1. The Prohibition Against Adding or Subtracting Mitzvahs
In this week’s parsha, specifically in Shlishi of Re’eh—see, we encounter the mitzvah that one is not permitted to do less than the mitzvahs that Hashem has commanded. But the Torah also instructs us not to add to the mitzvahs—not to create additional mitzvahs beyond what Hashem has given. This raises an important question: why would it be a problem to do more? Why would Hashem care if we added extra mitzvahs?2. The Example of Chava and the Snake
Rashi, in his commentary on Bereshis—Genesis, addresses this issue in the story of Chava and the snake. When the snake questions Chava about eating from the trees in Gan Eden, she responds that they are allowed to eat from all trees except for the one in the middle of the garden, the Eitz HaDas—Tree of Knowledge. However, she adds another prohibition: “and don’t touch it,” which was not part of Hashem’s original command. The snake then pushes her against the tree, and when nothing happens, he convinces her that eating from it will also have no consequence. As a result, she eats from the tree and gives some to Adam as well. Rashi points out that by adding to Hashem’s command, Chava ultimately came to transgress it. This is why the Torah warns us not to add to Hashem’s words—because sometimes adding can lead to doing less or even violating what was originally commanded.3. The Dangers of Personal Innovation in Mitzvah Observance
This concept is evident in real life as well: when people introduce new ideas into religious practice based on their own thinking rather than Hashem’s law, it opens the door for subjective changes. Once personal innovation enters, adding can eventually lead to subtracting or distorting mitzvah observance altogether.4. Disagreement Between Ramban and Rashi on Adding Mitzvahs
There is a notable disagreement between Ramban and Rashi regarding what it means not to add to mitzvahs. Ramban explains that this prohibition refers to not creating a new mitzvah—not making a 614th mitzvah beyond those given by the Torah. This raises a question: how could Chazal establish holidays like Chanukah and Purim with their associated mitzvahs? There are explanations for how Chazal were permitted to do so. However, Rashi does not accept Ramban’s interpretation. The Rebbe explains in a Sichah—a chassidic discourse—that since children see additional practices like Chanukah and Purim or stringencies accepted by Avraham Avinu (such as rabbinic laws), they understand that adding new mitzvos is not inherently problematic.5. Rashi’s View: Changing Details Within a Mitzvah
Accordingly, Rashi interprets “adding” as changing details within an existing mitzvah rather than creating entirely new ones. For example, Rashi gives cases such as placing five portions inside tefillin instead of four (as prescribed), taking five species on Sukkos instead of four for lulav, or putting five fringes on a five-cornered garment for tzitzis. Another example is adding an extra blessing for Birkas Kohanim—the priestly blessings—beyond the three specified by Torah. These examples illustrate that corrupting or modifying an existing mitzvah by adding elements is prohibited just as much as subtracting from it would be.6. Distinguishing Between Irrelevant and Relevant Additions
The Rebbe further analyzes why Rashi gives different examples in different places. In one context, Rashi discusses adding something irrelevant (like a fifth portion in tefillin where only four are required). In another context, he considers even relevant additions (such as an extra box for tefillin or another species for lulav) that might seem beneficial but still constitute prohibited change. The point is that whether an addition seems relevant or irrelevant does not matter—any change within a mitzvah’s prescribed details is forbidden according to Rashi.7. Application Back to Chava’s Addition
Returning to the story with Chava: her addition (“don’t touch”) was within the framework of Hashem’s command (“don’t eat”). It was not an entirely new command but rather a modification within an existing one. This fits with Rashi’s approach—the prohibition is about altering details within what Hashem commanded rather than inventing completely new practices. In summary, both decreasing and increasing within a mitzvah are forms of corruption according to Rashi’s literal interpretation (peshat). The Torah insists on preserving both the integrity and boundaries of each commandment as given by Hashem.