"Blunt his teeth" is an idiom

Here is an expression in the Haggadah that we should understand, based on its pattern of usage. Hak’heh et shinav, blunt the wicked son’s teeth. It is not meant literally, and I am saying this as peshat, not apologetics.

I suspect that a few of those who popularly it literal also conflate הקהה / blunt with הכה / smite or hit, not realizing that it is a kuf rather than a kaf, so it resonates. Or to Tehillim 3:7, which talks of shattering the teeth of the wicked.

ק֘וּמָ֤ה ה ׀ הוֹשִׁ֘יעֵ֤נִי אֱלֹקי כִּֽי־הִכִּ֣יתָ אֶת־כׇּל־אֹיְבַ֣י לֶ֑חִי שִׁנֵּ֖י רְשָׁעִ֣ים שִׁבַּֽרְתָּ׃

Rise, O LORD!
Deliver me, O my God!
For You slap all my enemies in the face;
You break the teeth of the wicked.

We had this in the daf for Shabbat, Sanhedrin 109b:

״וַיִּקַּח [קֹרַח]״ – אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: שֶׁלָּקַח מִקָּח רַע לְעַצְמוֹ. ״קֹרַח״ – שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה קׇרְחָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. ״בֶּן יִצְהָר״ – בֵּן שֶׁהִרְתִּיחַ עָלָיו אֶת כָּל הָעוֹלָם כַּצׇּהֳרַיִם. ״בֶּן קְהָת״ – בֵּן שֶׁהִקְהָה שִׁינֵּי מוֹלִידָיו. ״בֶּן לֵוִי״ – בֵּן שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה לְוָיָה בְּגֵיהִנָּם.

Apropos Korah, the Gemara proceeds to interpret the verses written concerning him. “And Korah, son of Izhar, son of Kohath, son of Levi, took [vayikkaḥ]” (Numbers 16:1), Reish Lakish says: He purchased [lakaḥ] a bad acquisition for himself, as through his actions he drove himself from the world. “Korah” alludes to the fact that because of him a void [korḥa] was created in the children of Israel. “Son of Izhar,” is referring to a son who incited the wrath of the entire world upon him like the heat of the afternoon [tzohorayim]. “Son of Kohath,” is referring to a son who blunted [hik’ha] the teeth of his parents, i.e., he shamed them with his conduct. “Son of Levi,” is referring to a son who became an escort [levaya] in Gehenna.

Obviously, Korach did not literally walk up to his father and mother and punch them in the mouth, to blunt their teeth. The meaning is idiomatic, that his actions shamed them.

Or similarly, in Sotah 49a,

שֶׁמְּבַזְבְּזִין דִּין אֲבִיהֶם לֶעָתִיד לָבוֹא. אוֹמְרִים לְפָנָיו: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, מֵאַחַר שֶׁאַתָּה עָתִיד לִיפָּרַע מֵהֶן, לָמָה הִקְהֵיתָה שִׁינֵּיהֶם בָּם?

who plunder, i.e., destroy, their fathers’ future judgment. When God sits in judgment of their parents, these children say before Him: Master of the Universe, because You were destined to exact punishment from our fathers in the World-to-Come for their wickedness, why did You blunt their teeth with the death of their children in their lifetimes? In this way, the death of their children atones for the fathers.

Here again, it is clearly not literally blunting of teeth, but what was done to them impacts them in a way equivalent to blunting their teeth.

Then, a bit later on the same page:

רַב הוּנָא אַשְׁכַּח תּוֹמַרְתָּא דְּחִינוּנִיתָא, שַׁקְלַהּ, כַּרְכַהּ בְּסוּדָרֵיהּ. אֲתָא רַבָּה בְּרֵיהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מוֹרְחִינָא רֵיחָא דְּחִינוּנִיתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּנִי, טׇהֳרָה יֵשׁ בְּךָ. יַהֲבַהּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ. אַדְּהָכִי אֲתָא אַבָּא בְּרֵיהּ, שַׁקְלַהּ, יַהֲבַהּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּנִי, שִׂמַּחְתָּ אֶת לִבִּי, וְהִקְהֵיתָה אֶת שִׁינַּי. הַיְינוּ דְּאָמְרִי אִינָשֵׁי: רַחֲמֵי דְּאַבָּא — אַבְּנֵי, רַחֲמֵי דִּבְנֵי — אַבְּנֵי דְּהָווּ לֵיהּ.

The Gemara relates that Rav Huna found a fragrant date. He took it and wrapped it in his shawl. Rabba, his son, came and said to him: I smell the aroma of a fragrant date. Rav Huna said to him: My son, there is clearly purity in you, as you were able to notice the fragrance. He gave it to him. Meanwhile, Abba, Rabba’s son, arrived. Rabba took the date and gave it to him. Rav Huna said to Rabba: My son, you have made my heart rejoice with your purity, and you have blunted my teeth, by showing your preference for your own son. The Gemara comments: This explains the folk saying that people say: The love of a father is for the sons; the love of the sons is for their own sons, more than for their father.

This also might be allegorical. Though if speaking literally about dates and setting teeth on edge, might this be literal?

Years ago, on parshablog, I spent some time analyzing the expression and how it was used in Rabbinic Hebrew, and concluded that it was not intended literally.

Here are the five posts:

1. Ramban’s opinion about Bereishit 49:10, וְלוֹ יִקְּהַת עַמִּים. To quote myself: Thus, he first discusses and rejects Rashi, that it means gather; then discusses the position of the grammarians, that it means obedience/acceptance; and finally, his preferred explanation, that it means to break, שבר, or weaken. In terms of a pasuk in Kohelet, it means that the iron of the sword has become weakened and cannot cut. Then, some examples from the language of Chazal. It can mean weaken, and it can mean to refute a question. And the last example he offers if from the Mechilta, which we have in our Haggadah, about the Rasha. And he renders it as break, שבר, his teeth, or weaken his teeth, with your words.
   
   Also, some pesukim about sons from Yirmeya, וְשִׁנֵּי בָנִים, תִּקְהֶינָה, and that pasuk from Tehillim quoted above.
   
   I also suggested that it might mean different things in different times. It might have one meaning in Biblical Hebrew, another in Tannaitic Hebrew, another for the Amoraim, another for the Geonim, another for the Rishonim, and so on. It might also vary by location. Still, the best we can do is investigate its usage in these different texts and try to intuit what it means in the Haggadah.
   

2. Next, in part two, the three instances in Bavli, appearing up top of this post, in Sanhedrin and Sotah.
   

3. Next, in part three, an instance in Bereshit Rabba, which is the midrash aggadah of the Amoraim of the Land of Israel. Analyzing that same obscure verse in Bereishit, ולו יקהת עמים, שהוא בא ומקהה שיניהם של עובדי כוכבים, and another instance a bit later. I suggest that it might be understood literally:
   
   Once again, this would appear to be a reference to the melech hamashiach, and he is doing this to the nations. Based on the prooftext in Michah, this would seem even more literal, even if only as an intermediate step for the sake of the allegory. That is, putting their hands upon their mouth seems a reaction to his breaking or blunting their teeth.
   
   An instance in Bemidbar Rabba also might be literal. And in Pesikta Rabbati, with a metaphor of putting sand into dough and it blunts the teeth of those who eat it. So too those who despoil Israel in this world have their teeth blunted in the next world. ועוד נמשלו ישראל לחול, שאם מילא אדם קדירה אוכלין והשליך בה מלוא קומצו חול, מקהה שיניו של אוכלו, וכן כל הנוגע בישראל תקהינה שיניו, שנאמר כל אוכליו יאשמו
   
   This seems literal, but a literal peshat as the first step of an allegory. Yes, blunting the teeth is meant to call to mind an image. But that seems like a first step towards something then allegorical. Not literal blunting of the teeth in the world to come!
   
   Also, an instance in Eliyahu Zuta. Finally, in Rabbenu Chananel’s commentary of Bava Batra, how mustard seed spoils bee colonies, he states מאכיל הדבורים חרדל וכח החרדל מקהה שני הדבורים ואינן יכולות לרעות בשדה וחוזרות ואוכלות הדבש שבנקבים שעל החלות, and that seems to be literal.
   

4. Next, in part iv, later uses of the phrase, in Rishonim. Tosafot HaRosh, Rashi, the haggadah of the Rashbatz, Avudraham. Then, two usages in teshuvot. Some of these have some sense of literalness, but maybe again as a first step; others, the sense of refuting an argument.
   

5. Finally, in part v, with the pasuk in Yirmeyahu, a parable about foxes, and how Shadal uses it. I concluded there: So now, after all these words, have we got anywhere? I don't know. There might be dispute as to the Biblical meaning, and the meaning throughout different sources in Chazal and in later Rabbinic writing is mixed. Part of this may be different understandings of the actual word hakheh, but part of it may be the literal/figurative aspect of it.
   
   At the end of the day, whatever it means, it surely means to give a forceful and perhaps somewhat insulting response that undermines the rasha's question. And certainly it is not meant literally here.