Happy the Generation Whose Prince Brings a Sin Offering

"When a prince sins" (Leviticus 4:22). Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai says: happy is the generation whose prince brings a sin-offering for his unintentional error. If he brings a sin-offering for his unintentional error, how much more so for his deliberate sin; and if a prince brings an offering for his error, how much more so a commoner. Rav Acha son of Rava objected: if so, since it is written "and that which he sinned against the holy thing he shall repay" (Leviticus 5:16), and concerning Jeroboam it is written "who sinned and who caused others to sin" (1 Kings 14:16)—should that generation too be called happy? It is different here, for Scripture varied its wording. "A prince": one might think a tribal prince like Nachshon ben Amminadav; Scripture says "from all the commandments of the LORD his God." And further on it says (Deuteronomy 17:19), "that he may learn to fear the LORD his God"—just as there it means one who has none above him except the LORD his God, so here "prince" means one who has none above him except the LORD his God. Rabbi asked Rabbi Chiyya: one such as I, what is my status regarding the goat? He said to him: behold, your rival is in Babylon. He objected: the kings of Israel and the kings of the house of David, these bring offerings for themselves and those bring offerings for themselves! There they were not subject to one another. Rav Safra taught it thus: Rabbi asked Rav, one such as I, what is my status regarding the goat? He said to him: there it is a scepter, here a lawgiver; and it is taught, "The scepter shall not depart from Judah" (Genesis 49:10)—this is the exilarch in Babylon, who rules Israel with a rod; "nor the staff from between his feet"—these are the descendants of Hillel who teach Torah in public. "When a prince sins"—excluding sins committed before he became prince. And would it not follow by reasoning: if the anointed priest, who brings a sin-offering after leaving office, does not bring for prior sins, then a prince, who does not bring a sin-offering after leaving office, surely should not bring for prior sins? But the anointed priest is distinct in that he does not bring for an unintentional act, whereas a prince does bring for an unintentional act; therefore Scripture says "when a prince sins"—when he sins while he is prince, and not when he sins while he is a commoner. "When a prince sins": one might think it is a decree [that he will sin]; Scripture says (above, verse 3) "if the anointed priest sins"—meaning when he sins. The Master said: one might think it is a decree—from where would that arise? Yes, for it is written "And I put a mark of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession"—it was good news to them that leprous marks would come upon them, the words of Rabbi Yehudah. "When a prince sins"—excluding one who is ill; because he became ill he is removed from his office of prince. Rabbi Avdimi bar Chama said: excluding a prince who became leprous, as it is said (2 Kings 15:5), "And the LORD afflicted the king, and he was leprous until the day of his death, and he dwelt in a separate house"—since it says "in a separate house," it implies that until now he had been like a slave. Yes, as in the case of Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua who were traveling in a ship. Rabbi Yehoshua had bread and fine flour, while Rabban Gamliel had only bread. When Rabban Gamliel's bread ran out he relied on Rabbi Yehoshua's flour. He said to him: did you know we would be delayed this long, that you brought flour as well? He said to him: there is a certain star that rises once in seventy years and leads sailors astray, and I thought it might rise and lead us astray. He said to him: you have so much knowledge, and yet you travel by ship! He said to him: before you wonder at me, wonder at two disciples on dry land, Rabbi Elazar Chisma and Rabbi Yochanan ben Gudgada, who know how to reckon how many drops are in the sea, yet have neither bread to eat nor a garment to wear. He resolved to seat them at the head. When he reached dry land he sent for them and they did not come; he sent again and they came. He said to them: do you imagine I am giving you authority? I am giving you servitude, as it is said (1 Kings 12:7), "And they spoke to him saying, if today you will be a servant to this people." "When a prince sins"—when he is prince, yes; when he is a commoner, no. And would it not follow by reasoning: if the anointed priest, who does not bring for an unintentional act, brings his sin-offering after leaving office, then a prince, who does bring for an unintentional act, surely should bring his sin-offering after leaving office? Scripture says "when a prince sins"—when he is prince, yes; when he is a commoner, no. And by an argument from lesser to greater regarding the anointed priest now: if a prince, who brings for an unintentional act [and so forth], then for a forgotten ruling together with an unintentional act, all the more so; Scripture says "and he shall offer for his sin which he sinned," teaching that he brings his sin-offering after leaving office.