Pt1 ‘When a King Sins’: Sin, Reward, and Responsibility in Talmudic Theology (Horayot 10a-b)
This is the first part of a three-part series. The outline of the series is below.1
This sugya opens by narrowing the Torah’s “When a king sins” (Lev 4:22): not every king counts. A sick king? No: Rav Avdimi bar Ḥama reads it as a king who is a metzora, like Azariah/Uzziah (II Kings 15:5), who was quarantined in a “house of freedom,” i.e., out of office. The line “house of freedom” flips the intuition: before the affliction the king was actually a servant—to the people. Leadership is servitude, not privilege.
A vivid anecdote hammers this home: Rabban Gamliel and R’ Yehoshua are at sea; Gamliel brought bread, Yehoshua brought bread and flour. When the voyage runs long, the nasi eats from Yehoshua’s flour. “How did you know?”—“Once in seventy years a star rises and misleads sailors.”
Yehoshua then shames the system: towering scholars R. Elazar Ḥisma and R. Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda can “count the drops of the sea” yet go hungry. Gamliel summons them to appointment; they initially refuse. He clarifies: “Do you think I offer you authority?! I offer you bondage!” (cf. I Kings 12:7).
From kingship the sugya pivots on a word: asher. R. Yoḥanan ben Zakkai hears “asher nasi yeḥeta” as “ashrei”—happy is the generation whose king brings a sin-offering for an unwitting sin; kal vaḥomer a commoner will atone, and kal vaḥomer for deliberate sins he will repent.
Rava bar Rabba pushes back: if every asher signals praise, we’d be praising “asher ḥata” (Lev 5:16) and Jeroboam “asher ḥata ve’asher heḥti” (I Kings 14:16)—absurd. Answer: here the Torah “changed its diction” (elsewhere the parallel is “if”), so the nuance stands only for the king’s case.
The word-play widens into theodicy. Rav Naḥman bar Ḥisda reads Kohelet 8:14 as: fortunate are righteous people who receive here what was “due” to the wicked there (their suffering pays their account); woe to the wicked who receive here what was “due” to the righteous (their comforts burn their account).
Rava resists a pious embrace of suffering: better that the righteous enjoy this world too; woe to the wicked who taste righteous suffering even here. He points to two students—Rav Pappa and Rav Huna b. Yehoshua—who mastered tractates and bought plots of land: “Ashrei ha-tzaddikim” fulfilled in real life.
The sugya then tests Hosea 14:10—“the ways of YHWH are straight; righteous walk in them, sinners stumble in them.” Is the same deed walk for one and stumble for another? The first parable (two men eating the Paschal lamb) is rejected—both fulfill a mitzva.
The sharper parable contrasts identical circumstances with opposite outcomes: two men in one house; one has sex with his wife (permitted), the other with his sister (prohibited). Or better: Lot and his daughters2—one “way,” diverging intentions—daughters aiming to preserve life (mitzva), Lot driven by lust.
Part 2: Lot and His Daughters; Amon and Moab; Tamar and Zimri; Yael and Sisera
R. Yoḥanan reads Genesis 13:10 as a chain of sexual allusions to expose Lot’s disposition; a dotted letter in “be-kumah” (Gen 19:33) signals: he didn’t know at lying down, but he knew upon rising—and still drank the next night. Lot’s separation from Abraham becomes a moral-rabbinic cautionary tale: he sowed enmity that echoes as the Ammonite/Moabite ban; his shame is rehearsed publicly in the batei midrash.
Not all sexual transgression is the same. Ulla pairs Tamar and Zimri: both are “znut,” yet Tamar yields kings and prophets, Zimri yields plague. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak crystallizes the rule: aveira li-shmah can outrank mitzva she-lo li-shmah; Yael, who seduces and kills Sisera, is “blessed above women in the tent”—surpassing even the Matriarchs in that moment.
R. Yoḥanan (per R. Shimon b. Yoḥai) guards the moral line: the “good” of the wicked is bad for the righteous—Yael took no illicit pleasure. Still, the sugya safeguards the long game of intention-in-practice: “Always learn and do—even not for its own sake, for from not-for-its-own-sake one comes to for-its-own-sake.” Balak’s forty-two offerings (maliciously motivated) nonetheless earn him Ruth via Eglon—imperfect intent can seed redemptive futures.
Finally, language and alacrity matter. God rewards refined speech: Moab (crude name) earns Israel a limited restraint—no war, but harassment permitted—while Amon (“ben Ami,” modest euphemism) earns total restraint. And zeal for mitzva pays generational dividends: the elder daughter’s precedence yields a four-generation head start—Moab’s Ruth reaches David before Amon’s Naamah reaches Solomon.
The sugya, then, is a study in authority-as-service, intention shaping identical acts, the moral calculus of suffering and reward, and the surprising ways flawed agents, careful words, and timely initiative can tilt history toward blessing.
Outline
Intro
Part 1
Part 2: Lot and His Daughters; Amon and Moab; Tamar and Zimri; Yael and Sisera
The Passage - ‘When a King Sins’: Sin, Reward, and Responsibility in Talmudic Theology (Horayot 10a-b)
“When a king sins” excludes a king who is sick
Rav Avdimi bar Ḥama - “When a king sins” excludes a king who is a metzora; such a king is removed from office
Prooftext - King Azariah - 2 Kings 15:5
“Independent house” implies that before the affliction the king was in servitude to the people
Anecdote of Rabban Gamliel & R' Yehoshua
Rabban Gamliel runs out of food, forced to rely on R' Yehoshua’s food
R’ Yehoshua - A star rises once in 70 years and misleads sailors; prudent planning is warranted
Rabban Gamliel surprised by R' Yehoshua’s poverty despite wisdom; R' Yehoshua - R' Elazar Ḥisma and R' Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda are also poor despite their wisdom
Rabban Gamliel calls for R' Elazar Ḥisma and R' Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda (to appoint them to scholarly positions), but they (seem to) hesitate
Rabban Gamliel - Appointment to leadership isn’t prestigious, it’s actually servitude - 1 Kings 12:7
R’ Yoḥanan ben Zakkai - happy is the generation whose king brings a sin-offering for an unwitting sin - Leviticus 4:22
.. all the more so a commoner will bring, and all the more so for intentional sin (repentance)
Rava bar Rabba (objection) - If “asher” always implies “happy,” then Lev 5:16 and Jeroboam’s “asher” would also imply praise (an untenable result) - Leviticus 5:16; 1 Kings 14:16
Rav Naḥman bar Ḥisda - Happy are the righteous who receive in this world what is due the wicked in the World-to-Come; woe to the wicked who receive in this world what is due the righteous in the World-to-Come - Ecclesiastes 8:14
Rava - Happy are the righteous who enjoy the good of this world; woe to the wicked who suffer like many righteous do in this world - Ecclesiastes 8:14
Anecdote: Rava upon hearing Rav Pappa and Rav Huna bar Yehoshua mastered tractates and gained some wealth, he applied “happy are the righteous” to them - Ecclesiastes 8:14
The same act can be “walk” or “stumble” depending on intent - Hosea 14:10
Rabba bar bar Ḥana citing R’ Yoḥanan - two eat the Pesach—one for the mitzva, one gluttonously
Reish Lakish - challenge: The glutton still fulfilled Pesach
... better parable: two men in one house—one has sex with his wife (permitted), one with his sister (prohibited); same “way,” divergent outcomes
Alternative parable - A single “way” is better modeled by Lot and his daughters: the daughters intended a mitzva; Lot intended a transgression - Genesis 19:30–38
Part 2: Lot and His Daughters; Amon and Moab; Tamar and Zimri; Yael and Sisera
R’ Yoḥanan - Lot’s conduct was driven by lust; the whole verse “And Lot lifted his eyes…” is read as coded for sexual transgression - Genesis 13:10 linked to Gen 39:7; Judges 14:3; Genesis 34:2; Proverbs 6:26; Hosea 2:7
R’ Yosei bar R’ Ḥoni - Lot did not know at lying down, but he knew at rising - Genesis 19:33
... he should not have drunk the next night
Rabba - Lot separated from Abraham and thereby set enmity between Israel and Ammon (Ammonite/Moabite ban) - Proverbs 18:19; Deuteronomy 23:4
Rava / R’ Yitzḥak - Lot’s separation exposed his shame, taught publicly via the halakha on Ammonites/Moabites - Proverbs 18:1
Ulla - Contrast: Tamar’s licentiousness produced kings and prophets; Zimri’s produced mass death - Genesis 38; Numbers 25:6–9
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak - A transgression for the sake of Heaven (aveira li-shmah) is greater than a mitzva not for its own sake
Prooftext - Yael is more blessed than the Matriarchs - Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah - Judges 5:24
Rav Yehuda citing Rav - One should always engage in Torah/mitzvot even not for their own sake, for this leads to for-their-own-sake
R’ Yoḥanan - Sisera had sex with Yael 7 times - Judges 5:27
R’ Yoḥanan citing R’ Shimon b. Yoḥai - Even the “good” of the wicked is bad for the righteous (Yael derived no pleasure from the act)
Rav Yehuda citing Rav - One should always engage in Torah/mitzvot even not for their own sake, for this leads to for-their-own-sake
Prooftext - Balak’s 42 offerings merited Ruth - Numbers 23 (offerings of Balak)
R’ Yosei ben Ḥanina - Ruth was a granddaughter of Eglon, who was a grandson of Balak
R’ Ḥiyya bar Abba citing R’ Yoḥanan - God rewards euphemistic speech
Prooftext - Israel was told not to wage war against Moab, but permitted to harass
... in contrast with Amon who earned a full ban, including on harassment - Deuteronomy 2:9, 19
R’ Ḥiyya bar Avin citing R’ Yehoshua ben Korḥa - Be first to a mitzva: Lot’s elder daughter’s precedence earned her lineage a 4-generation head start over the younger - Genesis 19
The Passage
“When a king sins” excludes a king who is sick
תנו רבנן:
״אשר נשיא יחטא״ –
פרט לחולה.
§ Apropos a king, A baraita states that
when the verse states: “When a king3 sins” (Leviticus 4:22),
this serves to exclude a king who is ill.
Rav Avdimi bar Ḥama - “When a king sins” excludes a king who is a metzora; such a king is removed from office
משום דהוה ליה חולה,
אידחי ליה מנשיאותיה?!
The Talmud asks: Due to the fact that he is ill,
is he removed from his sovereignty?!
אמר רב אבדימי בר חמא:
פרט לנשיא שנצטרע
Rav Avdimi bar Ḥama said:
The reference is not to all illnesses; rather, it is to exclude a king who is afflicted with tzara'at
Prooftext - King Azariah - 2 Kings 15:5
שנאמר:
״וינגע ה׳ את המלך
ויהי מצרע עד יום מתו
וישב בבית החפשית
ויותם בן המלך על הבית״.
as it is stated concerning King Azariah:
“And YHWH afflicted the king,
so that he was a metzora until the day of his death,
and dwelt in an independent house.
And Jotham, son of the king, was over the household, judging the people of the land” (II Kings 15:5).
Azariah was removed from his sovereignty when he was afflicted with tzara'at.
“Independent house” implies that before the affliction the king was in servitude to the people
מדקאמר ״בבית החפשית״,
מכלל דעד השתא עבד הוה.
The Talmud comments: From the fact that the verse states: “In an independent house,”
by inference it may be understood that until now he was a servant, i.e., he was in servitude to the people.
Anecdote of Rabban Gamliel & R' Yehoshua
Rabban Gamliel runs out of food, forced to rely on R' Yehoshua’s food
כי הא דרבן גמליאל ורבי יהושע
הוו אזלי בספינתא,
בהדי דרבן גמליאל הוה פיתא,
בהדי רבי יהושע הוה פיתא וסולתא.
שלים פיתיה דרבן גמליאל,
סמך אסולתיה דרבי יהושע.
The Talmud notes: This is similar to that incident of Rabban Gamliel and R' Yehoshua
They were traveling together on a ship.
Rabban Gamliel had sufficient bread for the journey.
R' Yehoshua also had sufficient bread, and additionally he had flour.
The journey lasted longer than expected, and Rabban Gamliel’s bread was finished.
He relied on R' Yehoshua’s flour for nourishment.
R’ Yehoshua - A star rises once in 70 years and misleads sailors; prudent planning is warranted
אמר ליה:
מי הוה ידעת דהוה לן עכובא כולי האי
דאיתית סולתא?
אמר ליה:
כוכב אחד לשבעים שנה עולה
ומתעה את (הספינות) [הספנים],
ואמרתי: שמא יעלה ויתעה [אותנו].
Rabban Gamliel said to R' Yehoshua:
Did you know from the outset that we would have so substantial a delay?
Is that the reason that you brought flour with you?
R' Yehoshua said to Rabban Gamliel:
There is one star that rises once in 70 years4
and misleads sailors at sea, causing their journeys to be extended.
And I said: Perhaps that star will rise during our journey and mislead us.
Rabban Gamliel surprised by R' Yehoshua’s poverty despite wisdom; R' Yehoshua - R' Elazar Ḥisma and R' Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda are also poor despite their wisdom
(See footnote.)5
אמר ליה: כל כך בידך, ואתה עולה בספינה?!
אמר ליה:
עד שאתה תמה עלי,
תמה על שני תלמידים שיש לך ביבשה,
רבי אלעזר חסמא
ורבי יוחנן בן גודגדא,
שיודעין לשער כמה טפות יש בים,
ואין להם פת לאכול ולא בגד ללבוש!
נתן דעתו להושיבם בראש.
Rabban Gamliel said to him: So much wisdom is at your disposal, and you board a ship to earn your livelihood?
R' Yehoshua said to him:
Before you wonder about me,
wonder about two students that you have on dry land,
R' Elazar Ḥisma6
and R' Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda,
who are so wise that they know how to calculate how many drops of water there are in the sea,
and yet they have neither bread to eat nor a garment to wear.
Rabban Gamliel made up his mind to seat them at the head of the academy.
Rabban Gamliel calls for R' Elazar Ḥisma and R' Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda (to appoint them to scholarly positions), but they (seem to) hesitate
כשעלה,
שלח להם
ולא באו,
חזר ושלח
ובאו.
When Rabban Gamliel ascended to dry land,
he sent a messenger to them to tell them to come so that he could appoint them
and they did not come.
He again sent a messenger to them
and they came.
Rabban Gamliel - Appointment to leadership isn’t prestigious, it’s actually servitude - 1 Kings 12:7
אמר להם:
כמדומין אתם ששררה אני נותן לכם?!
עבדות אני נותן לכם!
שנאמר:
״וידברו אליו לאמר:
אם היום תהיה עבד לעם הזה״.
Rabban Gamliel said to them:
Do you imagine that I am granting you authority, and since you did not want to accept the honor you did not come when I sent for you?!
I am granting you servitude!
as it is stated:
“And they spoke to him saying:
If you will be a servant to this people today” (I Kings 12:7).
This explains the phrase “in an independent house.”
This series is part of a planned broader series on tractate Horayot.
Notably, the daf yomi schedule is currently at tractate Horayot; this folio was studied a few days ago.
On the story being referenced, see Wikipedia, “Lot's daughters“:
The daughters of the biblical patriarch Lot appear in chapter 19 of the Book of Genesis, in two connected stories.
In the first, Lot offers his daughters to a Sodomite mob; in the second, his daughters have sex with Lot without his knowledge to bear him children […]
During the escape from Sodom, Lot's wife is turned into a pillar of salt.
Lot and his daughters take shelter in Zoar, but afterwards go up into the mountains to live in a cave.
Concerned for their father having descendants, one evening, Lot's eldest daughter gets Lot drunk and has sex with him without his knowledge. The following night, the younger daughter does the same.
They both become pregnant; the older daughter gives birth to Moab, while the younger daughter gives birth to Ammon.
According to Jewish tradition, Lot's daughters believed that the entire world had been destroyed, and that they were the only survivors. They therefore resorted to incest in order to preserve the human race.
See also the summary in Wikipedia, “Vayeira“, section “Fourth reading – Genesis 19:21–21:4“:
Lot was afraid to dwell in Zoar, so he settled in a cave in the hill country with his two daughters.
The older daughter told the younger that their father was old, and there was not a man on earth with whom to have children, so she proposed that they get Lot drunk and have sex with him so that they might maintain life through their father.
That night they made their father drink wine, and the older one lay with her father without his being aware.
And the next day the older one persuaded the younger to do the same.
The two daughters thus had children by their father, the older one bore a son named Moab who became the father of the Moabites, and the younger bore a son named Ben-ammi who became the father of the Ammonites.
נשיא - literally: ‘nasi’.
On this Hebrew word, see Wikipedia, “Nasi (Hebrew title)“ (with slight adjustments):
Nasi (Hebrew: נָשִׂיא, romanized: nāśī) is a title meaning "prince" in Biblical Hebrew, "Prince [of the Sanhedrin]" in Mishnaic Hebrew.
Certain great figures from Jewish history have the title, including Judah ha-Nasi, who was the chief redactor of the Mishnah as well as nasi of the Sanhedrin.
In Modern Hebrew, its meaning has changed to "president" […]
The noun nasi (including its grammatical variations) occurs 132 times in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible and is usually translated "prince" […]
The first use is for the twelve "princes" who will descend from Ishmael, in Genesis 17:20, and the second use (in Genesis 23:6), is the Hittites recognizing Abraham as "a godly prince" (נְשִׂיא אֱלֹהִים nǝśi ʾǝlohim).
In Leviticus 4:22–26, in the rites of sacrifices for leaders who err, there is the special offering made by a nasi.
In Numbers 7, the leader of each tribe is referred to as a nasi, and each one brings a gift to the Tabernacle. In Numbers 34:16–29, occurring 38 years later in the Biblical story, the nǝśiʾim (נְשִׂיאִים, plural) of each tribe are listed again, as the leaders responsible for apportioning tribal inheritances.
Later in the history of ancient Israel, the title of nasi was given to the Kings of Judah (Ezekiel 44:2–18; Ezra 1:8).
Similarly, the Mishnah defines the nasi of Leviticus 4 to mean the king […]
During the Second Temple period (c. 530 BCE – 70 CE), the nasi was the highest-ranking member and leader of the Sanhedrin […], including when it sat as a criminal court […]
In the time of the Roman Republic, the Romans recognized the nasi as Patriarch of the Jews […]
After the Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE), in the time of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and the Jewish diaspora, the office of nasi in Eretz Yisrael was comparable with the office of exilarch in Mesopotamia.
For more on this special “sin-offering of the king/nasi” in Talmudic halacha, see Hebrew Wikipedia, “חטאת נשיא“.
It’s been pointed out that this may be Halley’s comet.
See Wikipedia, “Halley's Comet“:
Halley's Comet is the only known short-period comet that is consistently visible to the naked eye from Earth, appearing every 72–80 years, though with the majority of recorded apparitions (25 of 30) occurring after 75–77 years.
It last appeared in the inner parts of the Solar System in 1986 and will next appear in mid-2061.
Officially designated 1P/Halley, it is also commonly called Comet Halley, or sometimes simply Halley.
And ibid., section “History” > “Before 1066 [CE]“:
If Yehoshua ben Hananiah's reference in the Talmud to "a star which arises once in seventy years and misleads the sailors" refers to Halley's Comet, he can only have witnessed the 66 CE appearance. [E.B. why not the following one?]
Another possible reference to the same apparition is also found in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, who described several portents visible over Jerusalem shortly before the outbreak of the First Jewish–Roman War.
He reported that “there was a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city, and a comet, that continued a whole year,” events that were interpreted as omens of the city's destruction in 70 CE.
This same trope appears elsewhere in the Talmud, namely Rabban Gamliel (the nasi, and thus high-status and relatively wealthy) expressing surprise upon becoming aware of R’ Yehoshua’s poverty. See my “Pt2 Power, Pedagogy, and Internal Rabbinic Politics: The Deposition of Rabban Gamliel, the Appointment of R' Elazar ben Azarya, and Eventual Reconciliation (Berakhot 27b-28a)“, section “Reconciliation - Rabban Gamliel visits R' Yehoshua, sees his poverty; R' Yehoshua’s rebuke“.
Yet another Talmudic story describing internal rabbinic political tension between Rabban Gamliel and others—this time R’ Meir and R’ Natan—is recounted a few pages later in this tractate (Horayot); I plan to discuss that in a later piece.
Compare the anecdote featuring R’ Elazar Ḥisma in a baraita quoted in Chagigah.3a.15-16, which I cite in a footnote to my “Pt2 Power, Pedagogy, and Internal Rabbinic Politics“ (cited in a previous footnote), on section “Resolution and Compromise - Leadership shared“.
That anecdote gives the second student of R’ Yehoshua as R’ Yoḥanan ben Beroka, as opposed to here, where it’s R' Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda.