The Torah speaks of three sons. I shall refer to them by their familiar monikers, the Chacham, or wise son, the Rasha, often called the wicked son but probably better described as the rebellious one, and the Taam, or simple son.
Now I know that the Haggadah, basing itself on a Midrash found in both the Palestinian Talmud and the Tosefta, identifies four sons, the three I already mentioned and one who does not know how to inquire. The four-son myth is so pervasive that I believe every Haggadah, no matter how radical, preserves it in some form, discussing the four children. Even spoofs include it, such as the late Tovah Hollander’s Four Daughters and Steve Green’s Four kinds of parents. It is so popular a theme that I have even seen it in a Karaite Haggadah, despite the fact that it is an utterly, virtually paradigmatic, Rabbinic exposition. Nevertheless, I believe that the Midrash, even using its own methodology, is incorrect; the Torah actually speaks only of three kinds of children.
This midrash is based on the fact that in three places the Torah discusses what to do when your child asks one question or another, and the three questions included in this portion of the Haggadah are the three questions posited in the written text.
The question we attribute to the wise son is found in Deuteronomy, in Parshas Va’eschanan. Of course the written Torah does not suggest teaching this child all the laws of the Seder as set forth in the Mishneh, which is the Haggadah’s analysis. Rather, the answer is very similar to our Avodim Hayinu. That of course is the answer we give our children when they ask the fier kashas, thereby setting up our little children who manage to memorize Ma Nishtanah to identify themselves with the Chacham.
The other questions and statements are all found in Parshas Bo, which JJ chanted so nicely a little while ago:
Let us look at how the Torah introduces these questions and answers.
In Va’eschanan, at Deuteronomy 6, verse 20, page 1028 in your Chumashim, we read,
“When … your children ask you, ‘Mah ho-eidos v’hachukin v’hamishpatim asher tsivoh HaShem Eloheinu es-chem?’ You shall say to your children, ‘Avodim Hayinu L’faroh B’mitzrayim [etc.].”
V’omarto l’vincho; and you shall say to your children:
Back again in Bo, on page 393 in your Chumash, at Chapter 13, line 14,
The simple child’s question is found at verse 14 of Chapter 13, along with the reply:
“And when … your son asks you, saying, ‘Mah Zos?’ You shall say to him, “It was with a mighty hand that HaSham brought us out from Egypt, [etc.].”
V’omarto eilov; and you shall say to him:
But when we go to page 386 in the Chumash, Chapter 12, line 26 ff., we find,
“And when your children ask you, ‘Mah HaAvodah hazos lachem?’ you shall say, ‘It is the Pesach LaShem, because He passed over, posach, on Bnai Yisroel’s houses in Egypt when he smote the Egyptians, but saved our houses.’”
Va’amartem; and you shall say.
No L’vincho. No Eilav.
And when we read on page 392 at Chapter 13, verse 8, it is written,
“And you shall explain to your son on that day, ‘It is because of what HaShem did for me when I went free from Mitsrayim.’”
V’higad’ta l’vincha bayom hahu leimor: and you shall explain to your son on that day,
But consider, that the Rasha’s question is not a question seeking information [or expressing wonderment]. Rather, it is a challenge.
The Beis HaLevi, Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik of Brisk, explains that when confronted in this matter, the parent must first be certain that he is strong in his own beliefs. So when the torah instructs this parent to say, “It is HaShem’s Pesach, because He passed over Bnai Yisroel’s houses in Egypt when he smote the Egyptians, but saved our houses,” the parent is saying it for his own benefit. He is not saying it to the Rasha; it is not a reply.
And so, when the Torah instructs us in the next chapter to explain to your son, “It is because of what HaShem did for me when I went free from Mitsrayim,” it is not an isolated statement, to be said to some child who had been heretofore silent; rather, it is the long-awaited answer to the Rasha.
And let us consider the Rasha a bit more. He is, after all, apparently at the Seder table. But he has a profound misunderstanding of the event of the Seder. He thinks the purpose of the Seder and its symbols and so forth is simply to remind us of the bitterness of slavery and that God brought us out from there. The Rasha feels that we don’t need these mitzvos to remind us of the exodus; they are no longer necessary.
But we don’t do mitzvos only to recall past events. And when we have a mitzvah to remember something, we are generally given that mitzvah directly and are instructed to remember it. God brought us out from Egypt to that we could fulfill His Mitzvos. Matzoh and Morror surely do remind us and help us to relive and experience a bit of Yetziyas Mitzrayim, but theologically at least they are among the causes of our redemption, not merely the results thereof.
As Rabbi Professor Yitzchok Handel writes, The mitzvah represents a meaningful bond between the AJewish people and God. Therefore,
“The rebellious child has his teeth dulled, Hak’heih es shinav, the bite is taken out by teaching him, not by denigrating him, and not by knocking out his teeth! He needs a radical change of perspective.”
And this is why the Haggadah gives the rebellious Rasha the same answer it gives the simple Taam.
I hope you will give these ideas some thought as you plan your Sedorim for this year.
And if, as I expect is likely, you persist in continuing with all
four sons, I hope you will ask why the Rabbis determined to include
the son who does not ask and carefully consider his role as well.