Mekor Chaim

Reflections on Parashat Ki Tisa

Who's In Charge Here?

Rabbi David J. Zucker

The highlights of this Torah section are the statements about Shabbat observance, the apostasy of the Golden Calf, then Moses’ re-ascending Mt Sinai with the second set of the stone tablets, along with the reinstatement of the contract between God and Israel.

Both literally and figuratively, this is a dizzying narrative. The action begins with Moses on Mt Sinai. He receives various instructions including the famous covenantal lines of the veshomru, “The Israelite people shall keep the sabbath . . . throughout the ages as a covenant for all time.” The very next line explains that “Upon finishing speaking with him on Mount Sinai, [God] gave Moses the two tablets of the Pact, stone tablets inscribed with the finger of God” (Exod 31:16-18).

Meanwhile at the base of the mountain, the people are restless and worried at Moses’ inexplicable extended absence; they coerce Aaron into building the Golden Calf (Exod 32:1-6).

Back on Mt Sinai God tells Moses to return to the camp. “Hurry down, for your people . . . have acted basely . . . this is a stiffnecked people” (vss.7,9). Learning that God intends to destroy the Israelites, Moses replies, “Let not Your anger . . . blaze forth against Your people . . . renounce the plan to punish Your people” (vss.11-12).

Moses heads down the mountain and confronts Aaron. “What did this people do to you that you have brought such great sin upon them?” (vs. 21). Aaron, trying to sidestep responsibility says to Moses, “You know that this people is bent on evil . . .” (vs. 22). Shortly later Moses chastises the people “You have been guilty . . .” (vs. 30). By chapter 33, Moses implores God to continue to lead the people, and he asks to see God’s presence.

Chapter 34 finds Moses back on the mountain, the two tablets of stone in his hands, the famous meeting with God, often described as the recital of the Thirteen Attributes (vss. 6-7), and then the restoration of the covenant.

The continually changing focus of the narrative, moving from Mt Sinai to the Israelite camp, back to Mt Sinai, back to the camp, and finally back to Mt Sinai, obscures an important question. Who was in charge? Who was answerable for the Israelites’ apostasy? Undeniably, the people themselves were the most culpable, followed by Aaron who was unable to prevent this action. Yet, Moses and God likewise share accountability for the debacle. Neither Moses nor God had thought this through carefully enough. Neither figure took into consideration the effects on the people when Moses would be away, incommunicado, for close to six weeks. Threaded through this narrative is the all too common reaction of denying responsibility for ill planning. God says to Moses, “Hurry down, for your people . . . have acted basely.” Moses is quick to reply, “Let not Your anger . . . blaze forth against Your people.” Moses questions Aaron’s actions, and Aaron responds with a statement that Moses knows what kind of people these are. No one wants to claim liability.

Several important lessons flow out of this narrative. Oftentimes many are tasked with the planning of a given venture. If/when, there are failures, frequently there is no one person, or one group of people who are fully responsible. Though not all are equally guilty, culpability needs to be shared. In the Exodus incident, none of the figures comes forward to say, “Yes, I take responsibility for my failures to think this through carefully enough. I did not plan this as well as I could have done.”

Yet, one figure comes close to admitting serious responsibility for allowing the matter to get out of hand. God not only allows Moses to challenge divine decisions, God never seems upset with him for daring to question those pronouncements. Further God agrees to reconnect with Moses and the people. “I will also do this thing that you have asked . . . I will make all My goodness pass before you” (Exod 33:17, 19).

Planning properly, trying to think of the many possible scenarios that might go wrong, serves us well. Then, if/when there are mistakes made, there is great virtue in admitting culpability, even if that is not shared evenly. A further benefit can be that after apportioning guilt, we can reconcile, reunite, and resolve to do better in the future. We can reestablish our mutual relationships and work together in common covenant.

Rabbi David J. Zucker, PhD, a member of UJC Rabbinic Cabinet, is Rabbi/Chaplain and Director of Spirituality at Shalom Park, a senior continuum of care center, Aurora, CO. He is a Board Certified Chaplain by the Association of Professional Chaplains (APC) and the National Association of Jewish Chaplains (NAJC). www.DavidJZucker.org

Jewish Federations of North America Rabbinic Cabinet Chair: Rabbi Steven E. Foster
Vice Chair: Rabbi Amy Small
Vice Chair: Rabbi Stuart G. Weinblatt
Vice Chair: Rabbi Larry Kotok
President: Rabbi Jonathan Schnitzer
Honorary Chair: Rabbi Matthew H. Simon

Senior Consultant, Rabbinic Cabinet: Rabbi Gerald Weider

The opinions expressed in Mekor Chaim articles are solely of the author and do not reflect any official position of Jewish Federations of North America or the Rabbinic Cabinet.