Musar על חגיגה 44:12

Repentance by following what is written — what is meant by that ? If he had intercourse with his wife during her unclean period, for which transgression the penalty is that he be cut off from his people, or if he committed any of the sins for which he must be sentenced to death by a court of law, or to be lashed, let him accept it upon himself to suffer pain and let him inflict pain upon himself, as it is written in the Torah. Now, the Rokeah ^** Eleazar of Worms (died 1238). has written how one may inflict pain upon himself for various sins. And we also find in the Talmud that they were accustomed to fast even for a very minor sin, even for mere talk. As in the case of the Sage who said, "1 am ashamed of your words, oh House of Shammai." And because of this remark he sat fasting until his teeth became black (Hagigah 22b). And there is also a story concerning Rabbi Hisda who said to Rabbi Huna on the question of respect due to another, "What of a disciple whom his teacher needs (because the disciple possesses traditions received from other scholars and which the teacher does not know), does this disciple have to stand in honor of the teacher?" Rabbi Huna retorted to Rabbi Hisda, "I do not need you." And for this apparent slight each one sat fasting many times (Baba Mezi'a 33a). And so have we found, concerning David, that the Divine Presence and the Holy Spirit departed from him for twenty-two years and every day he would shed tears and eat his morsel of food dipped in ashes. As it is said (Ps. 102:10), "For I have eaten ashes like bread, and mingled my drink with weeping." David said to God, "Master of the Universe, receive me as completely repentant before Thee, in order that I may purify the wicked in the world, as it is said (Ps. 51:15), "Then will I teach transgressors Thy ways, and sinners shall return unto Thee" (Tana Debé Eliahu, chap. 2).

At this point I would like to add my own comments while maintaining the utmost respect for the views expressed by the Tosafists I have quoted. Their answers seem rather forced in this matter. I am convinced that Samuel also admits that a person who has committed some wrong needs to flagellate himself and may certainly impose fasting upon himself as a means of self-flagellation. He may continue to do so until he is sure that such self-flagellation has removed the taint of sin from him. We have King David on record as saying: "my knees have given way from fasting" (Psalms 109,24). The Talmud is on record that the teeth of Rabbi Joshua had become blackened due to too much fasting. Here the author proceeds to list numerous similar examples of great scholars who had imposed fasting as well as other means of self-flagellation upon themselves. The author feels that it is clear that what Samuel had said applied only to people who are certain that they have not committed any sin. Such a person would be remiss if he subjected himself to fasts voluntarily. When Samuel said that a person may inflict injury upon himself [through fasting] he obviously referred to the kind of person who used this to atone for sin. In such a case it is not only permitted, but is a מצוה. If Samuel nonetheless uses the expression that it is "permissible," this is only since the Talmud wanted to contrast the expression with the case of other persons who are "forbidden" to impose such flagellation upon him.