A close friend of mine once asked, as we stood in the West Bank having just returned from a day in Israel, whether we were living in the Golden Calf. I was taken aback by the question then, but have always come back to it. Andrew’s brilliant last post helped me bring into new focus my friend’s question of whether some in the current Zionist movement actually “support” and “defend” Israel to the extent that they actually promote idolatry of Israel. And, when combined with the news I recently read in Ha’aretz that the Jewish Agency plans to send a group of 200 young Israelis, just recently finished their compulsory army service, to America to recruit students for a year abroad — sending soldiers out to promote, not just defend, the country — I now wonder if my friend’s question needs a new look.
Before getting into the Golden Calf story and some other thoughts, let me introduce this post with one image. My family lived for the past 2 years near the campus of an Ivy League university. I would estimate that, on average, I saw 2 students per week wearing some type of Israel Defense Forces gear – t-shirts, sweatshirts, hats, pins. No big deal? Just kids wearing what they think are cool things? Maybe. But I think there is also something else more worrisome going on with those things and the image they promote.
But first, the theme. In case you forget the verses from Exodus or the wild scenes from “The Ten Commandments,” the basic context of the story is that Moses has been summoned to Mt. Sinai by God and has left the Israelites waiting below. After some time of waiting, the restless people go to Aaron and ask (32:1):
Up, make us a god who shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that
brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him.
According to the text, Aaron does not argue or debate, but simply asks them to gather their gold, which he then takes and molds into a calf. Once finished, Aaron simply states (32:4):
This is thy god, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.
Aaron then gets a bit scared and declares that there is to be a feast to God in front of the Golden Calf.
God, having just finished giving Moses the tablets containing the Ten Commandments, is furious at what has happened and orders Moses off of Mt. Sinai, promising to wipe out this “stiffnecked” people (32:7-10). Without seeing the Golden Calf for himself, Moses intercedes and convinces God to relent from his promise and save the people. But once he sees the Golden Calf for himself, Moses is furious, throws down the Ten Commandments tablets, burns the Golden Calf, grinds it into powder and makes the people drink water that has been “laced” with the Calf’s remains. Moses, after ordering the Levites to kill close to 3,000 Israelites, then returns to Mt. Sinai and asks for God’s forgiveness for the people, who have “sinned a great sin, and have made them a god of gold.” (32:31).
First, I note that one Bible commentary I have appears to say Moses was incorrect in his last statement to God. The Collegeville Bible Commentary explains that, as Aaron molded it, the Golden Calf did not technically violate the commandment (Ex. 20:4-5) against false images of God because the Calf was meant to symbolize not God, but an aspect of God — strength. However, as Moses viewed it, because the people did not always distinguish between God and God’s attributes, and did not appear to make the distinction in this case, it was a violation in practice by many of the Israelites. Hence the punishment of many of them by the Levites.
So, back to my friend’s question. Is the modern State of Israel somehow a Golden Calf? Better said, not the State of Israel itself or its citizens, but the image of Israel that the Israeli Government and Jewish Community have created and maintained, particularly over the past 20 years. Has the created image of what Israel is, or should be, or must be in order to survive become an idolatrous symbol, a mere representation of the reality of Israel? One that does not motivate the Jewish people to act to fulfill the ideals of Judaism, which underlie the ideals of Israel, but rather only to believe and fulfill the basic mantras and needs of the image.
And maybe it is not quite a Golden Calf, but yet something we have created – or asked our leaders to create — to replace or represent God, or at least an attribute of God. Something we needed to move through a time where finding God, or our other leaders, was difficult. Resulting in an object made of all of our best intentions, our most valued items and ideals, but that in and of itself, actually betrays those intentions and ideals. Something that, even if technically not something problematic, may become so because of how it is interpreted by those who follow it.
Perhaps this is all an overstatement, but maybe, just maybe, it isn’t, maybe there is something to this analogy. Rather than try to convince you (or even myself) one way or the other, I will just introduce some admittedly leading evidence to consider. In the end, I am not sure anyone can or even needs to reach a definitive conclusion. That the question needs to be pondered at all is troublesome enough.
First is a point made by both Andrew and myself before on this site. Check the websites linked on this site in the “Major Jewish Organizations” category. Look in their “Israel” sections and what do you see? Pages, documents, guides for “defending” and “making the case” for Israel. Add in what you see from AIPAC, the dominant source in the Jewish community for information about Israel, and you get a relatively monolithic view. Perhaps only the Reform and Reconstructionist movements present diverse views and ideas.
Now, you might say, as I try to say to myself, that is what these organizations do: advocate for and on behalf of Israel. And if they don’t, no one will. Fair enough. But is that all that is needed from them, particularly within the Jewish community? Just talking points for defense? Or should these be the sources for space and information with which to consider all of the aspects of Israel? Do we need to see and asked to repeat just one attribute of Israel (its strength, the aspect of God represented by the Golden Calf), or all of Israel itself?
Second, a statement made by Brigadier General Gershon Hacohen in Ha’aretz last week. Hacohen is the commander of the 36th Division and was the soldier responsible for the actual physical acts of evacuating settlements. He is a fascinating man and the interview is well worth the read. Towards the end, he is asked by Ari Shavit whether he has emerged from disengagement “without a scratch.” He says all life is scratches but that he doesn’t whine because “Zionism is not whining. Zionism is accepting your destiny as a Jew, and struggling.”
Now, perhaps he misspoke, or this is a bad translation. But if not, then this begs a second look. Because, to me, “accepting your destiny…and struggling” is the definition of Judaism, not Zionism. And in some ways, Zionism is precisely the opposite. So has Zionism become Judaism? If not, has Judaism fundamentally changed because of Zionism? Can you now truly have one without the other? There are many answers to these questions, too many to consider here, but I believe that, where Zionism has replaced Judaism, or where its tenets have become as fundamental to people as the Ten Commandments, then we may again have another example of the Golden Calf. I am not saying that Zionism is in itself idolatry. But when whether and how you “defend” the State of Israel is seen as defining your fundamental religious and moral beliefs and your “being a Jew,” such that belief in and defense of Israel and Zionism defines, more than your observance of religious beliefs and rituals, your Judaism, then, you could argue, we have elevated this image of Israel to the level of God.
Finally, the college students and their clothes. The article I mentioned way back in the first paragraph of this post reported that the Jewish Agency will be sending 200 young Israelis recently finished their army service to the United States to recruit students to spend their “year abroad” in Israel. Sounds innocent enough: Young Israelis coming to recruit young Americans to go to Israel; something for these soldiers to do other than get high in India.
But think about it again. These young Israelis will be coming to do recruiting specifically as soldiers. Using their service in the military as recruiting cache, at least implicitly. Not surprising, as based on my unscientific survey, the Israeli military has a lot of cache on campuses. But should it? The IDF is a very strong military, one that has protected Israel valiantly throughout its short history. But, both early in its history and again of late, the IDF has been responsible for acts that, well, should not inspire people to don their emblems in admiration. The military should be a necessity, not a commodity. And the more we give into the worshipping of the Israeli military, the more we use the military as a means to bring Israel into the Jewish community, the closer we get to again honoring only one aspect of Israel, and placing that aspect above all else.
Here is the bottom line for me. I have an 11-month old son. His mother and I want very much for him to have a connection to Israel. Connection to Israel is how we met, after all; it is at the root of his coming to be. But when we look around and see that a connection to Israel means, in many places, simply defending what its government does and honoring its military, then I am concerned about what that connection will really mean for him, and for us as his parents. Will he understand the country and its people, or will they simply be a symbol to him? Will this kind of connection supplant, or at least crowd, his connection to Judaism? Will there be room for him to understand and connect to Israel in his own way, without being considered an outsider in his own community, without being as conflicted or as judgmental as his father? Will connection to Israel be at the root of his children coming to be?
