What Was Molekh?

Parshat Kedoshim

by Rabbi Avi Billet

One of the more strange rituals discussed in the Torah is Molekh. There is a debate as to what it was, what its purpose was, etc. But this is how the Torah begins the instructions concerning Molekh. “If any person, whether a [born] Israelite or a proselyte who joins Israel, gives any of his children to Molekh, he must be put to death. The local people must pelt him to death with stones. I will direct My anger against that person, and will cut him off [spiritually] from among his people, since he has given his children to Molekh, thus defiling that which is holy to Me and profaning My holy name.” (20:2-3) 

To give both sides: Targum Yonatan is of the view that the goal of Molekh was for the child to die. 

Noting that Molekh was discussed in last week’s parsha (18:21), Rabbenu Bachaye quotes Maimonides (Moreh Nvukhim 3:37), who writes, the following to explain what the Molekh ritual was all about.

The passage now presented is the Friedlander translation of the Guide to the Perplexed, p. 336 (can be found online here https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp173.htm)

It is not the place here to address Maimonides’ anachronistic thoughts regarding women’s frame-of-mind. There are certainly stereotypes about both women and men that might continue to be used as generalizations, but as there are a. many exceptions to whatever rules, and b. a very different reality in terms of education in general today, I intend to stick to the basic insights regarding Molekh and some superstitious practices, regardless of which parent might (or might not) buy into it. 

“We must also point out that originators of false, baseless, and useless principles scheme and plan for the firm establishment of their faith; and tell their fellow-men that a certain plague will befall those who will not perform the act by which that faith is supported and confirmed for ever; this plague may one day accidentally befall a person, who will then direct his attention to the performance of that act, and adopt idolatry. It being well known that people are naturally most in fear and dread of the loss of their property and their children, the worshippers of fire spread the tale, that if any one did not pass his son and daughter through the fire, he will lose his children by death. There is no doubt that on account of this absurd menace every one at once obeyed, out of pity and sympathy for the child; especially as it was a trifling and a light thing that was demanded, in passing the child over the fire. We must further take into account that the care of young children is intrusted (sic) to women, who are generally weak-minded, and ready to believe everything, as is well known. The Law makes, therefore, an earnest stand against this practice, and uses in reference to it stronger terms than in any other kind of idolatry; namely, "he defileth my sanctuary, and profaneth my holy name" (Lev. xx. 3). The true prophet then declares in the name of God that the very act which is performed for the purpose of keeping the child alive, will bring death upon him who performs it, and destruction upon his seed. Comp. "And I will set my face against that man and against his family," etc. (ibid. xx. 5). Know that traces of this practice have survived even to the present day, because it was widespread in the world. You can see how midwives take a young child wrapped in its swaddling-clothes, and after having placed incense of a disagreeable smell on the fire, swing the child in the smoke over that fire. This is certainly a kind of passing children through the fire, and we must not do it. Reflect on the evil cunning of the author of this doctrine; how people continued to adhere to this doctrine, and how, in spite of the opposition of the Law during thousands of years, its name is not blotted out, and its traces are still in existence.” 

Rabbenu Bachaye concludes his remarks noting, 

“I’ve already written about this in Vayikra 18:21, that some of the commentators believed that the child was burned when passed multiple times through the fire, until he died. This, however, was not the view of Maimonides, for he believed the child was not burned but was merely passed between fires (and survived!). According to his words, the verse (Devarim 12:31) ‘Do not worship God your Lord with such practices. In worshiping their gods, [these nations], committed all sorts of perversions hated by God. They would even burn their sons and daughters in fire as a means of worshiping their gods!’ refers to a different form of idolatry that is not Molekh.” 

In other words, Maimonides was of the view that there were two different rituals: a passing through to survival was Molekh, while the pass through to death was something else, a different kind of idolatry. 

The draw to Molekh was superstition and what we now know to be a false sense of security in response to fear mongering perpetrated by the Molekh idolators. 

If it’s just a superstition and it is meaningless and harmless, then why should God be upset about it? 

Because believing in the god that is Molekh in anyway is “thus defiling that which is holy to Me and profaning My holy name.” (Vayikra 20:3) 

Molekh thrives on fear. 

FDR famously said, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” Our decisions and choices should never be driven by fear. Instead, we should find the strength to believe and trust in God himself, and pray that He carries us through to the other side, to where we seek to be.