## Midrash BeChiddush on Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Four Sons

###### Midrash BeChiddush on Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Four Sons 2:1
[Midrash BeChiddush on Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Four Sons 2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Midrash%20BeChiddush%20on%20Pesach%20Haggadah/s/Magid,_The%20Four%20Sons/r/2:1)

**שאלת** החכם היא על כל פרט מפרטי התור' אשר כללותה היא שלשה החלקי' האלה עדות חקים ומשפטים וזה לפי שחפץ לדעת תוכן של דברים ולעמוד על בוריין והרשע הגם שלפעמים הוא עושה איזו מצוה להראות שגם הוא בשם יש' יכונה עכ"ז היא עליו לטורח וקורא כל התורה בשם עבודה להיות כבדה בעיניו וכמו שקורים אותה אחרים תורת עבדות. והתם שאינו מבחין בין דבר לדבר שואל דרך כלל מה זאת כלו' מהו ענין התורה הנקראת זאת. כמ"ש וזאת התורה אשר שם משה ומאמר החכם באומרו מה העדות וכו' אינו כמתמיה כמו מאמר הרשע אלא שאלה הוא שואל וראוי להשיב שאלתו. כמ"ש בס"ה שהפרש מבין מ"ה למ"י הוא כי מה קיימא לשאלה ולא לאתבא. ושאלתו היא מה טיבן של העדות והחקי' והמשפטי' אם לתועלת האדם או גזירת מלך וכיוצא כי המשפטים בפרט נר' שאין צורך לצוויים כי השכל האנושי גוזרם. ואין להאשימו באומרו אשר צוה ה' אלהינו אתכם ולא אמר אותנו כי מאחר שקבל עליו עול מלכות שמים במה שאמר ה' אלקינו נדין אותו לכף זכות שלא רצה להחזיק טובה לעצמו ולומר שהוא ראוי שיצו ה' את דבריו אליו וכיון שאמר אשר צוה ה' אלקינו אף הוא לא הוציא את עצמו מן הכלל. אי נמי דקדק באו' אתכם לפי שנ' בעיניו שלא היה ראוי שיבא מפורש בתורה אלא חלק החוקי' כי העדות והמשפטים האדם הישר מאליו היה יכול לעשותם וא"כ במה שצוה ה' אלקינו בפי' עדות חקים ומשפטים אתכם צוה אותם ועל כן שאל מה צורך לכל הפרטים ההם. להיות שאלה זאת שאלת בן חכם ע"כ כתב בה מחר כדכתיב כי ישאלך בנך מחר וכן בבן תם כאלו יאמר הלואי שמחר יהיה האות הזה שישאלך בנך מחר לאמר מה זאת אבל בבן רשע לא כתיב מחר דהלואי שלא ישאל ולא יוציא דבר כזה מפיו לעולם.

**Midrash BeChiddush, translated by Rabbi Mark B. Greenspan, Oceanside, N.Y. 2024:**
The wise one asks about every aspect of the *Torah* including: *eidut* (testimonies), *chukkim* (statutes), and *mishpatim* (ordinances),⁷⁷ our God hath commanded you? because he seeks to understand all the Torah's content deeply. Even though the wicked one performs some commandments so he will be recognized as a Jew, he considers them bothersome and refers to the *Torah* as *avodah* (work) because in his eyes, it is burdensome. He calls the *Torah, avodut,* slavery. The simple person doesn’t distinguish between one matter and another (in the *Torah*) so he asks, “What is this?” That is, “What is***Torah*****,”** since the *Torah* is called*zot* (this), as in the verse, “This (v’*zot*) is the *Torah* that Moses set before the Israelites.” (Deut. 4:44) 
The wise one’s question, “What is this testimony…” is not an expression of astonishment like the statement of the wicked person.⁷⁸ Rather he asks a valid question that deserves a fitting answer. As the *Zohar* states, “The difference between *mah* (What) and *mi* (Who) is that *mah* poses a question and not a statement.”⁷⁹ Volume 1, 3:8. I have adapted this passage in the commentary so that it fits the statement in the *Zohar:* And there is another below, called WHAT [M"H]. What is between 'WHO' [M"I] and 'WHAT' [M"H]? The first one, which is called WHO, is concealed. It remains a question: Once man has searched and inquired in order to understand and climb from one level to another, and has finally reached the end level of all, he is asked: WHAT? WHAT have you learned? WHAT have you seen? WHAT have you investigated, since everything is still concealed, just as it was before? The question of the wise child is, “What is the nature of the testimonies, statutes and ordinances?” Do we observe the testimonies, statues, and judgments because they serve some useful purpose or simply because they were commanded by God? This is especially the case with regard to judgments (*mishpatim*) since it is not necessary to command their observance as they can be derived through reason.⁸⁰ It is not necessary to declare him guilty because he said, “which*Adonai* our God commanded you,⁸¹” It was not necessary to say *otanu*, “us,” (“Which Adonai our God commanded **us**,”⁸² us. When the wise one said, “*Adonai* our God commanded” he shows that he has accepted God’s sovereignty and deserves to be judged favorably. Also he did so because he did not expect merit for himself. Also when he said “Adonai*our* God,” he showed that he had not removed himself from the community of Israel. 
By saying,*etchem*, “You” (“the Lord your God commanded *you*,”) the*Torah* is more exacting in its language. The wise child wonders, why not be more explicit in mentioning *etchem* for the *hukkim*, statutes (since one could not derive these laws on his own) when a righteous person could derive the testimonies and judgements on his own.⁸³ Therefore the Torah states, “Adonai our God commanded you,” for the “testimonies, *statutes* and ordinances”⁸⁴. (to teach us that God commanded all of them. The wise child’s question, then, is, ‘why is it necessary to mention *etchem* for all these various laws in the Torah?’ 
That is why the *Torah* says *machar* (for the wise and simple children) as it states, “When, in time to come (*machar*), your children ask you…” (Deut. 6:20) This is also the case with regard to the simple child’s question: “And when, in time to come (*machar*), your child asks you…” (Ex. 13:14) They are saying, “Would that in the time to come (*machar*) there will be a sign so that your child asks, “What is this?”⁸⁵ in their question, suggests that we hope for a time when the simple child will ask insightful questions like the wise child. But the word *machar* is not included for the wicked child*,* suggesting that we are saying, “Would that he never ask such questions and such matters never be expressed by him!”

footnotes:
⁷⁷ See Deut. 6:20 When thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying: ‘What mean the testimonies, and the statutes, and the ordinances, which Adonai
⁷⁸ Note that the statement of the wise one in Deuteronomy includes the word “questions” while the wicked one uses the word, “states.”
⁷⁹ See Introduction to Zohar,
⁸⁰ Thou shall not kill is a mishpat. We might arrive at this law without divine commandment because it makes sense.
⁸¹ When the wise child says “commanded you,” he sounds uncomfortably close to the wicked child who says, “Which God commanded you.”
⁸² See Deut. 6:20 But the verse says “Which the Lord our God commanded you.” The LXX, and some rabbinic statements use the word otanu,
⁸³ In other words, the chukkim needed the expression “GOd commanded you,” But the other two categories of commandments did not since they could be derived on their own through human reason. So why does the Torah say, “Statutes, testimonies and judgments which the Lord our God commanded you. “ It would have made more sense to simply say, “The statutes which the Lord our God commanded you..”
⁸⁴ Italics are mine
⁸⁵ The fact that both the wise and the simple child include the word machar


###### Midrash BeChiddush on Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Four Sons 2:2
[Midrash BeChiddush on Pesach Haggadah, Magid, The Four Sons 2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Midrash%20BeChiddush%20on%20Pesach%20Haggadah/s/Magid,_The%20Four%20Sons/r/2:2)

אף אתה אמור לו כהלכות הפסח אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן. כלומר אין להרהר אחר מדותיו ומצותיו ית' כי הלא תראה באכילת הפסח שני דברים הפכיים זה מזה. א' שאף אם אחר אכילת הפסח תאב לאכול אינו רשאי. ולפי זה נראה שלא תהא האכילה להתענג בה. ומה שצריך לאוכלו על השבע כמעט נראה אכילה גסה הואיל ואינו תאב עוד לאכול ואפי' כזית הפסח אוכלו על השבע. ולכן כשם שאין להשיב על אכילת הפסח כך לא יקשה לך על מה נכתבו בתורה כל חלקי המצות וכשם שאם תדקדק באכילת הפסח תמצא בו טעם נכון והוא שלהיות סעודת ליל פסח נעשית מזבחי שלמי חגיגה ואחר ששבע נפשו מהם וכל מיני מגדים שירצה אוכל כזית מקרבן פסח להעלות בדעתו שאין לידבק ולהתעסק בחלק החיצוני. אשר קרבן פסח רומז אליו להיותו יראתו של המצרים אלא מעט קט ואחרי אשר שבע נפשו מחלק הקדושה ואילו היה אוכל מיני מגדי' אחריו היה נר' שלא שבע נפשו מהעיקר כן העדות והמשפטים אילו לא בא צוויים בתורה הגם כי האיש השלם היה עושה אותם מדעתו. לא היה משיג בהם שלימות על שלימותו כמו שעושה בקיימ' על שהם גזירת מלך. וכן לפעמי' היה מוסיף או גורע בהם כאשר יראה לו נכון לפי השעה וכנימוסי שאר האומות עכשו שצום הוא ית' המקיימ' הוא אלקי לא אנושי. וע"כ דקדק המגיד בלשונו ואמר אף אתה אמור לו כהלכות הפסח לא אמר הלכות הפסח שזה דומה לזה בצד מה:

**Midrash BeChiddush, translated by Rabbi Mark B. Greenspan, Oceanside, N.Y. 2024:**
**“One should tell him the laws of Passover, (including), ‘one should not eat anything after the Passover sacrifice.’”** Eating the Passover offering with gusto is not permitted. This is God’s commandment, expressing two opposite ways: first, even if one is hungry after eating the Passover offering, it is forbidden to eat more of it since the offering is not meant to satisfy one’s hunger. Secondly, eating it when one is hungry would be considered to be excessive eating (*acheelah gasa*). One is not supposed to eat enough (of the Passover sacrifice) to satisfy oneself. It is enough to eat an olive-worth of the offering. Just as one cannot go back to eating of the Passover offering, so too, one should not be troubled by what is written in the*Torah* regarding the different commandments.⁸⁶ 
Similarly, if one studies the laws of the Passover sacrifice, one can find a correct explanation. The Passover offering follows the festive offering and one is supposed to satisfy himself with festive offering and all types of other desired goodies (during the festive meal). Only then one eats an olive-worth of the Passover offering. This is a reminder that one should not cling to or busy oneself only with worldly matters. The Passover offering reminds us that one’s fear of Egypt is small and minor. He should have the Passover offering only after he has satisfied himself with the holy offerings. If he were to eat other delicacies after the Passover offering, it would be as if he had not satisfied himself with what is most essential. The same may be said of the statutes and judgments. If the testimonies and ordinances did not appear in the *Torah,* and the righteous person thought he could derive them on his/her own, there would be no completeness like that of the Divine’s wholeness unless we consider them as part of God’s commandments. If not, we might add to or subtract them as we saw fit, according to the times and to the customs of the nations. Thus, we observe them according to God’s will and not personal desire. That is why the*Maggid* is so exacting in his language and says, “You shall instruct him in the all laws of Passover…” For these (*chukkim*) and these *(eidut* and *mishpatim*) are similar in their divine nature.

footnotes:
⁸⁶ (uncertain meaning) Possibly the idea is that there is no explanation for the statutes so don’t be troubled if you can not explain them - any more than you explain why you cannot go back and eat after the Passover offering even though you only had an olives-worth of it,