[Avodah] Who First Said it? 2

[rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com]

RZS:
> Rashi and Rashbam on the mishneh (Psachim 116a) both say that the son
asks "mah nishtana".

Rashi says:
"Mah nistanah ACHSHAV SHEMOZGIM KOSSHEINI"

Rashbam is similar

BUT NOT the Mah Nishtaneh WE HAVE

So Zev might be technically correct that those TWO WORDS are mentioned
by rashi and rashbam

BUT neither are referring to the Mah Nishtaneh we say in the Haggadah
NOR the Mah Nishtaneh of the mishnah or Talmud [both Talmudim]!

RZS:
> But that's a very strange interpretation, and hinges on just one word:
> "hakorei".

Adderabba the simple read of the mishneh

    [Kan or kein] the son asks and if the son lacks da'as THEN the father
    teaches him "mah mishtaneh halayla hazah ..."

At no point is there any evidence in Rambam Rashi Rashbam [or other
rishonim AFAIK] that the formula was said by the child

Rather the son was prodded to ask

And if the son failed to ask he was then taught the mah nishtaneh by
the father! Hence the rambam's precise lashon

So again - who first morphed the Reader/Father's role to the child or
youngest child?

------------------------
Some sources
Artscroll yad avrahan Pesachim 10:3 D"H "aviv m'lamdo" 2nd paragraph

Rambam
Hil. Chametz uMatza Ch. 8:2
See Touger "here is where the son asks"

As per Doniyyel Goldscmidt this is the reading of [all] the rishonim
afaik NOT just the Rambam cited

NB: Hil. Chametz uMatza
Ch.  7:3 might be more ambiguous.

Summary
The p'shat as per rishonim 
Son asks some question[s]
And ONLY if he fails does "aviv m"lamdo mah nishtana"


RZS:
> And then? He has no other questions?! He's not expected to have
> noticed the other differences?

NOW YOU GOT IT
The differences listed in the mishnah HAVE NOT YET TAKEN PLACE!

The p'shat is simple

If the child notices
    Karpas
    Yachatz
Or
    Mozgin kos sheini
[Or being given nuts
Or the kittel]
Then schoen gut!

If he lacks that much da'as or curiosity then it is the father/reader
who gives him a heads up of coming attractions that have yet to take place

EG
    Matzah
    Maror
    Hasiba
    2 t'villos
Or roasted only

That is why only the leader can say those points and as per Aruch
Hashulchan they are NOT qustions but declarations.

This is how Rishonim saw it and almost definitely how the Talmud
originaly meant it!

The story with Abayyei confirms that he was poteir [pre-empted] the Mah
Nishtaneh with his question!

So my question remains who converted it to the youngest kid saying the
"Mah Nistaneh" about stuff yet to occur?!

In fact the k'dai sheyish'alu is mamash obsoleted by having kids ask in
a rehearsed non-spontaneous way!


RZS
> Sure they have. The first matbilin has already happened, and he's seen
> the charoses so he knows a second dipping is coming. He's seen the biur
> chametz and the matza baking, and by this time knows very well that there
> are no cookies or pretzels or any of his usual sustenance in the house.
> He's seen the maror on the ke'arah (which was brought out after kiddush).
> He's seen heseibah at kiddush. And he's seen the lamb roasting on the
> fire. If he's young he may need to be prompted to ask about these things,
> just as he needs to be prompted to ask about the kos sheni, the nuts, etc.

And so he misses the obvious and darshens from implication!

Can everyone see how conditioning may rob one of the obvious read?
The Occam read here is as the Mishna says that the son asks and if the
lacks da'as then Aviv l'lamdo that these things will happen

And if haroses implies a future tibbul, maybe maror does too! So ask 3?

Let's not kvetch a dochak that the same child - who fails to notice
obvious hints can now read between the lines!

And it seems if zev were correct then probably the father shoud review
with the child how many hints have already been missed!

But since this child "ein lo daas" therefore aviv m'lamdo

This is Mishna
This is Talmud
This is Rambam
This is Rashi
This is Rashbam

Now who first said that the youngest child asks?

The artscroll P'sachim 116a2 adds in English "his father teaches him
TO ASK"
Where the font for "to ask" implies it's NOT in the text

IOW we NOWADAYS learn this as if the Mishnah says "aviv m"amdo lish'ol"
but the word lish'ol is not there and was not seen that way by Rishonim,
or by Aruch HaShulchan who sees these as declarations
Of wonder, not as questions mamash.

So again, who first moved this recital to the youngest child?

RZS:
> For what purpose? Why does he need to know what will happen, if not
> so that he can ask why?

The mishna says ein lo daas! So we know he won't ask having failed 3
opportunities already! He has a hazakkah mamash if eino yodei'a lishol!
So at p'sach lo mah nishtanah. Not to teach asking but to teach that
the night is different! See below

> Huh? Maror is not a dip. He sees one dip coming out, that hasn't
> been used yet, so he knows there's at least one more tevilah coming.

HUH how does he know haroses is a dip and lettuce is not? How perceptive
is he anyway? How can he intuit what WILL happen? Maybe hametz was hidden
as a surprise?!

> Again, *and then what*? What is he teaching him *for*, if not to ask?

Glad you asked
Pashut! He's teaching what a different night it is! 

The lashon is 
NOT Lamah
NOT keitzad
BUT mah!

What a different night tonight is!

And so goes several peirushim!

But I agree that people are now conditioned to read into it based upon
current practice.

Go back in a time machine and we'd see it otherwise!

No doubt the son or wife or colleague DID ask questions - as per the
tanu rabbana the son IF he was a chacham.

But not otherwise!

Who was the first to change that!

I'm sure Rambam and Rashi would be fascinated as to how this morphed.


Zev is admittedly adept at showing how the acharonim have understood
the Mishnah and the Haggadah.

The point is that we can read between the lines to show that a different
line of thinking used to be prevalent.

[FWIW The same might be said of 2 matzos vs. 3]

Disclaimer:
I'm NOT trying to show that the acharonim have an intrinsically flawed
understanding.

Rather
I'm trying to demonstrate that the Rishonim had a different understanding
at that at a point in time it morphed.

EG The Braisso on 116b states if his son is a chacham he asks!

Clearly this does not imply that the minhag was that everyone's youngest
son asks! Aderraba!

And so the question remains, who first said the youngest child asks?

Please don't bother anymore to show me that the acharonim have indeed
worked this out. I'm not challenging that. I can readily concede that
they have worked it out. I just want the question asked.

Of course by showing that acharonim did work it out produces more torah -
then go for it. ;-) But I'm simply not contesting that point.

Zissen Pesach
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile