Singapore Slingh - For Singaporeans, the Slick and the Sikhs

Singapore Slingh Dasam Granth (Prologue)

2014-09-30T23:49:00.001-07:00

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa;
Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

For the past year or so, I have been reading up on Dasam Granth Sahib. So far, I have read all of it, except its biggest chapter CharitoPakhyan (as it is very difficult to find resources online that can translate it to English).

Before I go on and start my own opinions about the various chapters in Dasam Granth Sahib, I would like to refer to Dasam Granth itself, its controversies and why I started reading it.

The controversy

Dasam Granth is a collection of Bani by Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji. It is written separately from Sri Gurun Granth Sahib Ji, where only one Dohra (couplet) is attributed to our Tenth Master. It is written in different chapters. In my opinion, it is also mean to be written in smaller different Granths as each chapter is unique. Also, SGGS Ji is largely written in Raags, DGS is mainly written in Chands.

There was / is a lot of controversy about its authenticity. Some say that since Guru Gobind Singh Ji did not add his bani into the SGGS Ji, hence why should he set aside a completely different Granth for his writings? Some question why Dasam Granth is more akin to Holy books of other religions which are story-based; as compared to SGGS Ji which is much more philosophical and its writings in its entirety are about God.

Proponents of DGS argue that since the Amrit Banis, of which Jaap Sahib, Tav Prasad Savaiye and Chaupai Sahib are Dasam Bani, are not refuted, why should Akal Ustat and CharitoPakhyan? Also we start the Ardas with the first Pauri of Chandi di Vaar, why should we not believe in Chandi di Vaar fully? In every version of the Rehraas (there are a few); we read the Savaiye (pahe gage..); why don't we then accept the chapter of the 24 Avtaars? Also,

This debate has been settled by the Akal Takhat and I think we as Sikhs should follow suit. Lets stop this bickering and the division of our Panth. And rather than saber rattling, lets put it this way. Read Dasam Granth Sahib fully, if you disagree, do so. But do not insist on others in doing so.

Dasam Granth Sahib Ji shown beside Guru Granth Sahib Ji in an old painting.

Personal Journey

Initially, reading comments online, I was vehement against the DGS. I am one who is strictly monotheist and do not believe in the Hindu Gods and Goddess. I am a man of strict logic which was why I really liked the straight forward nature of Sikhi; Naam, Seva and standing up for what is right even when it is tough and not ask anything back in return. DGS was portrayed as something completely different; and in many ways it is.

It was my Mama G, (mother's brother); who really opened my eyes. For all DGS doubters take note of this logic. If you are correct that the DGS is not written by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, then you are smarter than a lot of people out there and fools read the DGS. But if you are wrong, you have insulted the words of our Tenth Master. Would you want to risk that?

As I read on the DGS, there are parts that are absolutely beautiful and some others that, I myself wonder why its there. One would realize reading DGS is that other than Chandiji, no other diety is perfect in Guru Ji's eyes other than ChandiJi; and even then, Guru Gobind Singh Ji notes that she also was made. She also has a Joon and is not Ajooni (as in mool mantar)

Lastly, I would like to stress that the fact that I am not a Gyani, a learned person and definitely not a Maha-Purakh. I am just a Sikh that read the DGS and wants to share what I think about it.

Bhulla Chuka Ma'af.

Tragedy around FIBA Controversy all round

2014-09-27T01:59:00.002-07:00

It deeply saddens me that 2 Sikh players from India, including their captain, cut their hair so that they could play basketball for their country in the Asian games. I wish to speak about this in various angles.

Firstly, lets talk about FIBA. FIBA is the international Basketball authority. They banned "headgear" in all their sports without giving any good explanation. I get the reason some people think Sikhs should wear helmets in the army or on motorcycles, but to ban it on the basketball court? Really? Why? Because it makes people look different? Skin color make us look different, hairstyles make us different, our NAMES makes us different; they team that we play for is different, are we going to make all the above uniform? Is FIBA really that stupid to be scared of being different?

Sport is a great unifying force of good. Countless people exit poverty by lighting up our television sets; and indirectly our lives; with the talent they display in their sport. Jesse Owens and Milkha Singh smashed stereotypes along with their world records. It shows the most human of emotions, the joy of success, the agony of defeat. By playing together, you build camaraderie. No matter from which part of the world you are, you are on that court / pitch / field / gym (etc) competing with the person or people next to you.

Also, due to stupidity, insanity or (at worst) racism, of FIBA, we should appreciate so many other institutions that are not like that. FIFA and every football association around the world, FIH, NHL and every hockey association in the world, every boxing association, every MMA association (lets Sikhs keep hair), Wrestling etc....

Singaporean Sikhs who practice our religion like me, should also appreciate this. I played hockey and volleyball in school. No one ever made my turban an issue. Like every Singaporean son, I served NS and Reservist, but never had issues with my turban. This stupid incident really makes me appreciate my country.

Sikh Basketball player

Lastly, from a Sikh perspective, how sad is this? Where is the uproar? Some bits here and there, but where was the full blown action? Honey Singh saying stuff on Youtube is nothing close to sufficient. Why is Manmohan Singh quiet? Where are all the Sikhs that only seem to have loud voices in arguments and fights? Where are all the prominent Sikhs that did not demand an action? What would Israel do if circumcision banned from basketball? What would Muslims do if the name Muhammed was banned? Why were we so pathetically quiet?

At a personal level, I would have walked out of the Asian games if I was in the 2 Sikh's shoes. Qatari women showed the world how its done when they walked away. Many often say that I have an extreme point of view with regards to this, but I believe it is right. Clear lines has got to be drawn in the sand.

This is also the reason, I do not tie my beard. I am not against it on religious grounds, my problem is with its reasoning. Sikhs tie beards because other people (sometimes other Sikhs) are uncomfortable with it. They may call it untidy, out of times, ill-disciplined. My point is that if people are uncomfortable with our beards what are they going to be uncomfortable with next? Our Turbans? Our unshorn hair? Etc.. We are okay with organizations like FIBA blanketly banning our turbans, just like we are okay with organizations that never hire practicing Sikhs

I get it that some professions like surgeons or chefs; they need to tie their beard so as to not let it fall during an operation or in someone else's food. To me that is understandable, what I do not understand is why a computer programmer needs to tie his beard too. Scared beard fall into keyboard? <:)==

Gay and Sikhi

2013-12-20T09:06:00.001-08:00

Why in the world am I writing about gay issues again? I am wondering so myself. I am not gay. I do not hate gays. I do not have many gay friends; nor am I thinking about this 24 /7.

But there were a lot of people that were furious regarding Sikh Knowledge, a rapper from Canada, kissing a Muslim man in Canada. They were protesting laws against gay sex in India call Section 377. There were some morons making stupid threats. There were others that felt that he embarrassed his Pagh (Turban), and he should cut his hair as a result of it.

I felt that I should clarify the my interpretation of Sikh Religion's position on this issue on twitter and whilst doing so, I got a tweet back from Sikh Knowledge saying that I was not having enough sex. Kind of weird, then I tried to clarify it further and felt that it took too many tweets, hence I decided to try to put what I have on my mind in this blog.

Yes, I am not an authority on Sikhi, but there is only ever 1 true authority on Sikhi and that is the Guru Granth Sahib Ji. In the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, there is not one word, not one word, that criticizes a person for being gay. Do not believe me, find it here. None.

From word one to the 2nd last Ang of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, it is all about God and nothing else. (The last Paath in Guru Ji is Raag Mahalla, about the music mode of the banis). It is pure and its message is all loving. God is for all. If Guru Ji does not discriminate, why then the rest of us?

But in the Sikh Panth, marriage, is between a man and a woman. Some use quotes in Guru Ji which talks about how lady-soul want to entice her Husband-God. In my opinion, I think that is of spiritual nature and how all of us should be wanting to reach god and be hungry for His Name.

However, I would go to the 52 last orders of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, in which, rule number 14 states that all marriage must be done via Anand Karaj. Anand Karaj states that marriage is strictly between a man and a woman. Yes, as mentioned earlier, the bani was written to be Spiritual in nature. But it is Guru Gobind Singh Ji that gave the order that made it that human beings, not just our souls, are to partake in the marriage. So therefore in a Sikh point of view, marriage is between a man and a woman.

Furthermore, there is no sex outside marriage in Sikhi, be it with a man or a woman. This also implies that gay sex is not allowed. What I state is the fact, but I hope that I did not insult anyone.

Lastly, I think it is ridiculous asking a gay Sikh to cut hair? Do we tell a person that drinks or smoke to cut their hair? Do we tell a person that eats meat to cut their hair? So why should we tell a person who is gay to do so? So why are we having double standards when it comes to this?

Rab Rakha.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcNg4b5A5MA -- Anand Kaaraj.

No politics for a while

2013-12-20T06:32:00.002-08:00

Sorry to inform you that there would not be any political material on this site till the laws in Singapore becomes conducive to do so. It is simply ridiculous for me to risk my life and liberty in my country so that I can post blogs here leisurely.

Lets face it, I am not some big time blogger that the government should even be bothered about. Roughly, only one person a day comes onto this blogs, where I at times do not spend months on.In fact, I think that the government should not be even bothered about blogs, period.

But the Government does bother about blogs. I fear that if they do not like what I say, I will be targeted. I am 99.99% sure that I am insignificant to the Government, but the 0.01% chance is not one that I would want to take.

You may find that what I have written here is cowardice, but I hope that you respect this decision that I cannot write Singapore related issues for a while.

Why Sikhs do not worship Hindu Gods

2013-07-10T22:39:00.001-07:00

A beloved cousin of mine asked me yesterday.

: " You see in the translation of the Gurbani Kirtan that it is being sung, that there are a lot of Hindu gods in it; so why is it that Sikhs are not allowed to do a pooja of Hindu Gods?"

The most obvious Gurbani that would answer this is :

Swaiyaa

Paahe gahe jab te tumre tab te kou aankh tare nahi aanyo|| Raam Raheem Puraan Kuraan aneyk kahai mat eyk na maanyo||

O God ! the day when I caught hold of your feet, I do not bring anyone else under my sight; none other is liked by me now; the Puranas and the Quran try to know Thee by the names of Ram and Rahim and talk about you through several stories, but I do not ac

Sinmrit Shaastra Bed sabhai bahu bhed kahai ham ek naa jaanyo|| Sri asipaan kripaa tumri kar mai na kahyo sabh tohe bakhaanyo||863||

The Simritis, Shastras and Vedas describe several mysteries of yours, but I do not agree with any of them. O sword-wielder God! This all has been described by Thy Grace, what power can I have to write all this? (863)

Dohraa

Sagal duaar kau chhaad kai gahyo tuhaaro duaar|| Bahe gahe ki laaj as Gobind daas tuhaar||864||
O Lord ! I have forsaken all other doors and have caught hold of only Thy door. O Lord ! Thou has caught hold of my arm; I, Govind, am Thy serf, kindly take (care of me and) protect my honour. (864)

In Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, mentions of Hindu Gods are usually metaphorical. It is not a physical god. There are Hindu names of Gods that are used.

E.g. Mohan, Gobind, Gopal, Hari, Ram are used in names to describe God but are not the Hindu Dieties themselves. On the other hand, Raheem, Kareem, Allah used in Guru Ji is its equivalent to its Muslim meaning in the Quran.

Hari is used to describe God that is not attached to Maya; not Vishnu. Ram is used to describe the name of God with regards to peace not Ram Chand. Ram Chand himself is mentioned only 8 times in the Sri Guru Granth Sahibji.

Its like some Sikh kid named Gobind, Hargobind, Angad, Amar or Harkrishan. They might be named after our Gurus but are not our Gurus. A Christian named Jesus is not Jesus Christ. Muslims named Muhammed are not the Prophet nor are the Muslims named Kareem or Rafiq Gods. In the same way, our Granth Sahib refers to god in many names like Mohan, Gobind, Gopal, Hari or Ram, but not it does not recognize them as God.

Lets voice our differences not go to war about it

2013-01-21T04:40:00.000-08:00

This is with reference to this article on yahoo. http://sg.news.yahoo.com/growing-debate-online-over-repeal-of-section-377a--095505691.html
Basically, some priests in Singapore speak out against what they seem as a rising tide of homosexuality.
Firstly, I am not bothered at all that our former Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, was in the audience when one of the pastors was speaking. He was there listening and should not shoulder any blame for what the Pastor said.
In my personal opinion, I really do not have any malice or preference to gays being in Singapore. If you want to be gay, be gay. Your life, your wish. I also do not think that gay people are detrimental to the Singaporean society having had served National Service with them. Just because you have gay friends; that does not mean that you would be gay too.
People can also follow religion where they say that its not okay to be gay if they want to. It is their right and wish to do so. The rest of Singapore, who may think otherwise, should respect this fact too. That being said, these kinds of matters should be of a personal matter and not one to be pressured or impressed upon society.
I am a practising Sikh. I do not cut my hair. I am a vegetarian and I follow a religion that say that it is not okay to eat meat or cut our hair. In the same manner that I do not go around trying to force Singapore not to eat meat or to close down barber shops, Churches too should respect individual right to be gay if they want to.
This brings me this major point upon Pastor Yang Tuck Yoong comment where he referred to this as a war. This is where I think the Pastor crossed the line. Pastor Yang, we should never be in a proverbial or actual war with another. We are Singaporeans, regardless of whatever one thinks or believe in.
We are Singaporean regardless of race, language, RELIGION, thought and so on. We are Singaporeans, Christians, Muslim, Buddhist, Free thinkers, Hindus or Sikhs. We are Singaporeans, Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian or others. We are Singaporeans straight or gay. We are Singaporeans whether we support the PAP, or the Workers Party, or any candidate that we feel is best. We are Singaporeans, Pastor Yang; first and foremost.
Just as we have different races, religions and political affiliation, we have differences in the way we think. To change one's thought process, one should talk and persuade, not go on a warpath. We are an intelligent society. Let us decide if it is okay to be gay or not okay to be gay. You tell us your point of view and then let us decide.
Do not even talk about war against how we think. That sets a very dangerous precedent. If it is okay that we go to war with people who are gay, are PAP supporters going to then start a war with the Worker's Party supporters next? What if we go to war because we are if a different race?
To cap things off, I have absolutely no idea if there are homosexual activist who are going around waging war against the church or anything like that. If they are, then they should be ashamed. If they are just going against 377A, then I think it is okay.

My wish for Singapore politics

2013-01-06T06:20:00.004-08:00

A very intersting article was posted on Yahoo Singapore today discussing author's wish for PAP. Here is the link to the second part of the article.

That got me thinking as to what I want from Singapore in terms of politics. Here are 4 things I came up with.

1) A seperation from the law-making and the running the estate elements of Government. I would wish that the people making the laws and the people running our estates be different. In my opinion, there is a different skill involved in running an estate locally as compared to making laws for a country to run nationally. I also do not intend it to be a upper house, lower house kind of governance like other countries, but 2 bodies with different duties. One deals with local issues with regards to the estate, and the other deals with how this country is run.

2) Lets elect our and empower our Mayors. Many Singaporeans do not even know that we have 5 Mayors in Singapore and less of us even know what in the world do they do. I propose that Mayors be empowered, like in many other countries, to run the CDCs. Let them face all the problems on the ground like upgrading and cleaning carparks and so on. Let people choose who they want for these roles.

3) Empower our President. I believe that we should empower our President for there to be more check and balances of power. I think that the President, who is paid a lot, should be the person who actively chooses which elected MP belongs to which ministry and that which Ministry should be there in the first place. This would expand the role of the President who currently appoints the Prime Minister.

4) Greater representative democracy. Another condition that needs to be added in is that if a party wins x percentage of seats, then that party should, have to the best of abilities, have x% of seats in the cabinet. That would improve Singapore's Standing as a representative democracy. So if party X wins 5% of the vote and there are 21 cabinet positions, then at least 1 seat needs to go to party X. This would make situations more fair and gives public a chance to see what the opposition parties are made of.

New Rules (Singapore) ...#4

2012-12-16T22:46:00.000-08:00

1) Fire people from fucking up, not fucking around.

Who cares if Michael Palmer had an affair? That has got nothing to do with his job as speaker of Parliament. Same thing with the Workers Party MP a few months ago. They did nothing wrong.

What should one be fired for? Over budget on MRT and YOG by billions; flooding situation in Orchard, HDB prices too high, going on youtube and say that Singaporean live on streets etc...

2) Give recognition for a job well done.

Our football coach Raddy Avramovic is going off soon. He has won more national glory than all other coaches combined, amd yet Singaporeans and our media seem to have a good riddance attitude with him. Be careful what we wish for, because I do not see anyone being better.

3) When trying to get something, never play race card.

I initially had sympathy for the "strike" China workers, but the moment they start comparing themselves to Singaporean Malays, I got a problem there. This is Singapore. We may be majority Chinese but we are multi-racial and multi-religious. You do not like it that way, you can leave.

4) If you give one, you give all.

Again on the strike issue, if the SMRT is to give in to the strike workers demands for better lodging, then they better be prepared to do so for the other nationalities at other companies too. I agree that conditions were bad, but it would be even more unfair if only one particular nationality gets better stuff because they demand for it.

5) We have a Mr Singh International for Sikhs, where is it for our Kaurs sisters?

My Hypocritical stance on bearskin helmets and tying of beards

2012-12-09T15:21:00.000-08:00

As a practising Sikh, I did not have to wear a helmet over my turban during national service. I do not wear a helmet when I ride my friend’s bike.

So many people might assume that I would defend the right of a fellow Sikh in the UK to wear a turban instead of a Bear Skin hat when doing some parade in the British Army for the Queen of England. I do not.

Before I make my case, I would like to list the reason why Sikhs would not wear bear skin hats or helmets in Army and for motorcycles. It is not because Sikhs cannot do so. A Bear Skin hat can easily cover a Sikh’s turban. Sikhs in Guru Gobind Singh Ji (Our Tenth Master) time wore special helmets. And a helmet for Sikhs can be easily made for motorcycles.

But why do these Sikhs not want to wear helmets or any other thing on their head other than a turban. The reason is fear. If people start encroaching on Sikhs imagery with a turban, what else can they go after? Some feel that if you make Sikhs wear helmets today, will Sikhs be forced to wear a beret tomorrow which definitely would not cover a Sikhs hair?

I do get why they do it. In fact, I would use this sentiment in a similar manner in the second part of this blog-piece. But when it comes to this helmet philosophy I disagree.

Here is why. Sikhs are required to keep their hair uncut. Sikhs need to keep this hair covered. On these principles we should not compromise. Other than that, I feel we should be able to decide and apply discretion. Helmets are not meant to enslave a society, it is meant to save lives. Guru Gobind Singh Ji understood it, and had it in his army.

And at times, as long as we keep our hair covered and uncut, we should be able to do our jobs. What is wrong in wearing a bear skin hat over a Patka? Nothing! Wearing a bear skin hat in the parade would not make the soldier less a Sikh or more. It just means that that Sikh is doing his or her job.

My second stab at hypocrisy in this article is when I use the same sentiment on why Sikhs feel not the need to use helmets on motorcycles; on why Sikhs should not tie their beards. Many of my family and friends think that my reason for doing so is religious, but it is actually not.

Like what we do for our hair, practising Sikh men do not trim our beards or shave. However, it is a common practise for many Sikh men to tie their beards in a knot, gel the sides and put a net over it and make it look as small as possible and in their words, “making it look neat and clean.”

My first problem is with the phrase “making it look neat and clean.” Why, a Sikh who leaves their open their beard is not? If it is so simple in making a knot and putting some net over it was so clean and tidy, do these people not think that our Gurus would have come up with that idea?

Hygiene was an integral part of the Khalsa code. You wake up, you bathe first then you pray. Your body is your first place of worship you got to keep it clean and neat. And you think that our Sikhs then would not have made it a requirement if having a beard open if it was neat and tidy? Please!

Secondly, it is also psychological. If we are to allow someone to say that having a beard open is untidy, are we also opening up to other interpretation. A family member once told me that he cuts his beard having gel on your shirt would make it look untidy. There are entire industries where Sikhs cannot be put forward because they have turbans on their head, at times with the boss being practising Sikhs themselves. Where does the buck stop?

We should only tie our beards when we have to. If you are a surgeon, please tie your beard. If we need to tie our beards when handling radioactive material, we should. If you are having brain cancer and need surgery, please shave your head.

I have also felt the same way about people tanning or bleaching their skin. Black women should not be wearing weaves for work. It is not what on your head, its what in it that matters.

Please take down 377a

2012-11-30T18:12:00.001-08:00

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/gay-couple-files-377a-challenge-in-high-court-114540383.html
I am grateful to be living in a country where we accept and respect all religions; where we have free thinkers and not aethists, where different religions and races can come and harmoniously create a great environment to live in. One of the best things about this is that we are governed by a secular law that is respects religious believes cultural and traditional practices and customs.

This is the reason we have free thinkers who live harmoniously with others on this island. We do not have a problem with Chritmas, Hari Raya, Chinese New Year or Deepavali lightings and decorations. This is why roads can be closed for Thaipusam and Sikhs be allowed to serve in our army with turbans on our heads despite being minorities. Many "Westernized" countries do not share these priveleges that Singapore does.

In Western countries, most are open or are opening up to issues of same sex relations ships and marriages. In Singapore, whilst we are not closed and we do not openly hate gays like many of our fellow Asian coutnries do, we still lag behind these Western countries.

Many seem to be satisfied not to activele pursue and arrest someone for being gay. I liken this to saying that we are not actively investigating someone for being Jewish or to close our eyes to the Muslim practise of Korban. It should not be wrong in the first place. People should never be judged by the way they are (Jewish) or things they practise in private (like Muslims do during Korban).

There also comes the point that being gay is okay. I used to think that being gay was wrong too. This changed when I went to NS. There were two gay guys in my company named Aziz and Sophian in my Company. Whilst their actions were "girly" and they talk different and all, I realized that they were just like everybody else.

They were not the sex-hungry-sissy-perverts that I thought of gays to be before entering NS. Gays I meet later are like that. Singaporeans also treat gays just like any member of the society. We are no longer afraid of gays. Gays are no longer queer to us, they are just different. Just like being Malay is different from being Chinese, being gay is different from being straight.

Personally, I do not get why people want to be gay, and I also do not believe that people are born gay. But if some people are gay, so? You smoke, I get second hand smoke, increase my chance of cancer; you drink, you drive, I can die; but if you are gay, what do I lose?

Lastly, to people whose religious believes dictate that people should not be gay. I think if you think that way, then you yourself not be gay. I am a Sikh, in my religion, we do not cut hair or eat meat. So should Singapore ban barbers because of my religious beliefs? Should non-Halal stalls be banned? Should Pork and Beef be banned? Or how about meat and spices?

Lets live and let live. I think that government should really take down this 377A law. We are an inclusive society. We do not need to be scared..

Cut the BS out Sleeper

2012-11-19T21:57:00.002-08:00

Dear Mr Sleeper,

Let me get straight to the point. Your latest article in the Huffington Post is well just full of Crap.

As this name blog suggests, I am a Singaporean. I take to heart some of the offensive things that you have posted.

1) You have got to understand that Singapore is a country that takes zero tolerance to racial insensitivities. Even though you may have different intentions, your article can inflame some idiots who think otherwise. We already have Malaysia wanting to condemn Israel latest actions and let me guarantee you that your article, in all its inaccuracies, would all but be used as proof by some Malaysian Politician to condemn Singapore for political gain. Happened before and will happen again.

2) It is not a secret that Singapore got military training from Israel in the 1960s. It may come as news to you, almost every Singaporean son knows this. Your so call research claimed that Singapore only went to Israel, India and Egypt for help; in actual fact we asked other countries for help too. My elders were amongst the many who were trained by Singaporeans under the watchful eyes of the Isrealis. India too helped Singapore prop up our Airforce back then.

No one wanted to help Singapore. Reasons include not wanting to incur the wrath of Indonesia, a large country who had issues at that time and was having a campaign in Singapore called Konfrontasi. Another reason might have been the fact that the world did not know whether Singapore had rooted the Communists out and whehter they could make a comeback. But the reason, that I believe is most credible, is that Singapore was too small a country to care about.

Israel chose to help Singapore on one condition, that Singapore recognizes Israel. And we did. Hence the military partnership.

3) You failed to mention in your post that Singapore has chosen to stay neutral in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What that demonstrates is that we do not interfere in affairs that do not concern us and that Israel is a friend, not an ally.

4) Singapore issues with our neighbors is nowhere close to Israel issues with hers. We have no one shooting rockets over. Singaporeans go regularly to Batam (Indonesia) and Johor Bahru (Malaysia). Many Indonesians and Malaysians work here. I personally have family in Malaysia, one of my grandmother was born there. How you equate us is beyond belief. Majority of Malaysians do not go about claiming that Singapore should not exist.

Please Mr Sleeper, as the Singlish saying goes : You better wake up your idea!

Something Sikh women should know

2012-08-01T14:06:00.002-07:00

                   Ask anyone who knows me, I never intend to get married. Its nothing religious, customary and I am not gay; its just a personal preference. I rather live single happily than risk that for an unhappy marriage.

                   But I do get it that there are some practising Sikh men out there who are having trouble getting ladies. Why? Firstly, the men themselves are not the confident sort. Amongst my cousins, the most suave one is the person that wears a turban and a beard, not those who cut their hair.

                    Secondly, there is a problem amongst Sikh women that they do not want to marry a Sikh turbaned man. I do not need to go far. Some of my most beloved cousins have told me that they would never want to marry a practising Sikh, even though their own fathers are practising Sikhs.

                  There are forums online dedicated to this topic. And there are some good points that some make. There would be many Sikh men that would not even consider marrying ladies who choose to wear the Sikh Turban. I know as a matter of fact that this is true. I do not think that these people are right at all. There would be some who would not want to have women that are vegetarians. I think that this is less likely, but yes I do know that these people exist.

                    But there are other things that are utterly not true and baseless. Here are some.

1) Men do not like it and make fun of me if we have "hairy hands" ( as in hair on the skin (dermis) of the arm).

2) Men do not like it if we have hairy legs.

3) Men like plucked eyebrows, not "bushy" ones.

These two are very common mistruths and let me tell you it is utter bull! Unless you have super long, gorilla-length-hair caused by Hypertrichosis (Werewolf Syndrome) on your arms and legs; nobody is going to give a shit. Trust me, I am a guy. Like girls talk about guys, guys talk about girls, and no one and I mean no one; ever say or think that hair on hand or legs are unattractive. And, men do not even notice your eyebrows! Unless they are gay or creeps.

4) Men do not like hairy armpits.

No. Again, if you have very long armpit hair that will be issues, but majority of the time no one gives cares! Ok. I would say that this is not as unanimous as the earlier issues, sometimes associating it with bad smell. But that can be doused down with perfume.

However, there are some guys that are "turned on" by armpit hair, those are creeps; Stay away from them!

5) Men do not like hairy privates.

I am not even going there but just to say that it is utterly not true. Also, we do not care how fair or dark it is.

6) Men think that drunk girls are fun, and girls who do not drink are a bore.

If you are fun, you are fun. Regardless if you drink or not. It is a personality trait. If guys tell you that they prefer women drunk, they are looking for trouble.

7) Men like woman in heels / lipstick / ear rings / bangles/ nose rings / etc.

No, they grab attention, but not attarction.

Okay. Now that all these stuff are covered, what do men really see first? They would see your face first, and then move gaze down to your legs. Thats it. Then its you and your personality. If they notice you from the back, there is only slight difference in the manner that they gaze.

And ladies please do not say that I am not going to go out with that dude because the dude has a Turban or has short hair. Similarly for guys, do not care if girl is wearing a Turban or has short hair. Its really superficial. In the long run, its the both of you and how you are going to live together and all those stuff that your mum can explain it to you better than me.

My mum did not choose my dad, her brother did. If he were to be as judgemental as many people were at that time, and not see my dad for what he was rather than him having short hair, I would not be here today.

New Rules Singapore Version (Part 3)

2012-07-03T02:16:00.001-07:00

1) There is record heat and cyclones in the US and India, with very hot weather in Singapore, please do not ever mention that there is no Global Warming. At least we can then move the discussion to whether its man made or natural which can also be proven with simple experiments.

2) When I say why marriage is nothing but a choice, do not look at me as if I am crazy. There are some marriages where the woman stands by her man despite being beaten to a pulp, raped or even having her kids raped; but she still stupidly stands by her man. And there are others that divorce over toothpaste. Whether its arranged or "love", its just a choice. There is no such thing as a romance or love. Best example, the Reverend Moon marriages in Korea, where people marry the person that this pastor chooses; some "couples" do not even speak the same language. Some find this romantic or right; to me its just crock.

3) Just because you are not good in the small picture; it does not mean that you do not look at the big picture. If we can overlook extramarital affairs of a CEO as long as he rakes in the cash, I see why we cannot get the man in the street to start talking about politics, economy and so on. Its with discussion that we improve. Listen, but never heed right-away.

4) " The strong in the community are men, the strength is in the women of the community." (For Sikhs) I feel that this is the single biggest drawback that we have in our religion. If we do not go out and reach out the women, still forcing them to carry out abortions, practice dowry, not inculcate Sikhi in them, then we would be in the trouble.

5) Even if you do something that another loved one does not approve of, please do not just ignore the person outright or intentionally block the person from communicating with you. That hurts more. Its as if the action that you took changes you and the relationship that you have with that person. And to that person, if in the one in a million chance you are reading this, I still love you too bro.

New rules (Singapore Version) #2

2012-03-27T17:15:00.001-07:00

1) Never ever try to mass preach an individual on beliefs and not expect the individual to be defensive and volatile. Even if you think your group and you are right, you are still being the thought-rapist forcing things down another's throat.

2) No matter how one twists it, if you go after an unarmed person and you shot that person, honey you are guilty of something, at least provoking the death of that person. At worst, Zimmerman killed an innocent kid, Treyvon Martin and should kiss the noose for that.

3) Coming to how this case became famous, there are people who claim a double standard as to why the Treyvon Martin case garnered a lot of media attention and to the murder of a Muslim mother of 5. Whilst this is also a hate crime, also heinous, the bad thing about the Treyvon Martin case is that that individual did get away with that law and could get away with it again. In the Muslim mother crime case, if the criminal is caught, he or she is going to jail, going to get life or kiss the noose. So stop whining and complaining that America or the world is unfair to you.

4) If there is Peace in Syria as a result of his work; Kofi Annan deserves the Nobel Peace Prize; no questions asked. It shows how a man of esteem and respect can make anyone change the minds of the worst amongst us. Also what was the reason that they gave the Prize to US President Obama, don't know if that was a great decision in hindsight.

5) Back home in Singapore, we need to get a fucking wet weathered plan for the roads. I mean, rain and sure there is a jam one ( written in Singlish Slang here). Knn! If we have Wet-weather-plans for schools, Army and events why not one for the road? It is just not sane to expect that we come to work / school 1 hour late when it is raining or 1 hour early when it is not. Have we forgotten that we are in the tropics and that it rains more than 1/2 the year here?

New Rules (Singapore version) ... #1

2012-02-24T06:46:00.000-08:00

NEW RULES : (Inspired by Bill Maher New Rules; but please we are Singapore, do not say things that Bill Maher can, especially when it comes to weed or religion)

1) Singaporean men should not complain about Singaporean women being too high standards when we are going around marrying other nationalities. It is not only degrading to our Singaporean women to say such false things; but what does that mean. Singaporean men go for lower standards? Foreign women are of a lower standard or are less ambitious then Singaporean women?

2) NO MORE ERP! With ERP, got Jam. No ERP, also got Jam. So why should we pay for some policy that is not working. Would you buy something that is always not working?

3) Lets not make Mother-Tongue an examinable thing. It is rather shameful to fail in a subject that you speak in all the time!!!

4) Whilst STILL on Mother Tongue, lets learn all 4 official languages of Singapore and more. Its a great way to break down barries! But do not make them examinable. It is bad enough to fail in 1 language.

5) If Hougang gets a by-election, WE GET A HOLIDAY!!!

Why want to have no more F1?

2011-10-09T05:16:00.000-07:00

After just 5 years, our government seems to want to put the brakes of F1 in Singapore. They say it is because, Singapore is losing money because of the F1.

F1 in some sense, creates some problems for the citizens.For a couple of weeks, so many roads are closed. This causes the "town" area of Singapore to be clogged up even more than it normally is. Sometimes, you go round and round trying to get out of that area.

However, it is a pride of Singapore. F1 commentators often say that this is the jewel of the F1 crown. It is only the second street race in the circuit and the only one that circuit that runs at night. Sure, some driver will complain that the Singapore roads are bumpy, let them. It adds to the difficulity ratings right!!!

The party that follows F1 too is awesome!!! When esle can we have people like Shakira, Black Eyed Peas and Nicole Scherzinger come down and perform on one rocking night? You think the countdown party at Sentosa can draw that many stars?

Most importantly, it adds excitement and the tinge of sports that our country severly lacks. When else do Singaporean glue themselves to the screen for world class action that is not football nor the Olympics? When can we have Singaporean drivers amongst the elite in F1? If Malaysia can, so can Singapore!

I just hope that they do not take the F1 down!!!

Sehajdhari Sikhs, SGPC elections and criticisms.

2011-09-16T07:03:00.000-07:00

In today's blog, it would be about the Sikh element of the blog.

Every Sikh should aspire to be an Amritdhari Khalsa. That is something that I agree with. Before I die, I would like to take Amrit. That being said, I have not Amrit Shak yet.

By some definition or another, I am not an Amrit Dhari Khalsa. An Amrit Dhari Khalsa is someone that has taken the Amrit and has become Khalsa. They have kept their 5 ks amongst other things.

Now for some reasons or another, there are many people including myself, have not taken Amrit yet. People like us are called Sehajdhari Sikhs, people who have yet to take Amrit, but may want to do so one day and would also want to be identified as a Sikh of Guru Nanak Dev Ji.

That by itself I feel is already a mistake. The full form of the word Sikh is GurSikh, the Guru (teacher)'s student, the Guru's Seeker. Who in the world is one to say, this person is a Sikh or that person is not a Sikh other than the Guru? Only a teacher should dictate who his/her students are. Why should other students dictate if this person is a Sikh or not one?

Going back to the topic, currently Sikhs have a "supreme court" or our "legislative arm of Sikhism" at the Akal Takht. There is a committee that decides on the biggest matter of Sikhism. This body has elections every now and them.

Recently, the have announced that only Amrit Dhari Sikhs should be allowed to vote; after years and years of allowing Sehajdhari Sikhs to vote. This, as one can expect, has angered many Sehajdhari Sikhs.

On this ground, I dn not agree. Here is my reason why : Because I feel that a person that is following the crux of the religion should be the one that is allowed to hold the highest "office" in Sikhism. Just like only a Singaporean citizen can vote for a Singaporean MP, only an Amrit Dhari should vote on matters that concerns the Khalsa Panth.

I also fear that there would be an over-riding effect if Sehajdhari Sikhs come in and start having their own way when it comes to things like keeping of hair, allowing consumption of liquor and tobbaco and so on and so forth.

That being said, there are many issues that are not being ironed out but the Akal Takht. For example, we still are not sure if Raags are important in Sikhi. We still do not know if a Sikh should be a vegetarian or should be able to eat meat that is not Kosher, Halal or made for other religious reasons.

There are also other social evils that are being done by Gurudwara boards all around the world. There are still people that go around calling themselves Jatt or Chamar and believe in this ridiculous caste system. Caste system is not allowed by any measure in Sikhism. We still have the problem of the dowry, which leads to female infanticide. This should not be allowed at all, but are still carried out infront of Gurudwaras today. Fetuses are being aborted just because they would become girls if they are born.

Worst is that we are also closing an eye to even the biggest matters in Sikhism. When Sikhs get kidnapped in Pakistan and were told to convert or die, the Akal Takht did nothing. It just sat there and did nothing. Organisations like United Sikhs had to intervene. What more do we want? We do not need the SGPC coming out to tell Bollywood directors on how long Akshay Kumar's beard should be. Nor do we need them kicking people out of the Sikh religion for saying what the person think. We need them to wake the hell up or Sikhi would be going down the drain...

Please accept my apologies if my views offend you. Please air yours if you have to, but be civil about it. Thank you...

Why are problems not solved there and then?

2011-09-04T07:46:00.000-07:00

A few days ago, Singapore got robbed in the World Cup Qualifiers against China. 2 soft penalties were given and one clear penalty was not given to Singapore. There will be the same calls again for reforms to the sport and calls for video referral that has been applied to sports like field hockey and American football.

But as the readers can guess, nothing is going to be done at the end of the day. This has been going on for so long that it is really making me wonder if there is anybody out there that is really willing to solve the problem? Or are the press just going about sensationalizing everything so that they report it again and again and again?

This issue is not only about the football field. It is about so many things in life where we are just accepting problems as it is and not doing anything about it. The environment is one of them. We know that global warming is real. We can feel it in Singapore. We can see Orchard Road getting flooded. But what do we do? Nothing. The whole world does nothing.

Of course there are issues that we cannot control. E.g. If the government raises transport fares again, what can we do? Go and riot like England? We cannot do anything but "suck thumb". But not everything is like that.

But the fact is that we are not doing anything about things that we can control. We are "just closing our eyes" on things that do not seem to affect us or do not affect us too much. We have the attitude of if can tahan, tahan lah. Why are we not wanting to change things that are not right?

Is there anyone out there that can answer my question? Is this something ingrained in our DNA as human beings? Or is it that we just do not care anymore?

Is creating more MRT lines just a short term process

2011-08-29T22:10:00.000-07:00

SBS just won the contract for the DownTown Line. Ask anybody anywhere in Singapore and they share my pessimism that this line would not do anything to ease the morning congestion in the MRT. Then again, I only man on the street with common sense, not an intelligentsia with influence.
-->

The Downtown line is part of a massive expansion of the rail network in Singapore. From the simple East-West and the North-South Line in the past, it has truly become a very confusing web of lines. Well at the very least, they are not going to make the distance between the different trains as bad as the NEL to East West line distance at Ourtram Park.

That being said, would having so much lines really ease the burden? In simple common sense, yes. Because more tracks for people to use. But in reality, ask yourselves, is that really the case? Has the NEL really eased congestion? Or has it increased it? My points exactly. In my opinion, the only thing that the NEL has really contributed to is to the easy access to Punggol and Sengkang from anywhere in Singapore without a car or Taxi.

So what can be the other solution? Double decker MRT? But that can only work for the train lines that are not underground. Very soon, most of the line would be underground. More and faster trains? How fast can it be? Additionally, during non peak hours, there would be idle trains, which would mean even higher costs, see bei chia lat liao. Would this be the solutions that Singaporeans want?

How about the 2 opposition ideas? One to nationalize the train lines. Really? Where got Singapore nationalize anything? What if a screwed up fellow is running the trainlines? Or the other option is to have competition. What line can they operate? Where are they going to acquire the land from?

So many headaches... What to do... Or my fellow Singaporeans what to do.... Please advise....

A proposal to empower the President

2011-08-25T10:45:00.000-07:00

[caption id="attachment_69" align="aligncenter" width="150" caption="President Elections 2011"]The Presidential elections are just hours away. Yet, I think most can agree with me that we are not feeling the excitement of this campaign that was here a few months ago during the General election campaign. Ask most Singaporeans on the street and most would not be able to name the 4 candidates for the election?
-->

Why is this so? This is the man that is going to hold the highest office in Singapore. He is supposedly even more respected that the Prime Minister. He is the Yang Pertuan di Negara, the Head of State. Yet, all the President seems to do is to be the guardian of the CPF and the Reserves and to attend ceremonial functions such as see football games, attend military parades and the NDP. Please, if there is anyone out there that thinks that I am wrong, please correct me.

Here is my suggestion. One of the charges of our President is to oversee the appointment of civil servants in Singapore. Currently, this is just a rubber-stamping authority. Whatever the Parliament chooses, President accepts. Before I give my idea, I would like to think of our Ministers, DPMs and Prime Minister as civil servants too.

So my idea is that since the President is elected, he should choose from a list of people who is to be allowed to be the portfolio of ministers. For exampe, many Singaporeans are unhappy about the transport situation in Singapore. If there was a President who is empowered by the vote off the people, the President can choose the appropriate party in charge of transport in Singapore. In fact, I think that the President should also have the right to fire an individual should he deem fit, with the minister then becoming an MP; but this power to terminate a Minister should be vetoed by a 2/3 majority in parliament.

People often find it wierd that though I may not agree with the People Action Party policies, I am a loyal voter for the PAP. Why? Because at the local level, the MP in my GRC, Mr Muhammad Zaqy, does a really good job. We told him once that the carpark was dirty, he ensured that it got cleaned and we never have any problem since then. I do not see why he has not earned my vote.

I think that this would really make Singapore a fully Democratic society were the people choose all branches of office. With this, the President would surely be the head of state. With this system, the President really deserves and earned the millions of tax dollars that he is currently earning.

Lastly, I wish to stress that I agree 100%, that the President and the Cabinet should not be warring with each other. I think that we should have the two branches of office working together and discussing on the right path of our magnificent country.