Shavuot Against the Backdrop of the Golden Calf
Based on a sicha by Harav Aharon Lichtenstein
originally delivered on Shavuot 5754
Summarized by Chagai Sofer
Translated by Kaeren Fish
In parashat Mishpatim we learn: "Three pilgrim festivals
shall you celebrate for Me during the year. You shall observe
the Festival of Matzot; for seven days you shall eat matzot as
I commanded you, at the time of the month of spring, for at
that time you went out of Egypt, and you shall not come before
Me empty-handed. And the Festival of the Harvest, the first
fruits of your labor, which you sowed in the fields; and the
Festival of the Ingathering at the close of the year..."
(Shemot 23:14-17).
The Ramban asks why the Torah refers to Shavuot with the
definite article - "the Festival of the Harvest," since this
is actually the first time we find any mention of this
festival and therefore we would expect the Torah to explain at
this point what the festival is, just as it does in the case
of Pesach. The Ramban explains that since we have already
been told, "Three pilgrim festivals shall you celebrate for Me
during the year," and the "Festival of the Spring" has already
been mentioned in association with Pesach, the Torah is now
hinting at the yearly cycle of festivals according to the
agricultural year, including both Shavuot and Sukkot. He
writes: "And behold, all are named after the work of the
field, so that they serve as opportunities for us to thank God
who maintains the laws of the heavens and brings forth bread
from the earth to satisfy the longing spirit, and the hungry
spirit is filled with good."
Basically this teaches us that the pilgrim festivals are
to be viewed on two different levels:
a. The first level refers to the agricultural aspect of the
chagim, as mentioned in parashat Mishpatim.
b. The second level deals with the historical aspect. With
reference to Sukkot we are told, "In order that all your
generations may know that I made Bnei Yisrael dwell in sukkot
when I took them out of the land of Egypt" (Vayikra 23:43).
Concerning Pesach we find reference to this aspect in parashat
Bo, where we are told that the "Festival of Matzot" is the day
upon which Bnei Yisrael left Egypt. When it comes to Shavuot,
however, the Torah fails to provide us with any historical
context. In parashat Yitro we learn: "In the third month
following Bnei Yisrael's exodus from Egypt, on this day they
came to the wilderness of Sinai" (Shemot 19:1). This would
indicate that Shavuot falls more or less around the time of
the giving of the Torah. We are familiar with the controversy
concerning the exact date of the giving of the Torah, but
nevertheless it is difficult to understand why the Torah hides
this festival from us. Why does the Torah not state
explicitly that the festival of Shavuot is on the day of the
giving of the Torah, in the same way as it describes the
historical context of Pesach and Sukkot?
As we know, there are differences between the first
version of the ten commandments, which appears in parashat
Yitro, and the second version, as it appears in parashat Va-
et'chanan. The Ramban examines these differences and
discusses their significance. One difference is that in the
first version, with regard to the mitzva of honoring parents,
the Torah teaches us, "Honor your father and your mother in
order that your days may be lengthened on the land which the
Lord your God has promised you." In the second version we
read, "Honor your father and your mother as the Lord your God
has commanded you, in order that your days be lengthened and
THAT IT BE GOOD FOR YOU on the land which the Lord your God
has promised you." The Gemara (Bava Kama 54b) asks why "good"
is not mentioned in the earlier version of this mitzva, but
does appear in the second version. The answer which the
Gemara provides is, "Because they (the tablets containing the
first version of the commandments) were destined to be
shattered. And so what if they were destined to be shattered?
Rav Ashi said: God forbid that 'good' should disappear from
Israel." In other words, Rav Ashi maintains that the words
"in order that it be good for you" could not be written on the
original tablets because we all know that they were going to
be broken.
From this perspective we are able to understand why the
Torah refrains from stating explicitly that the day of the
giving of the Torah falls on Shavuot. On Shavuot the Torah
was indeed given, but we all know that the episode of the
giving of the Torah concluded with the debacle of the golden
calf. Hence the context of matan Torah is one which we would
prefer to forget. Chazal present a particularly shocking
parable in explaining this event: "This is comparable to a
bride who commits adultery under the chuppa (wedding canopy)."
Clearly, in the case of a bride who conducts herself thus
under the chuppa, we would prefer to forget not only her
specific action but the entire chuppa as well.
This idea concerning the Torah's treatment of Shavuot can
be traced through several sources both in the Torah and in the
writings of Chazal.
Matan Torah in Sefer Devarim
In parashat Va-et'chanan, when Moshe recounts the story
of the giving of the Torah, he commands the nation as follows:
"Only guard yourself and guard your soul carefully lest you
forget the things which your eyes have seen... The day you
stood before the Lord your God at Chorev... You heard the
Voice speaking these words, BUT YOU SAW NO PICTURE, only a
Voice... And let your souls be carefully guarded FOR YOU SAW
NO PICTURE on the day when the Lord your God spoke to you at
Chorev from within the fire" (Devarim 4:9-15).
Why does Moshe repeat at such length, and remind Bnei
Yisrael so many times, that they never saw any form (of God)
at the time of the giving of the Torah? Clearly he is haunted
by the trauma of the golden calf, and therefore he is driven
to emphasize this issue. A similar phenomenon occurs when the
tribes of Gad and Reuven come to Moshe and request the eastern
banks of the Jordan River as their inheritance. Moshe is
reminded of the sin of the spies, and he criticizes them
sharply - again, because of his fear of a repeat of the same
sin of despising the beautiful land.
The Shattering of the Tablets
At the sight of the golden calf Moshe breaks the tablets,
and the Gemara and Midrash provide us with several different
interpretations of this act. In one such midrash (Avot de-
Rabbi Natan 2:3), we find the following:
"Rabbi Yossi Ha-Gelili said: Let me give you a parable to
explain what this may be compared to. A king of flesh
and blood said to his servant, 'Go out and betroth to me
a beautiful and charming and kindly girl.' The messenger
went and betrothed a girl. Following the betrothal he
found out that the girl had been unfaithful. Immediately
he made the following calculation: 'If I now hand her the
ketuba [sealing the marriage], then she will be deserving
of death [because she has committed adultery], and will
be lost to my master forever.' Similarly, Moshe in his
righteousness judged the situation and said, 'How can I
now give Israel these tablets? I will thereby commit
them to the mitzvot and make them deserving of death.'
Therefore he took them and immediately broke them."
This Midrash highlights the idea that in the wake of the
golden calf, it was as though matan Torah had not taken place.
The Midrash illustrates how the Torah had not been completely
handed over, and because of the sin, the handing over was
canceled. The Beit HaLevi explained the difference between
Moshe's role regarding the first and second tablets as
paralleling the difference between a sheliach holakha and a
sheliach kabbala (an agent to deliver and an agent to
receive). He compared Moshe, holding the first tablets, to a
messenger on the way to deliver a 'get' (bill of divorce) -
the document does not take effect until he reaches the woman
for whom it is destined. Similarly, the commandments which
Moshe brought down, inscribed on the first tablets, only took
effect once they reached Bnei Yisrael. Because of the sin of
the golden calf they never reached Bnei Yisrael, and in this
sense it was as if the Torah was never given. In the case of
the second tablets, however, Moshe was not comparable to a
messenger on the way. Here he was comparable to a
representative charged with receiving the document on the
woman's behalf. The moment he receives the document the woman
is legally divorced; similarly, the moment Moshe received the
second set of tablets they were immediately binding upon the
nation.
An Angel of God
Following the episode of the golden calf, in parashat Ki
Tisa, the Torah records the following: "And I shall send
before you an angel... for I shall not rise up among you -
for you are a stiff-necked nation - lest I destroy you along
the way" (Shemot 33:2).
It would seem, though, that this was the case even before
the sin. As we read in parashat Mishpatim, "For My angel will
go before you..." Would this not suggest that from the
beginning it was God's intention that an angel would lead
them, rather than God Himself?
Rashi explains that in mentioning the angel in parashat
Mishpatim, God was in fact hinting to them about the sin of
the golden calf. Thus from Rashi's point of view we see that
not only with hindsight is the value of matan Torah diminished
by the sin; it is diminished even before the sin takes place.
The knowledge that immediately following matan Torah the calf
will arise, damages matan Torah in advance.
We can explain the presence of the angel in a different
way. Every convert to Judaism is required to undergo a three-
part conversion process:
a. brit mila,
b. immersion in a mikva,
c. offering a sacrifice.
The commentators are divided as to how this process took place
at the time of Bnei Yisrael's exodus from Egypt. According to
Rashi, first came the conversion process and only afterwards
was there matan Torah. The Ramban, on the other hand,
maintains that first they were circumcised and immersed, then
came matan Torah, and at the end was the sacrifice. The
Ramban's view does in fact follow more closely the order of
the parshiot as they appear in the Torah, but what is the
logic behind this process? The answer is that mila and tevila
(immersion) elevated Bnei Yisrael to the de-facto state which
allowed them to receive the Torah, and after matan Torah they
were able to enter the covenant of the sacrifice.
This perspective allows us to explain the problem we
posed earlier. The angel mentioned in parashat Mishpatim, and
not God Himself, escorts the nation, because Bnei Yisrael at
this stage have not yet completed their conversion process and
are therefore not able to withstand the presence of the
Shekhina among them. Only after matan Torah and offering a
sacrifice will Bnei Yisrael be able to accept the Shekhina
into their midst. At this stage the presence of the angel is
not a punishment, but rather the result of a given situation -
a natural result of the nation's lack of readiness to stand
the full and direct power of the Divine Presence. On the
other hand, when God states "I shall send an angel before you"
in parashat Ki Tisa, this is clearly and explicitly meant as a
punishment, indicating that the Shekhina has departed in the
wake of the sin. Hence, although the two pesukim both
describe similar situations, their contexts are vastly
different. The first instance describes an interim situation
on the way to a goal they aspire to, and the second describes
a descent and the eradication of the spiritual achievements
which characterized the process of attaining the Divine
Presence.
We Shall Do, and We Shall Hear
In parashat Ki Tisa, after the sin of the calf, God says:
"'And now, take off your adornments (edim) from upon yourself
that I may know what I shall do to you.' And Bnei Yisrael took
down the edim from Mount Chorev" (Shemot 33:5-6).
Rashi adopts the Gemara's explanation (Shabbat 88a) that
the word 'edim' refers to the crowns granted to them on Har
Sinai when they said, "Na'aseh ve-nishma" (We will do and we
will hear). The Gemara explains as follows:
"R. Simai explained: When Bnei Yisrael eagerly declared
'Na'aseh ve-nishma,' six hundred thousand ministering
angels came down, one to each member of Israel, and gave
him two crowns - one in reward for saying 'na'aseh' and
the other for 'nishma.' When Bnei Yisrael sinned, double
that number of angels of destruction came down and took
them away, as it is written, 'And Bnei Yisrael took down
the edim from Har Chorev.'"
What this teaches us is that after the sin, the
significance of matan Torah was greatly and seriously
diminished. The nation had taken a step backwards, in a
negative direction. We may compare the situation to that of a
bride who was unfaithful under the very chuppa - it would have
been better had she never entered the chuppa at all.
We originally posed the question of why the Torah hides
the festival of matan Torah from us. Now the significance of
the textual 'gap' is clear. Even Chazal refer to Shavuot as
"zeman matan torateinu" (the time of the giving of the Torah)
rather than as "zeman kabalat torateinu" (the time of the
receiving of the Torah), because there was a giving of the
Torah at the time, but not a proper receiving.
The Nature of the Festival of Shavuot
Since Chazal ultimately do refer to Shavuot as 'zeman
matan torateinu,' we are obliged to regard it as such - and
perhaps with more conscientiousness than we invest in the
other pilgrim festivals. In the case of Pesach and Sukkot, we
are able to experience the spirit of the day in relative
simplicity. Pesach, for example, is the festival
commemorating our freedom, without any associated problems.
But on Shavuot we are required to experience the essence of
the day as the festival of the giving of the Torah, without
relating to what we know took place immediately thereafter -
the sin of the golden calf. This may be compared to the
situation of someone who is required to take part in a
production and to experience the celebration despite the fact
that, having previously read the script, he knows that the
celebration is immediately followed by a terrible tragedy.
In fact, Shavuot is in a certain sense also a day of
teshuva; a day of correcting the sin of the golden calf.
Indeed, the Gemara in Shabbat teaches:
"Reish Lakish said: God is destined to return them (the
crowns) to us, as it is written (Yishayahu 35:10), 'And
the redeemed of God will return and will come to Zion in
celebration, with eternal joy (simchat olam) upon their
heads' - joy of the past (simcha she-me'olam) upon their
heads."