אמר שמואל כל היושב בתענית נקרא חוטא סבר כי האי תנא דתניא ר' אלעזר הקפר ברבי אומר מה תלמוד לומר (במדבר ו, יא) וכפר עליו מאשר חטא על הנפש וכי באיזה נפש חטא זה אלא שציער עצמו מן היין והלא דברים קל וחומר ומה זה שלא ציער עצמו אלא מן היין נקרא חוטא המצער עצמו מכל דבר ודבר על אחת כמה וכמה ר' אלעזר אומר נקרא קדוש שנאמר (במדבר ו, ה) קדוש יהיה גדל פרע שער ראשו ומה זה שלא ציער עצמו אלא מדבר אחד נקרא קדוש המצער עצמו מכל דבר על אחת כמה וכמה ולשמואל הא איקרי קדוש ההוא אגידול פרע קאי ולר' אלעזר הא נקרא חוטא ההוא דסאיב נפשיה ומי אמר רבי אלעזר הכי והאמר ר' אלעזר לעולם ימוד אדם עצמו כאילו קדוש שרוי בתוך מעיו שנאמר (הושע יא, ט) בקרבך קדוש ולא אבוא בעיר לא קשיא הא דמצי לצעורי נפשיה הא דלא מצי לצעורי נפשיה ר"ל אמר נקרא חסיד שנאמר (משלי יא, יז) גומל נפשו איש (חסיד) [צ"ל חסד] ועוכר שארו וגו' אמר רב ששת האי בר בי רב דיתיב בתעניתא ליכול כלבא לשירותיה אמר רבי ירמיה בר אבא אין תענית צבור בבבל אלא תשעה באב בלבד (אמר) ר' ירמיה בר אבא אמר ריש לקיש אין תלמיד חכם רשאי לישב בתענית מפני שממעט במלאכת שמים:
§ The Gemara returns to the primary topic of the tractate, the issue of fasts. Shmuel said: Whoever sits in observance of a fast is called a sinner, as it is inappropriate to take unnecessary suffering upon oneself. The Gemara comments: Shmuel holds in accordance with the opinion of the following tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Elazar HaKappar the Great says: What is the meaning when the verse states, with regard to a nazirite: “And he will atone for him for that he sinned by the soul [nefesh]” (Numbers 6:11). But with what soul did this nazirite sin? Rather, the nazirite sinned by the distress he caused himself when he abstained from wine, in accordance with the terms of his vow. And are these matters not inferred a fortiori? And if this nazirite, who distressed himself by abstaining only from wine, is nevertheless called a sinner and requires atonement, then with regard to one who distresses himself by abstaining from each and every matter of food and drink when he fasts, all the more so should he be considered a sinner. Conversely, Rabbi Elazar says: One who accepts a fast upon himself is called sacred, as it is stated with regard to the nazirite: “He shall be sacred, he shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow long” (Numbers 6:5). Here too, one can apply an a fortiori inference: And if this nazirite, who distressed himself by abstaining from only one matter, wine, is nevertheless called sacred, then with regard to one who distresses himself by abstaining from every matter, all the more so should he be considered sacred. The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of Shmuel, the nazirite is indeed called sacred, as stated by Rabbi Elazar. The Gemara answers: That verse is referring to the sanctity of the growth of the locks, as the nazirite’s hair does possess an element of sanctity, but it does not refer to the nazirite himself. The Gemara reverses the question: And according to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, the nazirite is called a sinner. The Gemara answers: That verse refers specifically to a nazirite who rendered himself ritually impure by coming into contact with a dead body, an act that is prohibited for him. This particular nazirite must bring an offering to atone “for that he sinned by the soul.” The Gemara asks: And did Rabbi Elazar actually say this, that fasting is a virtuous act? But didn’t Rabbi Elazar say: A person should always consider himself as though a sacred object is immersed in his bowels, which he may not damage, as it is stated: “The sacred is in your midst; and I will not come into the city” (Hosea 11:9). This statement indicates that it is prohibited to take a fast upon oneself. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This first ruling, that one who fasts is sacred, is referring to a case where he is able to distress himself without causing bodily harm. That second ruling, that one may not overly burden his body, deals with a situation when he is unable to distress himself while avoiding all harm, and he proceeds to fast nevertheless. Reish Lakish said: One who fasts is called pious, as it is stated: “The pious man does good [gomel] to his own soul; but he who troubles his own flesh is cruel” (Proverbs 11:17). The verb gomel can also mean weaning, or abstaining from unnecessary pleasure. Accordingly, Reish Lakish derives from this verse that one who abstains from food is called pious. Similarly, Rav Sheshet said: This student of a Torah academy who sits in observance of a fast has let a dog eat his portion. Since his fast weakens him and prevents him from studying Torah, it is considered as though a dog ate his meal, as the student derived no benefit from it. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said: There is no completely stringent communal fast in Babylonia, except for the Ninth of Av alone. All other fasts, even those which are fixed and routine for the community, are treated as individual fasts, with regard to both the customs of the fast itself and the halakhot of who is obligated to fast. Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said that Reish Lakish said: A Torah scholar is not permitted to sit in observance of a fast, due to the fact that his fasting reduces his strength for the heavenly service of Torah study and mitzvot.