Make Up Your Mind!
And he took it from their hand and he formed it with a tool and they made it into a molten image of a calf. And they said: This is your god Yisrael that brought you up from Egypt. (Sefer Shemot 32:4)
- The incident of the golden calf
Parshat Ki Tisa describes the incident of the egel – the golden calf. Moshe had ascended the Mountain of Sinai to receive from Hashem the Torah and the tablets of the Decalogue. He remained on the mountain for forty days and nights. The people believed that Moshe had not returned to them because he had died on the barren mountain. They were overcome with panic and appealed to Aharon to make an idol for them that would replace Moshe. This idol would lead them forward. Aharon did not refuse the people and the egel was created. In the above passage the people adopt it as a replacement for Moshe and prepare to worship it.
The narrative continues and explains that Hashem sent Moshe back to the people. Before departing, Moshe beseeched Hashem to not destroy the people. Hashem agreed and Moshe descended from the mountain. Moshe carried with him the tablets of the Decalogue. He approached the camp and observed the egel. He shattered the tablets. Moshe then destroyed the idol and punished those who had worshiped it.
And now send and gather to me all of Israel at the Mountain of Karmel and the four hundred and fifty prophets of the Baal and the four hundred and fifty prophets of the Asheyrah who eat at the table of Ezevel. (Sefer Melachim I 18:19)
- Eliyahu and the priests of the Ba’al
Each week, the reading of the Torah portion is accompanied by a short reading from the Neve’im – the Prophets. This reading is referred to as the haftarah. The reading is related to the Torah portion that it accompanies. The haftarah for Parsaht Ki Tisa discusses Eliyahu’s challenge to the priests of the Ba’al.
Eliyahu was a contemporary of Achav, the king of Israel. During Achav’s reign and with his approval, worship of the deity Ba’al was widely adopted by the people of Israel. Hashem brought a prolonged drought upon the land and terrible famine afflicted the nation. Achav sought out Eliyahu. Eliyahu confronted Achav. He told the king that the famine and suffering of the people was the result of his abandonment of Hashem and promotion of the worship of the Ba’al.
Eliyahu then proposed to Achav that they gather the priests of the Ba’al to the Mountain of Karmel. There Eliyahu would challenge them to a test.
Eliyahu and the priests of the Ba’al erected altars. Each placed a bull upon their respective altars. Neither set their altar aflame. Instead, each prayed to his deity and asked that a flame descend from the heavens and consume the sacrifice.
The priests of the Ba’al placed their sacrifice upon their altar. They cried out to the Ba’al but no flame came forth. Eliyahu ridiculed the priests of the Ba’al. He suggested that they pray louder. Perhaps, their god was sleeping. The priests of the Ba’al became ever-more frantic in their petitions but no response was evoked from their god.
Then Eliyahu prepared his altar. After placing wood upon it and his sacrifice, he thoroughly soaked the fuel with water. In front of the nation, Eliyahu prayed to Hashem. A flame descended from the heavens and consumed the sacrifice, the wood on the altar, and scorched the altar’s stones and mortar. The people were awed by this wonder. They fell upon their faces and acknowledged that Hashem is the only G-d.
And Eliyahui approached the entire nation and he said: Until when will you continue to skip between two views? If Hashem is G-d, then go after Him. If the Ba’al, then go after him. And the nation did not answer him a word. (Sefer Melachim I 18:21)
- Eliyahu’s strange criticism
The above passage introduces Eliyahu’s challenge to the priests of the Ba’al. He asks the people to choose between worship of Hashem, and worship of the Ba’al. He then proposes his contest and the nation agrees to the challenge.
The commentators are disturbed by Eliyahu’s message to the people. He criticizes them for wavering between the worship of Hashem and service to the Ba’al. He demands that they choose one or the other. It seems that he is criticizing their inconsistency and not their worship of the Ba’al. The implication of his criticism is that it would be satisfied by their wholehearted devotion to the Ba’al!
The Targum – the Aramaic translation of the text – suggests that Eliyahu was engaging in rhetoric. He was not actually proposing that wholehearted acceptance of the Ba’al was a reasonable response. He was saying to the people, “Is not Hashem, the only true G-d? Why do you stray after the Ba’al?”
- Strange combinations
Malbim disagrees. In order to understand his interpretation of Eliyahu’s rebuke of the people, we must understand the practices of the time. Many of the commentators suggest that the people of Eliyahu’s time had not completely replaced worship of Hashem with service to the Ba’al. They could not ignore the drought and famine that were ravaging their land. The drought had been brought upon the land with the pronouncement of Eliyahu. He announced that it was a punishment for their idolatry. However, the priest of the Ba’al assured them that their loyalty to the Ba’al would bring an end to the drought.[1] They were confused. They were torn between worship of Hashem and service to the Ba’al. According to Malbim, they believed that these two perspectives could co-exist. In other words, rather than choosing between Hashem and the Ba’al, they believed they could worship both.
Malbim explains that Eliyahu criticized the people for combining two forms of worship that are exclusive of one another. The Torah teaches us that Hashem is the only G-d and that He is worthy of worship. It is impossible to combine this perspective with the worship of another deity. Eliyahu was not actually suggesting that the people adopt the worship of the Ba’al and abandon worship of Hashem. He was explaining to the people that the compromise they had adopted was nonsensical. Combined worship of Hashem and the Ba’al was indistinguishable from abandonment of Hashem. We serve Hashem as an expression of our recognition of His omnipotence and as acknowledgment that no other power can act contrary to His will. Service to Ba’al assumes that this deity acts independent of Hashem or in His stead. These two perspectives cannot be reconciled or co-exist.[2]
- The tenets of Judasim are inseparable from one another
Another interpretation of Eliyahu’s message is suggested by Rav Chaim Soloveitchik Zt”l. Rav Chaim’s interpretation has two components. First, he suggests that Eliyahu told the people that their merging of worship of Hashem with service to the Ba’al was the same as wholehearted worship of the Ba’al. Second, Rav Chaim explains why this merger is undistinguishable from simply completely adopting worship of the Ba’al. He suggests that the Torah’s fundamental tenets are inseparable. These tenets comprise a single system of theological outlook. The rejection of any one compromises the entirety. Therefore, if one accepts Hashem as creator and sustainer of the universe, but believes it appropriate to worship other deities, he has rejected the Torah’s system of tenets. His acceptance of Hashem is rendered meaningless.[3]
- Belief co-existing with doubt?
Rav Chaim’s first point is that Eliyahu told the people that their merging of worship of Hashem with service to the Ba’al was the same as wholehearted worship of the Ba’al. His second point is an explanation for this equivalency. There is another, perhaps simpler, explanation for this equivalency.
There is a fundamental difference between a physical performance and an obligation of the heart and mind. A physical performance can sustain and retain its meaning even when its motives are compromised. If a person gives charity to one in need moved by selfish motives, the recipient has been provided with support. Of course, the mitzvah of assisting one in need has been performed in a less than ideal manner. But the charity retains some virtue and has a positive effect.
An obligation of the heart and mind cannot be executed in a partial manner. A person is either convinced that a belief is true or the person has doubts. Obligations of the heart and mind require that we fully subscribe to a tenet. If we accept the tenet, but retain some doubt, we have not fulfilled the obligation and must strive to eliminate that doubt.
This interpretation of Eliyahu’s comment seems to be supported by Rashi. Rashi explains that Eliyahu said to the people, “You cannot choose between your two perspectives!”[4] This seems to be an odd criticism. If they could not choose, then they acted properly in following both perspectives!
However, as explained above, this is not an option in respect to an obligation of the heart and mind. One cannot believe that Hashem is the only G-d and yet harbor some doubt. If that doubt exists, then the obligation has not been properly executed. The obligation is to believe in Hashem wholeheartedly. Belief and doubt are incompatible.
- Working on our convictions
We understand that we must work toward improving our performance of mitzvot. In the case of mitzvot that are accomplished through actions, the method for improving our performance is self evident. We study the halachot that guide us in the performance and we execute the mitzvah more scrupulously. If we wish to improve our observance of Shabbat, we study its halachot and we carefully observe them.
However, obligations of the heart and mind also deserve our attention and our commitment to their performance. In a sense, their demand upon our attention is even more urgent. These obligations are severely compromised when accompanied by doubt. The appropriate execution of these obligations is achieved only through elimination of doubt and ambivalence.
[1] Rabbaynu David Kimchi (Radak), Commentary on Sefer Melachim I 18:21.
[2] Rabbaynu Meir Libush (Malbim), Commentary on Sefer Melachim I 18:21.
[3] Rav Y. Hershkowitz, Torat Chaim on TaNach, p 203.
[4] Rabbaynu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Melachim I 18:21.