‫נר לאפרים‬ ‫בס"ד‬

The FOUR CHILDREN ‫אַ ְרבָּ ﬠָ ה בָ נִ ים‬

CONTENTS
Source Sheets
Why Discuss This Now
The Four Children and the Exodus Narrative
The Good News and the Bad News
Ten Answers for the Wise Child
The Difference Between the Chachum and the Rasha
The Aspirations of the “Wicked” Child
The Rasha’s Teeth
Thanks for the “Wicked” Child
Not So Simple At All
Clueless by Choice
No Jew is Left Behind
www.parshapages.com
For subscription to weekly emails send note to info@parshapages.com
Collection compiled hopefully for the elucidation of Torah
 The Four Children - Family Reunion
Based on Source Sheet by Shaul Wertheimer

‫ כנגד ארבעה בנים א׳‬,‫ מגיד‬,‫הגדה של פסח‬

,‫ וְ אֶ חָ ד תָּ ם‬,‫ וְ אֶ חָ ד ָרשָׁ ע‬,‫ אֶ חָ ד חָ כָם‬:‫תוֹרה‬
ָ ‫ כְּ ֶנגֶד אַ ְרבָּ ﬠָה בָ נִ ים ִדּבְּ ָרה‬.‫ בָּ רוּ� הוּא‬,‫תּוֹרה לְ ﬠַמּוֹ י ְִשׂ ָראֵ ל‬
ָ ‫ בָּ רוּ� שֶׁ נָּתַ ן‬,‫ בָּ רוּ� הוּא‬,‫בָּ רוּ� הַ מָּ קוֹם‬
. ‫וְ אֶ חָ ד שֶׁ אֵ ינוֹ יוֹדֵ ַﬠ לִ ְשׁאוֹל‬
Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Four Sons

Blessed is the Place [of all], Blessed is He; Blessed is the One who Gave the Torah to His people Israel, Blessed
is He. Corresponding to four sons did the Torah speak; one [who is] wise, one [who is] evil, one who is innocent
and one who doesn't know to ask.
Which son is which? Note the order of the verses.
Exodus 12:26
And when your children ask you, ‘What do you mean by this rite?’

Exodus 13:8
And you shall explain to your son on that day, ‘It is because of what the LORD did for me when I went free
from Egypt.’

Exodus 13:14
And when, in time to come, your son asks you, saying, ‘What does this mean?’ you shall say to him, ‘It was with
a mighty hand that the LORD brought us out from Egypt, the house of bondage.

Deuteronomy 6:20
When, in time to come, your children ask you, “What mean the decrees, laws, and rules that the LORD our God
has enjoined upon you?”
 ‫ב׳‬:‫תלמוד ירושלמי פסחים ע׳ ב‬
.‫תני ר' חייה כנגד ארבעה בנים דיברה תורה בן חכם בן רשע בן טיפש בן שאינו יודע לשאול‬
'‫בן חכם מהו אומר )דברים ו( מה העדות והחקים והמשפטים אשר צוה ה' אלקינו אותנו אף אתה אמור לו )שמות יג( בחזק יד הוציאנו ה‬
.‫ממצרים מבית עבדים‬
‫בן רשע מהו אומר )שמות יב( מה העבודה הזאת לכם מה הטורח הזה שאתם מטריחין עלינו בכל שנה ושנה מכיון שהוציא את עצמו מן‬
.‫הכלל אף אתה אמור לו )שם( בעבור זה עשה ה' לי לי עשה לאותו האיש לא עשה‬
.‫אילו היה אותו האיש במצרים לא היה ראוי להגאל משם לעולם‬
‫טיפש מה אומר )שם( מה זאת אף את למדו הלכות הפסח שאין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן שלא יהא עומד מחבורה זו ונכנס לחבורה‬
.‫אחרת‬
:‫בן שאינו יודע לשאול את פתח לו תחילה א"ר יוסה מתניתא אמרה כן אם אין דעת בבן אביו מלמדו‬
Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim 70b:2
Rabbi Cheya taught, corresponding to four sons did the Torah speak; a wise son, an evil son, an innocent son and
a son who doesn't know to ask.
What does the wise son say? "'What are these testimonies, statutes and judgments that the Lord our God
commanded us?' (Deuteronomy 20:6)" And accordingly you will say to him, "'With the strength of [His] hand
did the Lord take us out from Egypt, from the house of slaves.' (Exodus 13:14)"
What does the evil son say? "'What is this worship to you?' (Exodus 12:26) What is this toil that you make us toil
each and every year?" Since he excluded himself from the collective, accordingly you say to him, "'For the sake
of this, did the Lord do [this] for me.' (Exodus 13:8) 'For me' did He do and not for 'that man.'
If 'that man' had been there, he would not have been worthy of ever being saved from there."
What does the innocent [son] say? "'What is this?' (Exodus 13:14)" And accordingly you will teach him the laws
of the Pesach sacrifice, that "We may not eat an afikoman [a dessert or other foods eaten after the meal] after [we
are finished eating] the Pesach sacrifice, so that a person should not get up from one eating group to another eating
group."
And [regarding] the son who doesn't know to ask, you will open [the conversation] for him first. Rabbi Yosa said,
"The Mishna said, 'and if the son has no understanding [in order to ask questions], his father teaches him [to
ask].'"
‫ב׳‬:‫ כנגד ארבעה בנים א׳‬,‫ מגיד‬,‫ביאור הריטב"א על הגדה של פסח‬
‫ שהפריש להגיד ולספר לכל בן ובן כפי מה‬,‫כי כל כך רצה לקיים ענין סיפור יציאת מצרים בזרעינו‬. ‫כנגד ארבעה בנים דברה תורה‬
.‫שהוא‬
Commentary of Ritva on Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Four Sons 1:2
Hashem was so intent on maintaining the story of the Exodus in our offspring, that he differentiated [the four
types of children] and recounted the story for each child, as they are (i.e., each at their own level).
Why doesn't the Haggadah list the sons in the order that their respective verses appear in the Torah?
‫אבודרהם‬
‫ כי של חכם הוא כתוב בפרשת ואתחנן ושל רשע ושל תם ושל שאינו יודע לשאול כתובים בפרשת בא‬,‫וא''ת סדר מקראות אינו כתיב כך‬
‫ בתחלה‬,‫ וי''ל שרצה להזכירם כסדר חכמתם‬.‫ והיה לו לתפוש סדר המקראות‬,‫ אך של שאינו יודע לשאול הוא קודם לשל תם‬,‫אל פרעה‬
‫ ואחריו שאינו‬,‫ ואחריו תם שאינו חכם ממש אלא יש בו קצת חכמה לשאול‬,‫ ואחריו רשע שגם הוא חכם ומתוך זדון לבו מרשיע‬,‫חכם‬
‫יודע לשאול שאין בו חכמה כלל‬.
Abudraham
You may wonder why the sons appear in a different order from the Biblical verses from which they are derived
(the Wise One is in Parshat Va’Etchanan; while the Wicked, Simple & the One Who Does Not Know How To
Ask are in Parshat Bo, with the Simple One preceding the One Who Does Not Know How To Ask). The reason
is because the author of the Haggadah wanted to mention them in order of their intelligence: The Wise One is
first, followed by the Wicked One, who is also wise, but has been led astray. He is followed by the Simple One
who has some wisdom, and lastly the One Who Does Not Know How To Ask, who is devoid of wisdom.
 ‫גר"א‬
‫ והי' צריך לומר בסדר הזה‬...‫וחכם הוא תלמיד חכם וההיפוך ממנו הוא מי שאינו יודע לשאול והתם הוא ההולך בתמימות והפכו הוא הרשע‬
.‫חכם ושאינו יודע לשאול תם ורשע ואמר רשע אחר החכם כי לא רצה לסיים ברשע‬
Vilna Gaon
The Wise Son is a Torah scholar. His opposite [son] is the one who does not know how to ask. The Simple one
goes with simplicity and his opposite is the Wicked one. Thus, the order of the sons should have been: Wise, one
who does not know how to ask, simple, wicked. However, the author of the Haggadah put the Wicked one after
the Wise one, because he did not want to conclude with the wicked one [ed.: in accordance with the Talmudic
principle that we conclude on a positive note].

‫כ''ק אדמו''ר מליובאוויטש‬

‫ לבן רשע‬,‫ בעל ההגדה‬,‫ וסמך‬.‫ אחד חכם ואחד רשע ואחד תם ואחד שאינו יודע לשאול‬:‫וכנגד ארבעה בנים דברה תורה בענין והגדת לבנך‬
‫ וא"ו המוסיף‬- "‫ ובתוספת וא"ו "ואחד רשע‬,‫תיכף לבן חכם‬.
‫זאת אומרת‬: ‫ מי‬,‫ ובלבד שיתוסף‬- ‫ כי המקום מזמין לו בן חכם שיכול להפיע עליו ולעזור לו להיטיב דרכיו‬,‫א( גם לבן רשע יש תקוה‬
,‫כ כל ישראל ערבין )ומעורבין( זה בזה‬- ‫ יאבד ברשעו‬,‫ ב( אין לחכם לומר מה לי ולרשע‬.‫ וייעשה טפל אליו‬,‫ לחכם‬,‫שהי' רשע עד עתה‬
.‫ ולא להיפך‬,‫ להיות מושפע ומקבל מהחכם‬,‫ ובלבד שיזכור תמיד שהרשע נתוסף נטפל אליו‬,‫ועל כל אחד מוטל להשתדל להחזירו למוטב‬
- ‫ וצופה רשע )שבקרבו( לצדיק ומבקש להמיתו‬,‫ וכל הגדול מחברו יצרו גדול הימנו‬,‫ג( על החכם לזכור תמיד אשר פתח חטאת רובץ‬
‫ יוכל לו לרשע שבקרבו‬- ‫ שרק בזה‬,‫ ולבקש רחמים שהקב"ה יעזור לו‬,‫ולכן צריך לדקדק על עצמו ביותר‬.
‫ בנוגע לתם )טפש( ובנוגע לשאינו יודע לשאול‬- ‫ על אחת כמה וכמה‬,(‫ כנ"ל‬,'‫ואם בנוגע לרשע צריך להשתדל לעזור לו )בזהירות הראוי‬.
‫ וא"ו דא‬,‫ אשר בכל אחד מהם בא וא"ו המוסיף בתחילתו‬,‫ ושאינו יודע לשאול‬,‫ והתם‬,‫וכשהבן חכם מוסיף ומצרף ומזכך ומגבי' את הרשע‬
.‫ ברכנו אבינו כולנו כאחד‬:‫ אז ממלאים את בקשתנו‬,‫ המשכת ורת אמת‬,‫אות אמת‬
Lubavitcher Rebbe
The reason why the author of the Haggadah juxtaposes the Wise One to the Wicked One – and with a “connecting
Vov” – is to teach us:
1. All is not lost for the Wicked One, for the Almighty has arranged it that he is next to a Wise One who can help
him improve his ways;
2. The Wise One should not say, “What do I care about the Wicked One, let him do whatever he wants!” For all
of Israel are guarantors for each other, and it is incumbent upon every single person to help bring him back to a
good place (provided that they remember that it is their job to influence and not be influenced).
3. The Wise One must always remember that “sin crouches at the entrance,” and the greater the person, the greater
the yetzer hara. The Wicked One (within him) is anxiously waiting to “kill him,” and he therefore needs to be
extra cautious in all he does, while requesting compassion and assistance from G-d. This is the only way that
he can overcome the Wicked One within him.
If this is the approach that we must take with the Wicked One (with the appropriate caution, as mentioned), then
it certainly also applies to the Simple (Stupid) One and the “One Who Does Not Know How To Ask.“
When the Wise One brings together the other children – after all, the author of the Haggadah lists each of the
children with a “connecting Vov,” and Vov is the “letter of Truth.” -- thereby bringing all of us together as one,
G-d will fulfill our request of “Bless us, our father, for we are all together as one.”
 THE FOUR CHILDREN AND THE EXODUS NARRATIVE
From alhatorah.org
Introduction
The Hidden Subtext
The Torah is often laconic in the descriptions of the lives of its protagonists, and this can sometimes be a source of frustration to
the readerwho yearns to know more details. This is especially true when it comes to characters' thoughts and emotions which are
often not made explicit. Thus, while the story of the Exodus speaks at length about both the hardships of the enslaved and the
punishments meted out to Paroh and his nation, it hides how all of this was viewed by the Israelites. When Moshe spoke about
Hashem redeeming the people, what were they feeling? What did they know of Hashem beforehand? Were they long time
monotheists, or mired in the polytheism of Egypt?
Were they exuberant or hesitant about the idea of leaving Egypt, eager or skeptical about following Hashem?
Impact on the Larger Story
The way one answers the above questions has widespread ramifications for understanding the entire story of the Exile and
Exodus, andtouches on numerous topics raised by the opening chapters of Sefer Shemot:
Purpose of the exile and bondage – Why did Hashem decree both the exile and the enslavement in Egypt? Were they
punishment forsin, or was there some positive value in the experience? If the latter, what did the nation gain that justified so many
years of oppression?Goshen – Why did the Israelites originally decide to reside in Goshen? Did they remain there throughout
the sojourn in Egypt or did theyspread beyond its borders to mingle with the rest of Egyptian society? How did the choice of
residence affect their religious beliefs and social standing in Egypt?
Nature of the bondage – Were the people slaves to the State or also to individuals? According to either scenario, what were
relations like between lay Egyptians and the slaves? How severe were the conditions of the bondage? Was anyone exempt?
Were all miserablein their low status, or might some have become so accustomed to slave life that it rarely bothered them?
Three-day journey – Why did Moshe request just a Three-day leave rather than asking for total freedom? Was this not deceitful?
Wasthe ruse aimed at Paroh, the Egyptians, or the Israelites themselves?
The Plagues – What was the purpose of the Plagues? The verses only explicitly state that the Israelites were spared in five of
the plagues; does that mean that they were struck by the others? For what purpose? What lessons were these wonders meant
to instill inboth the Egyptians and Israelites?
The Pesach – How is the Pesach rite, with all its accompanying laws, meant to be understood? Was it merely a means through
which todistinguish Israelite homes, or did it play some more fundamental role? As above, who was the primary target of its
lessons, the Egyptians or Israelites?
Roundabout route – The Torah shares that upon leaving Egypt, Hashem intentionally took the nation via the Wilderness route
which ledto Yam Suf. What were the advantages of this route? Hashem speaks of avoiding war "lest the nation return to Egypt".
What does this suggest about the people's feelings regarding leaving?
The "Four Children" in Egypt
This topic will use the "Four Children" of the Pesach Seder as prototypes through which to consider the various types of Israelites
that mighthave existed in Egypt:
The Wise or Righteous Child – A nation of righteous people who believed in Hashem and were fully prepared to obediently
follow Himand Moshe.
The Assimilated or Wicked Child – Pockets of idolaters who might have been reluctant to leave Egypt and follow an unknown
God.
The Simple Child Who Does Not Know – Masses of simple people who wavered in their beliefs and were anxious in the face
of changeand the unknown.
The nation was obviously not monolithic in its make-up, and it presumably was a complex composite of all of these types.
Nonetheless, the Approaches presented here will separate the models, looking at each individually so as to more clearly define
the implications of these
various portraits. The exact proportions in which these models existed among the Children of Israel are harder to ascertain, but
any accuraterepresentation of the reality in Egypt will most definitely combine elements of each.

Exegetical Approaches
The Wise Child: A Righteous Nation
The Israelites were righteous monotheists who had maintained a unique identity throughout their sojourn in Egypt. They were
eager to leaveEgypt and follow Moshe, their spiritual leader.
Purpose of the Exile – Accordingly, the exile was aimed at preventing the assimilation of Yaakov's descendants in Canaan. In
Egypt, wherethe inhabitants were xenophobic and would not even eat with the Hebrews, let alone marry them, the chances of
assimilation were much lower. Living as a secluded minority in exile would allow the family to grow into a nation with its own
unique identity. See Seforno and R. Hirsch in Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage.
Initial settlement in Goshen – Yaakov's family settled in Goshen, specifically, so as to avoid mingling with the Egyptians and to
ensure thatthey did not acculturate into the surrounding society. See R"A Saba, R. Hirsch, and Netziv in Why Live in Goshen.
Did the Israelites stay in Goshen? The nation remained in Goshen exclusively, segregated from the rest of the Egyptians,
throughout theirsojourn. See the second opinion brought by R. D"Z Hoffmann in Where in Egypt Did the Israelites Live.
Purpose of the bondage – The bondage (as opposed to the exile) had an educational objective. By experiencing slavery
themselves, the Children of Israel learned to empathize with and care for the downtrodden and less fortunate members of society.
The shared experience ofsuffering further fostered unity and common identity, strengthening them as a nation. See Nechama
Leibowitz and R. Hirsch in Purposes ofthe Egyptian Bondage.
Nature of the bondage – This approach can view the experience of slavery as either very harsh, with the people being slaves to
both the State and individual Egyptians under severe conditions, or as a somewhat milder experience in which the people worked
only in shifts and were able to return home periodically. See Nature of the Bondage.
Who was enslaved? The Levites might have been granted exemption from slavery due to their status as religious leaders and in
merit of their great Torah learning. See Shemot Rabbah in Who was Enslaved in Egypt and Selection of the Priests and Levites.
Why request only a three-day journey? The ruse might have been necessary to deceive Paroh, who otherwise would have
never agreed tolet the nation leave and might have even killed Moshe for the impertinence of his request. Paroh's refusal for even
such a short reprieve from work further served to make transparent just how intransigent he was and why he deserved the
punishments he received. See A Three-day Journey.
Were the vessels gifts or loans? Since the Egyptians assumed that the Israelites were not leaving for good, it is likely that they
gave the vessels as loans and expected them to be returned. The Israelites, however, were justified in keeping the objects as
partial compensation foryears of servitude. See Reparations and Despoiling Egypt.
The Plagues – The plagues were punitive in nature, taking vengeance on the Egyptians for the enslavement. Since the Israelites
were isolated in Goshen, they were spared the effects of the plagues which struck only outside of Goshen's borders. This position
likely would assume that even in the plagues where the text is silent about differentiating between Egypt and Goshen, there is an
assumption that the Israelites were not harmed. This strengthened the people's belief in Hashem's justice in punishing the wicked
and sparing the innocent. SeePurpose of the Plagues and Whom and Where Did the Plagues Strike.
Purpose of the Pesach – This approach might view the Pesach as a thanksgiving offering, given by the joyous nation as they
embarked ontheir journey to freedom and worship of Hashem. It might have further served as an educational tool for the Egyptians,
showing them the worthlessness of their gods. See R. D"Z Hoffmann and R. Bachya respectively in Purpose of the Pesach.
The roundabout route – While the Israelite's religious beliefs were strong, they still needed to develop the physical and mental
fortitude necessary to be an independent nation. Thus, they were not yet ready to enter and conquer the Land of Israel. See
Rambam and others inThe Roundabout Route and The Road Not Traveled.

The Assimilated Child: An Idolatrous People

The Israelites were idolatrous in Egypt and were reluctant to leave Egypt to follow Moshe and an unknown God.
Initial settlement in Goshen – Yaakov's family settled in Goshen not for its spiritual benefits but for its economic advantages, as
it provided good grazing land for their cattle. See Why Live in Goshen.
Did the Israelites stay in Goshen? As the years passed, the Israelites, in their desire to mingle with Egyptian society, moved out
of Goshen. Netziv emphasizes how the move promoted the assimilation of the nation, leading them to worship idolatry like their
neighbors. See Where in Egypt Did the Israelites Live.
Purpose of the bondage – The enslavement came either as punishment for the nation's idolatry, or as a means to prevent their
assimilation from progressing further. See Seforno and the Netziv respectively in Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage.
Nature of the bondage – This approach might assume that the enslavement in Egypt constituted state slavery which, while
harsh, still allowed people to own their own homes and cattle and maintain intact families. It is possible that they even had positive
relationships withsome of their Egyptian neighbors. See Nature of the Bondage.
Who was enslaved? It is possible that only the able-bodied were enslaved, while the frail, elderly, women, and children were
exempt. In addition, as Ralbag suggests, it is possible that those who were wealthy enough could pay a monetary tax in lieu of
work. If so, for some groups of people, the conditions in Egypt were not as unlivable as often imagined.
Why request a three-day journey? Many of the Israelites would not have been enthusiastic about leaving Egypt. They had no
desire to adopt monotheism, did not fully trust Hashem or Moshe, and might not have wanted to forego relations forged with their
fellow Egyptians. If some had positive work conditions, there was not even the incentive of freedom to drive them. As such, the
Three-day ruse might have beenaimed, not at the Egyptians, but at the Israelites themselves who would otherwise have opted to
stay put. See A Three-day Journey.
The Plagues – The plagues had an educational goal, to help the Israelites see Hashem's omnipotence and begin to believe in
Him. The stated objective, was aimed at Israel as much as at the Egyptians.
Who was affected by the Plagues? It is possible that the Israelites were not spared during the plagues. If the differentiation
mentioned in the verses was only geographic in nature, then all Israelites outside of Goshen (a considerable amount) would have
been affected. These nonbelievers might have needed a concrete taste of God's power, and not just a show as it affected others.
Moreover, being included taughtthem to recognize that identifying as Egyptians had its costs.
Purpose of the Pesach – The Pesach rite was meant to highlight the worthlessness of Egyptian gods. By observing the Egyptian
god killedand unable either to defend itself or wreak punishment, the people would learn to reject idolatry.
Chased out – Hashem ensured that the nation was actively chased out of Egypt, since otherwise they might not have left. R. Meir
Spiegelman suggests that this is also the reason why Hashem needed to have a drawn- out process of ten plagues. Had the Plague
of the Firstborn been the first plague, Paroh would have capitulated immediately and given permission to the nation to leave, but
would not have aggressively kicked them out. Only after ten plagues, did he reach the point that he actively chased out even those
Israelites who might havepreferred to stay put.
The roundabout route – The choice of route might have had a dual goal. In the short term, the route was selected, not to avoid a
confrontation with the Egyptians, but in order to ensure that they would drown in the Sea. The total destruction of Egypt would
guarantee thatthe Israelites had no reason to return. In addition, the longer route provided the nation with time to grow in their
relationship to Hashem before entering Canaan. The isolated environs of the wilderness protected the people from outside
influences, while the miracles of the Splitting of the Sea, manna, and water, helped instill faith in God.

The Simple Child: The Unknowing Masses

The Israelites wavered in their beliefs and desires. Though they were tired of slavery, they were equally frightened of change.
Initial settlement in Goshen – This position might suggest that the family opted to live in Goshen mainly due to its proximity to
Yosef and theprotection he could afford them. See Why Live in Goshen.
Did the nation stay in Goshen? The Israelites likely remained mainly in Goshen, out of a mixture of inertia and comfort with the
familiar, butwith time, Egyptians moved in and they were no longer segregated.
Purpose of the exile and bondage – This position might view the experience as crucial to the formation of the Israelite nation.
Only throughshared experiences of suffering could they unite as a people. See Purposes of the Egyptian Bondage.
Nature of the bondage – This position might suggest that the people were slaves to the State and not to individuals. Though the
work washard, they owned their own homes and were not separated from their families. Though they hated the government, they
likely had some Egyptian neighbors with whom they maintained cordial relationships and might have even considered friends.
Desire to leave – Though the people desired freedom from slavery, they were much more hesitant about the idea of leaving Egypt.
Changeis difficult, and no matter how harsh life was, the unknown is potentially worse. Unsure of where they were going, and what
Hashem was to expect of them, the decision to follow Moshe was not automatic.
Why request a Three-day journey? It is possible that the request for a Three-day journey was not a ruse at all. Hashem originally
planned a staged redemption, in which the Children of Israel would gradually become accustomed to Hashem's commandments
and the concept of freedom. They would leave for Three-days to worship God, sense what it was like to be independent and then
return. Only later, when they were religiously and mentally prepared, would they leave for good. Alternatively, this position could
say, as above, that the request was a ruseintended to deceive the Israelites who otherwise might not have left.
Borrowing of vessels – As the initial plan was really to return, it is likely that the Israelites had every intention of giving back the
borroweditems. When the Egyptians attacked on Yam Suf, they were the ones who forfeited their claim to the vessels.
The Plagues – The Plagues served both an educational and utilitarian role. The Israelites needed to learn more about Hashem's
power to be convinced to follow Him. Yet, since their ties to Egypt were also related to the comfort afforded by the known and
familiar, Hashem needed to ensure that there was nothing in Egypt for which to remain. The Plagues devastated Egypt, removing
any idea that it was "home"or had the potential to provide for anyone.
Who was affected? This position might assert, as does Ibn Ezra, that there was differentiation only in the five plagues where it is
explicitly mentioned, and that the Israelites were affected by the other less harmful plagues. They, as much as the Egyptians, needed
to learn from thePlagues, but since they were not particularly sinful and deserving of punishment, they did not unduly suffer. See
Whom and Where Did the Plagues Strike.
Purpose of the Pesach – It is possible that the Pesach rite served a dual role. The smearing of blood allayed the fears of the
masses caused by the Plague of Firstborn and, in so doing, taught them that they were protected by God. The killing of the lamb,
on the other hand,helped them realize the futility of Egyptian gods. See Ibn Kaspi and Ralbag in Purpose of the Pesach.
The roundabout route – As above, the choice of traveling via the Wilderness Route might have had both an immediate and long-
term goal. In the short term, the route was selected, not to avoid a confrontation with the Egyptians, but in order to ensure that they
would drown in the Sea. This would sever the Israelites' remaining bonds of servitude and remove any incentive to return to Egypt.
In addition, however, the longer route bought the nation time before entering and conquering Canaan. These extra months would
help them unite as a people, discardtheir fears and slave mentality, and gain the extra confidence and independence essential to
conquer and rule Canaan.
 Ten Answers For The Wise Son
based on a post by: Gil Student

“What mean the testimonies, and the statutes, and the ordinances, which the
L-RD our G-d hath commanded you?” The wise son’s question is taken from
Devarim, 6:20. However, the Torah’s answer is “avadim hayinu…” (Devarim
6:21-25), which appears previously in the haggadah. This clearly cannot be
repeated. Instead we teach the wise son “ein maftirin achar ha-Pesach
afikoman.” We do not eat anything after eating the Pesach sacrifice, or today,
after eating the final piece of matzah that serves as its placeholder.
How does this answer the question?
Here are ten of the many explanations offered by commentators:

The question is why we eat the meat of the Chagigah sacrifice before the Pesach sacrifice, if the Pesach
is more important. The answer is that we may not eat after the Pesach, we may not remove the Pesach
taste from our mouths. Similarly, today we eat the matzah (afikoman) as the last item of the evening to
retain its taste. (Rashi)
The wise son asks a smart question and thinks he is a hot shot. Therefore, you teach him all the laws of
the seder, overwhelming him with information, so he is humbled and realizes that there is always more
to learn. (Abarbanel)

The same answer can be rephrased less cynically: Since the wise son knows so much, give him more
information by teaching him the laws of the seder. (Pseudo-Maharal)

The answer to the wise son is to teach him all the laws of Pesach through the final law about afikoman.
Among those laws is Rabban Gamliel’s statement about the three things that must be mentioned at the
seder, which consists of a brief explanation of the entire evening. (Rashbash, no. 494)

The wise son asks whether Pesach is eidus (testimony), chok (divine decree) or mishpat (rational law)?
The answer is that it is some of each, and the afikoman is an aspect of chok. You have to eat the Pesach
sacrifice last, so you can only eat it in one place. But if it was solely eidus, it would make sense to go from
house to house and eat there, like God passed over houses. (Shelah)

The wise son asks two questions. First, is Pesach eidus, chok or mishpat? That was already answered with
avadim hayinu: it is all three. Second, why do some people have a Chagigah and others not? The answer
is that the Chagigah is so the Pesach will be eaten on a full stomach. A big group will need a Chagigah
first, but a small group will have enough Pesach for everyone to be full. (Gra)

The wise son asks for details about the different types of commandments. He wants to study these at
length. So, we respond to him the one does not leave the seder hungry, i.e. that this is precisely what the
evening is about. (Chasam Sofer)
The wise son asks about eidus (biblical text), chok (methods of interpretation) and mishpatw (analysis).
Why was the Torah given in such a way that it has to be developed? The answer is complex and only
offered in a hint, so as not to go off on too much of a tangent during the seder. The Pesach is eaten at
the end of the meal so that throughout the evening we are concerned and involved in it. Similarly, the
Torah was given in such a way that we would have to toil over it. (Netziv)
The wise son’s question actually encompasses the entire Torah. However, this night we only focus on the
mitzvah eating and the discussion of the Exodus. Therefore, we tell him that just like we eat nothing after
the Pesach, similarly we will only discuss the Exodus and not all the commandments. (Aruch Hashulchan)

The wise son asks why there are so many details to mitzvos, primarily defined in the Oral Torah. The
answer is that the details emphasize the reason (ta’am, taste) for the commandments. We tell the wise
son that the afikoman keeps the taste of the Pesach in our mouths. So too, the details keep the
taste/reason of the commandments in our minds. (Rav Kook)
 THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CHACHAM AND THE RASHA
By Rabbi Mordachai Koster, Gevuras Akiva
The statement of the chacham and the statement of the rasha seem very similar. If so, why is one labeled
a chacham and one is labeled a rasha?
Rav Isser Zalman Meltzer (Even Haezel Meila 8:8) writes that while these statements might seem similar, there
is a fundamental difference between them. The chacham is asking a question and the rasha is making a statement.
In other words, although it sounds like the rasha is asking a question, in reality, that is not the case. The rasha
wants to do avayros, therefore in order to justify what he is doing, he asks his question. He does not want an
answer but rather he just wants an excuse to justify what he wants to do.
The Haggadah says that the reason that we knock out the rasha’s teeth is because he took himself out of the klal
and he denied the divine truth. This statement is seemingly out of order. It should have said that he was a kofer
and therefore he removed himself from the klal.
Rav Isser Zalman answers that the order is most certainly correct. Why did this person become a kofer? Because
he had questions? No! The reason he became a kofer was because he wanted to leave klal yisroel. He had the
desire to do avayros and therefore he became a kofer.
Rav Isser Zalman points out that when a person says that he is leaving Yiddishkeit because he has questions, this
is rarely the case. He does not have questions but rather he has answers.
***
The pasuk writes that Esav sold the Bechora and it was disgusting in his eyes. Seemingly this pasuk is out of
order. The reason why he sold the Bechora was because in his eyes it was disgusting. The pasuk should have
first written the cause and only then the result. Why does the pasuk reverse the order?
A certain talmid chacham answered that the pasuk is most definitely in the correct order. The reason why Esav
sold the Bechora was because he did not want it. But once he sold it, he had to answer to himself why he did it.
Therefore, it became disgusting to him. This fits what we previously said. First the rasha fulfills his desires and
only afterward does he find the justification for it.
***
If one looks at the questions of the four sons when they are written in the Torah, one can see the following
discrepancy. The pesukim are as follows:

The question is obvious. Why in regards to the chacham and the tam does the pasuk use an expression of asking,
and by the rasha the pasuk uses an expression of saying? According to everything we have said, we can
understand the pesukim beautifully. Indeed, the rasha is not asking a question but rather he is making a statement.
This is why we don’t give him an answer. We can only answer questions; not questions. The rasha has no desire
to know the truth and therefore we are left with no alternative but to knock out his teeth and to put him in his
place (See Meshach Chochmah).
 THE ASPIRATIONS OF THE RASHA
By Rabbi Mordachai Koster, Gevuras Akiva
Much has been written to explain the intent of the rasha and the intent of our response to him. And yet, we find that the
Yerushalmi itself deals with this very question. The Yerushalmi (brought in the Ritva) brings that the rasha is complaining
about the delay in getting his food. He says, “What is this avodah? Every year you bother us with this avodah and don’t
let us eat our meal!” To this we respond and knock out his teeth. Those teeth that wanted to eat the food.
We see from the Yerushalmi that the problem with the rasha is that he is not interested in the ruchnius and just wants to
satisfy his physical desires. He does not realize that the entire point of the physical world is to be a means to achieve in
the spiritual world.
Indeed, this is not the first time that we find a rasha who did not understand this concept. Esav Harasha just wanted to eat
the bowl of lentils and was ready to give up on the bechora in order to get this measly meal!
Perhaps we can take it a step further. It’s not that Esav (the rasha) doesn’t want the mitzvos. Rather, they believe that
while there might be some gain with doing mitzvohs, it is not worth the loss that it entails. This is exactly what Rashi tells
us. Esav says that he does not want the Avodah as it has too many laws and too many risks. Rather, he says that he just
wants to enjoy the pleasures of this world without the worry of being the bechor.
This is the difference between the chacham and the rasha. The chacham understands, that while it is true that the avodah
requires hard work and sacrifice, it is most certainly worth it. He realizes that the point of the physical world is to help us
in our spiritual pursuits and therefore he is willing to put in the effort to achieve them.
The rasha on the other hand does not understand this. He thinks that while ruchnius might be a nice thing, it can be at the
expense of his physical pleasures. It might be nice to sit and discuss the story of yetzias Mitzrayim, but not if that would
cause a delay in getting his meal.
Perhaps, we can now understand what we answer the chacham. We tell him the halachos of the Afikoman. The Afikoman
is the perfect response to him, as the halachos of the afikoman highlight the difference between him and the rasha.
The halacha is that a person can only eat the afikoman if he is satiated. Now, if the purpose of the eating is to satisfy your
physical desires, this halacha does not make sense. How could it be that you are supposed to eat specifically when you are
not hungry!? It must be that the need for this eating is not a physical one but rather a spiritual one.
We tell him the halacha that once you eat the afikoman it is forbidden to eat anything else. But how could that be? If you
are eating to satisfy your bodily needs, you should be allowed to eat until you no longer want to. From this halacha, we
once again see that this eating is done for a higher purpose. It is the vehicle to achieve in ruchnius and not just to satisfy
our animalistic desires.
This is the difference between the chacham and the rasha. The rasha sees the world as an end in and of itself. The chacham
understands that this is not the case. We are in this world to accomplish. The physical world is merely a vehicle to
accomplish this.
***
Perhaps we can add the following remez; that the difference between the chacham and the rasha is already found in the
story of Yaakov and Esav itself. The posuk says that Yaakov came with mirma (trickery- ). What was the trickery? There
are those who explain as follows.
Yaakov was nervous that perhaps after he would get the berachos from Yitzchok, Esav would come and Yitzchok would
give him berachos as well. Therefore, Yaakov specifically gave him two young goats. Rashi tells us that one of them was
the Korban Pesach (afikoman).
Why did Yaakov give him the Korban Pesach specifically? He did so in order that Esav could no longer get the berachos.
Once Yitzchok would eat the Korban Pesach, it would be forbidden to eat anything else. Since Esav would not be able to
give Yitzchok any food, Esav would not be able to get the berachos. There are those who add that the very word mirma
hints to this idea, as the gematria of mirma is afikoman!
It comes out that the reason why Esav could not get the berachos was for this reason specifically. The afikoman states that
the purpose of beracha in this world is to achieve in ruchnius. If a person does not realize this, he does not deserve success
in gashmius. The afikoman (Korban Pesach) prevented Esav from getting the berachos and indeed, Esav did not deserve
the berachos as he did not understand their purpose.
 Why do we attack the Rasha’s teeth? 18 Explanations
In the Haggadah, we read about the four archetypal children, the Chacham, Rasha, Tam, and She’Eyno Yodea
Lishol. The Rasha asks, “What is this service to you?” The Baal HaHaggadah points out that since the Rasha used
the word Lachem, to you, he is excluding himself, and consequently is considered to be denying everything. As
with the other three sons, the Haggadah tells us the wording we should use to reply to him: “Because of this,
Hashem did things for me, when I left Mitzraim.” However, unlike the other three sons, aside from a verbal
response, the Haggadah instructs us in a physical response as well: Hakheh es Shinav, which can be translated
“Blunt his teeth”. Others translate this as “Knock out his teeth”, although since the word Hakheh is spelled with
a kuf, not a khaf, blunting is a more accurate translation.
Are we really supposed to blunt his teeth? What does this actually mean, and what’s unique about the Rasha, and
his teeth, that necessitates this particular type of physical response? Here is a review of 18 explanations for why
the Haggadah says that we attack the Rasha’s teeth. (Of course they are many more in the commentators)
1. The very basic p’shat is that this line can be taken literally, which would imply that a wicked child must by physically
punished. Some, however, consider it a figurative expression, implying that nothing should be held back in our
response to the Rasha; we should be firm and strong in our response to him.
2. An apparently wicked child has a pure Neshamah hidden deep within him. He became a Rasha as a result of various
external forces, whether a bad group of friends, inappropriate influences, negative experiences, or inadequate
education. Our role as parents and educators is to reverse the process that led him off the derech; by determining what
the root cause of his rebellion was, we can take steps to bring him back to religiosity. This is depicted in the Haggadah
by knocking out his teeth; we are “de-fanging” him by removing the outer, negative, sharp shell that has built up over
the years. We’re removing the sharpness from his bite, and smoothing out his rough edges. This will allow the
goodness of his inner Neshamah to emerge. (Rabbi Eleazar Rokeach of Worms, and other mefarshim)
3. The expression of “blunting his teeth” is the equivalent of the modern expression “give him a taste of his own
medicine.” Just as the Rasha spoke in the second person to exclude himself, the father rebukes the Rasha by implying
that yes he would be excluded, when it comes time for the redemption. (Abarbanel)
4. The gematria of the word Rasha is 570. The gematria of Shinav (“his teeth”) is 366. When we’re instructed to attack his
teeth, it means to subtract the 366 from 570. 570 - 366= 204, which is the gematria of Tzaddik. Therefore, the
Haggadah is telling us that our job is to take this Rasha, and find a way to turn him into a Tzaddik. (Alshich)
5. The Rasha thinks that if he understands the basic story of Pesach, he has no need to actually participate in the physical
Mitzvos of Pesach. He complains that he can easily read a history book to get the details, so why bother participating in
a whole ceremony?
Eating food requires 3 steps: Machshavah – the thought process about getting food, Dibbur – speaking to buy or obtain
food, and Maaseh – the actual act of eating food. Mitzvos are the “food for our soul”, and therefore Mitzvos also
require Machshavah – proper Kavanah, Dibbur – a verbal declaration of doing the mitzvah L’shem Shamayim,
and Maaseh – the actual act of the mitzvah. We need to explain this parallel between food and Mitzvos when we
engage the Rasha in dialogue. We explain to him that if he doesn’t want to participate in the physical act of this
mitzvah, he shouldn’t need to participate in the physical act of eating, either, and just reading a cookbook should be
enough. Hakheh es shinav means that his teeth should be kept “clean” of any food particles actually making their way
into his mouth. (Chid”a)
6. The Rasha excludes himself, and consequently is considered to be denying Judaism. In response, we don’t even allow
him to taste the Korban Pesach. We make him sit alone, watching us eat the tasty meat, while he grinds his teeth in
hunger. (MeAm Lo’ez)
7. There are people who believe that spirituality has its place in the world, and physical matters have their place, but there
is no connection between the two. With regard to spiritual matters, they daven, learn Torah, and do as many Mitzvos as
possible. However, when it comes to mundane physical pursuits, like eating and drinking, they see it as a “non-
religious” activity, and deny the religious significance of these physical acts.
When this Rasha comes to the Seder table, all ready for a fulfilling spiritual ceremony, he is surprised to see all the food
and drink. He doesn’t see any spiritual value in food, so he says, “What is this service to you?” In response, we knock
out his teeth, as a way of telling him that he never properly used his teeth to eat with spiritual significance. (Kozhnitzer
Maggid)
Similarly: The Rasha says, “I understand that one can serve Hashem on Yom Kippur, by fasting and praying, but how do
we serve Hashem through eating?” Therefore, since he does not know how to use his teeth, he doesn’t deserve to have
them. We see this with regard to the korbanos as well: A non-Jew is only allowed to bring a Korban Olah, which is
totally burnt on the Mizbeach, so the entire Korban goes to G-d, and man has no share in it. Only a Jew can bring a
Shlamim, because only we can relate to service of Hashem that combines both man and Hashem. (Kotzker)
8. Hashem created our teeth to serve as a barrier for our tongue. If we have the urge to speak evil, our teeth are supposed to
clamp down and prevent it from emerging from our mouth. This Rasha has indicated, through his speech, that he has
no intention of utilizing this barrier properly, therefore we criticize his teeth. (Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Horowitz of Ropshitz)
9. Blunting teeth is a consequence of excessive tooth gnashing, or grinding. This is a self-inflicted injury. In the same way,
the Rasha’s mistake is a self-inflicted one, as well. In the wording of the Rasha’s question, “What is this service to
you?” he excluded himself, and ended up causing himself to be excluded from the category of those worthy of
redemption. Since his self-exclusion was a self-inflicted injury, we use a physical example of self-inflicted injury,
blunting teeth. (Malbim)
10. The Biblical prototype of evil was the Nachash. The main strength of the Nachash is the letter Shin, which is the final
letter of Nachash, his name, and the first letter of Sheker, his weapon. To rectify Adam’s sin, which occurred due to the
influence of the Nachash, Hashem made Adam leather garments, which the Zohar says is a reference to Tefillin. The
Shin printed on the Tefillin is supposed to counteract the Shin of the Nachash. Removing the Shin from Nachash leaves
“Nach (Noach)”, which represents rest and the absence of wickedness. Similarly, we have the Pasuk in Tehillim, Shinei
Reshaim Shibarta, You have broken the teeth (or Shin) of the Reshaim. In the Haggadah, shinav doesn’t mean “his
teeth” but instead it means “his letter Shin”. Taking all this into account, we therefore see that hakheh es shinav,
blunting his letter Shin, represents removing the evil nature of the Reshaim. (Maharal Tzintz)
11. The Rasha, as the second of the four sons mentioned, parallels the second of the four questions of the Ma Nishtana. The
Rasha is bothered by the question of why we need to have Maror, something bitter, at the Seder, if this is supposed to
be a happy celebration. Our response blunts his teeth, i.e. defuses his sharp remarks, by telling him that the bitterness at
the Seder is all his fault. The Maror reminds us of our enslavement, and if everyone in Mitzraim had been the same as
the Rasha, then the redemption wouldn’t have happened at all. We involve Maror, and the Rasha, in our Seder to
highlight the contrast of the Tzadik’s salvation. (Sfas Emes)
12. Although we’re told that, in general, we should refute the arguments of heretics, the Gemara in Sanhedrin 38b limits
this to non-Jewish nonbelievers. When counterarguments are offered to a Jewish heretic, they can cause him to become
even more rebellious. However, we shouldn’t just ignore Jewish non-believers, but instead our attitude should be to
improve our own Torah observance as much as possible, and this will actually have an effect on the non-believer. We
don’t respond to the Rasha directly, but instead we work on ourselves, and expect that this will eventually make a
positive impression on the Rasha. We “blunt his teeth” by ignoring the words coming out of his mouth and not
engaging in a direct face-to-face verbal dialogue. (R’ Moshe Feinstein)
13. Hakheh (blunt), has the same shoresh as the name Kehas, and the Gemara in Sanhedrin 109b explains that Korach was
called “ben Kehas” since he blunted the teeth of his parents. Rashi on the Gemara explains that blunting teeth means he
brought shame on his ancestors through his wicked actions. This is why Hakheh es shinav is mentioned here, when we
discuss the Rasha. (The Rav)
14. Instead of removing his shinav, his teeth, shinav actually means “his Shin”. If you remove the letter Shin from the word
Rasha, it leaves the letters Reish and Ayin, which together spell the word Ra, bad or evil. The Shin is composed of three
stems, which represent Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. Our task with the Rasha is to push forth his Shin, bring out his
inner good self as epitomized by the Avos, and separate it from the Ra, his outside evil shell, which is only external and
artificial. (Belzer Rebbe, told over by Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach)
15. There are many people today who are proud to identify themselves as Jews, but they feel that keeping Halacha is an
old-fashioned concept, and inapplicable in today’s modern world. The Rasha shouldn’t be called “Evil”, but instead, he
should be called “Mistaken”. He is off the derech due to ignorance, not rebelliousness.
Our approach to this category of “Rasha” shouldn’t be harsh and attacking, instead it must be with gentle persuasion. We
should “blunt his teeth” through verbal discussion with him, attempting to convince him of the proper course of action.
We have to demonstrate that questions about Judaism can only be meaningfully answered when asked with the
reverence of an “insider”, and not with the flippancy of an “outsider” to the Tradition. The best method of persuasion is
to serve as a proper role model: “V’Af Atah Hakheh Es Shinav” – bring “Atah” – yourself – as a method of persuasion.
(Ideas mentioned by both Rabbi Norman Lamm and Rabbi Dovid Orlofsky)
16. The Rasha’s basic problem is that he is unable to see the Hand of G-d at work in day-to-day life, even in the face of
miracles. This is why he leaves Hashem’s name out of his question. We blunt his teeth because the gematria
of shen (tooth), is 350, the same gematria as sechel(intelligence), and both work the same way. Just like the mind takes
raw ideas and “chews” them so they can be more readily “digested”, so too the teeth take food and break it down for
digestion. The Rasha doesn’t want to apply his sechel to properly understand the world, consequently we focus our
attack on his teeth. (Rabbi Pinchas Winston)
17. The Rasha’s sin is that he takes grand ideas and trivializes them into nothing. This is the function of teeth: breaking
larger pieces of food into small pieces. We need to explain to him the tremendous significance of all the Mitzvos we
do, and he shouldn’t use his “teeth” to belittle the Mitzvos.
18. The Rasha is questioning why we need so many rules. In response, the father turns around and hits him, as if to say
that’s what would happen if there were no rules.
We hope and pray that with this year’s Seder, any remaining Reshaim will be converted to Tzadikim, and consequently, we will all be worthy of the
ultimate redemption.
 No Jew is Left Behind
Lekutei Sichos Vol. 11, Sicha 1
At first glance, it would be possible to say as follows: The verse (Yechzekel 20,33),
“surely with a mighty hand… I will be King over you,” refers to the Future Redemption. The
Midrash {however} applies the lessons of the Future Redemption to the exodus from Egypt. So,
conversely, we may employ the scriptural lessons of the Exodus from Egypt to the Future
Redemption. Meaning, even at the time of the Future Redemption, HaShem’s “mighty hand”
will extend only to the “community.” That is to say, the Torah’s promise that “you will return
to HaShem your L-rd… and HaShem your L-rd will return…,” (Devarim 30:2-3) and “that the
Jewish people will ultimately do teshuvah at the end of their exile and will be redeemed
immediately,” (Rambam Laws of Teshuva, 7:5) applies to the community and the Jewish people
as a whole, but not to individuals.
In truth, however, this explanation is untenable: As Rashi explains, the verse, “HaShem
your L-rd will return...” pertains to everyone individually. As Rashi writes: “{HaShem} takes
each individual with His very hands… gathered one by one, Children of Israel.”
(Yeshayahu 27,12) For the promise of the redemption, and the method by which it unfolds,
“HaShem will return,” proceed from, and are the result of, the catalyst for the redemption: “You
will return to HaShem your L-rd,” “for Israel will ultimately do teshuvah at the end of their
exile.” Meaning, that teshuvah also will be performed by everyone individually.
The Alter Rebbe writes (Laws of Torah Study 4:3) similarly that every single Jew “will
certainly do teshuvah in the end… for no one will remain banished.”
Accordingly, this includes all the sinners, even those who don’t want to leave Exile —
HaShem will even arouse them to do teshuvah, and redeem them from Exile. As the verse states
explicitly (Yeshayahu 27:13), “It will come to pass on that day, a great shofar will be blown,
and those lost in the land of Ashur will come {along} with those banished in the land of Egypt,
and they will prostrate themselves before HaShem on the holy mountain in Yerushalayim.” Even
those who have immersed themselves in their state of exile to the extent that they became “lost”
and “banished,” with no desire to leave exile — even they will be stirred to teshuvah, even
coming to “prostrate themselves before HaShem on the holy mountain in Yerushalayim.”
As discussed many times, the response to the Wicked Son in the Haggadah is nuanced.
The Haggadah says: “If he were there, he would not have been redeemed.” This response seems
baffling. What is the need for, and purpose of, telling the Wicked Son something that has no
connection to the Seder, which is a remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt? To explain: The
intent of this response is not to bar the Wicked Son from the Seder by proclaiming that he
would not have been redeemed. Quite the contrary, the response emphasizes that only “there
(in Egypt) he would not have been redeemed,” but concerning the Future Redemption, since it
takes place after the Giving of the Torah, he, too, will be redeemed. Consequently, this awakens
an awareness {in the Wicked Son} of the wondrous
impact of the Giving of the Torah. From the time
HaShem said, “I am HaShem your L-rd,” in the
singular, {the G-dly emanation of} “Havayah”
became the strength and spirit of each and every
Jew. Therefore, every Jew, even a bad person like
the Wicked Son, is guaranteed that through this strength, he will be ultimately redeemed.