Avodah Mailing List

Volume 28: Number 34

Wed, 09 Mar 2011

• 1. Re: Fwd: Rav Chazkel Levenstein On The Capture Of Adolf Eichmamm ym"s (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer)
• 2. Re: Boreh Minei Bessamim: Stop And Smell The Flowers (Isaac Balbin)
• 3. Re: Molad Alert: Friday night (kennethgmil...@juno.com)
• 4. Re: Moshe Rabeinu and his family (Eliyahu Grossman)
• 5. yaroq (Eli Turkel)
• 6. Re: yaroq (Micha Berger)
• 7. Re: Moshe Rabeinu and his family (Zev Sero)
• 8. Should Woman Go To Shul For Megilas Esther? (Prof. Levine)
• 9. Re: Moshe Rabeinu and his family (Micha Berger)
• 10. Re: Boreh Minei Bessamim: Stop And Smell The Flowers (Shoshana L. Boublil)
• 11. Re: Boreh Minei Bessamim: Stop And Smell The Flowers (Micha Berger)
• 12. Re: Boreh Minei Bessamim: Stop And Smell The Flowers (Zev Sero)
• 13. yotzros (Saul.Z.New...@kp.org)
• 14. Re: Molad Alert: Friday night (Zev Sero)
• 15. Re: Boreh Minei Bessamim: Stop And Smell The Flowers (Micha Berger)
• 16. Re: yotzros (Micha Berger)
• 17. Re: Moshe Rabeinu and his family (Arie Folger)

It was presented to us as more of the latter (#2).

KT,
YGB

On 2/24/2011 3:02 PM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:30:24AM -0500, Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer wrote:
>> The variation on this theme that I heard, from Rabbi Meir Schlesinger,
>> is that Reb Chatzkel if you gave your typical yeshiva bachur 007 license
>> to kill, with exemption from punishment in both this world and the next,
>> he would become a serial killer (perhaps he said mass murderer - it
>> amounts to the same thing).
> I'm curious to know RCL's intent. I could read this at least two ways:
>
> 1- Kol hagadol michaveiro, yitzro gadol heimenu
>
> 2- Yeshiva bachurim get used to positing abstract rules without a
>     general gefeel for morality, and thus would do evil if there were
>     no rule against it.
>

R'MB:
> Do we shift all the questions of okhel vs refu'ah to scents as well?
> If someone smells something only for refgu'ah, does he make a
> berakhah?


I'm not sure I understand. Isn't it a Birchas HaNehenin (unlike Me'orey H'oeish which is Shvach)
Are you implying that there is only Hano-oh if it has a nice smell but if that
smell also makes me feel better I don't have Hano-oh?

R' Yitzchok Levine wrote:

> Most people do not know that when the Molad is announced it
> is Jerusalem Solar time.

R' Zev Sero asked:

> As opposed to what?  Standard time (AKA railroad time)?

Standard Time and Railroad Time are not the same thing. Standard Time is
the new-fangled artificial stuff based on "Time Zones" that the revenooers
forced upon us in the mid-to-late 1800s. Solar Time (also called Local
Time) is the old-fashioned natural time, by which each clock is set to have
12:00 Noon at midday, keeping in mind that midday over *here* is different
than midday over *there*, even if you're only a short distance away.

Railroad Time was a mess, caused by railroads whose clocks were set
according to the Local Time of some point on its route, ignoring the clocks
of the towns elsewhere on its route, and also ignoring the clocks of the
other trains it would meet with (or crash into). Much info on this is can
be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Time_zone and elsewhere.

But, to answer the question: When the Molad is announced, it is according
to a system that does not use the time zones which we have today. And most
people are unaware of that fact.

For example, if the molad is announced as being "at exactly 10 AM on
Sunday", there will be people in New York who will look at their
wristwatch, see that it says "10:00", and they'll think to themselves,
"That's exactly 24 hours from now," but they'll be wrong. There will also
be people in New York who think, "Yerushalayim is 7 hours ahead of us, so
the molad will be in exactly 17 hours," but they'll be wrong too. There
will also be people in Yerushalayim who hear the same announcement, and see
"10:00" on their watches, and they will say, "That's 24 hours away," but
even they will be mistaken.

There will also be some people in Yerushalayim who say, "Hmmm... We are 35
degrees east of Greenwich, so the center of our time zone is at 30 degrees
east of Greenwich. That means that at 12 Noon in our time zone, the sun is
overhead for the people who are 5 degrees west of us, but it was already
overhead here 1/3 of an hour before that. That means midday here is already
at 11:40 AM, according to the Time Zone. And if the molad is at 10:00 local
time, it will happen when our watches say 9:40 AM. That's 23 2/3 hours from
now." -- *Those* are the people who understand the gabbai's announcement.

(Of course, as other posters have mentioned, it's not the *real* molad
anyway, just the *calculated* molad. And, for the nit-pickers: More precise
calculations would show a 19-minute difference, as opposed to 20, but I
tried to keep the math simple.)


R' Yitzchok Levine wrote:

> I have come to the conclusion that the announcement of the
> time of the Molad really does not mean much to most people.

I agree. But then why do we announce it? Is it to reassure us that Rosh Chodesh is on a day that makes sense? Or what?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
$65/Hr Job - 25 Openings
Part-Time job ($20-$65/hr). Requirements: Home Internet Access
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4d7561344eefe66e838st06vuc

Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 22:07:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Harvey Benton <harvw...@yahoo.com>
Subject: [Avodah] Moshe Rabeinu and his family

> After he was an infant, how did Moshe Rabeinu know who his family was? 
> We know his sister watched our for him, and was picked up by Bat Pharoa,
but did Bat Pharoa know that the one who nursed Moshe was his Mother? 
> Did she relay this information and/or keep Moshe in touch with his family
after Moshe grew up in the KIing's Palace?  
> Or did Moshe find out some other way who his family was? 
> and if so, how???
> thanks much, hb

All of these are good questions (which are better than pat answers), and you
will discover that there are MANY answers, some that contradict, and some
that go off into interesting directions. But the fact of the matter is that
the Torah is silent on the matter, so we are left with Aggadic expressions
and Biblical exegesis by authors who had mussar to teach (as one
possibility). For example, those who have a problem with Bat Paroah being a
[high] priestess of Avodah Zara (her duties as the daughter of a "god"), say
that she was by the water because she was "converting". Another says
(instead of converting) that she had a disease and was purifying (so what
about her job?). One could come up with more, easily. One Midrash that wants
her to be connected in a Jewish way, has her arms extend past the norm like
"elasti-girl" (if one starts an act, He will cause miracles? One
interpretation), and another has her being very Egyptian and selfish,
calling him "I pulled" (moshe) with the because she saw the babe as
something that she deserved, and she caused by her actions alone. And you
have those that have a problem with Moshe not being raised "Jewish", so you
have stories of him being raised by his parents (some problems there,
considering they needed to get rid of the babe, and there are multiple
Midrashim why), and others that have him raised as an infant in the palace,
with grandpa Paroah delighting in him. Was he born and raised for his job as
leader, or did he grow into it? The midrashim vary, based on point of view
and mussar.

As one who loves and delves into Midrashim, I believe that it is important
to ALWAYS introduce a midrash by declaring it to be one. Rather than saying
"Her name was Batyah", one should say "There is a Midrash [site source if
you recall] that gives her name as Batyah." (For extra credit, give your
interpretation as to why.) Too often we drop this, and listeners may come to
accept that what was declared was in the text, when it is not. And sometimes
when the distinction is missed, conclusions are made, and when you conclude,
you don't think about it anymore, which, in my opinion, is contrary to the
purpose of Midrash.

Eliyahu Grossman
Efrat, Israel

<<Yaroq kekarti means the color of a leek. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Leeks_produce-1.jpg

,
it's green, the part above ground is a pretty dark green.

We also know yaroq kekarti is a different color than tekheiles, from the
definition of misheyaqir that says that it's when you can distinguish
those two colors.>>

which in fact is one of the proofs that Dr.Koren brings that techelet is a
deep
blue. He claims that with very little light it is impossible to distinguish
between your deep blue suit and your deep green tie until there is more
light.
If techelet were a lighter shade of blue it would be easier to tell them
apart


-- 
Eli Turkel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110308/73178d33/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 11:17:32AM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote:
: which in fact is one of the proofs that Dr.Koren brings that techelet is a
: deep
: blue. He claims that with very little light it is impossible to distinguish
: between your deep blue suit and your deep green tie until there is more
: light.
: If techelet were a lighter shade of blue it would be easier to tell them
: apart

But the alternative is techeiles and lavan. I don't think you can deduce
from "misheyaqir" that it was necessarily the same brightness, as opposed
to two colors having a more similar brightness than tekheiles and white.

For that matter, maybe tekheiles should be greener, and the whole
point was to pick to things of similar hue but different value and
brightness! How can we know?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The true measure of a man
mi...@aishdas.org        is how he treats someone
http://www.aishdas.org   who can do him absolutely no good.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                   - Samuel Johnson

That Moshe was raised in his parents' home until he was weaned is not
a medrash, it's explicit in the Torah.


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher

 From http://revach.net/article.php?id=5001

Chelkas Yaakov & Rav Menashe Klein: Should Woman Go To Shul For Megilas Esther?

The Mogen Avrohom (689) says that because women are Chayav in Megilah 
you must read it to them at home. The Chelkas Yaakov (OC 232:2) says 
that this implies that there is no need for them to go to Shul to 
hear it with a minyan. The question is if they are Chayav why are 
they not chayav to hear it BiRov Am together with the Tzibbur?

The Chelkas Yaakov answers that the mitzva of Megila does not need a 
Minyan. However there is a special mitzva of Pirsumei Nisa of 
publicizing the Nes. This aspect he said does not apply to women upon 
who the pasuk says, "Kol Kivuda Bas Melech Pnima". Especially given 
that it is much more difficult to hear each word in the women's 
section and it would be hard for them to be Yotzei anyway.

However the Piskei Tshuvos brings from Rav Menashe Klein that there 
is an importance attached to women hearing Megila Bi Tzibbur. 
Therefore unlike the Chelkas Yaakov he holds if there is a choice 
between women coming to Shul and having children under Bar Mitzva 
baby sit or vice versa, the women should come to shul and the 
children can hear the megila later at home.

----------
Of course, the opinion of those who hold that one can (should) read 
the megillah to women at home presumes that one has a kosher megillah 
and that one is able to read it properly.  This is certainly not the 
case for many men.

YL

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110308/9083a2c1/attachment-0001.htm>

On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 10:00:45AM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
> That Moshe was raised in his parents' home until he was weaned is not
> a medrash, it's explicit in the Torah.

To be specific, RZS is referring to Shemos 2:9-10. 2:9 isn't clear
that the wet-nursing was being done outside Bas-Par'oh's home. However,
2:10 begins, "Vayigdal hayeled vativi'eihu leVas-Par'oh..." That does
pretty compellingly imply he was living with Yocheved not Bas-Par'oh.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

> From: Micha Berger <mi...@aishdas.org>
> Subject: Re: [Avodah] Boreh Minei Bessamim: Stop And Smell The Flowers
>    --      The Scent Really Can Soothe Stress

RMB wrote:

> As for giving flowers before Shabbos, I always thought the iqqar
> was the pe'ulah, not the chetzah. To relate to this week's parashah
> (archive readers: it's Vayiqra), Rachmanah liba ba'i. The essence
> of a qorban is the emotion expressed in and reinforced by giving it,
> not the animal.

[SLB writes] Apparently it is indeed that S'char Mitzvah - Mitzvah.

While the emotion and the actual giving are prime factors in the
relationship with your wife, apparently when you choose to give flowers that
have a scent [you could have brought her a book] - you are also providing
her with an element of medical care by reducing her stress levels.

Multiple benefits from the same single action.

[a very permaculture type behavior <g>]


Shoshana L. Boublil

On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 09:00:34AM +1100, Isaac Balbin wrote:
: Are you implying that there is only Hano-oh if it has a nice smell
: but if that smell also makes me feel better I don't have Hano-oh?

I was under the impression that if I take something for the purpose of
refu'ah but happen to also enjoy the taste, I do not make a berakhah.
That's why my mental associations shifted the topic from RtSB's
statement about flowers to things one smells (aromatherapy) for the
purpose of refu'ah.

-Micha

On 9/03/2011 6:08 AM, Micha Berger wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 09:00:34AM +1100, Isaac Balbin wrote:
> : Are you implying that there is only Hano-oh if it has a nice smell
> : but if that smell also makes me feel better I don't have Hano-oh?
>
> I was under the impression that if I take something for the purpose of
> refu'ah but happen to also enjoy the taste, I do not make a berakhah.

Not so.  So long as you enjoy it you have to make a bracha.  Ditto for
a choleh who has to eat on Yom Kippur, or one who has to eat treif; so
long as there is physical enjoyment they have to make a bracha.  The
fact that it also heals him or keeps him alive is yet another reason
to thank Hashem for creating it and making it available to him.

There's a machlokes about someone who is forced at gunpoint to eat: on
one hand the food is physically enjoyable, but OTOH at this moment he
has no desire for it at all and would rather it didn't exist, so how
can he thank Hashem for creating it?

(OC 204:8-9)

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher

in discussing  which types  of shuls  say yotzros  for  daled  parshiyos, 
my assumption was that all chassidim  do,  and all  MO  type shuls  do 
not. 
yet , the  yotzros have  been in  artscroll  siddurim of both ashkenaz and 
sfard since the 1st editions; and  i was told  that not all chassidic 
groups  say them.
any data  would be  appreciated.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110309/c770cfd6/attachment-0001.htm>

On 7/03/2011 5:49 PM, kennethgmil...@juno.com wrote:

> Standard Time and Railroad Time are not the same thing. Standard Time
> is the new-fangled artificial stuff based on "Time Zones" that the
> revenooers forced upon us in the mid-to-late 1800s.

Nope, it was the railroads that done it.

> Solar Time (also called Local Time) is the old-fashioned natural time,
>  by which each clock is set to have 12:00 Noon at midday

Not exactly.  12:00 is the *mean* noon, "chatzos ho'emtzo`i", and does
not vary from day to day.  Thus it can be calculated directly from the
longitude.  Actual noon on any one day can be +/- about 15 minutes, but
by the same amount everywhere in the world.


> Railroad Time was a mess, caused by railroads whose clocks were set
> according to the Local Time of some point on its route, ignoring the
> clocks of the towns elsewhere on its route, and also ignoring the
> clocks of the other trains it would meet with (or crash into).

No, that was the mess *before* Railroad Time, and is what caused the
railroads to get together and eventually implement Railroad Time, which
we now call Standard Time.  They didn't actually force anyone else to
adopt it, but if you wanted to catch a train and your clock was on your
local time, you'd better be aware of the difference.  Most people found
this was more trouble than it was worth, so they adjusted their clocks
to match the railroads'.


> Much info on this is can be found at
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_zone and elsewhere.

Indeed.  Particularly http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time
Where I just learned something I didn't know before: that in France,
from 1891 to 1911, the law required clocks inside railway stations
(which governed what time the trains actually left) to be set five
minutes behind, so people who came late would still catch their trains.
The clocks *outside* the stations had to show the correct time, but
as soon as you set foot inside the station you moved back five minutes.
I'd bet, though, that this didn't work; people being people would just
add five minutes to whatever the timetable said, and take it into
account.


> But, to answer the question: When the Molad is announced, it is
> according to a system that does not use the time zones which we have
> today.

Exactly.  It uses Jerusalem Mean Time, not an artificial time that
goyishe geographers have imposed for international convenience.


> And most people are unaware of that fact.

Most people have no idea what a "molad" is anyway.  But if you want
to know, e.g., whether the molad will be zaken, then you need to know
it in JMT, not GMT+2.

  
> For example, if the molad is announced as being "at exactly 10 AM
> on Sunday", there will be people in New York who will look at their
> wristwatch, see that it says "10:00", and they'll think to themselves,
> "That's exactly 24 hours from now," but they'll be wrong. There will
> also be people in New York who think, "Yerushalayim is 7 hours ahead
> of us, so the molad will be in exactly 17 hours," but they'll be wrong
> too. There will also be people in Yerushalayim who hear the same
> announcement, and see "10:00" on their watches, and they will say,
> "That's 24 hours away," but even they will be mistaken.

But of what use is that information?


> (Of course, as other posters have mentioned, it's not the *real*
> molad anyway, just the *calculated* molad.

Exactly.  And this is the scale on which it's calculated.


> And, for the nit-pickers: More precise calculations would show a
> 19-minute difference, as opposed to 20.

Huh?  Surely it's nearly 21 minutes.  19 minutes, at J'm's latitude,
would put you somewhere near Gedera.


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
z...@sero.name                 eventually run out of other people?s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher

On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 10:37:19AM -0500, Zev Sero wrote:
>> I was under the impression that if I take something for the purpose of
>> refu'ah but happen to also enjoy the taste, I do not make a berakhah.

> Not so.  So long as you enjoy it you have to make a bracha...
> (OC 204:8-9)

Seems it's a machloqes acharonim. Here's R' Jachter's "the rest of
the story"
<http://www.koltorah.org/ravj/14-37_Medicines_
that_Contain_Non-Kosher_Ingredients_or_Chametz_4.htm>
(or <http://bit.ly/dTUKnz>):
    The Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 204:8) rules that one should recite a
    Bracha on "any food or drink that one consumes for healing purposes
    if it has a good taste and is pleasant to the palate." Accordingly,
    it would seem that one should recite a Bracha on pleasant-tasting
    medicine. However, applying this Halacha to modern medicines is
    not a simple matter. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach originally ruled
    (cited in Nishmat Avraham 1:91 and Shmirat Shabbat Kehilchata 40
    footnote 191) that one should recite a Bracha on pleasant tasting
    medicine. In addition, Dr. Abraham S. Abraham reports (Nishmat
    Avraham ad. loc.) that Rav Ovadia Yosef told him that he agrees with
    this ruling.

    However, Rav Yehoshua Neuwirth (ad. loc.) disagrees arguing that
    since the active ingredient of the medicine is bitter, one does
    not recite a Bracha on the sweet inactive ingredient (the active
    ingredient of medicine is the ingredient that effects the cure;
    inactive ingredients are added to assist in the consumption of the
    medicine). He argues that the sweet inactive ingredient is considered
    Tafel (insignificant) and thus does not merit a Bracha. He cites the
    Gemara (Brachot 35b-36a) as proof to his position. This Gemara states
    that one who drinks pure olive oil to cure a sore throat does not
    recite a Bracha because the olive oil "damages" him (even though it
    effects a cure) and is not considered to constitute an act of eating
    (see Rashi s.v. Azukei). However, if one places the olive oil in a
    vegetable soup (apparently this was a common practice in the time
    of the Gemara) he recites Borei Pri Haetz on the mixture since the
    active ingredient (the olive oil) is considered the primary and
    significant ingredient. Ordinarily, though, one who places olive
    oil in vegetable soup and drinks it for non-healing purposes recites
    Borei Pri Ha'adama, since the vegetable soup is the primary ingredient
    (see, though, Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 205 for further discussion
    regarding whether to recite Borei P'ri Ha'adamah or She'hakol on
    vegetable soups).

    Accordingly, Rav Neuwirth argues that this passage in the Gemara
    teaches that when medicine is mixed with another product (to make
    taking the medicine easier) the medicine is considered the primary
    ingredient that determines which Bracha should be recited. Thus,
    when the active ingredient (the "medicine") is bitter (and merits
    no Bracha) and is mixed with pleasant tasting inactive ingredients
    (which do merit a Bracha), the active ingredient should be considered
    the primary ingredient and thus no Bracha should be recited on the
    elixir. Thus, just as in the Gemara's case, the active ingredient
    determines which Bracha should be recited, so too, the active
    ingredient determines whether a Bracha should be recited altogether
    on the mixture. Rav Shlomo Zalman replies, though, that the Gemara
    (Berachot 35a) writes that one who benefits from this world without
    reciting a Bracha is compared to a thief (as he takes from Hashem
    without paying "the fee," i.e. reciting the Bracha).

    One could reply that the active ingredient characterizes the elixir
    as a medicine and not as a food. The prohibition to benefit from
    this world applies only to benefiting from food without reciting
    a Bracha. Medicine, simply put, is not food. In addition, one
    could argue that the Halacha requires a Bracha on "medicine" only
    when one consumes food or drink for healing purposes. However,
    modern medicines are, generally speaking, not considered food or
    drink, as no one other than a sick individual would take such food,
    unlike the olive oil that is discussed on the Gemara. Accordingly,
    Dr. Abraham (Nishmat Avraham 4:7) reports that Rav Shlomo Zalman
    retracted his ruling and agreed with his student Rav Neuwirth that
    no Bracha should be recited on pleasant-tasting medicines. However,
    Rav Shlomo Zalman is cited (ad. loc.) as nonetheless ruling that a
    Bracha should be recited if the medicine is coated with sugar, since
    one tastes the sugar before taking the medicine. Rav Heber reports
    that the common practice appears to accord with Rav Neuwirth's ruling.

    Dr. Abraham cites (ad. loc. 1:91) that Rav Waldenberg told him that
    one can avoid this controversy simply by reciting the very brief
    Tefillah mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 230:4) that one should
    recite before one undergoes a medical procedure. Rav Waldenburg
    argues that this recitation functions in a similar manner to a
    Bracha and therefore obviates the problem of stealing from Hashem,
    as one enjoys the sweetener only after he has thanked Hashem.

-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "'When Adar enters, we increase our joy'
mi...@aishdas.org         'Joy is nothing but Torah.'
http://www.aishdas.org    'And whoever does more, he is praiseworthy.'"
Fax: (270) 514-1507                     - Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l

On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 07:41:42AM -0800, Saul.Z.New...@kp.org wrote:
: in discussing  which types  of shuls  say yotzros  for  daled  parshiyos, 
: my assumption was that all chassidim  do,  and all  MO  type shuls  do 
: not. 

There are yotzeros for 4 parshiyos? I knew about piyutim during "Shemoneh
Esrei" (I should say "Amidah" for accuracy), but not during birkhas
Yotzeir haMe'oros.

I presume that's what RSZN meant; I just wanted to get on a soap-box and
campaign for more proper usage.

To answer the question: Yeshivish places are split: some say the piyutim,
because it's minhag; some do not, because it's a hefseiq (R' Chaim
Brisker wouldn't even allow Unsaneh Toqef!); and some say the piyutim
outside of Chazaras haShatz to nod to the minhag without making a hefseiq.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             When one truly looks at everyone's good side,
mi...@aishdas.org        others come to love him very naturally, and
http://www.aishdas.org   he does not need even a speck of flattery.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                        - Rabbi AY Kook

RB wrote:
> After he was an infant, how did Moshe Rabeinu know who his family was?
> We know his sister watched our for him, and was picked up by Bat Pharoa,
> but did Bat Pharoa know that the one who nursed Moshe was his Mother?
> Did she relay this information and/or keep Moshe in touch with his family
> after Moshe grew up in the KIing's Palace?  Or did Moshe find out some
> other way who his family was? and if so, how???


Is that not wonderful evidence for 'Hazal's contention that Bitia (NOT
BATYA, ain't no such name - check your Chronicles) was a ba'alat
teshuvah? She turned on her father's policies by saving Moshe, which,
according to some, was even opposed by her maidservants, whom she
immediately overrode. So it stands to reason that she continued on
that path.

Kol tuv,
-- 
Arie Folger,
Recent blog posts on http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
* Audio-Schiurim: Die Schomre-Thora-Vortr?ge zu Gebet
* Multimedia Shiur: Was Esther Slow on the Uptake?
* The Onset of Death in Halakha IV: In the Media
* The Onset of Death in Halakha III: Noteworthy Discussions
* Audio-Schiur ? Psalm 126 ? Gedenklernen f?r Herrn Heinz Althof s.A.
* Le psaume 92 - cours multim?dia en fran?ais
* Is Outsourcing Ethical?


------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 28, Issue 34
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."