Ki Tisa: The Censored Speaking Golden Calf

In a prior post, I noted a relatively benign and minor censorship, or seeming censorship, of a Rashbam about mixing the anointing oil. Let us more on to something with greater disparity.

Eliyahu Munk writes about it “[I fleshed out the author’s words. Ed.]” But, I think does more than fleshing out Rashbam’s words, but redirects and misdirects them.

I think that, according to Rashbam, idols were capable of speech via the impure spiritual forces. But that was just magic, but did not mean that they were channeling anything Divine. And that was the people’s error, misunderstanding the witchcraft-based speech.

Eliyahu Munk would not like that, and so I think he interprets it as the idols being incapable of speech, even via witchcraft or impure spiritual forces. And the people’s error was thinking that they could, in some way, be capable of speech. And then, that that imagined speech would come from anything Divine.

It is iffy, and I can see how one can interpret it either way. But specific words / phrases take me in a particular direction.

That’s a pretty big disparity. Let us see Rashbam’s words, and decide which is correct, starting with my own translation…

---

In Shemot 32:4:

וַיִּקַּ֣ח מִיָּדָ֗ם וַיָּ֤צַר אֹתוֹ֙ בַּחֶ֔רֶט וַֽיַּעֲשֵׂ֖הוּ עֵ֣גֶל מַסֵּכָ֑ה וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ אֵ֤לֶּה אֱלֹהֶ֙יךָ֙ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר הֶעֱל֖וּךָ מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃

And he received the gold at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool and made it a molten calf: and they said, These are thy gods, O Yisra᾽el, which brought thee up out of the land of Miżrayim.

and Rashbam writes:

אלה אלהיך ישראל אשר העלוך - וכי שוטים היו שלא היו יודעים שעגל זה שנולד היום לא העלם ממצרים? כל עובדי עבודת כוכבים יודעים שאלהינו בשמים ברא את העולם, אך בזה היו טועים, שהתרפים יש בהם רוח טומאה כמו הנביאים שיש בהם רוח הקדש, וסבורים שהעגל שהיה מדבר ברוח הטומאה כאילו היה מדבר ברוח הקדש של מעלה, ולכך אומרים: אלה אלהיך ישראל אשר העלוך - כלומר רוח הקדש יש בו וכאילו רוח הקדש הולך לפנינו. וכן לבן אמר על התרפים: למה גנבת את אלהי.

ולנסות בו את ישראל נתן בו רוח הטומאה שלכל מיני מכשפות ואוב וידעוני כח בו להכחיש פמליא של מעלה ולהגיד נולדות, לדעת אם יהיו תמים לה' אלהיהם ולא יהיה בהם מעונן ומנחש ומכשף ולא מאמין לאות ומופת של רוח הטומאה, כדכתיב: כי מנסה ה' אלהיכם אתכם לדעת הישכם אוהבים את ה' אלהיכם וגו'.

I would translate:

אֵ֤לֶּה אֱלֹהֶ֙יךָ֙ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר הֶעֱל֖וּךָ — now, were these fools, who didn’t know that this calf was “born” today did not bring them up out of Egypt. All idol worshipers know that God in Heaven created the world, but they err in this — that the idols (terafim) have within them an unholy spirit, just as the prophets who have a holy spirit; and they (mistakenly) believe that the idol, which spoke (שהיה מדבר) with the impure spirit was as if it spoke with the holy spirit of above. And therefore they said: אֵ֤לֶּה אֱלֹהֶ֙יךָ֙ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר הֶעֱל֖וּךָ , that is to say, it has the Holy Spirit in it, and it as if the Holy Spirit walks before us. And so too Lavan said about the idols (terafim), “why have you stolen my gods / אלהי?”

And in order to test Israel, He (Hashem) placed in it the unholy spirit, for in all manner of witchcraft, and ov and yidoni, there is a force in order to refute the Heavenly Entourage (פמליא של מעלה), and to relate future events, in order to know if they (Israel) will be complete to Hashem their God, and not have a me’onen, a menachesh, and a mechashef, so that they will not pay heed to the (fulfilled) sign or worder of the unholy spirit, as it written (Devarun 13:4), “For Hashem is testing you, to know if you love Hashem your God [with you whole heart and whole being.”

It certainly seems like Rashbam is legitimizing the existence, or apparent existence, of an unholy spirit placed in these idols, which can speak and can predict the future. And the error is one of interpretation, that they think it reflects some real force up above, namely a true deity or perhaps Hashem himself, however you take it.

Did Rashbam believe that idols were capable of speech?

Now, see how Eliyahu Munk takes it. I cannot italicize all of the changes, but I will italicize and bold a few of them.

אלה אלוהיך ישראל אשר העלוך, were the Israelites all idiots that they would accept such a statement? Had they not all experienced the miracles performed by the G’d of Israel only less than 3 months ago? The declaration is to be understood as based on the premise subscribed to by most idolaters that while it is true that there is a G’d in heaven Who had created the universe, the teraphim were held to possess divine powers, exercising same just as did the prophets who performed miracles. The former were agents of spiritually negative forces, known in our parlance as רוח הטומאה, the prophets performed their miracles by invoking the spiritually positive forces, G’d in heaven. The people who had made the golden calf, or who had seen it emerge from the mould, proclaimed that the same force which had produced the golden calf had also been instrumental in freeing the Jewish people from the enslavement by the Egyptians. They implied that such teraphim may sometimes be the embodiment of holy spirit, other times of Satan’s spirit. They insisted that seeing that the calf had materialised at the time when the Jewish people were in need of a replacement for Moses, this was proof that it was a replacement for Moses, and if they would now carry the golden calf in front of them, or have it walk in front of them, this would be equivalent having the holy spirit walking ahead of them. [I fleshed out the author’s words. Ed.] We know that Lavan (Genesis 31,30) accused Yaakov of having stolen his “gods” which was the description he gave to his “teraphim.” He himself had admitted that Yaakov’s G’d had enriched him, and yet for himself he paid heed to these teraphim.

If G’d allowed the spiritually negative forces to appear as possessing divine powers, He did so in order to test the loyalty of the Jewish people who had been warned not to have any truck with witchcraft or those who practiced this art. Moses spells all this out in Deuteronomy 13,4. The prohibition against אוב, ידעוני, and a variety of different demonic and other sorcery performing spirits has been repeated in the Torah several times. Loyalty of the people to their G’d can be proven only when alternative sources of what one desires are offered or appear as being offered.

Some of this fleshing out does add good points, which might have been intended by Rashbam. But, I am at the least, not sure about others. The big difference might be in whether these unholy spiritual forces were understood as unholy by the people / being Satan, rather than being misunderstood as being holy forces from above; and also what is meant by “divine powers”. To me, it seems like Rashbam is saying that these idols could really talk and predict the future, because Hashem had allowed them to do so. Is that the same as “appearing” to possess divine powers?

It is hard for me to understand exactly what Eliyahu Munk is saying, because I think he’s a bit inconsistent, and uncomfortable with idea itself.

As for myself, I am not uncomfortable with saying that Rashbam said X. I don’t think I agree with Rashbam that X is true, or that X reflect the Biblical attitude, but that might be my own Rationalist tendencies.

Also, if Rashbam is really saying this, it seems to go directly against pesukim in Tehillim 115 / Hallel:

עֲצַבֵּיהֶם כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב מַעֲשֵׂה יְדֵי אָדָם׃

Their idols are silver and gold,
the work of men’s hands.

פֶּה־לָהֶם וְלֹא יְדַבֵּרוּ עֵינַיִם לָהֶם וְלֹא יִרְאוּ׃

They have mouths, but cannot speak,
eyes, but cannot see;

אׇזְנַיִם לָהֶם וְלֹא יִשְׁמָעוּ אַף לָהֶם וְלֹא יְרִיחוּן׃

they have ears, but cannot hear,
noses, but cannot smell;

יְדֵיהֶם  וְלֹא יְמִישׁוּן רַגְלֵיהֶם וְלֹא יְהַלֵּכוּ לֹא־יֶהְגּוּ בִּגְרוֹנָם׃

they have hands, but cannot touch,
feet, but cannot walk;
they can make no sound in their throats.

I don’t know how Rashbam could contend with that. (Maybe that the lips don’t move. Still, there’s this general theme of utter powerlessness.)

Anyway, let us run it through ChatGPT, o1 reasoning model. I’ve found that ChatGPT is often too generous for my taste, in giving the benefit of the doubt that something is not censorship. I want to eventually try the strategy of continuing a prior conversation where it agreed that Eliyahu Munk censored, and seeing if that context primes it to be more agreeable in finding censorship. But due to an error, I didn’t do that this time — I extended a different chat.

My approach will again be:

1. Give verse and Rashbam in Hebrew, ask ChatGPT to translate Rashbam.

2. Give Eliyahu Munk’s English translation. Ask it to compare the translations and tell me if there are differences and / or censorship. Also, if censorship, to explain what could motivate the censorship.

I am not sure I agree with all everything ChatGPT suggested / thought of as a difference, but out of the box, without any wrestling like I had to do in the former instance, it does generally concur with my understanding that Munk is offering a more Rationalist reinterpretation of Rashbam. It is also caught up in the idea that censorship is to avoid arguments with Christians, which does not strike me as pertinent in Eliyahu Munk’s case. Thus, ChatGPT’s response was (you have to scroll to the bottom):

There are some significant differences between Eliyahu Munk's translation and the original Rashbam text, including potential signs of censorship and editorial reinterpretation. Below is an analysis of the key differences and possible motivations behind them.

Differences in Content

1. Stronger Emphasis on Rationalism in Munk’s Version

   • Munk adds rhetorical questions about the Israelites’ intelligence:

"Were the Israelites all idiots that they would accept such a statement?"
Rashbam’s original does not phrase it this way. Instead, he states the issue plainly:
"But were they fools who did not know that this calf, which was just created today, did not bring them up from Egypt?"
Munk’s version makes this a broader philosophical challenge, emphasizing the absurdity of idolatry from a rationalist perspective.

1. Shift in the Understanding of the Calf’s “Powers”

   • Rashbam explicitly states that the egel (golden calf) had a spirit of impurity (ruach tum’ah), which misled the people into thinking it was a form of divine prophecy.

   • Munk, however, frames this differently:

"The people… proclaimed that the same force which had produced the golden calf had also been instrumental in freeing the Jewish people from the enslavement by the Egyptians."
Rashbam does not say this. Rather, he says that the Israelites saw the calf as imbued with some form of divine power, not that it itself freed them from Egypt.

1. Censorship or Alteration of References to Magical Powers

   • Rashbam explicitly draws a comparison between the calf and sorcery, necromancy, and divination (m'chashef, me'onen, yid'oni). He asserts that the spirit of impurity can produce deceptive signs and wonders, testing Israel’s faith.

   • Munk softens this, avoiding direct discussion of sorcery and instead frames it as a test of loyalty, omitting some of Rashbam’s details about magic’s role.

   • Example: Rashbam says that these forces have power "to oppose the heavenly hosts and to foretell the future." Munk does not translate this directly.

2. Avoidance of Directly Stating That the Calf “Spoke”

   • Rashbam suggests that the calf may have spoken through a spirit of impurity (ruach tum’ah), much like the biblical teraphim were sometimes believed to do.

   • Munk reinterprets this more metaphorically, saying the people thought that carrying the calf would be equivalent to the holy spirit leading them. This eliminates any reference to the supernatural speech of the calf.

Possible Censorship and Motivations

1. Avoidance of the Idea That the Golden Calf Had Any Real Power

   • Munk’s translation downplays the notion that the egel was infused with a ruach tum’ah capable of misleading people.

   • The original Rashbam acknowledges that such spiritual forces—though false—have influence over people, similar to necromancy and divination.

   • Some religious translators might hesitate to include this because it could be misunderstood as validating the existence of independent supernatural forces outside of God.

2. Rationalist Leaning

   • Munk’s version presents a more rationalist approach, portraying idol worship as pure foolishness.

   • Rashbam’s text, however, engages with the spiritual psychology of idolaters, explaining how they could believe in something false but still powerful.

3. Potential Christian Sensitivities

   • Some Jewish texts were historically censored due to Christian scrutiny. Rashbam’s discussion of false prophecy and misleading signs could be seen as paralleling Christian claims about miracles outside of Judaism.

   • Rashbam’s explicit framing of ruach tum’ah as a deceptive force could have been censored to avoid polemical implications.

Conclusion

Munk’s translation is not an outright censorship, but rather a reinterpretation with rationalist and apologetic tendencies. The omissions and rewordings reflect an effort to:

• Avoid attributing supernatural powers to the golden calf.

• Reduce references to magic and spirits of impurity.

• Frame idolatry more as a test of faith than as an interaction with deceptive spiritual forces.

If you’re looking for a translation truer to Rashbam’s intent, Munk’s version may not be fully reliable in conveying the mystical and theological nuances of the original.

I am not entirely happy with ChatGPT’s analysis, but I broadly concur with the conclusion.

Readers, what do you think? Is this an instance of censorship, or am I being oversensitive to minor translation choices?