Atoning for the Golden Calf with the Kapporet

This is true of MT and SP, but in LXX, the retelling is much shorter. See discussion in Brandon E. Bruning, The Making of the Mishkan: The Old Greek Text of Exodus 35–40 and the Literary History of the Pentateuch (Ph.D. diss., University of Notre Dame, 2014).

The term aron is precisely the same term used for coffin (as in Joseph’s coffin in Gen 50:20). Everett Fox thus renders the term here as “coffer” to distinguish it from Noah’s ark; see Fox, The Five Books of Moses (New York: Schocken Books, 1995), 397).

In the P-source, the tablets of the law may be referred to as either the luhot ha-‘edut (Exod 31:18, 32:15; 34:2), or simply ‘edut (Exod 25:16, 21 and 40:20), and therefore the Ark is called ’aron ha-‘edut (Exod 25:22, 26:33, 34, 30:6, 26; 39:35; 40:3, 5, 21; Num 4:5, 7:9).

2.5 cubits (3.67 feet/1.11 meters) by 1.5 cubits (2.20 feet/0.67 meters), though its thickness was not specified.

See also, Joshua M. Grintz, “Early Terms in the Priestly Torah” [in Hebrew], Leshonenu 40 (1975/1976): 5–32; Jacob Milgrom, The JPS Commentary: Numbers (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1990), 305 [n23], 59.

A contraction of kp (n) rdwj (cf. kappot raglai, Ezek. 43:7). See, M. Görg, “Eine neue Deutung für Kapporet” ZAW 89 (1977): 115–118; Görg, “Die Function der Sarafen bei Jesaja,” Biblische Notizen 5 (1978): 28–39.

 k3pt (3>r plus metathesis). See discussion of this and other translations in William H. C. Propp, Exodus 19–40, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2006), 385–386.

See Gen. 6:14:

^{בראשית ו:יד} עֲשֵׂה לְךָ תֵּבַת עֲצֵי גֹפֶר קִנִּים תַּעֲשֶׂה אֶת הַתֵּבָה וְכָפַרְתָּ אֹתָהּ מִבַּיִת וּמִחוּץ בַּכֹּפֶר:

^{Gen. 6:14} Make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in the ark, and cover [ve-kafarta] it inside and out with pitch [ba-kofer]”

This is admittedly an unusual expression, and the cognate accusative form here (pitch with pitch) is likely borrowed from the Akkadian, which has the same expression. But see also, Gen. 32:20(21), Isa. 47:11 (cf. 43:3, kopher as ransom), and Prov. 16:14. HALOT further suggests that the term kefir, meaning lion, derives from the fact that the male lion’s head is covered with a mane. Finally, this same root in Arabic means “cover” as well as “expiate” (i.e., same root and even verb form has both these meanings).

This is also the preferred translation in Carol Meyers, Exodus, The New Cambridge Bible Commentary (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 228.

See BDB, s. v. “כַּפֹּרֶת.”

This rendering is also preferred by Thomas Dozeman, Exodus, Eerdmans Critical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009), 614.

From Sifrei Deut. 1; the parallels include: y. Sheqalim 1:1, Sifrei Deut. 1; see also, Exod. Rab. 50:4, Tanḥuma VaYakhel 10, and Ibn Ezra on Exod 25:17.

For a discussion of what these beings were supposed to look like, and what their function was, see Raanan Eichler, “What Kind of Creatures Are the Cherubim?” TheTorah.com (2016); Zev Farber, “The Cherubim: Their Role on the Ark in the Holy of Holies,” TheTorah.com(2014).

The term masekhah, molten metal or image, derives from the verb נסך, “to pour out or cast.” The golden calf is repeatedly referred to as a masekhah: Exod 32:4; 32:8; Deut 9:16; Neh 9:18; cf. Ps 106:19. Deuteronomy, on the other hand, never says the calf was made of gold. See the discussion in David Frankel, “The Golden Calf: Comparing the Two Versions,” TheTorah.com (2014). It is worth noting that this process violates the prohibition found in priestly sources of making a molten image of a god (or God) (Exod 34:17; Lev 19:4). See BDB, s.v. “נסך.”

Rashi, on Exod 32:2, maintains that the people looked at the calf as a god, and that they really wanted many gods. Ramban (on vv. 1 and 4), by contrast, maintains that they were looking for a “guide” to lead them through the desert, for the Israelites did not know what had become of Moses to whom they ascribed the Exodus project. Given that Aaron declares “tomorrow shall be a festival to YHWH”, Ibn Ezra (on v. 1) argues that the calf functioned as a pedestal for God. See Deena Grant, “What Was the Golden Calf?” TheTorah.com (2013); Joel Baden, “What Was the Sin of the Golden Calf?” TheTorah.com (2017). In 1 Kgs 12:26-28, Jeroboam I of the Northern Kingdom builds two golden calves in Dan and Bethel, which may have represented the mount or footstool for the throne of YHWH. See, for example, the discussion in William H. Propp, Exodus 19-40, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2006), 582, and Frederick Greenspahn, “The Golden Calves of Sinai and Northern Israel in Context,” TheTorah.com (2015).

See Pirqe deRabbi Eliezer 45, Shemot Rabbah 42–43. Accordingly, it is the Egyptian rabble, the ‘mixed multitude’ (‘eruv rav), who accompanied the Israelites out of Egypt, that initiate and threaten the Elders and Aaron with death if they refuse to make the Golden Calf: See Tanḥuma Beha‘alotekha 14.

The cherubim as the throne (כסא) upon which the divine glory “sits,” is most developed in Ezekiel’s account of the destruction of Jerusalem (Ezek 8–11), particularly Ezek 10:1.

See 1 Sam 4:4; 2 Sam 6:2; 2 Kgs 19:15; Isa 37:16; Ps 80:2; 99:1. According to Raanan Eichler, the cherubim in Mishkan do not support the base or throne upon which God is “seated,” but more abstractly, frame the space in which the Divine Presence comes to dwell. He understands the epithet for God as the “One who dwells [yoshev] among the keruvim”, as comparable to the One who inhabits the Heavens (Ps 2:4; 123:1), or “dwells above the vault of the earth” (Isa 40:22). As he notes: “From his heavenly abode Yhwh does, however, see, hear, and respond to earth-dwellers.” See Raanan Eichler, “The Meaning of ישב הכרבים,” ZAW 126.3 (2014): 358–371 (370).

See also Exod 29:42; 30:36; Lev 16:2.

According to most Bible scholars, the making of the Mishkan belongs to the Priestly source (P), whereas the story of Israel’s breach of loyalty in worshipping the Golden Calf and its consequences (Exod 32–33) has been ascribed, for the most part, to the Elohist (E), and the account of the “second” tablets (ch. 34) to the Yahwist (J). See Baruch Schwartz’ outline, teasing out of the three strands, P, E, and J, in his essay, “What Happened at Mount Sinai?” TheTorah.com (2013).

See especially Rashi on 31:18, based on Midrash Tanḥuma Ki Tissa 31. Ramban, on the other hand, maintains that the chapters follow their chronological order, and the Mishkan presents a way of taking the theophany of Sinai with them (see Ramban on Exod. 25:1; also Umberto Cassuto, Commentary on Exodus (Jerusalem: Magnes Press 1983).

For more on this principle, Isaac Gottlieb, “Highlighting Juxtaposition in the Torah,” TheTorah.com (2015). See also Rashi on Exod 31:18 and 33:11; Tanḥuma Teruma 8; Pekudei2, 11; Exod. Rab. 51:4; Tanḥuma Tissa 4; Midrash Psalms 3. Other midrashic sources maintain that the commandment to build the Mishkan was given before the golden calf (as written) and only transmitted to the people after they had been forgiven as Lekaḥ Tov 105; Seder Eliyahu Rabbah 17; Tanḥuma Yashan Bechukotai 65; see Ramban and Ibn Ezra on Exod 25:1.

Avivah Gottlieb Zornberg, The Particulars of Rapture (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 339.

Though the thickness of the cover is not specified in the biblical text, the Rabbis surmise that it was one tefaḥ (handbreadth); the height of ten tefaḥim (the height of the ark plus thickness of the mercy seat) delineates the boundary line between the heavens and earth. In a teaching in the name of R. Yossi: “The Shekhinah never descended below [ten tefaḥim], nor did Moses or Elijah ever ascend on High [above ten tefaḥim], as it is written, ‘The heavens are the Lord’s heavens, but the earth he has given to human beings’ (Ps 115:16)” (b. Sukkah 5a).

After the initiation of the priests and the consecration of the Tabernacle, only the High Priest could enter the sanctum sanctorum, and only then on Yom Kippur in a cloud of incense “that screens the cover that is over the Ark, lest he die” (Lev 16:2, 13). The death of Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:1–3) is mentioned explicitly at the opening of the chapter to serve as dire warning about the exclusive and dangerous nature of that space (Lev 16:1). Following the elaborate description of Solomon’s consecration of the Temple, the priests were also forbidden entry as a result of the descent of the cloud into the holiest place (1 Kgs 8:10–11). Further, no one was allowed to touch the Ark itself, and only a select clan of Levites (the Kohathites) could disassemble it (along with the other holy objects in the Sanctuary), and bear it on their shoulders when the Israelites were meant to journey onward (Num 4:5, 9–12; 7:9; 10:21; cf. 1 Kgs 8:3, 6).

Raanan Eichler “תפקיד כרובי הארון” [The Function of the Ark Cherubim], Tarbiz 79.2 (2011): 165–185 [174–175]. See also Eichler, “What Kind of Creatures Are the Cherubim?” TheTorah.com (2016); and Eicher, “God Abandons the Garden of Eden and Dwells with the Cherubim,” TheTorah.com (2018). Even for Moses, the encounter with the divine presence was highly fraught at this locus, precluded by the descent of the cloud of glory into the Tabernacle (Exod 40:34–38; Lev 1:1). In fact, some medieval exegetes (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Hizkuni on Exod 25:22) suggest that Moses never actually entered the inner sanctum, but, rather, he would hear the voice speaking to him, emerging from the most holy place between the two cherubim. According to this, the kappōret was not meant to be visible in modus operandi at the moment of theophany.

This is quite different than the imagery of Num 10:35–36, which suggests that the ark was taken out as a kind of mascot in war. This couplet, indicated by inverted nuns that frame it, is known as “The Song of the Ark”, most likely drawn from an independent source (cf. Ps. 68:1 [68:2 MT] and 132:8) (see Milgrom, Numbers, 77). This description of the Ark’s deployment contradicts the P-sources (cf. Num 2:17; 10:21), where the Levites carry the Mishkan in the midst of the other tribes, who are arrayed around it. See also Num 14:42–44, when YHWH, “the LORD,” conterminously identified with “the Ark of the Covenant” is not with the Israelites who defy the decree not to enter the land. They are then defeated in battle. Similarly, in “the Ark Narrative” (1 Sam 4–6; 2 Sam 6), during the battle against the Philistines, the loss of the ark entails military defeat for the Israelites (4:11, 21–22). In an attempt to harmonize the sources, some Rabbis conjecture that there were two Arks, one that travelled in front and one that travelled in the midst of the tribes; Sifre Num. 82; y. Sheqalim 6:1, 49.

The midrash answers the question: Why is God euphemistically called maqom “place” (Gen 28:11, Exod 33:21): “שֶׁהוּא מְקוֹמוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם וְאֵין עוֹלָמוֹ מְקוֹמוֹ” (Gen. Rab. 68:9; Midrash Tehillim 90:10; PRE 35). See the discussion in Abraham J. Heschel, “The Abode of the Shekhinah,” in Heavenly Torah as Refracted through the Generations (New York: Continuum, 2006), 93–103.