Our Gemara on Amud Aleph describes a situation where a person was obligated to bring a sin offering for an unwitting transgression, but later became an apostate. In this case, even if the person wanted to offer the sacrifice, it would not be accepted due to their heretical status. But what if they later repented?

Ulla says, quoting Rabbi Yoḥanan: If someone unwittingly ate forbidden fat and designated a sin offering, but then became an apostate, and later retracted their apostasy, despite their retraction, the offering remains invalid. This is because once the offering was rejected while the person was an apostate, it cannot be reinstated, even if they later repent.

This principle reflects a general rule in sacrificial law: once a sacrifice is invalidated for a reason, it cannot be accepted again, even if the reason for its rejection is removed. In this case, the rejection came from the person’s apostasy, which tainted the sacrifice, even though they later repented.

Sefer Daf al Daf quotes a powerful derash from Rav Shaul Moshe Zilberman (Mi-Virshov), highlighting an important nuance. The Gemara does not explicitly state that the person repented; rather, it says they "retracted their apostasy," which indicates they reversed their declaration or made it known that they had rejoined the community of believers. This is a declaration of intent, not a full repentance for the sin. Rav Zilberman therefore suggests that since full repentance can transform a sin into a mitzvah (as taught in Yoma 86b), the person's apostasy and the tainting of the sacrifice could be nullified retroactively. In other words, the sacrifice would still be valid because, retroactively, there would have been no apostasy to invalidate it.

At first glance, the idea that a sin can be turned into a mitzvah might sound allegorical or encouraging—like a reward for sincere repentance. But Rav Zilberman takes this teaching literally: repentance can actually transform a sin into a mitzvah. How do we understand this?

Rav Tzaddok elaborates on this idea in several works (see Peri Tzaddik Vayyigash 8, Takanas Hashavin 5:1, and Tzidkas Hatzaddik 40 and 43). He explains that all actions, even sins, are part of God’s will. However, since we cannot know in advance which actions are divinely intended and which are simply sinful, we must resist sin with all our might. On a practical level, sin must be resisted. But in hindsight, it may turn out that the sin was part of God's plan. This is why repentance is still necessary: because sin represents rebellion against God’s will.

Rav Tzaddok distinguishes between action and intention. If the action is part of God’s plan, it no longer matters, but the intention behind it remains stained. Repentance, which is a change in thought, can correct that intention. Intention is not the same as action, and while thought cannot change an action, a new thought can change a prior one. This explains how the highest form of repentance—done out of love for God rather than fear of punishment—can turn sins into mitzvos, as taught in Yoma 86b. When someone’s devotion to God’s will is complete, their rebellious intention is erased and even turned into a positive one. Thus, the sin, now aligned with a positive intention, becomes a mitzvah.

Psychologically, this idea can be understood as well. Life experiences, including our mistakes, shape who we are. Even if the sins we committed should not have happened, once we repent and gain the right perspective, they become part of our personal growth. These experiences, which may have seemed negative, can ultimately be seen as necessary steps in our development and thus as part of God’s will—turning them into something positive, a mitzvah.

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)