Friday, October 07, 2016

Virgin

Malaysiakini - ‘Nasi Lemak Anak Dara’ owner unfazed by lewd calls, pictures


For selling her nasi lemak under an apparently saucy label 'Nasi Lemak Anak Dara', business owner Siti Hajjar Ahmad admitted she has been harassed with lewd calls and even lewd pictures from errant males.

Since she started her business about one month ago, Siti Hajjar said she has received at least six lewd calls, including messages with lewd pictures.

Most of these 'naughty' messages and calls came around midnight, forcing the 24-year-old to turn off her phone.

"I once received sexually harassing calls, and at two in the morning I received lewd pictures. I was shocked, I blocked him, turned off my data, shut down the phone and went to sleep.

"I received weird messages at least six times from different individuals. They got my number from my Facebook posting," she told Malaysiakini.

Siti Hajjar's 'Nasi Lemak Anak Dara' stall made headlines last week when Selangor Menteri Besar Azmin Ali visited her stall to hand over forms for her to apply for a hawker's licence.

Sweetie of course could expect Azmin to make a call, wakakaka. But the person Siti Hajjar should probably watch out for is the man in the following photo.


It's about registration of brand all across the world. In Australia, a shop which had been operating under his own designed Virgin brand since nineteen k'ong k'ong (Penang colloquialism meaning for eons, wakakaka) found to his shock, from a legal letter sent by the global Virgin, that he was infringing rights of the globally registered brand and to cease and desist using the name within xx number of days, or he won't be one, that was, a virgin (financial one, of course, wakakaka).

He had no choice but to change his shop's name even though he came out with the Virgin brand when 'someone' was still in his diapers, wakakaka. Rave and rant and call the law an ass, but the reality life and laws regulating brand registration are tough.

But I think Siti should well be safe because her brand is in Melayu, and it's quite unlikely Anak Dara will take to the sky in the near future, wakakaka.

On the subject of anak dara, many religions seem to have a very involved stake in it. They seem to indicate some men's unceasing selfish and avaricious demand for sweeties who were 'untouched, unpossessed and unused' but for their own sexual gratifications or, in rarer case, their worship and respect (eg. Roman vestal virgins, Miryam the mum of Yehoshua ben Yosef).

Let's start off with Islam where the most well-known one is the writing of Abū al-Faḍl ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Abī Bakr ibn Muḥammad Jalāl al-Dīn al-Khuḍayrī al-Suyūṭī (1445 - 1505) who wrote:


Each time we sleep with a Houri we find her virgin. 
Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. 
Each chosen one [i.e. Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetizing vaginas.


Hmmm, I wonder how could a vagina be appetizing but there was no/is telling of taste (ahem) when Abū al-Faḍl ‘Abd al-Raḥmān was consoled by probably only a camel in Egypt's Western desert, wakakaka.

The myth of perpetual virginity, despite or rather in spite of the 'virgin' being shagged umpteen times, reminds me of Draupadi in Hindu legend.

Draupadi is the principal female personality in the Mahabharata, where the story of that Hindu epic would have been meaningless without her. Her husbands were the Pandava brothers, yes, her husbands in plural, wakakaka.

As the Mahabharata tell us, after Arjuna (No 3 of the Pandava brothers) won Draupadi's hand in an archery contest, she married all five of the Pandava brothers, due to a casual unthinking remark by their mum, Kunti.

Hindu values required her as the heroine to be a chaste virgin for each of the heroic brother, not unlike the houri of Abū al-Faḍl ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Abī Bakr of the 'appetizing vaginas' fame.

In another Mahabharata episode, Yudhishthira the husband of Draupadi (Brother No 1 of the Pandavas) lost her in a game of dice to his enemy-cousin Duryodhana of the Kauravas. Having on her, the cousin started to unravel her saree to strip her naked as an act of insult to the Pandavas, but thanks to her divine saviour Krishna, her saree was endless (to the envy of Globe Silk Store), thus any amount of naughty unravelling was futile.

Again, Hindu values intervened to keep the chastity of a heroine.

A wee while back in time, Kunti the mum of the 5 Pandava brothers had, prior to her acts of sex with the gods Dharma, Vayu and Indra (mind you, not at the same time) and giving birth respectively to to Yudhishthira (No 1 Pandava brother), Bhima (No 2) and Arjuna (No 3), had a prior sexual liaison with the sun god Surya whereafter she gave birth to Karna. 

After giving birth to Karna, her first son, Kunti miraculously reverted to being a virgin again. Hmmm.

Meanwhile the Christians made Miryam, mum of Yehoshua, into a virgin. She gave birth to Yehoshua through a process claimed as virgin birth.

But the story of virgin birth buggered the prophecy that Yehoshua as a descendant of King David, as claimed by Israelites to be a promise to David by YHWH.

In 2 Samuel 12 - 14 we read:

"When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for My name and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. For I will be his father and he will be my son"

But Matthew screwed it when wrote the genealogy of Yehoshua in his gospel. Yehoshua was an issue (son) from Yosef who was no doubt descended from King David. But if Yosef was the father, then Mariam couldn't have had a virgin birth. Matthew had recklessly started with King David via his son King Solomon which came down to Yosef, but as just mentioned, conflicted with the virgin birth. If Yosef acted like a red blooded man, there was then no virgin birth, but if Yosef couldn't or didn't perform, without him (Yosef), then where was the lineage from King David?

Fortunately for the biblical authors,  Mariam was also from the House of David so a revision or different genealogy was written subsequently during Luke's time, Luke was smarter, probably seeing how Matthew f**ked it up, by starting from another of David's son, Nathan.

Unlike Yosef who was from King Solomon's line, Mariam was of Nathan's line, thus Yehoshua (Jesus) could be traced along the Nathan to Mariam line without Yosef being involved. Thus Mariam satisfied the prophecy that Yehoshua was of King David's lineage (via David's son Nathan) and also the virgin birth claim (minus Yosef the poor luckless hubby).

There was another factor, YHWH's curse on Jeconiah, why Luke's version supports Yehoshua to be King of the Israelites while Matthew's version did not. but let's leave this for another post, wakakaka.

Anak dara ... er?

21 comments:

  1. I'm not a Christian, but I just wonder, why do you have to insult other people's religions ?

    I heavily criticise the actions and practices of Muslims, Muslim societies and Muslim countries for example, but never insult the writings of Islam itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. what insult - all taken from t respective religious documents

      Delete
    2. But wait my matey KT ... perhaps, there will be no sex parties/orgies in heaven lah… The suicide bombers and the jihadist/terrorists will be disappointed!

      Quote:

      A March 2002 New York Times article describes Luxenberg's research:

      "Luxenberg, a scholar of ancient Semitic languages, argues that the Koran has been misread and mistranslated for centuries. His work, based on the earliest copies of the Koran, maintains that parts of Islam's holy book are derived from pre-existing Christian Aramaic texts that were misinterpreted by later Islamic scholars who prepared the editions of the Koran commonly read today. So, for example, the virgins who are supposedly awaiting good Islamic martyrs as their reward in paradise are in reality "white raisins" of crystal clarity rather than fair maidens. . . . The famous passage about the virgins is based on the word hur, which is an adjective in the feminine plural meaning simply "white." Islamic tradition insists the term hur stands for houri, which means "virgin," but Luxenberg insists that this is a forced misreading of the text. In both ancient Aramaic and in at least one respected dictionary of early Arabic hur means "white raisin."

      In 2002, The Guardian newspaper published an article which stated:

      "Luxenberg tries to show that many obscurities of the Koran disappear if we read certain words as being Syriac and not Arabic. We cannot go into the technical details of his methodology but it allows Luxenberg, to the probable horror of all Muslim males dreaming of sexual bliss in the Muslim hereafter, to conjure away the wide-eyed houris promised to the faithful in suras XLIV.54; LII.20, LV.72, and LVI.22. Luxenberg 's new analysis, leaning on the Hymns of Ephrem the Syrian, yields "white raisins" of "crystal clarity" rather than doe-eyed, and ever willing virgins—the houris. Luxenberg claims that the context makes it clear that it is food and drink that is being offered, and not unsullied maidens or houris."

      Delete
    3. I did not write the following so read at your convenience:

      This false myth of "white raisins" originated from Christoph Luxenberg, a modern author writing under a pseudonym.[39] His anti-Islamic claim,[40] which has been accused of having a "Christian apologetic agenda", is that the Qur'an was drawn from Christian Syro-Aramaic texts in the early 8th century, in order to evangelize the Arabs, and that the Aramaic word 'hur' (white raisin) had been mistranslated by later Arab commentators into the Arabic word 'houri' (virgin). The Qur'an describes the physical characteristics of the houri in many places, and a reading of relevant verses show that Luxenberg's theory regarding heavenly white raisins is in error. Raisins, which are dried grapes, cannot have large eyes, big breasts, cannot restrain their glances, cannot be described as chaste, or have any of the characteristics listed above. The Qur'an further states that men will be wed to these houri. Men cannot be married to raisins or white grapes. Additionally, for someone to accept this "72 raisins" theory, they would also have to accept that the Qur'an was not written by Allah or revealed to the Prophet Muhammad in Arabic during the 7th century, but was in fact written by Christian evangelists in Syro-Aramaic during the 8th century.

      Delete
    4. y not many religion document on buddhism, taoism n confucinism? relatively speaking, is that not an act of insult? the absurdity of the 3 religion or belief system mentioned is not less. i agree tis is yr right, but doesn't mean it is not selective or not insult. diff is ck is direct while u imply.

      Delete
    5. personalities of 'virgins' have not been raised in buddhism, taoism and confucianism. if you can provide some I'll be happy to include them

      Delete
    6. Wakakakaka... direct to the point, & save time & brain power too!

      Why u want to play wayang kulit mixing with shadow boxing, when the audience is already 'high' - drowning in their toxic religious broth?

      A straight arrow is like using an Automated External Defibrillator (AED) to restore the heart's natural rhythms during cardiac arrest. It saves life for the borderline case.

      But it's too late for the religious zombies. They have no self-conscious. They only have an insatiable urge of following naturally what they have been converted.

      BTW, ain't the subject in hand related to virgin in the Abrahamic faith?

      So, why so kepochi to get other faiths to involve?

      Must justifing one horrendous act in one faith with similar act in other faiths ke?

      Ain't they ALL horrendous?

      Apa logic tu???

      Delete
    7. Because insulting people to raise awareness always works? :lol:

      A believe is a believe because it required no proof and our brains are hard tunes to keep on believing.

      For example why bother throwing statistics to pakatoon that their beliefs of malaysian getting bankrupted is flawed. They will never believe it so might as well have fun with them.

      Delete
    8. Insulting people to raise awareness?

      It doesn't work with zombies. Bcoz that jelly between their ears is all messed up, zilch neurons interconnectivity. Thus, zombies work on manufactured urges, that nothing, even praise/insult, means nothing to them!

      My AED is for the self conscious, bordering on fence-sitting! R u?

      A believe is a faith, required no proof. Betul.

      Tapi that believe MUST be able to stood on comparative logics within the same idea.

      U can't have two opposing teachings existing within the same idea & calling that idea a faith! The two opposing teachings have rendered that believe to be self contradicting. When a believe is self contradicting it's no longer a faith, since it is NOT precise.

      U r quoting a piece of spin from that Manchester imbecile. Why don't u use yr brain? Ada otak, tak?

      Yr quoting that spinmaster, LSS's take of throwing statistics that malaysian getting bankrupted is flawed, again, shows convincingly u knew NOTHING about financial data implication!

      LSS is playing with statistic, & u r buying his plays wholesomely..tsk.. tsk..sigh.

      Suffice to quote this:

      Lies, damned lies & statistics.

      Simply put, LSS has conveniently binned all solid rebuttals, leaving ONLY layman replies to counteract his spins.

      Comparing M'sia's high debt ratios, vis-a-vis Oz, is VERY misleading.

      Yes, Oz has a higher mentioned debt ratios. So r many other developed countries. But Oz also has a much higher CREDIT DEFAULT TOLERANCE compared with M'sia.

      Tahu apa tu CREDIT DEFAULT TOLERANCE?

      Maksud nya, when crisis hits, Oz has enough credible reserves, from all financial resources, to lessen the debts issues.

      Tapi, kalau M'sia is hit by another financial black swan macam 97, tentu mati lah, u bet!

      So keep believing those spins lah. Meanwhile make sure u ada cikup simpanan when crisis hits.

      Don't cry father, cry mother & blame every other people except u!

      Delete
  2. gotcha... since you always quote wine and women and endless sexual pleasures in paradise for soo many umpteen times.. therefore ipso facto you believe in Allah too. hallelujah..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. of course, dun u see his judgement is solely base on one take an oath, or no.

      typical dap fanboy, selective accusation n selective text when it suit him.

      Delete
  3. Waduhhh! You should 'konsiders' incubating suicide bombers and talibans, Ktemoc?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nothing in the Qur’an mentions about 72 virgins. So, it is from the hadith. There are more than 500,000 hadiths but only 2,400 i.e. (less than 0.5%) are considered credible (‘sahih’). This particular hadith on the 72 virgins is in the weak category indeed.

    Nevertheless, our dear KT would prefer to say it again and again and again, either to ridicule it and or to make it fact. We know how KT’s feel for Islam/Muslims! Thus, he will pick and choose la! I remember, once KT did promise himself “I will never mention the 72 virgins ever again”. Why turncoat on his promise? tsk tsk tsk..

    BTW who is the world leader in trafficking prostitutes? How many brothels in the world are there? Is there any law on prohibition of prostitutes in the Christians West, Jews Israel, etc ? There are many Nons who can easily or had f***(ed) more than 72 virgins on earth. Why don’t you blog on it KT? Wakakaka.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. my dear Bro hasan, don't be so sensitive about the virgins. If it's a fatwa, let it be so.

      If you look carefully I did NOT mention 72 virgins as promised - it's 70 (minus 2) wakakaka

      why compare pros with anak dara - different lah. besides I was only quoting Abū al-Faḍl ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Abī Bakr, maka tenang lah, saudara

      Delete
  5. •Quran-(52:17-20): "They will recline (with ease) on thrones arranged in ranks. And We shall marry them to Huris (fair females) with wide lovely eyes.” "There they shall pass from hand to hand a (wine) cup, free from any Laghw….”
    •Quran: (37:40-48): …they will sit with bashful, dark-eyed virgins, as chaste as the sheltered eggs of ostriches.


    •Quran: (44:51-55): Yes and we shall wed them to dark-eyed houris (beautiful virgins).
    •Quran: (55:56-57): In them will be bashful virgins neither man nor Jinn will have touched before. Then which of the favours of your Lord will you deny?
    •Quran-(55:72): "Hur (beautiful, fair females) guarded in pavilions;”
    •Quran: (78:31-32): "As for the righteous, they surely triumph. Their gardens and vineyards and high-bosomed (pointed breast) virgins for companions, truly overflowing cup”
    •Quran-(78: 33-34): "And young full-breasted (mature) maidens of equal age, and a full cup of wine.”
    •Quran-(55:57-58): "Then which of the blessings of your lord will you both (jinn and men) deny? (In beauty) they are like rubies and coral”.
    •Quran-(56:34-37): " …we created the houris and made them virgins, loving companions for those on the right hand….”
    •Quran-(55:70-77): " In each there shall be virgins chaste and fair….dark eyed virgins sheltered in their tents whom neither man or Jinn have touched before…”
    •Quran-56:22: "And (there will be) Huris with wide, lovely eyes (as wives for the pious)”


    •Quran-(56: 35-36): "Verily , We have created them (maidens) of special creation. And made them Virgins.”
    •Quran- (55:56): "Wherein both will be Qasirat-ut-Tarf (chaste females restraining their glances, desiring none except their husband) with whom no man or jinni has had tamth before them.”
    •Quran: (2:25): "And give glad tidings to those who believe and do righteous good deeds, that for them will be Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise)……… .and they will be given these things in resemblance (i.e., in the same form but different in taste) and they shall have therein Azwajun Muhtahharatun (purified mates and wives) and that they will have abide therein forever”.
    •Quran:(47:15): "The description of Paradise which the Muttaqun have been promised (is that) in it are rivers of water the taste and smell of which are not changed, rivers of milk of which the taste never changes, rivers of wine delicious to those who drink, and rivers of clarified honey……….

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What r u trying to prove?

      1) The holy book is full of questionable entries?

      2) Something was wrong with the translations?

      Unlike the other Abrahamic holy books, this one has no other alternative sources to trace it's origin - what u get is what u have!

      Besides ancient Arabic language was not a well developed medium of literature. There were many tribalistic interpretation of the same word, causing uncertainty in the exact meaning implied.

      Perhaps, the matured ummat Islam should form a worldwide effort to formally give a right form to their holy book.

      Delete
    2. Monsterball.. mana ada sebut 70 atau 72 anak dara?

      Delete
    3. Any difference in fooling around with 1 anak Dara, or 70, or 72???

      U people r REALLY losing the essence of fair play!

      ONE horrendous act is less horrendous than 70???

      Ya loh, in quantity. BUT, no less horrendous!

      Can u get that into that jelly between yr ears?

      Delete
  6. What r u trying to prove?

    1) The holy book is full of questionable entries?
    Yes
    2) Something was wrong with the translations?
    Yes

    I actually lifted the quotation from a blog, but I won't quote the blog as the overall blog may be interpreted as anti-Islamic.
    Its run by a Westerner who appears to be proficient in Arabic and very knowledgeable about the Quran and Hadith.
    Like Ktemoc with regard to Christianity, I suppose, he uses his very detailed knowledge of the Quran and Hadith to expose the inconsistencies, fallacies and dubious areas of the Islamic scriptures.

    Unknown - what is for sure the Quran repeatedly mentions many perfect virgins. Human beings are very uncomfortable with vague references to "many".
    Somebody along the way must have placed a specific number to it. 72 is as good a number as 70...or 60.

    ReplyDelete
  7. How can Muslims cherry pick (or raisin pick...wakakaka) which Hadith to accept as hasan (genuine) and which are not ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hadis ada tiga: sahih, hasan dan dhaif.. hadith hasan adalah hadis yang tak cukup kukuh kerana satu atau lebih sanad sambungan perawi (narrator) lack credibility. oleh itu boleh dianggap lemah. wallahuaklam..

      Delete