Bachelorette Corn Salad

I made a double batch of this salad the other week, and it was gone in one evening. Even better than having no leftovers is the fact that it takes maybe 3 minutes to make!

INGREDIENTS
1 lb can/package corn kernels (if package, defrosted)
1 c red pepper strips
1/2 c sliced green olives
1/2 tbsp parsley
coriander to taste
pepper to taste
1 tbsp dried minced garlic
1/4- 1/2 c light mayonnaise

PREPARATION
Assemble, add spices to taste, and stir in mayonnaise. Chill overnight.

Notes

• If you do not have coriander available, you can substitute a sprinkle of oregano. I suggest you avoid substituting cumin, since its flavour will overpower the taste of the salad.
  
• If the mixture is too thick, add 1 tsp of lemon juice, stir and repeat until the mixture is the correct consistency. Adjust the spices accordingly. If the lemon juice has caused the mixture to become too acidic, add a tsp of sugar at a time until you hit the right "balance".

T-Shirt Mania

It's only the second week of July, but I am already obsessing about buying a few new essentials for my wardrobe. To be frank, while I am neither a fashionista nor someone who enjoys shopping, I will bite the bullet and hit the shops if I really need something. Case in point: this past May, when I noted how my tichels from last summer were disintegrating into a mass of fringes, I went scouring the $ stores for bandannas. My current obsession with adding a few pieces to my summer wardrobe happened to crest this week, because my second "new" skirt (which I purchased this past December) finally went kaput after I subjected it to innumerable washings.

As I was combing the racks yesterday in Conway hoping to find just the right items (read tznius and age-appropriate), I noticed the most beautiful t-shirts: in the softest colours, made of very feminine fabric, featuring the most glam prints. My mouth practically started to water as I tried to convince myself that the tasteful nature of the print rendered the shirt appropriate for someone middle-aged like myself. After a 20 minute internal battle, during which I envisioned myself walking down Avenue J in the said shirt paired with a long-sleeved shirt underneath and my favourite jean skirt, my yekki nature won out and I put the shirt back on the rack. I am, after all, a Rebbetzin...

Anyhow, the ordeal convinced me that what I really need are two white and two black long-sleeved t-shirts for the summer for layering. So there you have it. In the name of tznius, my hunt continues...

You've Got to Be Kidding Me

I have once again encountered a black hole in New York services, namely filling my eye wear prescription. Back in Canada, the standard procedure was to first visit an OD to get a prescription and then shop around to find a pair of glasses/contacts that suited you. My usual course of action was consequently to pay for the eye exam and exit with my prescription. No problems, no hard/soft sells, i.e., a done deal. I managed to follow the same formula down in the South without hassle. However, for the past two years, I have found that such is not the method followed in the Empire State.

Last year I tried my luck in Queens. I asked how much the eye exam would cost and was told $30. I couldn't believe the price, which should have been my first tip off that something was amiss. Since the given optician was my husband's though, I didn't ask any further questions. Upon arriving for my appointment, I went to the back where the OD was, and had a very low-key, thorough exam. She was, I will admit, one of the best ODs I had ever encountered. However, when I went to the front to get a copy of my prescription, I was met with a surprise: the proprietor refused to give me the prescription, claiming that he keeps the record on file, and that I had to buy at least one box of contacts, to make it worth his while. Not wanting to make any waves, I asked how much the box of contacts would cost.

The price he gave me was $100 for a brand that is sold elsewhere for no more than $50. I then informed him that I would just like to pay for the exam, and reminded him that I had been upfront in stating that I only wanted the exam. He said that I should have known, because that process of buying from him is a given. "Why should I give you the prescription so that you can just go buy online?", he said. We agreed to a compromise: he would return my $30, and I would leave without my prescription. He did subsequently try to get my husband to convince me to place an order, but my husband and I managed to exit the shop in a civil manner. Needless to say, my husband has refrained from any further dealings with that shop or its proprietor.

Last month, having learned my lesson (or so I thought) from the incident in Queens, and down to my final pair of contacts, I went for another eye exam. This time, I made sure to state outright in all communications prior to my appointment that I was only interested in getting an eye exam and getting my prescription; I was not interested in purchasing anything. No problem, they said. The combined exam (contacts/eyeglasses) costs $60. Great, I thought.

But it was not to be. During my eye exam, which I had to pay for before entering the OD's office, I was submitted to several attempts at soft selling (E.g., You're sure you don't want to look up front?) before being informed that my exam did not include glaucoma testing (which costs an additional $25 and is performed on a different day). Then, at the end of the exam, I was given a prescription that omitted certain key information. For example, what is the true diameter of my eyes, versus what it states in my old contact lens prescription? Or, equally important, what is my PD (pupil distance)? During a phone call the following week, the purpose of which was to obtain this missing information, I was instead told to simply order a trial pair of the lenses I want and "test" them out. Maybe they would work out, maybe not, he said. In short, once again I was refused information that legally an OD is required to provide patients, at no cost.

Thankfully, my husband's best friend is an optician. He agreed to order a trial pair of lenses for me, and has attempted to answer my questions in the process. Unfortunately, he also lives out-of-state, and I am consequently left without in-person follow up care. In the end, to ensure that any lenses fit my eyes properly, I am going to have to go to yet another OD and pay out-of-pocket for a fitting exam.

Buyer beware, as they say. Perhaps it's just my mazel, but I find it sad that the medical "industry" is such that every provider attempts to make a buck off "customers", potentially to the detriment of the customer's health. Next year, I am going to remember to ask what the eye exam includes, and whether I can receive follow up care at an additional price. Hopefully then I can do away with all this nonsense, and ensure that my eyes stay healthy for years to come, bli ayin hara.

Shidduch Q&A

I had such a flattering thing happen to me the other day. A male friend of mine, who is single, sent me an email with a shidduch question. It was so nice that someone actually thought I could help, especially on that topic!

Anyway, I gave my two cents, but thought it would be a good idea if I posted the question here so that anyone with any thoughts could comment. (I of course got permission first from the said friend, and modified the question slightly to conserve confidentiality.) So, if anyone has any thoughts, or even just wants to tell me how "way" of base I was in my response, please post a comment.

Here is his question and my answer.

The Question

Imagine for a moment you know an observant guy who meets a Jewish woman who:

• Is very educated (works in university-level academia)
  
• Is a feminist and likes the idea of female Rabbis
  
• Grew up in a intellectual, anti-Jewish home
• Keeps some Shabbat things but with a focus on "spirituality" versus observance (E.g., attends services that involve drums and chanting)
  
• Is very spiritual

Now they really get along and even discuss the possibility of keeping Shabbat/Kosher. Is this a shidduch that the guy should pursue or is it just too much to ask for her to change to his observance level?

My Answer

Hey there! I appreciate that you ask for my opinion. But all I can offer you is a "it really depends" with the following "advice".

First, only you can find out whether she is sincerely ready to grow to the level of observance you would require. I know one woman very similar who remained spiritual versus observant and yet another who became a total frummie frumstein. I will also share that when I started dating, I was willing to consider someone less observant than myself but in the end, it always became an issue. We both know that people only change if they want to.

Secondly, what level of compromise can you see yourself tolerating before any resentment/ill will comes into play? If she remains spiritual, can you live with that? That's a reality you really need to consider. Also, what do you value more in a spouse? Is it more important to you that you get along right away or that you find someone who shares your core religious values but who you might need to coax out of her shell? If you answer the former, you might also want to determine how long you are willing to wait to see progress on the observance front and what you would do if you see no progress. Finally, and I hate to bring it up, but you should also determine what the impact could be on your son if he is exposed to conflicting levels of observance.

I don't know if this at all helps you; they're just my personal thoughts about the "issue". It really is up to you to decide. Feel free to contact me if you want to discuss the matter further.

Take care!

Parah Adumah

First of all, Happy Fourth of July everyone! Yes, I am an equal opportunist; since you had to tolerate my Canadian pride earlier in the week, the least I can do is tip my hat to all you Americans.

Down to business. You know, Parshah Chukat is amazing; it's full of so many incidents that each carry a heap of lessons. But every year, for whatever reason, I always focus most on the Parah Adumah. I mean, even Shlomo HaMelech couldn't figure it out, and he knew Torah better than Moishe Rabbeinu. How awesome is that? Anyway, I had several "ideas" about why the heifer both purifies and contaminates.

Would it be conceited of me to post a few? Our Torah sages have been stumped and have only had certain elements elucidated for them, so why would my little thoughts be anything but worse than what Our Sages have already stated, I say. Then again, I'm sure that whatever I do say is simply a rehash of what Our Sage have said...Since it has been on my mind all week though, and I need a tidbit to say to my husband over dinner tonight, I will give a brief summary of some of the things I've been mulling over.

Since in this world duelling forces co-exist, it makes "sense" that an item and a ritual that purify are the result of an item and a ritual that produce contamination. Any heifer carcass would produce contamination, so why not the parah adumah's when it is prepared? Moreover, it is no wonder that while being purified, the person who is purifying the contaminated person becomes contaminated as well. We see by the very juxtaposition of the ritual of the parah adumah with descriptions of ways that one becomes contaminated that Hashem always creates both a situation and an antidote. Why then should the antidote not carry consequences for the purifier as well as the contaminated party? When purifying, the purifier comes into contact with tumah and consequently becomes contaminated until evening. We see the same process on Yom Kippur, with the goat sent to Azazel.

In this world, contamination of one easily impacts us all; the physical, spiritual, and emotional elements of life on this earth are inextricably intertwined, as are we all. Contamination, while a physical state, is also a spiritual state, and there are degrees, as with anything else: a tzaddik, for example, is at a higher degree of spirituality than myself or any other Ben Oni. The same goes for other spiritual states as well. When a wife becomes niddah, does her separation not contaminate her husband? How so, you might ask? Because the physical separation from his wife causes shifts in his emotional and spiritual being as well, since his soul and her soul are intertwined. By the same token, a person contaminated by the dead is impacted emotionally, spiritually, and physically. And as we see by the incidents of the striking of the rock and the death of Aharon HaKohain, the loss of one yid impacts us all and changes the dynamic of us as a people. Thus, when our brother becomes contaminated through death, the impact is felt around him. By extension, the purification process necessitates that one yid "sacrifices" himself for the benefit of his fellow, to transfer some of his "purity" to the impure person.

In other words, the purifier consequently takes the spiritual demotion in order to elevate the contaminated party. Since we are all intertwined as a people, it would be foolish to believe that one yid's suffering is unrelated to our life. To return to the concept of duelling forces, we can see how when one yid is up, another is down, and it is only by Hashem's current calculation of us that we are in the same boat as the one yid or the other. When we contemplate that reality then, we see how powerful the parah adumah really is, both as an actual conduit for purification and as a symbol of Ahavat Yisroel.

Good Shabbos!

Poisson au Haricot Lima

It's Wednesday, aka cooking day for Shabbos in my home. My husband has been loving what I serve for the fish course lately, so here is a new standby. I recommend using a mild flavoured fish, such as pollack or cod, but if you prefer a meatier fish, just adjust the cooking time.

INGREDIENTS
1 lb frozen fish, thawed
1 10-14 oz package frozen lima beans
2 large tomatoes, chopped
5 cloves garlic, peeled and chopped
2 tbsp turmeric
2 tbsp parsley
salt and pepper to taste
lemon juice to taste
3 tbsp olive oil
1 cup water

PREPARATION
Heat 2 tbsp of the olive oil over medium in a deep skillet. Add the garlic and saute for 2-3 minutes. Add the fish, water, salt and pepper, and bring to a boil. Place the lima beans, turmeric and remaining olive oil on top of the fish, cover the pan, and reduce the heat to medium-low. Simmer until almost fully cooked, checking from time to time that ensure that the water has not completely evaporated. Add water as required during cooking. About 5 minutes before the fish is done cooking, add the tomato. When done cooking, remove the pan from the heat and stir in the parsley. Before serving, stir to mix and sprinkle with lemon juice before plating.

Bonne Fête du Canada!

So here I am in Brooklyn on Canada Day. In a show of national pride (and solidarity with my fellow ex-pats), I am sharing just a few tidbits about my fair and native land.

• Population: 34 million. A nation that has always promoted immigration, Canada's population includes persons from more than 200 countries of origin. For the past 25 years, Canada has taken in more immigrants than either America or Australia.
  
• Land Mass: 10 million square kilometres (4 million square miles)- the second largest on earth after Russia. This area is divided into 10 provinces and three territories:

• Alberta
• British Columbia
• Manitoba
• New Brunswick
• Newfoundland
• Northwest Territories
• Nova Scotia
• Nunavut Territory
• Ontario
• Prince Edward Island
• Quebec
• Saskatchewan
• Yukon Territory

• Capital: Ottawa, located in the province of Ontario.
  
• Motto: A mare usque ad mare, which is based on Perek Ayin Beit (72) in Tehillim.
• Symbol: The Beaver. Early Canadian commerce was reliant on the fur trade, with the beaver pelt as the trade's primary commodity.
• Emblem: Maple Leaf. Maple products have remained staple exports throughout the country's history.
  
• Colours: Red and White. As a colony of both France and England, Canada adopted the national colours of those countries.
• Flag: The red maple leaf on a white background flanked by two red bars is recognizable internationally. Americans might be interested to note that there is no pledging allegiance to the flag in Canada, although no individual is prohibited from doing so if they wish.
• Languages: English and French dialects. The accents for both are distinct, and the vocabulary includes many Canadianisms, E.g. chesterfield, tuque, depanneur. Many Canadians are trilingual, speaking the language of their family's country of origin in addition to English and French.
  
• Sports: Lacrosse and Hockey. Hockey was officially legislated as the national winter sport in the 1990s; Lacrosse remains the national summer sport.
  
• Anthem: O Canada. As befitting a bilingual country, the anthem can be sung in English or French. The standard practice in some provinces is to sing half of the anthem in French, half in English. You will note that Canada, unlike America, has no qualms about mentioning country and G-d in the same breath:

O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.

With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!

From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

• Constitution: Peace, Order, and Good Government. Canada's constitution consists of several documents, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. One important distinction between the Canadian and American constitutions is that the American constitution focusses on the rights and freedoms of individuals, whereas the Canadian constitution stresses the need to balance the rights and freedoms accorded the individual with the needs of the community at large. In other words, the greater social good is always the focal point, versus the wants and needs of individual citizens.
• Political System: Parliamentary. The parliament consists of the Monarch, the Senate, and the House of Commons. Queen Elizabeth II currently acts as the monarch, and is represented at the federal level by the Governor General and and at the provincial level by each province's Lieutenant General.
  

Finally, why is today called Canada Day? On July 1, 1867, the Province of Canada was divided into two provinces, Quebec and Ontario, and joined together into a federation with the colonies (British) of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The day was referred to as Dominion Day until 1982, when Canada was granted its own constitution, thereby removing the British Parliament's ability to legislate for Canada. As mentioned above, the Queen still retains legal power in Canada, and acts as its figurehead.

Vive le Canada!