FaustianBargain

i think you have to obtain a special permit to have the handwash area outside the restrooms...at least in california...i'd love to hear the owner explaining the concept to the building inspector..

ooh..there's a budding gourmet you got there..

we call it kanji...nothing like the huge bowls of meat/veg/spiced congees i have had at the local chinese restaurants...often made for sick tummies for easy digestion or when patients are recovering..after a particularly nasty fever episode and your tongue is coated white and your taste buds are dead anyways...gah....or the working man's staple...cooked rice cooked again in water..often accompanied by half an onion and a raw green chilli. sweet or salty, it can be made with milk, buttermilk or just water...richer versions of the sweet kanjis can include cardamom and milk..which is kinda weird, if you ask me...rice with milk, sugar and cardamom is a dessert(kheer)..i suppose sweet(with expensive ingredients) kanjis are 'thin' kheers ...kanji is mostly made with rice..altho' semolina, tapioca or wheat may also be used sometimes(starch basically...fills you up..easy digestion..easily converted to ready carbs..) for the sickbed...other kanji versions can be made with barley, oats or arrowroot...the indian kanjis i know are mild and bland...not that there is anything wrong with that..

err..you came up with this in the middle of the night? sometimes..i crave bad chinese when i wake up...its almost worth considering moving to nyc...

Here you go...

Nun's farts discussed in this thread previously.

not particularly cuisine/culinary related...but has a food theme..kinda.. i am working my way through The collected short stories of Roald Dahl. just finished 'Pig' from 'kiss, kiss'. roald dahl is not just a children's author(the twits, charlie(willy wonka across the pond)and the chocolate factory are some of his more well known stories for kids). his short stories for adults are often bizarre, distrubing and completely confounding. utterly delightful in a confusingly dark sort of way. pig is the story of an orphan who was picked up by a vegetarian, spinster aunt from virginia. she raises him to be a vegetarian, encourages him to create new recipes(brazilnut soup, flaming spruce needle tarts and such) and thinks that he should be a chef. she dies..and having never been exposed to the real world, he comes to nyc to collect his inheritance. and there he is introduced to roast pork. the rest is pure bizarro narration.

vathalkozambu rice with roasted(not fried) appalam...with..i dunno..potato roast...erm

highly priced wine is whats sometimes known as 'veblen goods'...the preference for the product goes up with the price...people will pay for it because they want to say that they paid $$$ for a bottle of wine or at least feel good about it in the privacy of their bank vaults... daniel boulud's Letters to a young chefhas some interesting points on why the margin for wine is drastically upped in restaurants. I like to read MarginalRevolution, Tyler Cowen's blog..foodieand economist. I dont remember when I read his wine entry, but take a whirl around his blog. It is very interesting.

Precisely, and if it is an important subject, it deserves more research than has been put into this thread. In any event, a broad guideline is useless as it doesn't let you know exactly how many in any group are not covered by the material included. A truly observant Jew would not eat meat from a plate or a fork that ever came in contact with a milk product and vice versa. On the other hand, many people who profess to be Jewish, have no trouble eating bacon. Following your broad guideline one may well have gone to needless trouble, or not nearly enough trouble. I am very well aware of the slew of warnings that are whooshing past for this topic and frankly it confounds me. A little information can be a dangerous thing? OK. So what are you suggesting? That such threads shouldnt exist or that it should be exhaustingly elaborate and precise? This was also meant to be an invitation for others to participate and some of them have done that. Did I, at any point of time, suggest that this thread is also to serve as a source of religious information? Tell me, please? Because I am utterly confused. The messages that is coming through from most of the people(especially, the established older members of egullet) is discouraging as it seems to be a rap on my knuckle for bringing this topic up. Worse, I see to have ruffled many a feather for not going into 'more research'. Is not knowing that Jews dont mix meat and dairy better than NOT knowing anything about it at all? If there are subtleties about the various dietary practices even within the religious groups, maybe this is a place to register it instead of flogging the validity of the thread itself. What *is* the point of discussion if it's credibility is questioned because of the lack of reams and reams of papers of 'research'? Have a nice day. Perhaps you haven't suggested that this thread is also to serve as a source of religious information, but it's hardly likely that it wouldn't be taken as that. I believe it's reasonable to suspect that more than a few readers of the thread might latch onto your post and the posts that follow as all the information they need to say they made an effort to accommodate their guests. The answer to your question is that it is my belief that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing more often that it is a helpful thing. To know not to mix milk and meat would not lead to keeping bacon off the table, let along not serving the hindquarter of beef. Cakewalk seemed to understand the nature of my reply. Were we to decide that this thread should not be here, it would be deleted. On the other hand, it can only remain with the caveats of those who point out the flaws. Read my response to Jon's post above. When this thread attempts to get people to think about the needs of their dinner guests it serves a good purpose as far as I am concerned. When if attempts to offer answers, or even solicit answers from other members in the hope of building a useful compendium of information, it may be doing a disservice to many. As a responsible person, I feel moved to point out the problem. As a manager of the site, I feel it is my duty to err on the side of pointing out the dangers of regarding any information that appears on a site such as ours, as the answer. I apologize if I come off unappreciative of your contribution, but not all criticism is meant to be a rap on the knuckle. The information offered in this thread regarding dietary restrictions is but the tip of the iceberg. It will never be more than that, in my opinion. Ships have sunk not by hitting the tip of the iceberg, but the part that was not seen. Threads of this sort can be very misleading, it is only with that warning that they can be allowed to continue. There is no need for any apologies. If I had any control over this thread, I'd simply delete it. *I* dont want to be associated with something(especially since I started it) that is so obviously misleading, ambigious and a potential ticking bomb to most. It was started with good intention and especially since the original thread re alcohol and mormonism had a number of culled posts because of digressions into other misc and sundry topics. No, I didnt spend a considerable amount of time doing research when I posted it. But I did set aside time from whatever it is that I was doing and I wouldnt want it to grow into something that is obviously dangerous to religious sensibilities. That was never the intention. I will leave the discussion of such things to the experts, whoever they are. Am I to take responsibility for starting a thread that would excite people's imaginations and misconceptions? If that is the case, do I have the right to eliminate the thread as I am the one who is to bear the burden of responsibility? Maybe there should be a disclaimer at the beginning of the thread? Should there be a disclaimer for every thread? This is NOT a guide book. It was meant to be a discussion. You say that when this thread 'attempts to offer answers or even solicit answers from other members in the hope of building a(sic) useful compendium of information, it may be doing a disservice to many.."[...] There is no excuse, whatsoever, for this thread to exist if that is how you, a moderating pillar of egullet, feels that way even though it was never intended to be an encyclopedic version of religious dining etiquette. That it 'can be allowed to continue only with a warning' is an innuendo if I have ever seen one. It pains me that I am part of something that had lead to this. If I had the power, I will lock this thread and allow you to leave a conclusion with the warning/disclaimer. As far as I am concerned, this misleading/dangerous/unhelpful discussion is over. I denounce responsibility for people's assumptions. I am NOT a cerebral babysitter.

Precisely, and if it is an important subject, it deserves more research than has been put into this thread. In any event, a broad guideline is useless as it doesn't let you know exactly how many in any group are not covered by the material included. A truly observant Jew would not eat meat from a plate or a fork that ever came in contact with a milk product and vice versa. On the other hand, many people who profess to be Jewish, have no trouble eating bacon. Following your broad guideline one may well have gone to needless trouble, or not nearly enough trouble. I am very well aware of the slew of warnings that are whooshing past for this topic and frankly it confounds me. A little information can be a dangerous thing? OK. So what are you suggesting? That such threads shouldnt exist or that it should be exhaustingly elaborate and precise? This was also meant to be an invitation for others to participate and some of them have done that. Did I, at any point of time, suggest that this thread is also to serve as a source of religious information? Tell me, please? Because I am utterly confused. The messages that is coming through from most of the people(especially, the established older members of egullet) is discouraging as it seems to be a rap on my knuckle for bringing this topic up. Worse, I see to have ruffled many a feather for not going into 'more research'. Is not knowing that Jews dont mix meat and dairy better than NOT knowing anything about it at all? If there are subtleties about the various dietary practices even within the religious groups, maybe this is a place to register it instead of flogging the validity of the thread itself. What *is* the point of discussion if it's credibility is questioned because of the lack of reams and reams of papers of 'research'? Have a nice day.

If you have some dietary restrictions, then its part of the invitation negotiation.I'm always careful to ask about dietary restrictions, or warn people what we are likely to eat when I invite people. If you have strong food issues, like vegetarian, it means I either have to cook seperately for you, or invite you on your own, and the evening becomes centred around you. I wonder if some people do it just for the attention. On the whole I'd prefer to socialise by not inviting you for a meal, but some other activity. I recently did a dinner where half were strict vegetarian, and the others were on Atkins. Fortuantely they ate eggs. A challenge. We had Soup, salad, souffle, sorbet, roulade (a good veggy standby), and three deserts. The worst are people who arrive and then say "Oh, by the way I'm vegetarian/don't eat carbs/shellfish/foie gras", when you just cooked that for them. . My niece, for example, who is meshuganer frum , won't even drink a glass of water in my house. I find that hurtful, but its her problem, in that it restricts our social interaction. i think we are missing something here..lets list the scenarios: 1.you invite someone and ask for their dietary preferences. 2.you invite someone and they inform you of their dietary preferences beforehand 3.you invite someone and they inform you of their dietary preferences after its too late. 4.someone drops by without informing you to break bread A has a food preference. B has a food prohibition. It is easier to design the evening around B than around A...why? because its the right thing to do. Atkins and vegetarians at the same table. My sympathies. About people who do it for attention .. dont we all or we'd just hire a chef for the evening instead of cooking it ourselves...surely, there is some redeeming quality that your fussy guest possess that stresses the need for you to consider them on the guest list...its easier to drop them off the list instead of inviting them without an either/or option...the burden is ON you...you cant simply invite someone and refuse to accomodate their needs... Personally, I am thinking that creating a menu that combines meat, fish and vegetarian options is not that big a deal...cant back that up as i have no real life experience..just speculating..will inform you when i have sailed that way... re your niece..its not about food preferences/restrictions..its about excluding you on basis of your beliefs or lack of...been there, got the t-shirt...although never from someone younger than me....i suppose its easier to stomach it when its someone elder who acts that way...the niece situation is a whole different ball game. almost all dining is geared towards social interaction....restricting on the basis on one's exclusionary dietary preferences doesnt seem logical.

you cant go wrong with vegetarian food...unfortunately, it will be mostly mush....unless you are *really* creative...

whoa!! slow down sparky! where did *that* come from!! I can point to at least one logical fallacy in that comparison, but on second thoughts...I am not going to bite. I dont expect to be abandoned like an orphan when I am invited by someone...maybe it was the constant change of cultures, cuisines and fads that turned me into a demanding bitch at the table and this is just personal preference and not a strong belief as the trappings of religion can be...dont get me wrong..but some of the western foods are utterly unpalatable to me...i cant even stomach the regional variations of indian cuisine...maybe its my curse and i will have to live with saying no to certain foods...but I am *not* going to fill up before dinner or spend more money on after-dinner dinner just because... Well said! I mirror that sentiment, but what if you invite someone to your table? Will you call someone, demand their time and declare that if they dont eat what you eat, they will simply have to leave your table...what if the main objective of the gathering is not food/eating? do they sit by the corner and bring their own lunchbox?

Mabelline: Thank you for the invitation. I was not trying to simplify dietary laws for my own comfort here. This thread is just plain information. Info for info sake. Actually, I have been more of a bad guest than a good host. I have made some of my guests wash the dishes along with me. Good times. Reading the original thread that made me throw this one in as it brought back memories of how I'd casually inform my hosts that I am vegetarian...and it was not even a religious/moral/ethical issue for me..I was too lazy to change my habits and to try new things because they were 'eww' to me at that time and they *always* obliged...i do realise that there are people out there who, unlike me, take their religious dietary restrictions seriously.. tanabutler: Buddhists dietary laws are part of the seven-fold path which includes kindness to animals(i cant think of any religion that says..be cruel to animals, have you)...i suppose, like hinduism(a very small percentage of hindus are vegetarians, actually..even the very orthodox hindu brahmins used to be meat eaters in the pre vedic period..the discovery and publication of which caused a lot of conflict and verbal violence in the media and press) cruelty to animals takes a different interpretation when it comes to preserving and protecting life..jainism, iirc, is not that flexible... re ISKCON...since they are a vaishnavite cult that has lord krishna as the main deity, they are indeed vegetarians...ISKCON is not a religious sect...there are many sects and sub sects in hinduism where vegetarianism is not mandatory....it is a misconception that all indians and all hindus are vegetarians. alexhills: Back to ISKCON and their kitchens.. Lord Krishna's Cuisine by Yamuna Devi is a good book. It is simple vegetarian fare, but the ingredients may be a little hard to find..unless you can find an indian grocery store... Bux: This wasnt intended to be a gospel, but as a broad guideline...before I looked it up, I didnt know that Rastafarians are vegetarians... I agree. For our graduation dinner, for example, we had quail stuffed with foie gras and it was the most ghastly piece of food I have ever put into my mouth. I could either follow etiquette and waste the food or pass it on to someone who will enjoy it more than I do(which i did). The lobster, however, I sent back because I am allergic to shellfish. I was hungry and wasnt going to skip the first course because I knew that there was a kitchen that is equipped to deal with my 'special' needs. If it had been dinner at a home where the hostess slaved over a hot stove, it is a different matter. During my vegetarian exile, I have never minded a chicken leg on my plate as long as it was willing to trot over to the neighbour's plate before the end of the meal. But being allergic to dairy, shellfish or eternal damnation is a good reason to inform people beforehand especially if they are going to prepare food you are going to waste anyways. There is no greater sin or nothing more criminal than wasting food. Havent you heard, there are children starving in....................? As our mothers have taught us, when finger-wagging instruction doesnt work, *always* unleash the guilt. You just did! And I do agree with what followed the above quote too...Not wanting to risk going against egullet faith-based policies, I would just like to add that we are not and have never been rational beings. We are rationalising beings. Behemoth: You are right! There are no restrictions re shellfish. I read that Sufis practiced vegetarianism, but Sufism emerged a long time after the Prophet's time in India. It probably was something to add increased appeal for the benefit of the local Indian populace. Vegetarianism is both kosher and halal because it doesnt violate any of the dietary laws as one can see from the various indian veg restaurants in nyc that advertise their kosher certification. GiftedGourmet: agree completely re your rule of thumb!

This post is inspired by this thread about entertaining guests with religious perferences. Did I miss anything or have I gotten anything wrong? Please contribute the missing bits. Seventh Day Adventists: The most devout are vegetarians and the strictest form of dietary restrictions involve being a vegan. Mostly prohibited are pork, shellfish, alcohol, coffee, tea. Buddhists: Mostly vegetarians. Staunch Buddhists lead a vegan lifestyle. Hinduism: Not all Hindus are vegetarians, although most will not touch beef as the cow is considered sacred. Some communities dont consider ingestion of fish, shellfish, eggs or dairy as a hurdle to remain moral vegetarians according to their religious beliefs. Judaism: Kosher laws prohibit shellfish and pork. Meat and dairy in the same meal is not considered kosher. Leavened bread is restricted during certain times. Kosher law requires ritual slaughter. Fasting is part of the annual religious Jewish dietary calender.(regular coke is prohibited during passover and not considered kosher because it contains corn syrup...maybe someone here can explain why it is so...) Islam: Halal laws also prohibit shellfish and pork. Ritual slaughter, like in Judaism, is required to certify meat as 'halal'. Strict Moslems do not imbibe and avoid tea and coffee. Moslems fast and practice moderation for part of the year. Church of Latter Day Saints/Mormons: prohibition of tobacco, alcohol, tea and coffee. I am not sure if the caffine in fizzy drinks like coke, pepsi or *gasp* mountain dew is prohibited. Roman Catholics: Fasting is observed. There are restrictions on meat(although not on fish) consumption and alcohol. During Lent, no meat is to be consumed on fridays.(?) Eastern Orthodoxy: Moderation is encouraged when it comes to meat, fish, alcohol, tea, coffee and abstinence from certain foods during fasting periods. Jainism: Jains are vegetarians and will not imbibe. They will not eat anything that grows underneth the soil or consume honey. Sikhism: Sikhs will not eat beef but pork is permitted. Their dietary laws are slightly different from the Hindu food laws. Alcohol is prohibited. Rastafarians: Their food laws permit only "I-tal" foods. I-tal foods are generally foods that are natural and untouched by chemicals, preservatives, artificial colourings etc. Most Rastafarians wont touch pork and a large number of them are strict vegetarians. Druzism: Alcohol, pork and tobacco is banned and most Druze take their religion very seriously. End note: Almost all religious dietary laws were designed for healthy living in harmony with the environment. No religion promotes gluttony(infact, almost all of them consider gluttony as a sin as the body is where the 'soul' resides...hence 'body as a temple' etc...maybe the early founders of Religion saw something that we are missing today.). Do not assume that a person of a certain faith strictly adheres to their faith re diet. You may be denying them their favourite drink or dish! Enquire. Some guests might insist on 'purity' and something called hygiene....(gah!)...double dipping is frowned upon by some...using the same spoon/ladle in two different dishes for serving is sooooo not cool for others...spoons, forks or glasses are not to be shared...simply put, exchanging bodily fluids when sharing a meal is a no-no according to 'purity' laws. Re: praying before a meal. The most religious will say a prayer of thanks before beginning a meal. If you do not subscribe to the habit, simply bend your head. Do not scream your prayer over their prayer. If you are the guest, ask for permission before you begin pray. If you are the host, always be gracious. Do not force any of your guests to join you in prayer. Should you let your other guests suffer because some others have religious (or otherwise) dietary restrictions? Well..this is tricky...these days, nobody is going to be offended if you exclude them from enjoying a dish that they have voluntarily decided to avoid..however, it is better to find all of your guests' dietary restrictions, allergies, religious prohibitions etc before planning a meal. Some may refuse to eat from the same table from where meat or alcohol is served.(I can speak for my own Hindu family...onions, garlic, eggs are usually cooked in seperate utensils in some houses..elder members will only eat from their own plates or from plantain leaves which are discarded..something like organic disposable plates..water is usually not sipped as it taints the glass with one's saliva...drinking of water is a hilarious, precarious glass balancing act where a stream of water will flow from the glass to the open mouth cavity...as children, we were trained to NOT sip from glasses offered in restaurants, other people's houses etc...obviously, it has had little impact on me as I leave my lipstick smudges like the The Ghost Who Walks leaves his skull mark)once again, all this depends on your guest list and whether they are part of your inner circle whose pet peeves, likes and 'urghs' you have endured before.. personally, i like to keep my guests happy. as luck would have it, my social circle has almost always been one that has mirrored my own culinary habits or someone who doesnt mind indulging my eccentric mood swings(more than one guest has been asked to wash his own dirty plate)...as my grandmother used to say, 'adithi devo bhava'...when a guest graces your home, consider that as a visit from god...well..or your favourite rock star...

Arrowroot is pure starch...you should use half the quantity as you would flour for thickening...iirc.

I have family who belong to the LDS church and rest of the family goes on with their business...the only way to stop this crowd from imbibing is to pry the alcohol from their cold, death fingers.....but from my personal pov, out of respect, I wouldnt recommend putting anything on the table what your *all* your guests wont touch.....even if some of your other guests arent mormons...its just the polite thing to do....but again..thats just me!

huh? are you saying women and men are physically 'equal'?

but if you try to eat me, i'll beat you to death with a limp noodle..

wowsa! since when did prices shoot up like that?! prices are always higher in the coasts...i think i used to pay $3.94 per gallon for organic milk...bay area was *always* pricey...they better get their act straight..it is no longer the 'silicon valley'...its time to fix their shit or its going to be a ghost town..my friend in iowa says that he pays 69c per gallon...but he is a bull shitter..but even trippling the price...the price index @coasts are always higher... btw.. Dairy prices appear set to fall from record highs ... btw...here is the seed for another of my pet peeves. pepsi = 89c/gallon. milk $4.71/gallon. i rest my case. edited to add from the news article: there was an excellent article in the charlotte observer several months ago about the demise of dairy farms in north carolina...maybe kpurvis can point it to us?

sawge? ysope? savray?..sigh..translation, please?

rare pork does sound like a bad idea...you dont want it so rare that it'd leap and oink at you....send it back......its your money afterall... on a slightly diff note..why is it not advisable to cook veal/milk fed veal rare? i vaguely remember that it had something to do with the meat being of a diff composition because of the youngling's diet..can someone clarify?

strawberry and coriander..is this coriander as in coriander seeds or coriander as in cilantro?

i suppose wearing my bestest sari is out...what if the sari is black?