In Rav Shach's Avi Ezri Laws of Tzitzit chapter 1, law 15 is brought this fact that if one has a garment with four corners and puts in the four blue threads but then adds another then the previous four are also nullified. That is when the Torah gives a commandment that has a certain amount and one adds to that amount then the entire fulfillment of that command is nullified.

[This would tend to show that religious fanaticism does not help in terms of keeping Torah. ]

 There are on the other hand certain commandments that have no upper or lower limit as is brought in the mishna in Peah  אלו דברים שאין להם שיעור הפאה והביכורים וגמילות חסדים וכו' ותלמוד תורה כנגד בולם
These things have no given amount peah, the first fruits, kindness, honor of parents, visiting the sick etc., and learning Torah is equal to all of them together.

That is you can add as much to learning Torah or doing kindness and that is not a sin because the commandment has not given amount. But other commandments that have an amount, if one adds extra, he or she loses the fulfillment.

See Rav Shach there that there is an argument how to explain the Gemara in Menakot [page 40  side b and also page 41 side a] that is the source of this whole issue. But to all the different opinions, putting on another thread makes the whole fulfillment null and void.
The issue there in Menakot is  "to make" not make from "what is already made", and the gemara asks on this from R. Zeira. Then Rava makes an statement that seems hard to understand and that is the source of the difficulty.

pseudo commandments

The issue of adding to the commandments seems to me to be serious. It is just like the Torah says "Do not add and do not subtract to these commandments that I have commanded you this day". You can see what happens when lots of things are added "to make a fence" around the law that then automatically changes the whole structure of the law itself and certainly detracts from the actual fulfillment of real commandments when all people's energy is devoted to keeping pseudo commandments.

This is what it actually says in the commentary on Pirkei Avot by an amora R. Natan. [It is printed in the Vilna Shas after the end of seder Nezikim which is where Pirkei Avot itself is. אבות דר' נתן על פרקי אבות על המשנה לעשות סייג לתורה

 There are examples of being strict about addition stuff results in open violation of actual commandments of the Torah. This is not just in theory. 

Do not add to the commandments [Deuteronomy: "Thou shalt not add nor subtract from these commandments which I command you this day."]

I was wondering about the prohibition in the Torah of not adding to the commandments.
There is obviously a question about a lot of stuff.
One area you see this is with the blue thread on the corner of ones garments.
See Rav Shach on this issue in the Avi Ezri. [The very first law in the laws about the blue thread on the four corners on one's garment]. There he brings this issue concerning putting on a fifth thread which makes all the previous four threads "pasul"[null] . That is putting on an extra thread--just to be extra strict makes the fulfillment of the commandment null and void.

I never really got a satisfying answer to this question. My learning partner brought this idea that if you add;-- but you do not say it is an obligation from the Torah, but rather from your own volition or some decree of the scribes, that makes it OK. (?)The problem with this answer seems to be right here in this law that Rav Shach brings. Here we see that it makes no difference if one says he is adding another thread because of what ever reason there may be. The very fact of adding it makes the entire fulfillment of the commandment null and void.

Rav Shach brings this issue in a few other places in the Avi Ezri, but this is the most recent place that I noticed.]


Not adding to the commandments is a large issue. There are things that are considered a need for the times. Like you would have in norms like when to cross the street. Not to cross on a red light etc.

But to claim these are obligations of the Torah would be a problem. On the other hand there are commandments of the Torah that do not have upper or lower limits--like learning Torah or all the things mentioned in the beginning of tractate Peah. [These are the things that have no size... and learning Torah is equal to all.]

trust in God and learning fast

The way of learning of  just saying the words in order and going on is not directly related to trust in God. Yet it does provide an opportunity to exercise trust in God.
And having a chance to do something positive about acting on trust is a way to help trust in God grow.

I mean to say any good character trait grows in general by how much you exercise that trait. Whether by kindness or telling the truth. But trust in God seems different. How do you exercise it expect by "not doing". So since in any case one is required to learn, this gives a chance to do something positive to help your trust--and faith- in God grow.

[The idea of learning I want to add is not for everything.  Pseudo wisdoms are not in the category of things that it is a commandment to learn. So what is in the category of "teach them to your children and speak of them" is highly limited. To the Rishonim [mediaeval authorities] the command is only on the Oral or Written Torah. Only some Rishonim include Physics and Metaphysics in the command. [Those Rishonim based on Saadia Gaon]]


So my idea of what to study [especially now when you have a chance --finally out of the rat race. Quarantine.] Is the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach and  Physics. As for Metaphysics I am not sure what to recommend.

It is not clear how to reason about time because of Bell's inequality. The idea is that things do not have actual classical values of time or position in space until measured. [That was based on the Einstein Rosen thought experiment about polarization of light that shows either one of two things. Either action at a distance or things have no classical values of time until measured. [The experiment was done in the 1960's.] We know there is no action at a distance from GPS which depends on Relativity, so the second is true.]

Was the connection between the Philosopher Leonard Nelson and David Hilbert deeper that just Hilbert well known kindness and help for people in need? Leonard Nelson could definitely not get anywhere because all the philosopher in Germany were against him. [Not just in the university where David Hilbert was, but even in all Germany.]

But my point is that Hilbert saw a great importance in axioms, and getting to a basic set of axioms that all mathematics depends on. He wanted to expand that to physics. So the fact that Leonard Nelson wanted to expand that to philosophy would fit right in!
[It was not just the beauty aspects of having a small set of axioms, but also to make progress. And even though Godel showed that if you axioms are consistent then the system you derive from them can never be complete still David Hilbert's idea of the importance of the axioms is valid.

Socialism and eating pets.

“You would think that when your economy gets to the point where people are eating their pets, people might have second thoughts about what system they’ve chosen.”
 [Senator Rand Paul, contemplating the quick descent of once-rich Venezuela].

It occurred to me the main problem with socialism is equality. That is the idea that everyone has to be equal in the amount of goods. The problem with that is there is nothing in it to create goods. Only to divide what there already is. And add to that the further problem that there is no motivation for anyone to create anything. The only motivation to go and work is that the police arrest you after three months of you have a blank in your "work book" and send you to a gulag. That is a motivation but not a motivation do do anything constructive. 

Marx himself had noticed the tremendous potential of capitalism to create goods needed and wanted by people. But he thought that the age of the new man, the "idealistic socialist man" had arrived such that people would happily work for others and the state with no thought of their own needs.