Our Gemara on amud aleph deduces that the subverters —those who encouraged the idolatrous practice of an Ir HaNidachas—are worse than the actual sinners themselves. (An Ir HaNidachas is a city condemned to be decimated due to a significant portion of its populace being identified as idolaters.) This distinction is reflected in the punishments each receives: the inhabitants are merely executed by the sword, while the subverters suffer the more severe penalty of stoning.  

The Rambam (Laws of Idolatry 4:1) offers a fascinating ruling. He holds that even if the subverters themselves did not commit the sin of idolatry, they are still subjected to this harsh punishment for having encouraged others to do so.  

But why is this fair and just? If one views punishment as a form of deterrence, then it follows logically that the subverters deserve a harsher penalty. A sinner is a “one-man show,” whereas a subverter causes many others to sin, exponentially magnifying the social consequences. (We will explore the idea of Jewish law being motivated by deterrence in Psychology of the Daf, Sanhedrin 53.)  

At first glance, our Gemara could be understood as simply determining the appropriate punishment, without necessarily implying that the sin of subversion is inherently worse than the actual sin. However, Sefer Daf al Daf cites several sources that explicitly warn that causing others to sin is even worse than the sin itself. This expands the scope of the discussion beyond legal penalties and frames subversion as intrinsically more severe than the transgression alone.  

If we accept that causing others to sin is not just punished more harshly but is also morally prioritized as a greater evil, then there must be an inherent reason for this distinction. I believe the answer lies in the internal corruption that results from such behavior. A person who sins on his own may still see himself as striving for good but succumbing to weakness. He will likely experience contrition and regret, which can foster self-honesty and eventual repentance.  

By contrast, an instigator who leads others to sin—especially if he does not even partake in the sin himself—cannot simply be motivated by base desires such as lust or greed. His intent must either be ideological or purely manipulative, reflecting a deeper moral perversion. This degree of corruption is both socially and spiritually destructive, making it a far graver offense.  

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

If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.

Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families as well male sexual health. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com