Maybe this has been addressed in another post, but this is "fundamentals" so I don't feel embarassed bringing it up:

Being machmir seems, to me, to be an insult to Halacha/Torah, in some senses. How? Because it's almost like saying the Law isn't strict enough, and you feel it needs to be stricter. If someone tells you how to live your life, and you disobey in any way (whether its taking their ideas one step further or taking them one step back) isn't that disrespecting the law? Theoretically, if the Torah wanted people to have long payos, for example, wouldn't it have said that? Now I don't want to get into a discussion on payos, but machmir-ism in general.

Basic question:
Is being machmir deviating from Torah, whether or not it seems to be in the "spirit" of the Law?

I would be more impressed if people were more worried about being machmir bein adam lachaveiro than bein adam laMakom. That doesn't seem too popular though.

Nope. We are told by the torah in quite a few places to be machmir in general.

9

While there are many chumros that are bad for you in many ways, there is no way that chumros in general are against the Torah. In fact, chazal say "asu syag latorah". That said, there are specific "chumros" which are not allowed under halacha because of bal tosif.

I am against people just throwing around words like 'machmir' in everyday conversation, all that's being accomplished is making it as meaningless a word as 'freedom'.

I agree with that. I think being machmir bein adam lachaveiro is the more difficult task.

Agreed.

Taking this argument to its logical conclusion,is it reasonable to assume you think all the sh'vusim instituted by Chazal (by hilchos Shabbos) insult the Torah?

Fascinating. So when chazal said, "Ko'ach de-heitera adif", they were heretically contradicting the torah?


It depends on a case by case basis and why the person is being machmir. There are indeed instances where it is appropriate to be machmir, but there are instances where it is inappropriate. There are many, many cases where it is appropriate to be machmir and it is not considered deviating from the Torah. Rather, it's considered as honoring the torah by taking extra measures to ensure that one does not violate the torah. There is no greater honor for the torah than to be observed. If anything, chumrot reflect the reality of human frailties and weaknesses rather than anything missing from the torah itself.
But it depends which chumrot you are speaking of - there are different categories of chumrot. For example, one extreme is the one chumra that is a d'orayta law, not to approach a forbidden woman in case it leads to intercourse. When we commonly speak of chumrot, usually it's a personal practice or a community practice not required by the law but practiced either as a safeguard against violating a halachah or where the law is unclear and we are holding like the strict opinion in case the law is like that strict opinion even though strictly speaking the law is not. One needs to differentiate among types of chumrot, and in what area of the law we are speaking, and the reason for the chumra, before one can determine if that chumra is appropriate or inappropriate for the individual or the community.

Chazal also say "kadesh atzmecha bimuttar luch" and as krum said "ase syug litorah". You tell me.

9

Long peyos isnt a chumra................
There is a mekor for long peyos in a tosafos in nazir daf mem beisamud beis i dont know the acutal one off hand and in a gemera in shabbos and mekoros in kabbalistic worksand the Alexander rebbe told me himself that the reason he has long peyos is becuase thebluzohver rav told him that having long peyos is a segulah for arichas yomim

That's why the Shach (or the Taz, I keep confusing the two) says you need a heter in order to be machmir, for exactly the reason you specified. If the halacha says A, then it's chutzpa to say A+.

I heard a fascinating shiur from a Rabbi Rapaport from England ( I don't remember the city) who endorsed chumras in general, adding three caveats, and he gave examples for each one:

1) Make sure that the performance of the chumra does not violate the Mitzva itself.
2) Make sure that the performance of the chumra does not violate a different Mitzva.
3) Make sure that the chumra affects you and not other people; after all, if you accepting a stringency, you should perform it and not someone else who does not necessarily accept it.

I would add that in at least one place, the Torah clearly considers chumras a sin - when it comes to a Nazir. While the Torah accepts the need for this behavior, the Torah still demands a Chatat (sin offering) when the Nazir's time period has expired. The Talmud comments on this that when someone deliberately denies himself the world which Hashem created for him, he is commiting a sin. (That's why Judaism doesn't have monasteries, monks and nuns).