Where did it go?

Looking at the aftermath of hurricane Katrina reminded me of an event last year. On Boxing Day 2004 is the day where certain part our country was suddenly washed by the tsunami. Hundreds of houses were damaged and assets worth millions were washed either away or ashore. Some lost their family members and all of them have suffered losses. But Malaysian being so generous has responded to the cries from the needy. Those with means have parted with some of their belonging in the name of helping the tsunami victims. We appreciate all the efforts poured by Malaysian to help the victims.

The Kedah Government has appointed a company to build temporary shelter/home for the victims and later build the permanent homes for them. Reliable sources told me that the company is related to one of the “leading man” in Kedah. Of course like other government projects, the company must have certain “link” or otherwise, no work for them. Thus, the “temporary shelter” was built and completed within 2 weeks after the tsunami incident with a promise from the government that the permanent houses will be erected for those who are without houses within a year from the date thereof. Furthermore, the promise goes on and on and other “help” will come earlier this year (2005). A local television network has started a tsunami victim fund collection which attracted many people to share a bite from the piece of their pie. Million of Ringgit were collected and announced everyday. Until the last day, the collection made will be enough to first of all build new houses for the victims and put them back on track.

But odd enough, the permanent houses promised to the victims is still a myth and the land where the houses were supposed to be built is still a vacant land. So, what happened to the initial plan? From the Boxing Day until the day this post is posted (20/9/2005) nothing had happened there. The temporary shelters are crumbling down. Wall falling and cements breaking here and there and the victims are asking for what they have been promised to them. New home and better living.

To make things better for the victims, the Federal Government agrees to allocate several millions to the company who is given to task to “develop” the new homes and later the “loan” given by the Federal Government will be paid off by the victims for a certain period of time. But one question remain unanswered. What happened to the contribution given to the local television network? Because if my calculation is correct, the contribution forwarded by Malaysian are more than the “loan” which the Federal Government agrees to give to the company and the victims will have the house free of charge. The residue will be given to the victims who are fishermen who loss their sampan and boats. But, my uncle, who is one of the victims, said that the money from the contribution was never seen and the only contribution received was the contributions which were directly given to them. I have seen a bank’s “stoves” in some of the houses. A company (not the company entrusted to build the permanent homes) refrigerators given to the victims and of course a lot of tiny weenie small stuff which is as important as the large items given by Malaysian DIRECTLY to the victims but no news on the millions contributed by some other Malaysian through the local television network.

So the victims and their families were asking these questions: -

1) When are we getting the new permanent homes or are we getting the home after all?
2) If we are getting the houses, why are we paying for it, aren’t there enough contributions given?
3) Where are the millions contributed by the public through the local television network?

Because to these victims, logic says, why should they pay when the contributions are enough to cover the cost of rebuilding their homes and what is their status now. Are they supposed to live in the temporary shelters for the rest of their lives or are they supposed to pack their things and go home to their own place and start rebuilding their home which were smashed by the tsunami. What are they supposed to do?

For readers information, the last time I went there, the place which was raged by the tsunami (especially in Kg Kepala Jalan and Kg Kuala Sg Muda) remains in the same conditions from that day (2004 Boxing Day).

Pek Nga...

… is neither a Japanese name for a car nor it is some unknown Korean word. My grandmother loves it and so do I. But people may ask what on earth is that.

For us “orang kampong” (especially in Kedah and I don’t know whether it exist outside Kedah or not), it is nothing more than a coconut pancake as opposed to the normal English pancake or “lempiang pisang”. For your information it is best to be eaten with curry (preferably fish curry) but I’ve tried with jam and butter. It is not as nice as you eat it with “gulai ikan semalam” (yesterday’s fish curry). Trust me on this it is the best thing you’ll eat and they even have a song for it. But I shall not share the song with you today. Not today. But I will share with you the way to make it.

You need:

A clean bowl
A flying pan (well frying pan. Mr Mia Sim Man, my standard 3 English teacher used to say flying)

The Ingredients:

Plain Flour (depends on how many people you’re serving. You want more you add more flour and this old recipe don’t really have measurement)

Grated Coconut at the ration of 2 flour : 1 grated coconut (if you use pound then 2 pounds flour : 1 pound grated coconut)

Water (to make a thick batter not our ordinary pancake batter a little thicker)

Salt to taste

Sauce:

Find yesterday’s fish curry (make sure it is still edible)

How to make it:

Mix flour, water, coconut and salt.

Heat pan the rest you can figure out I think. You like big pancake make big one and if you like miniature do small one.

Then it is ready to eat.

To make lempiang pisang, add banana to the batter and you’ll get lempiang pisang instead of pek nga. But make sure you eat it with “gulai semalam”.

Don't kiss my hand, will ya

King Abdullah, the new King of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia decreed that people should stop kissing his hand because the act of kissing hand of another person is unIslamic and against the Islamic teachings.

Couple of days later, scholars in our country answered and highlighted to Muslims that the act of kissing one’s hand does not contravene any Islamic teachings and it is basically allowed subject always that the act of kissing one’s hand does not bring the meaning of worship.

However, for the fun of it, let us look at the act itself. In our community, the act of kissing one’s hand was intended to show first of all respect to the other person. And we see children kissing parents hand, or the young kissing the elders’ hand. But would it also mean one submit to the other when the person kisses the other person’s hand. I give you the scenario of a wife kissing her husband’s hand. Is it an obligation? Or it was just what people do since Hang Tuah’s time? Does it tantamount to the act of submission to the person? In addition to that, I was having this question for quite a while now. In the Malay society, I don’t know why and for whatever reasons, a woman is supposed to kiss her fiancé’s hand. Why is that? I mean, the lady is not even your wife yet and the act shows? Submission to that person or just mere respect? These are among the questions which we should answer before we go on with the tradition.

Frankly, I was only introduced to this “tradition” when I got married (That was not totally correct. I kissed the hand that slapped me and it is not my parents however that would be another story). Before that, shake of the hand or “bersalaman” (as we know it) is sufficient for me. And we do the Arab thingy also. You know kissing on the cheek (muhram only). I asked myself, is the practice allowed long before King Abdullah raised the issue.

My opinion would point the fact that in our community, kissing one hand is just a mere gesture of respect or showing gratitude and nothing more. But be careful with those who kiss one’s hand to kiss ass. They are just not the people to be friend with. Why I say it is not a gesture of submission (I don’t know whether some people would think it is a sign of submission)? Well, if we look at the scenario, the hands that we kissed were our fathers’, mothers’, grandparents’, prominent leaders’ (may be for another reasons as well) and also the elderly. It is not that we submit to them and they are human like us too. If we say it is a kind of submission, then the person must be somebody like “Ayah Pin” or someone bigger.

But if we were to look at the story in the Holy Quran, when Allah first created Prophet Adam, all angels were ordered to prostrate to Prophet Adam (of course to the disagreement and objection of the Devil). But the prostration here is not meant that Allah wants the angels to worship Prophet Adam. The prostration here is the show of respect.

Thus, coming back to the hand-kissing practice, I hold the view after looking into the Prophet Adam creation’s story, and analyzing the circumstances which may lead to one kissing the hand of the other that the practice is allowed subject always that the act of kissing hand is not intended to demonstrate one submission to his fellow human being rather to demonstrate our respect towards that person and sometimes our show of gratitude. But I still don’t understand the advice some people gave to their daughter once they are engaged i.e. kiss your fiancé hand. May be not all but I have witnessed the instances where the mother say, "Hah Semah, salam dengan Mat tu, cium tangan dia. Dia tu nak jadi laki kau tu."

The Hornet breaking the formation

The first to make the move.....

and away.... they go...

copyright remains with budakkampong

Sunset

Sunset in Kg Sungai Jagong, Sg. Petani Kedah.















Copyright remains with budakkampong

The Celebration

The Finale...






















First firework to appear on the Putrajaya skyline
















I know what you guys are thinking, why the finale first... I just like the aircrafts more...

Men and reasons

Recent development in the world reminds me of the two P. Ramlee movies. One being Nujum Pa’ Belalang and the second is Madu Tiga. Why these two movies? One has a riddle and the other has a song.

The wording of the riddle in Nujum Pa’ Belalang goes something like this: -

Satu, banyak
Dua, sikit-sikit
Tiga, jarang-jarang
Empat, kadang-kadang

The song lyric in Madu Tiga on the other hand goes something like this: -

Hai senangnya dalam hati
Kalau beristeri dua
Seperti dunia hai ana ampunya
Kepada isteri tua
Kanda saying padamu
Kepada isteri muda
I say I love you
Isteri tua merajuk
Balik ke rumah isteri muda
Kalau dua-dua merajuk
Ana kawin tiga
Mesti pandai membohong
Mesti pandai temberang
Tetapi jangan sampai hai pecah tembelang

The riddle and the lyric do not take you anywhere save for the fact that there are occasion where men marry more than one wife. But the question, which is frequently asked here, is do we (by we I mean men) need more than one wife. Even it is allowed in the Holy Quran, but what would be the possible reasons to justify a man to keep more than one wife?

If we look around the world, we will find that in so many regions of the world, some men do keep more than one wife. If we travel to the Middle East, the King of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has more than one wife. The departed King Fahd came from the 5th wife. King Abdullah, his successor came from the 6th or the 7th wife. Same case with King of Swazi, King Mswati III. Recently, he gathered hundreds if not thousand of young virgins for him to choose one to be his next wife. I understand that the “chosen one” would be his 17th wife (it is a man’s dream to gather all women and choose which is the one to be his next wife).

But logic behind (the Kings) taking more than one wife was clear. So many tribes populated Africa and some parts of the Arabs country. So, the strongest tribe will emerges as the ruling tribe and civil war often occur between the tribes (just to show who will rule). While the King leads his tribe into the civil war, he is exposed to the risk of being killed. Thus, the King needs many offspring to replace him as King. Even if one or two of his princes were killed during the war he still has a lot more to replace him. Right?

But there apart from the “good” reasons, there are other reasons given by those who take more than one woman to be his “companion”. Some say men are given the ability to love more than one woman or men have to “release” their needs by having more than one wife (I think that’s the most appropriate answer). Believe me when I say I have nothing against those who has more than one wife because both my grandfathers have two each, their brothers have either two or three each and some other people I know have more than one but if the person have more than one, and he neglected either one or both, so what’s the point of having the wives with him.

My view on this matter would be based on the revelation, “And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan­ girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three, or four but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one or (the captives and the slaves) that your right hands possess. That is nearer to prevent you from doing injustice” Surah An-Nisa verse 3.

Most men stop reading the verse at “…marry (other) women of your choice two, three or four” but failed to proceed to the next limb. The continuance of the verse would show that “…if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one…”

Therefore, the crux of the verse is you can marry more than one woman but you have to be just. If you think that you are unable to do so, then you marry only one. But for those who have the least self-restrain, then the next limbs of the verse above are more or less left “untouched”. As long as he can “plough through a woman” then it is okay to have more than one wife and it is allowed. That would form somehow or rather shallow opinion on the subject matter.

The paramount consideration for men to have more than one wives here is the ability to deal with his wives justly. The word just or the act of being just itself is subjective. Or was it a word between subjective and objective. What does it mean by being just to the wives?

Does it mean that if you buy a red cheongsam for one you need to buy the exact same red cheongsam for the rest? Or does just mean the man ability to treat women nicely, fairly and without prejudice. As for me, just here does not mean that we have to do the former but if you shower your first wife with luxury, then the second wife if you have two, or the rest if you have more than two, should be able to have the same opportunity and vice versa.

The situation now in this country is for Muslims, they are allowed to have more than one (but some states requires the first wife to consent to the subsequent marriage) but for the non-Muslims, the law prohibit such arrangements even though before the Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act, 1976 comes into force, Chinese and Indians ethnics are allowed to keep more than one wife. For the Chinese, previously, they have the principal wife which is known as “Tsip” and secondary wives known as “Tsai”. I can’t remember the Indian’s situation but I remember the instances where they have more than one wife.

The intention of the parliament and the state authorities in enacting these laws are very clear. To prevent the cases where wives are neglected, abused and tortured (mentally and physically). Even if for the Muslims, the laws allow the arrangements but it would be a sin if the wives are neglected, abused and tortured and for the wives, they have rights to ask from the husband what they want. Finally, we men have to keep at the back of our head that marrying more than one women is not just to “satisfy” your needs because the responsibilities that come with the arrangements are huge.