108. The above Qur'anic verse absolves Aaron of the charge levelled against
him by the Jews. According to the Biblical version of the story of calf-worship,
however, it was Aaron who had made the golden calf for the people of Israel.
To quote:
When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people
gathered themselves together to Aaron, and said to him, 'Up, make up gods who
shall go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the
land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.' And Aaron said to them,
'Take off the rings of gold which are in the ears of your wives, your sons,
and your daughters, and bring them to me.' So all the people took off the rings
of gold which were in their ears, and brought them to Aaron. And he received
the gold at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, and made a molten
calf; and they said, 'These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out
of the land of Egypt.' When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it; and
Aaron made proclamation and said, 'Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord.' And
they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings and brought peace
offerings; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play (Exodus
32: 1--6).
The Qur'an, however, refutes the above account at many places and points out
that it was Samiri the rebel of God rather than Aaron the Prophet who committed
that heinous sin. For details see (Ta Ha 20: 90 ff.)
Strange though it may appear, the Israelites maligned the characters of those
very people whom they believed to be the Messengers of God. The accusations
they hurled at them included such heinous sins as polytheism, sorcery, fornication,
deceit and treachery. Needless to say, indulgence in any of these sins is disgraceful
for even an ordinary believer and decent human being, let alone Prophets. In
the light of the history of Israeli morals, however, it is quite understandable
why they maligned their own Prophets. In times of religious and moral degeneration
when both the clergy and laity were steeped in sin and immorality, they tried
to seek justification for their misdeeds. In order to sedate their own consciences
they ascribed the very sins of which they were guilty to their Prophets and
then their own inability to refrain from sins on the grounds that not even the
Prophets could refrain.
The same characteristic is evident in Hinduism. When the Hindus reached the
lowest point in their moral degeneration, they produced a literature which presents
a very perverted image of Hindu ideals. This literature portrayed their gods,
hermits and monks as crass sinners. In doing so, they suggested that since such
noble people could not refrain from indulging in grave sins, ordinary mortals
are inevitably bound to commit them. Moreover, a person's indulgence in immoral
acts should not make him remorseful for the same acts were committed earlier
by their monks and hermits.