In parashat Ki Tisa we read of the sin of the Golden Calf and of Moshe?s subsequent prayers to G-d. One curiosity of these prayers is that Chapter 32:34 and Chapter 33:1,2 record that G-d told Moshe that He would send an angel to escort the people and that Moshe should take the people to Israel. However, Chapter 33:12,13 record that Moshe was unhappy with G-d?s offer, which is surprising since G-d?s offer seems to be identical with what was promised prior to the sin of the Golden Calf. Before the sin of the Golden Calf, in Shemot 23:20, G-d also told Moshe that an angel would lead the way to the land of Israel and we do not read of any complaint by Moshe. Why was Moshe satisfied with this offer in Shemot 23, but not in Shemot 33?
Ramban (on Shemot 33:12) explains that previously Moshe had been told that G-d?s name would be ?within? the angel, 23:21, but after the sin of the Golden Calf G-d did not specify who was to be the angel. Yet, what does it mean that G-d?s name would be ?within? the angel? Furthermore, what does it mean that an angel would lead the people? Also, if G-d forgave the people for the sin of the Golden Calf, then why would G-d not make the same offer as before the sin of the Golden Calf?
The crucial question is, what is meant by the term ?angel? in Shemot 23:20, 32:34 and 33:2? While many commentators (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban) understand it literally as an angel, we never read in the Torah of any angel actually leading the people in the desert after the sin of the Golden Calf. Rambam (The Guide for the Perplexed, 2:34) explains that the verses refer to a prophet to whom an angel would speak. Ralbag and Rabbi Moshe Hayim Luzzatto (1800-1865) explain that the reference is to Moshe, who was the messenger of G-d. Amos Chacham (contemporary, in a commentary on Shemot 23:20 in Da?at Mikra) suggests that the angel was the glory of G-d. This last suggestion is appealing since the glory of G-d did appear when the people were in the desert, as in Shemot 40:34. However, why was Moshe disappointed with G-d?s offer for an angel, the glory of G-d, after the sin of the Golden Calf? My thought is that we need to define the connection between the cloud of G-d and the glory of G-d.
The cloud of G-d was a cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night (Shemot 13:21,22) that accompanied the people in the desert. The glory of G-d appeared as a ?devouring fire? (Shemot 24:17), which is a similar imagery to the cloud at night, but this similarity does not mean that they were identical. Abravanel (Commentary on Shemot, Chorev edition, p.619) claims that the viewpoint of most commentators is that the glory of G-d was distinct from the cloud of G-d. Abravanel (p.627) explains that the glory of G-d was always within the cloud of G-d as a fire encased within the cloud and the fire only became visible at night. Yet, it seems highly unlikely that the glory of G-d could have been inside the cloud and not been during the daytime. I think that the cloud of G-d and the glory of G-d were distinct, in the sense that the cloud of G-d did not necessarily contain the glory of G-d. At night, the cloud itself turned to a pillar of fire, independent of the glory of G-d. When the glory of G-d appeared, it appeared from the cloud of G-d, but the glory of G-d was not always present within the cloud. For example, Shemot 13:21 and 14:19 mention the cloud of G-d, but there is no mention of G-d?s glory until 16:10, which indicates that the glory of G-d was not present in the cloud in chapters 13 and 14. With this understanding, we can understand why Moshe was unhappy with G-d?s offer to send an angel after the sin of the Golden Calf.
The angel was the cloud of G-d, as the cloud did lead the people in the desert, Shemot 40:36-38, and Bamidbar 9:15-23. The word ?angel? literally means messenger and the cloud was the messenger of G-d. When Shemot 23:21 referred to G-d?s name within the angel, this meant that the glory of G-d would be within the cloud. The glory of G-d was potentially deadly, ?a devouring fire,? and thus 23:21 warns the people not to sin, as the people would be punished. After the sin of the Golden Calf, G-d agreed to send the angel, which meant the cloud, and 33:9 records the appearance of the cloud of G-d. However, G-d did not want the glory of G-d to be present within the cloud, since if the people would sin, then they would be punished. Thus, 33:3 records that G-d would not be in the midst of the people, since they were a hard-necked people and G-d would come to destroy them. This would be referring to the glory of G-d, which could destroy the people if they sinned. Accordingly, in order to help the people, G-d did not want to send the glory of G-d, since, after the sin of the Golden Calf, it was very likely that the people would sin in the future.
In Shemot 33:12, Moshe was unhappy with the offer of just the cloud of G-d since he also wanted the glory of G-d to accompany the people. 33:13 records that Moshe asked G-d to tell him His ways, which was Moshe?s request for G-d?s glory to accompany the people. The idea is that the term ?show me (or let me know) Thy ways? would mean to show the glory of G-d. The understanding of ?G-d?s way? as the glory of G-d also appears in 33:19, which refers to ?G-d?s goodness? when the reference is to G-d?s glory.
Why did Moshe desire the glory of G-d to accompany the people? The answer is that the real issue of Moshe?s prayers was whether the covenant would be renewed after the people broke the covenant with the sin of the Golden Calf. The presence of G-d?s glory would show that the Jewish people were G-d?s people (33:13), which indicates that the covenant would be renewed. If G-d had just sent the cloud to lead the people, the people would have inherited the Land of Israel but, there would have been no covenant. In 33:17, we read that G-d agreed to Moshe?s request.
If the above interpretation is correct, then the conversation of 33:12-16 refers to G-d?s glory and 33:17 means that G-d agreed to send His glory, in addition to the cloud, which signals G-d?s agreement to renew the covenant. Thus, after the conversation between G-d and Moshe, 34:10 records that G-d announced a new covenant. (Note that whether G-d agreed that His glory would always accompany the people or could just potentially appear is a separate question, beyond the scope of this discussion.)
--------------------------------
Rabbi Schein is a lecturer in economics at Netanya Academic College and at Bar-Ilan University. The author can be reached at aschein@attglobal.net.
Ramban (on Shemot 33:12) explains that previously Moshe had been told that G-d?s name would be ?within? the angel, 23:21, but after the sin of the Golden Calf G-d did not specify who was to be the angel. Yet, what does it mean that G-d?s name would be ?within? the angel? Furthermore, what does it mean that an angel would lead the people? Also, if G-d forgave the people for the sin of the Golden Calf, then why would G-d not make the same offer as before the sin of the Golden Calf?
The crucial question is, what is meant by the term ?angel? in Shemot 23:20, 32:34 and 33:2? While many commentators (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban) understand it literally as an angel, we never read in the Torah of any angel actually leading the people in the desert after the sin of the Golden Calf. Rambam (The Guide for the Perplexed, 2:34) explains that the verses refer to a prophet to whom an angel would speak. Ralbag and Rabbi Moshe Hayim Luzzatto (1800-1865) explain that the reference is to Moshe, who was the messenger of G-d. Amos Chacham (contemporary, in a commentary on Shemot 23:20 in Da?at Mikra) suggests that the angel was the glory of G-d. This last suggestion is appealing since the glory of G-d did appear when the people were in the desert, as in Shemot 40:34. However, why was Moshe disappointed with G-d?s offer for an angel, the glory of G-d, after the sin of the Golden Calf? My thought is that we need to define the connection between the cloud of G-d and the glory of G-d.
The cloud of G-d was a cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night (Shemot 13:21,22) that accompanied the people in the desert. The glory of G-d appeared as a ?devouring fire? (Shemot 24:17), which is a similar imagery to the cloud at night, but this similarity does not mean that they were identical. Abravanel (Commentary on Shemot, Chorev edition, p.619) claims that the viewpoint of most commentators is that the glory of G-d was distinct from the cloud of G-d. Abravanel (p.627) explains that the glory of G-d was always within the cloud of G-d as a fire encased within the cloud and the fire only became visible at night. Yet, it seems highly unlikely that the glory of G-d could have been inside the cloud and not been during the daytime. I think that the cloud of G-d and the glory of G-d were distinct, in the sense that the cloud of G-d did not necessarily contain the glory of G-d. At night, the cloud itself turned to a pillar of fire, independent of the glory of G-d. When the glory of G-d appeared, it appeared from the cloud of G-d, but the glory of G-d was not always present within the cloud. For example, Shemot 13:21 and 14:19 mention the cloud of G-d, but there is no mention of G-d?s glory until 16:10, which indicates that the glory of G-d was not present in the cloud in chapters 13 and 14. With this understanding, we can understand why Moshe was unhappy with G-d?s offer to send an angel after the sin of the Golden Calf.
The angel was the cloud of G-d, as the cloud did lead the people in the desert, Shemot 40:36-38, and Bamidbar 9:15-23. The word ?angel? literally means messenger and the cloud was the messenger of G-d. When Shemot 23:21 referred to G-d?s name within the angel, this meant that the glory of G-d would be within the cloud. The glory of G-d was potentially deadly, ?a devouring fire,? and thus 23:21 warns the people not to sin, as the people would be punished. After the sin of the Golden Calf, G-d agreed to send the angel, which meant the cloud, and 33:9 records the appearance of the cloud of G-d. However, G-d did not want the glory of G-d to be present within the cloud, since if the people would sin, then they would be punished. Thus, 33:3 records that G-d would not be in the midst of the people, since they were a hard-necked people and G-d would come to destroy them. This would be referring to the glory of G-d, which could destroy the people if they sinned. Accordingly, in order to help the people, G-d did not want to send the glory of G-d, since, after the sin of the Golden Calf, it was very likely that the people would sin in the future.
In Shemot 33:12, Moshe was unhappy with the offer of just the cloud of G-d since he also wanted the glory of G-d to accompany the people. 33:13 records that Moshe asked G-d to tell him His ways, which was Moshe?s request for G-d?s glory to accompany the people. The idea is that the term ?show me (or let me know) Thy ways? would mean to show the glory of G-d. The understanding of ?G-d?s way? as the glory of G-d also appears in 33:19, which refers to ?G-d?s goodness? when the reference is to G-d?s glory.
Why did Moshe desire the glory of G-d to accompany the people? The answer is that the real issue of Moshe?s prayers was whether the covenant would be renewed after the people broke the covenant with the sin of the Golden Calf. The presence of G-d?s glory would show that the Jewish people were G-d?s people (33:13), which indicates that the covenant would be renewed. If G-d had just sent the cloud to lead the people, the people would have inherited the Land of Israel but, there would have been no covenant. In 33:17, we read that G-d agreed to Moshe?s request.
If the above interpretation is correct, then the conversation of 33:12-16 refers to G-d?s glory and 33:17 means that G-d agreed to send His glory, in addition to the cloud, which signals G-d?s agreement to renew the covenant. Thus, after the conversation between G-d and Moshe, 34:10 records that G-d announced a new covenant. (Note that whether G-d agreed that His glory would always accompany the people or could just potentially appear is a separate question, beyond the scope of this discussion.)
--------------------------------
Rabbi Schein is a lecturer in economics at Netanya Academic College and at Bar-Ilan University. The author can be reached at aschein@attglobal.net.