CLARIFYING 'THE TRUTH ABOUT RELIGION'?

Greetings...

The truth for a person might be a lies to another person. Take religion for example. If anybody put a knife on my neck and asked me to convert my religion, I might defend my belief until the end of my life. I believe most of you will do the same regardless what your religion is. I do not believe the teachings that my Buddhist friends, my Hindus friends, my Christians friends, even my Scientologist friends [if I have Scientologist friend in the future] believe, but I definitely respect them and respect their beliefs. In facts, I believe it is a sin to belittle other Gods and other religions. That is why when I first interested in knowing what is Scientology Church [in which John Travolta, Tom Cruise, etc. are the firm believers and the belief has connection with a story of aliens inhabitant 75 millions years ago], my first impression is 'Gosh, this is ridiculous!'. But then I came to my senses, I should respect what they believe accordingly.

Allow me to go much deeper on this issue...

In early 1990's, I took my A-Level at PPP/ITM Shah Alam, Selangor. There was a time, during our religion studies, a religious teacher or Ustaz asked a very provocative question [this Ustaz was known later as anti-hadith Ustaz according to rumor, and transferred after his first class with us].

WARNING: Please do not continue reading this article if you think you are not up to it.

The Question from the Ustaz was something like this...

'Assuming that you were born in Swizerland, born in a Christian family, exposed to Christian life, went to church every Sunday and did lots of charity works, and then you die... do you think you still go to heaven?' A spontaneous response from one of my classmate, 'Of course not, because I died as a Christian, not as a Muslim'. The Ustaz asked again, 'Who made you born in Swizerland? Who made you a Christian? Who made you live in Christian environment? Who made you died as a Christian? Who put you into hell and not heaven? Is it all of them done by God? So, do you think God is fair?!' [His actual word were 'Jadi, adilkah Tuhan?' and I still remember those words until now.]

I believe I talk on behalf of all of my classmate during that time that our heartbeats literally STOPPED. What the heck man? An Ustaz came out with such question and during that time all of us were very young and immatured to talk about such big issue. That is a very irresponsible act.

To be honest with all of you, the Question really lingered in my mind for years until I found another Ustaz [not a Malaysian] while I studied oversea. I did ask this Ustaz almost similar Question. The Arabian Ustaz answered me in front of everybody, cautiously, and before he gave me the answer, he kept telling all the congregates in the mosque that his answer was taken from a group of Islamic Scholar's Fatwa or Decree in early 1900.

The Answer is, 'God will judge you according to your religion if the truth of Islam is not reach you. The definition of 'the truth of Islam is not reaching you' is up to God Himself. If a community that live in an isolated island and never heard to any of the Islam Gospel, never know the teaching of Islam, never heard of the name of Muhammad as the last Prophet in this world; we are certain that they will be judged in according to their island religion. If they behave well, never harm anybody, obey the islander rules, etc. they will not be put into hell. However, if they already knew about Islam, knew about the teaching of Islam, heard about Muhammad and started to believe in them BUT purposely reject Islam to be their religion just because they do not want to forego their interest in this world, then they will go to hell. This is similar to Abu Lahab and the rest of the Musyrikin 14 centuries ago.

I asked again, 'what about someone who heard about Islam but the words about Islam do not trigger them to know more, to learn more, and they still believe in their own religion not because of the interest of the world, but because they believe they could become a better person as a Christians, or Buddhists, or Hidus, etc. What about them? Could they be classified similar to the Musyrikins or the island people that never heard about the name of Islam at all?'

The Ustaz answered, 'That is something you and me could tell. That is something that only God knows, the Creator knows, not to be known by the creations like you and me.' The Ustaz added, 'We already knew that God is fair and the fairness of God is beyond our understanding as human being. So do you think God will misjudge people whether to put them into heaven or hell; whether to classify them as the Musyrikin or the islander; if according to you, these people might lies in the between? So, your question just now could not be answered and we must believe God is fair in his judgment in the case of the Swizerland guy.'

This is a serious matter. If any of you [who read this article] is a respected Ustaz or Mufti, please do not hesitate to make any correction on the opinion given by the Arabian Ustaz above. But make sure your response is not merely based on emotion and baseless without any supporting argument from Al-Qur'an or Hadith or 'Ijmak Ulamak'.

So what is my conclusion that I would like to share here? Never say that a non-Muslim will definitely go to hell as much as never say that a Muslim will definitely go to heaven [he might be a Muslim in name but non-Muslim in term of behavior]. God is the judge, let God make the judgment. We are human being and as a human being, it is safe not to be judgmental by determining who [in our opinion] goes to heaven or hell. Like what been said by Haji Labu [in P. Ramlee's Labu Labi movie], 'I don't know whether I go to heaven or I go to hell?' But as a Muslim, we strive to be a better person [or putting Robbie William's song into perspective, a 'Better Man'] and hope that God will accept us in the day of Judgment.

Thank you for your valuable time.

Dr. Tahoma

MY PULP FICTION OF DR. MM & MR. AI

Greetings...

Allow me to tell you a Fiction Story about a Prime Minister and his Deputy in late 1990's. The Prime Minister was Dr. MM and his Deputy is Mr. AI. This scenario happened in a country of Melasia.

The economic crisis faced by the whole Asian countries put Dr. MM into a deep thought. On one side, he knew that he need to make a very drastic action. On other side he had to be sure that the country will not face unnecessary political turmoil. The decision of his Deputy, Mr. AI, in adopting the remedy prescribed by IMF could put Melasia economy in spiral meltdown. Dr. MM knew about this but having Mr. AI as his Deputy and Minister of Finance made thing much complicated.

For Dr. MM, the economic policy of the country needs to be redirected and taking 'the pills' from IMF as had been suggested by Mr. AI was the most stupid move anybody would take. Dr. MM also knew that 'a ship can not have two captains'. By by still having Mr. AI in his current position as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister Finance, the possibility of Mr. AI portray himself as another captain is very, very high. In addition to that, Mr. AI already had a temporary ego of being the captain when Dr. MM had his long holiday few months before.

Out of blue, Mr. AI made major mistake. He sang 'Indonesian Songs', talking about cronyism, nepotism, etc., tried to make a hero out of himself. He asked his General who was in-charge with Youth Movement to support him. He made noise, some people did not like it. In fact these some people thought that Mr. AI climbed his political ladder without much testing. So these some people create rumors on Mr. AI sexual behavior. Dr. MM looked at this as his opportunity to solve his dilemma. He terminated Mr. AI not just as his Deputy, but also as the number two of the party and the Minister of Finance of the country. Only by doing that, Dr. MM could save the country's economy 'MY WAY' [My Way is his all time favorite song]. Not even a decade later, without any hesitation everybody in Melasia and the whole world praised Dr. MM for his brilliant thinking in putting Melasia economy on track, without being attached with IMF loan and regulation.

Well as you know by now, that is my version of what really happened in 1998 between Dr. M and Anwar Ibrahim. To be safe, I would like to emphasize that the scenario above is just my so-called Pulp Fiction. I have a ridiculous thought, if such story is writen into a movie script and Oliver Stone direct it, it could be at par with Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction. Just a joke.

Putting the joke aside, without any doubt the termination of Anwar one way or another divides the govenment supporters into two. My friends asked me on the issue. Do I believe in Anwar or do I believe in Dr. M? My answer, whether it was a conspiracy or Anwar really have such 'bad sexual orientation', I do not know. I never been in the room with the conspirators to topple Anwar. I never been in a close proximity to see Anwar having his 'activity'. So I can not be certain whether Anwar really bi-sexual or whether all of the accusation was made to topple Anwar. And I believe most of you [in actual fact] not certain as well. We just heard the news, the rumors, the infomation, etc. and our mind processed them and made conclusion 10 years ago. If the information regarding the existence of conspiracy diagnosed to be much convincing than others, we will say 'the truth is all these accussations are lies'. Likewise, if we believe the story that Anwar was a student of MCKK and it is nomal for the students there to have male girlfriend [in other words 'Main Jambu'] we might tend to believe that Anwar [despite of his religious face] really did that. The truth is we do not know. Or should I say, I do not know.

Re-evaluate how you make your decision 10 years ago on who do you believe, Dr. M or Anwar? Think about all the information that you received during that time. Do you think all those information still relevant and convincing now? Be objective on this matter. You might find that what you believe as 'the truth' 10 years ago seems 'not so true' at the end of first decade of the millennium. Who knows?

Feel free to criticize or disagree with me.

Thank you for you valuable time.

Dr. Tahoma

BOOK THAT DEFINITELY SELLS LIKE HOT BANANA FRITTER

Greeting...

If I decided to write a book, and I want my book to sells like hot banana fritter [or hot chocolate], and I do not care about ethical issue, and just simply put my conscience under the carpet, I will write a book with a title... 'How to Cheat Your Wife'. The title alone could trigger lots of interest among those who already or just at the intentional stage cheat the wife.

The book will contain the tricks on how to 'camouflage' the name of the girlfriends in the hand phone, create reason to come back home late convincingly, art to persuade the girlfriends not to call or text during night time, conspires with the colleague or even the boss on how to create fictional business travel and for the worst scenario of getting caught by the wife, use the 'I am in my mid-life crisis' as a final justification [if I am not mistaken, Harrison Ford used this excuse before].

I believe all the mid-life guys with ample money in the pocket and at one point thought of getting tired eat at home all the time for 20-30 years will buy this book. And all of the worry wives who suspect his husband of having an affair outside but can not prove it really happens will buy this book to understand any possible trick from the husband. This book will sells like hot banana fritter, for sure.

WARNING: The above article is meant to put a smile on your face. It is just a naughty thought of mine and should not be taken seriously. At no point of time I have any intention to encourage any writer to write on the subject and sell his book. And I am not responsible if anyone do really write a book on that title. Having scandal for both men and women is morally wrong, against religion and hazardous especially for long term, like cigarette.

Thank you for your valuable time.

Dr. Tahoma

ANWAR IBRAHIM, EASY COME EASY GO

Greetings...

First of all I would like to apologize to any Anwar supporter if you find this article is unfair to your beloved leader. I am not against him but why don't we evaluate Anwar based on his own history.

Look, where is Anwar now? He is the Opposition Leader in the Parliament. He is the Prime Minister of his own shadow government. He aspires to be the next Prime Minister either through the hopping of the Barisan MP or through the success in the next General Election. No doubt, he is a good politician. He master the skill to leverage on the current situation. During the last General Election, the sentiment of anti-Barisan was so strong. Some might says if 'monkey' nominated against any Barisan candidate, that 'monkey' will sure win. What else to say if the opposition candidate is a person that only yesterday just came back from Shanghai [just because he is popular due to Linggam video] or someone that just been caught under ISA or someone that just had a name as blogger. As long as he against the Barisan, possibility of him to win the election is high.

Pakatan utilized all the stupidity done by Barisan. Some of the Barisan candidates were stupid enough having big house in the middle of nowhere; some of the Barisan candidates were stupid enough 'allow' his/her sensitive pictures [pictures of scandalous] to be taken and distributed to the public. [A little bit of advice to Malaysian politicians and the artists, if you all want to have scandals or stupid affairs, PLEASE do not take pictures together. Recently I saw a picture of a well-known Malaysian actor, hugging another woman and according to the article, this actor's wife is pregnant. Of course some outrageous statements come out from such behavior. My question to this actor is 'why on earth you want to take a picture like that with your scandal?' 'What do you want to prove?' 'Don't you think such digitalize pictures could come out in the internet and hence tarnish your reputation?' Sorry to say but that is so stupid.]

Pakatan also utilized the weak leadership and incompetency of the current government leaders. The picture of Pak Lah while he is sleeping became a very influential tools. The rumors of corruptions done by the Barisan leaders had been put into New Branding in which Internet became a very effective Marketing Tools.

As a result of that, Pakatan managed to get an impressive election result. I salute Pakatan and that is how politic power should be gained, 'either you kill or be kill'. When the Pakatan achieved such success, Anwar was 'located' in the right place and ight time. For Pakatan to have strong influence, PAS and DAP must wok together. And PKR play a role as the glue of this cooperation. PAS on PKR's right arm, DAP on PKR's left arm, PKR in the middle. When Anwar won the Kepala Batas by election, Haji Hadi and Lim Kit Siang knew they have no other alternative and allow Anwar became the Opposition Leader even though Haji Hadi and Lim Kit Siang are much senior in the opposition side of the Parliament.

Come to think about it, Anwar achieves his current political position on a silver plate. I believe Haji Hadi and Lim Kit Siang done much more than what had been done by Anwar as opposition candidate. But credit has to be given to him because he really know how to play his card. He really how to leverage his history ['unfairly' jailed and punched by the stupid police], his PKR status as the Party for all races, the unsolved issues between DAP and PAS especially on the Islamic Country and Hudud Law, and many more.

That remind me of the history on how Anwar got his position as Deputy Prime Minister long, long, long time ago. He was a student activist and because Dr. M did not want him to join PAS, Dr. M offered him Deputy Minister position. Evn at that moment we could see Anwar already leveraged his current situation in getting good position in government. From there onward, everything happened so easy for him. He did not have to stuggle like Dr. M in getting and mainatining his position. Dr. M had to fight KuLi, the Sultans, the Judiciary, etc. and all could potentially buried Dr. M political career. That is why when Dr. M placed 'in a ring' to fight Anwar, we should know already who will win. Anwar was very politically immature and naive [as compare to Dr. M] during those day.

So what is my point? My point is Anwar have not yet complete his 'learning curve' in his political career. If you say that Anwar already put in jail and that is a good experience for him, I just can give you a comment, experiencing jail term does not give you political intelligent. Without the 'learning curve' [same goes with Pak Lah], Anwar might become the Prime Minister because [as I said] he is a good 'leverager', but a little bit of tidal wave [we do not need tsunami for this], he will fumble. In fact, personally, I do not believe Anwar is capable enough to achieve the position of Prime Minister. Easy comes Anwar, easy go. That is the law of nature.

Feel free to disagree with me.

Thank you for you valuable time.

TYPICAL SEXUAL JOKE

Greetings…

· A guy who just got divorce complained about his ex-wife to another guy [that he newly met at a bar counter]. The new friend asked the reason behind the divorce.

· The guy answered ‘I’m not sure. Perhaps it’s my career’.· The new friend asked again, ‘what do you do for living anyway?’

· The guy briefly answered ‘Porn Star’.

Seriously, do you think the above joke is funny? Out of 10 friends, 9 of them found the joke funny. It is funny to understand that most of the funniest jokes in the world are sex-related. Sex sales and that is a fact. Otherwise Hollywoods would not use sexy women to sell most of their films. Otherwise the blue movie industry would not blossom as what we can see now. Otherwise porn sites in the internet would not take large portion of time of the internet surfers. To my surprise porn sites are damn popular even in a less developed country such as Afghanistan [according to the newspaper article that I read last year]. We do not need to be a rocket scientist to understand why.

However, a question pop up in my mind [you can say it is one of my Outrageous View], why a sex-related joke easily can make people laugh [or at least perceived as funny]. I ask you to waste your time to surf internet, finding all the good jokes available ‘in the market’. I bet you will agree with me that most of the jokes that could make you giggling one way or another involves with sexual subject. I am not saying the other jokes which is not sexually related is not funny but majority of so-called good jokes is sexual related.

Let me try to answer my own question.

I believe the main reason is sexual related jokes do reflect ‘something’. ‘Something’ that is very much related to our everyday life as if the scenario could also happen to ourselves. ‘Something’ that is very much portrays our stupidity without we realizing it.

Feel free to comment.

Thank you for your valuable time.

Dr. Tahoma

'CASINOING' THE SHARE MARKET

Greetings…

Assume that I invest my money in share market. I bought 10 lots of XYZ shares for $10,000.00 or in other words each of the share cost me $1.00 [simple calculation: $1.00 X 1,000 X 10 Lots = $10,000]. A week later, my friend told me that my share appreciates to $1.50 each. So I sold my 10 Lots share at $15,000.00. Assuming that the commission and any form of service fee are insignificant, how much do I make? The Answer: I made $5,000.00 [Gross Profit] in a week time.

Allow me to ask one more question. Where is that $5,000.00 come from?

Most people would answer ‘I do not know’

Some other people prefer not to answer.

Perhaps, few of them would answer, ‘The money derived from the market’.

The TRUTH is…

That $5,000.00 derived from those [the other investors] that already LOSS their money OR will LOSS their money in the share market!

The $5,000.00 is not from a genuine business, economic or investment activities. It is the money from the other unfortunate people in the share market. I do not see any different from getting the money through lottery ticket. Millions of people buy a lottery ticket for $1.00 and one of them get $1,000,000.00. That $1,000,000.00 is not derived from the sky. It comes from the unfortunate people who bought the lottery ticket for $1.00.

Please do not lecture me as if I do not understand the true mechanism of share market. I understand the purpose why any government and any financial system require the existence of share market [such as BSKL, NYSE, FTSE, etc.]. I understand such system is to ensure the liquidity of the share investment. Without the market, those who buy the shares would face difficulties to sell them. My MBA specialized in Finance and my PhD is also in Finance. But the explanation of the system does not justify the real application or practice of this ‘corrupt system’. The action and the intention of so-called investors who aim for the capital appreciation when they bought the shares make the whole thing similar to the system of Lottery Ticket. The same goes for those who 'investing' in Foreign Exchange and other financial derivatives.

I fail to understand why NOBODY, not even the MUFTI Institution understand this and comes with a FATWA that investing in the share market with the expectation of capital appreciation especially in short period of time is GAMBLING.

I am not against anybody that buy share for long term investment and targeting to make profit out of the dividend declared. That is a genuine investing act. But these people could also easily be blinded if the share value increase drastically and they would be tempted to sell their share in order to gain instant profit. Having says that, they will not be different as compare to those who purely buy shares with capital appreciation motive.

Just remember, every time you make money due to the share value goes up, you are not really making money BUT you get your money from someone else. And that someone else could be you one day.

Stop GAMBLING ooopss… I mean stop investing in share market [unless you really invest purely to get the dividend at the end of the financial year]. It is not worth it.

Thank you for your valuable time.

Dr. Tahoma

IDIOCY IN MALAYSIAN PARLIAMENT

Greetings...

I watched Malaysian Parliament in session few times. What I found interesting is how these so-called the Members of Parliament, the representative of Malaysian citizens, the group of people that suppose to set good example, fighting like a Primary School students. The Speaker of the Parliament faced lots of difficulties to calm all the member of Parliament and this scenario is equivalent to the difficulties faced by a teacher in controlling bunch of stubborn students in a classroom. These members of Parliament sometimes shouted at each other, mumbled without proper thing to say, got unnecessarily emotional, and did not listen to the Speaker to keep quiet. And sometimes the Speaker seemed as if he is going to have nervous break down when all these members of Parliament shouted as if they are in the wet market.

I have this ridiculous thought...

How much to install an audio system in which one person [the Speaker] could control which which member of Parliament can talk and which one can not? What I mean is an audio system in which in front of the Speaker located lots of buttons. If the Speaker wants MP from Jerlun to talk, he just need to press Jerlun. Other mic put into mute mode. So no matter how many people want to intervene MP of Jerlun speech, their voice could not be heard, not until they shout like Tarzan in the jungle. The current audio system in the House of Parliament allows everybody to speak, and all their voice could be heard through a loudspeaker. How ridiculous is that?

I believe that is the best solution on how to maintain order in the Parliament. Sending them away, emphasizing and re-emphasizing that the members of Parliament should behave, etc. does not work. So having 'fit-to-the-purpose' audio system is much practical. Unless such approach is unconstitutional according to Malaysia Constituional that I do not know of. If the government does not have enough budget for that, allow me to get the donation from my friends and other citizens. I believe some my friends and most of the citizens also could stand all the yelling of the immature members of Parliament in the name of so-called 'democracy'. Whatever...

Feel free to give any comment.

Thank you for your valuable time.

Dr. Tahoma