Why can’t we be like this ?

 My wife forwarded an email to me showing these pictures and a short write up.

I was very moved by these and I would like to share it with all of you.

If a tiger can take the piglets as her own, why can human of different culture and religious belief live in peace?

Why are there instigators (batu api) in every organisation, every society? These instigators fight for the sake of fighting, create factions for the sake of creating factions. They are worse than the animals.

In the local scene, this is why DAP and PAS can now co-exist.


In a zoo inCalifornia, a mother tiger gave birth to a rare set of triplet tiger cubs. Unfortunately, due to complications in the pregnancy, the cubs were born prematurely and due to their tinysize, they died shortly after birth.

The mother tiger, after recovering from the delivery, suddenly started to decline in health, although physically she was fine. The veterinarians felt that the loss of her litter had causedthe tigress to fall into a depression. The doctors decided that if the tigress could surrogateanother mother’s cubs, perhaps she would improve.

After checking with many other zoos across the country, the depressing news was that therewere no tiger cubs of the right age to introduce to the mourning mother. The veterinariansdecided to try something that had never been tried in a zoo environment. Sometimes a motherof one species will take on the care of a different species. The only ‘orphans’ that could befound quickly were a litter of weanling pigs. The zoo keepers and vets wrapped the piglets intiger skin and placed the babies around the mother tiger. Would they become cubs or pork chops??
Take a look…

 Now, please tell me one more time……
Why can’t the rest of the world get along??



14 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. A true Malaysian
    Apr 07, 2008 @ 18:23:49

    Dr. Hsu,

    This story tells us that everyone of us has a rightful place on this earth and can co-exist peacefully if each and everyone of us posses a right frame of mind.

    There have been many arguements on the topic of ‘God’ these days, like:-

    my God is the only God
    my God is more powerful than your God
    Allah is the only God
    only Muslim can use that word ‘Allah’

    To me, all these arguements leading us to no where and it is a waste of time and resources. These arguements also lead me to think that, if your God is so powerful, then why there is still no peace in this world? Why there are still poors and sufferings?

    So, all these lead us to no end. These will only mass up the whole issues. We must as well put our efforts in enriching mankind.

    This is also the reason for why I said, leave religion alone, don’t involve religion in politics.

    On the other hand, I would like to think that actually there is no God. God does not exist at all. So, if everyone think like me, then there is no arguement on God.

    Really, we really need to know how to co-exist.


  2. jughead
    Apr 07, 2008 @ 19:23:31

    You cannot bring such analogy. The piglets are very innocent and does not go against the mother tiger. But what happen if the piglets grow up? Just like a baby and a teenager. Teenager are more rebellious. they can think for themselves and what they want in life. Likewise, PAS talk about religion but PAS should focus on good principles and governance which has in common with DAP.


  3. Trackback: Holy Balls and F-Bombs « Rants and Railroads
  4. romerz
    Apr 08, 2008 @ 00:00:35

    A true Malaysian,

    I agree with you that mixing religion and politics is a very combustible concoction but unfortunately, we live in a country where these 2 things are so intertwined.

    We have no choice but to talk about religion as certain aspects of it has crept into the laws of the land and will directly or indirectly affect us.

    Its very hard to debate about religion as it brings out the worst of human emotions.

    There is a huge debate and abuse and counter abuse going on in Malaysia Today triggered by RPK’s posting ‘Coming of Age’. It got so explosive that some posters were banned.


    I also put in my 2 sen worth which runs along thinking as yours. Guess what? It got a measly +5 votes!

    “Religion is the hardest issue to agree on.” – RPK

    Without a doubt!

    Why? Because it is all about human faith and ALL humans are different both physically and mentally. Why then not as hard for politics or race relations or any other debate?

    Because unlike any other subject, religion does not have the benefit of HINDSIGHT which is something we humans use to correct our beliefs or opinions and make adjustments accordingly in our daily life.

    Without hindsight, we are just ‘guessing’ that we have made the ‘right’ choice and that our choice will salvage us from ‘damnation’ in the after-life (for those who believe in the after-life).

    Before I go any further, I’d like to clarify that I’m agnostic, meaning that I’m a fence-sitter, a chicken shit to be blunt!

    Having eyes, I cannot fail to see that there are more believers than non-believers of God around me (whatever the names of the different faiths). So does that make me wrong for being unsure about the existence of God, just because I’m not part of the majority?

    Are the majority always right and the minority wrong? On this I’m not so sure and it is debatable, because to prove this assumption, you have to be able to ascertain ‘absolute truth’.

    What is absolute truth? Is it truth as believed by the majority of human beings on this earth or is it truth which cannot be debated upon and will hold true regardless of the test of time?

    I would like to offer a simple question for us human beings to ponder.

    Color blindness. It affects 10% of the human population worldwide. 1 in 10 people see red as green and vice versa. Because the 90% of us are the majority, we call the other 10% color blind. How sure we are that it is not the 90% who are actually color blind, seeing green for red or vice versa? If you seek truth, as I do, then don’t be so quick to conclude that your faith is the only true faith, disregarding all other humans who choose to use our senses and ability to think, to choose what suits us best (selfishness; a very human characteristic).

    “I think therefore I am” is the most I can go right now without the benefit of hindsight.

    If we are to believe that ‘God’ gave us our brain to think, then why are we not using it to explore ourselves and discover what is it that make us so willing to believe that God’s words are divine and not the interpretation of man?

    In summary, I am confused and unsure why we human beings have to be assertive about our beliefs. Religion or the lack of it is a personal matter between one’s self and one’s fears.

    No matter what people from other religion apart from yours may profess, you yourself determine what you believe in.

    What is unacceptable, IMHO, is imposing your belief on others claiming you are right and anyone differing from you is wrong. Who appointed the believers to save ‘souls’?

    Without hindsight, there is no right or wrong, so long as we are human beings, let us choose our own paths without infringing on the rights of others.

    I do not wish to spark-off a debate here about the existence of God. I am still searching for his existence/or not and cannot engage in a meaningful debate.


  5. romerz
    Apr 08, 2008 @ 00:14:11

    A very entertaining post from the same emotional thread.

    Hope Dr Hsu doesn’t mind my reproducing it here.

    The following is supposedly an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term. The answer by one student was so “profound” that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well.

    Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

    Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

    One student, however, wrote the following:

    First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving.

    As for how many souls are entering Hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell.

    Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell.

    With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

    This gives two possibilities:

    1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

    2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

    So which is it?

    If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year that, it will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you, and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number 2 must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over.

    The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct…leaving only Heaven thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting “Oh my God.”



  6. jeff
    Apr 08, 2008 @ 00:56:47

    Dr Hsu; we are not worst than animals except those umno racists, they are the beasts and evil doers, so in reality, animal is a lot better form of live on this world. So it is quite an insult for animal to compare with them since animal is at a higher level of purity and conscious where umnoputra is totally lack of except in pursuit of great wealth for own self with whatever means possible.I do not understand why you refer as we rather than those evil government officials.


  7. A true Malaysian
    Apr 08, 2008 @ 23:25:34


    I agree with you on ‘hindsight’ and ‘majority’ part of your comments.

    Without hindsight, we cannot judge whether it is right or wrong. This is why religions are what we call ‘beliefs’. There is no absolute right or wrong in religions. That is why we also call it ‘faiths’.

    My point of bring up ‘God’ here is to bring up what others believe as I feel that the word ‘God’ has resulted in many controversies that pose problems to the ‘co-existence’ brought up by Dr. Hsu here.

    The word ‘God’ has also been mis-used by many people. When there is something that one couldn’t explain, they often answered with ‘because of God, this thing happened’.

    Also, the ‘God’ element here also resulting in ‘must be correct’, ‘must believe’ or ‘must follow or else’ kind of reaction from those who rely on Holy Bible or Qur’an. This has become very rigid kind of situation and does not encourage ‘open discussions’ among the believers of the religions concerned. That also resulting in ‘co-existence’ problems among human beings.

    Well, when I say that I rather believe there is no God in this universe, I don’t expect many people will agree with me on this, but you does. That is a plus point to me.

    I subscribe to the saying below, ie:-

    “Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

    Again, I do not propagating anything here. Just ask yourselves, if there any truth in this saying?

    See how will be the response to this saying. I will only disclose whose saying was this, if necessary.


  8. romerz
    Apr 09, 2008 @ 00:28:02

    I have another joke to share with readers here. Its the funny side of ‘not getting along’. well actually nothing funny about not getting along, but important to keep our sense of humor.

    Two Arabs boarded a shuttle out of Washington for New York. One sat in the window seat, the other in the middle seat. Just before take-off, a fat, little Jewish guy got on and took the aisle seat next to the Arabs. He kicked off his shoes, wiggled his toes and was settling in when the Arab in the window seat said, “I think I’ll go up and get a coke.”

    “Don’t worry about it,” said the Jew. “I’ll get it for you.” While he is gone the Arab picks up the Jew’s shoe and spits in it.

    The Jew brought back the coke, when the other Arab said, “That looks good. Think I’ll have one too.”

    Again, the Jew obligingly goes to fetch it, and while he is gone the Arab picks up the other shoe and spits in it.

    The Jew returns with the coke, and they all sit back and enjoy the short flight. When the plane was landing the Jew slipped his feet into his shoes and knew immediately what had happened.

    “How long must this go on?” he asked. “This enmity between our peoples…this hatred…this spitting in shoes…and blowing noses in Cokes?”


  9. jeff
    Apr 11, 2008 @ 01:59:08

    In reality ,arab n jew are not hostile to each others, due to the fact of zionist conspiracy to expand territory beyond the confine border, and decade of islamic terrorism on innocent jews, both people are misguided by their own leaders with hidden agenda to hate and destroy each others, quite similar in umnoputra tactic used among Malay.


  10. dan
    Jun 16, 2009 @ 22:58:57

    well, that’s very interesting – they had to kill one tiger for the skin, and make one pig mother very sad for loosing her cubs just to make another tiger-mom happy…


  11. Mildonidle
    May 05, 2011 @ 14:37:52

    Do you think the tiger might just be fattening them up for Christmas?


  12. joe
    Sep 11, 2011 @ 04:12:15

    I love this story because it shows everyone that if we pretend to be something else, we can fit in.


  13. fatin
    Jan 15, 2012 @ 14:34:52

    hi! this is my first time visiting your blog 🙂 i like your style of writing and your english is easy for me! and i like this tiger story 🙂 and will keep visiting here!


  14. tess
    Apr 20, 2012 @ 06:01:22

    what happens when the tigress isnt nursesing anymore and decides she’s hungry?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: