Archive for June 5th, 2017

Dear Mr Karpal Singh …

Exhibit A


June 4, 2014

To: Mr Karpal Singh

c/o Kingdom of Heaven

Dear Mr Singh,

Greetings from Malaysia. How has, as they say, ‘life’ been treating you. Has it not been three years since, and we do miss you as … hell.

Let me come straight to the point: It is with great displeasure I must inform you that one Mr Tan Keng Liang, some Gerakan man from Alor Star, has the temerity to call you a ‘deity‘ — as a deity in a ‘tokong‘. You might consider it as flattery, but let’s see….

We will return to that. For the moment though, this is the other part of the news, also from Mr Tan (and hang on to your seat): He thinks you are able, like PAS, to guarantee people ‘safe passage to heaven‘. (See Exhibit A, screen shot above of Mr Tan’s tweet.)

I have no idea how Mr Tan came up with the notion that to get to heaven requires ‘safe passage’. Maybe — who knows? —  he got it from his wife who has dreamed of flying to heaven riding a unicorn and surrounded by Saudi imams wrapped in white bed sheets, PAS and Jakim mullahs in tow. In this way, she won’t be waylaid then to be ‘tested’ for virginity by ISIS terrorists out looking for girls; 72 for each person can mean a lot of work and muscle and blood vessel stress.

Yes, his logic is difficult to follow, I know, but stay with me please: PAS mullahs — you are acquainted with them, of course —  has been known to decide who goes to Heaven and who goes to Hell. Your party colleague Hannah Yeoh is also an expert on that place, Hell; ask her about it should you see her one day.

(BTW, if you get a chance, please check out your neighbor. I’m simply terrified at the prospect that this letter will end up in the wrong place, heaven being so expansive. If that happens, we are in trouble. Blasphemy! I for writing, you for possession and we know how those desert Gods are easily angered and can be very vindictive and destructive. Think of hail and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah where, because a couple of guys behaved badly, Mr Tan’s Jesus God incinerate the whole town. It is what ISIS people also do today. I think we would call such an act genocide.)

Now, back to your goodself, Mr Singh. Whether or not you are seated in a ‘tokong’ is of no consequence to the powers Mr Tan has conferred on you as deity. His point is simply that you have been elevated in status, from human to a specie greater than human, from mortality to immortality. Even so, he won’t stand for your immortality: ‘DAP leader can really become deity?‘ he said.

From that, you can see how his logic between his two propositions — PAS promise of heaven being equal your conversion to deity status — is near impossible to put together. This is where Mr Tan’s confusion starts:

  • (a) PAS mullahs presume they speak for an Allah that, they insist, exist. Can you speak for Allah?
  • (b) PAS mullahs claim powers delegated by Allah. Do you make such claims? Have you such powers?
  • (c) PAS mullahs claim the grant of the authority of Heaven, deciding who enter and who can’t. Are you granted that authority? Please — and this is important — when you see Nik Aziz, who you are also well acquainted with, ask him about this point; he was a PAS mullah after all: How does he get heaven’s authority?

Can you now see the impossibility of our situation Mr Tan has thrown us? It is imperative, therefore, you address these points of contention because at stake isn’t just your reputation as the Lion of Jelutong. You are now the Tokong of Jelutong. More than that, your entire existence is in question: Are you man or God? Mr Tan is saying you are something in between, half man and half God. You are there, somewhere, up there, and we are trapped down here. Between us stands one Tan Keng Liang who is suggesting that infidels such as I now have actual hope of Heaven if only you give us ‘safe passage’.

Mr Karpal — or shall I address you as Lord Karpal — is now our salvation. You have done much good on earth so I implore you, once again, just for one more time, to assure me and my infidel friends passage to heaven.

We have no one else to turn to. We are neither Muslims nor Christians after all. Mr Tan has Jesus Christ to reserve for him front row seat in the Kingdom of God. What do we have? Nothing. Now, instead, we have you and we really don’t care if your heaven has no virgins. We — me and my girlfriend — just want to get in so long as it ain’t the same heaven for those ISIS people. (You understand our dilemma, don’t you? I am thinking of the girls.)

All this is cause for optimism and hope — provided Mr Tan is right. That is, if indeed you are God or, if not, as a God equivalent.

Here’s the problem: What if Mr Tan is wrong? That is, with all due respects, you are neither God nor half-God. No offense to you, please; it’s just that Mr Tan fella; he can be quite a nut.

Please understand this: not every man with a Chinese name (Tan Keng Liang is actually 陈庆亮 or Chen Qingliang) and born of Chinese parents necessarily know anything about Chinese philosophical ideas and culture.

By this I mean he may not even know how to read and write Chinese much less comprehend what it is he is saying when he tweets things like ‘deity’ or ‘heaven’. For instance, when he declared you a deity, he automatically presumes a deity has extraordinary human powers — like a PAS mullah! He doesn’t say why he should grant you the status of tokong deity? Who gave you deity power? Is there a king deity?

Your son Ramkarpal — and let me add this in case he hadn’t yet report back to you — has said this: “We don’t wish to offend any religion or tradition and prefer not to offer any comments on the matter.”

This reminds of the Wittgenstein line: ‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof be silent.‘ That is, if a person can’t or has no language to convey anything meaningfully and with accuracy and truth, then shut up.

As an analogy I shall compare Wittgenstein’s line to your learning English laws. What is the ultimate source of those laws? Are they even true — to us? If they do have such a source, then there must be a source giver. If the English are able to draw their laws from some source, what about the Chinese? Will it surprise you to know that the Chinese have their own legal institutions. Because Malays, or Malaysia, have no backing of their own legal sources it was therefore necessary you learn and pick up law from the Englishmen. Yes?

Or, look at it differently, what is true to the English is not necessarily true for us.

One result of this legal deficiency in Malaysia is that the West define things and pass laws purely on their own terms: God, religion, belief, faith, culture, morality, sin — everything. The only tool for their understanding was and still is their language. In Malaysia, they didn’t adopt the Chinese language hanyu. Nor did they adopt the standards of Sikhism.

This sort of maladministration has profound consequences. For one thing, it turned our lives around, making us dependent on their culture. Our lives came to revolve on solely the English worldview.

The implication is no small beer. It took the West more than 700 years since their arrival in Asia to understand that, by defining other people on their terms, they caused great harm. Take blasphemy laws: imagine being jailed for talking about some non-existent thing called God!

Or take the constitutional provision, ‘freedom of religion’. We have no religion and have no need for one. This being the case, the law ought to have been, ‘freedom from religion’.

In the NYRB western society has only just discover that they, too, don’t need a religion or a God to build a community or to be good. It’s the other way around. Among the Chinese, the so-called religion had nothing to do with ‘faith‘ (whatever that is):

A village had its temples, its gods, and they were honored on certain ‘holy’ days. Almost every profession venerated a god…. The list is inexhaustible (all of which) spread over every aspect of life like a fine membrane that held society together.

Further on, White people has also just discovered what we had taken for granted for thousands of years:

Chinese ‘religion’ had little theology, almost no clergy, and few fixed places of worship. Confucianism was largely a moral code of what the upright person should aim to achieve by self-cultivation. In the Analects, Confucius famously advised: “Respect ghosts and spirits, but keep them at a distance.”

The passage also means this: The religions of Abraham are not our ideas of religion and all the theology they had been telling us was nothing but White man’s bullshit falsified on irrationality then dressed in savory English.

Now, if there is no God, there can be no ‘deity’, and so there can be no ‘worship’ nor ‘prayer’. So, you see, how the thoughts of Mr Tan, of Anglophiles and similar others are trapped in the language they picked up from childhood then shaped in school, all the while in contradiction to their native upbringing?

We, the Chinese, have never considered a so-called deity as an object of ‘prayer’ (whatever that is). This is because, in ‘prayer’, western voodoo theology assumes there is a recipient, that is someone listening in. But, Mr Singh, you are dead.

To us, your statue, whether seated in a temple or outside, exist purely as a physical representative form with which your ideals of humanity are contained. The temple pays homage to you, venerating in your ‘deity’ presence. Why venerate? Answer, for your conduct of those ideals that we see are identical to our Daoist/Confucian moral code of conduct. Among which are, fair play and just administration of law.

We, the Chinese, defy all gods, whether big G or small g. We have no need for them. Our lives, our experiences, our conduct and our morality are grounded on real life circumstances then inculcated by learning from the past and this is, in turn, reminded and reinforced by rituals. Putting you up in physical image form is an enforced reminder of that idealism and your standard of humanity that we, as Chinese, take to heart. Call this practice ‘tradition’, as Ramkarpal correctly did (recall the Wittgenstein rule), but it is certainly not deification which, intrinsic to the word, connotes a western, biblical god-like status. (These motherfucking Anglophiles, they never cease to insult us.)

Our practices and rituals are not drawn by picturing some wishy-washy pieces of timber strapped together into a cross or through some fictitious tablet commanded by thunder and delivered on top of Mount Senai. All those things, if you’d think it through, are nothing else but voodoo, pure hogwash made up by men to shackle others waiting at the foothills.

Can — or does — Mr Tan Keng Liang comprehend all that I have explained above? Of course not. How can he? He is a Western product, a thoroughbred Anglophile, like Hannah Yeoh or half-fucked Malaiyoos such as Annie of the Valley; they are complete bananas, yellow outside, white inside.

For a man such as Mr Tan to be trained in law, in the powers of reason, and then to give in to accepting the voodoo of a fisherman walking on water, he must be a truly fucked up person. He is almost certainly nuts who, omg, wants to be elected into Parliament, speak on our behalf, then to made more laws and to run our lives, his way, White man style, and on his terms. Mr Singh, please, return and deliver us from this baboon-toothed motherfucker!

Now that you have heard us, let me also suggest that, if you have the time, pay him a visit. Several actually. Scarce the shit out of his pants if you need to. Tonight is a good night to start. The moon comes out at midnight.




They are not ‘praying’ because nothing exists to listen. Dead people can’t listen, even if willing. They are honoring and venerating ideals in the hope that they, too, could do just as well, be just as successful.

But newspaper editors and reporters will caption this as ‘offering prayers’. We have not just the ignorant to contend with but also malicious motherfuckers, like those as moronic as Tan Keng Liang and Malaysiakini.

Read Full Post »