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 isTorah,” since the Torah is calledzot (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, “whichAdonai 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 “Adonaiour God,” he showed that he had not removed himself from the community of Israel. By saying,etchem, “You” (“the Lord your God commanded you,”) theTorah 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

“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 theTorah 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 theMaggid 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,