, (Exodus 9, 16) what would the Egyptians say when they hear that You have wiped out this nation?" We read in Joshua 7, 10 that G-d told Joshua that Israel's defeat at Ai was due to the nation having sinned, having transgressed the injunction not to appropriate any of the loot of Jericho etc. Actually, only one man, Achan ben Karmi, had committed those acts. (7) When G-d told Moses that the Jewish people had made themselves a cast calf, worshipped it etc, Moses may have thought that this could have been the act of a single individual, and that G-d had referred to the collective responsibility every Jew bears for the actions of another Jew. It had not occurred to Moses that the nation as a whole had been involved in this act.