Search the Community

“What burning ‘paper money’ really meant those days.” During a funeral ceremony in ancient China, paper-made models of houses, sedan chairs, treasure chests, clothes, daily utensils, and even effigies of servants, were burnt as the cortege was leaving home for burial in the cemetery. The ORIGINAL meaning of such an act is to show everyone present that all former possessions of the deceased cannot be brought along to the next life. At one’s death, everything one had ever owned has to be left behind. The burning only emphasizes this message, as it is the most graphical, symbolic, and dramatic way of showing total loss! There is a Chinese saying that ‘no possessions can be brought along to the next existence; the only thing that follows one is his deeds, or ‘karma’ ‘ ( 万般带不去，唯有业随身 ). Furthermore, his relatives and friends only follow the deceased up to the grave, but soon turn to go home, leaving the dead alone in his tomb! Thus, the burning of cheaply-produced paper models and effigies served as an effective educational tool. Witnessing how fire consumes every ‘former possession’ of the deceased, even an illiterate peasant or young child was able to understand this sense of total relinquishment at death. Today, this practice is completely misunderstood by the majority of Chinese. Instead of the original meaning, paper-made models have been turned into “paper offerings” – with the mistaken thought that whatever one burns, his departed relatives will obtain in the netherworld! Hence people nowadays burn paper models of the latest i-Pads, smartphones, LED screens, and “paper money” in inflated sums in order to please the dead. All these will not help the departed ones at all. In fact, this misunderstanding will only harm the living by maintaining their ignorance and delusions. http://www.nalanda.org.my/what-burning-paper-money-really-meant/

As I mentioned tt i was admitted. It was waiting for this case, and he would have been my donor. Guess it was not meant to be. RIP nevertheless, and wishing the family finds closure through this difficult period http://www.tnp.sg/content/parents-rage-kee...vest-his-organs

Rules are there. People just take it lightly. Luckily I was slowed and distanced away. This Vios had brake out of a sudden and signal, before making an illegal turn. [shakehead]

Hi, I'm interested in installing a spoiler that was meant for a different car make. I've actually 'test-fitted' with the actual spoiler so can confirm that it does not sit squarely (ie, it's not resting 'flat' on the boot) and have gaps of about 3mm at certain points of each foot of the spoiler. The workshop that is selling that spoiler says will need to fill the gaps with silicon. Anyone with experience in installing such 'incopmatible' spoilers? Can share your thoughts and experience?

http://lifestyle.msn.co.nz/nzmenslifestyle...h-on-gps-advice Woman drives rental car into marsh on GPS advice By MSN NZ 12:00 AEST Fri Jun 17 2011 A driver has highlighted humanity's growing dependence on technology when she drove her rental car into a US marsh while following directions from her GPS. The Mexican woman's road journey came a cropper while driving to her hotel in Bellevue, in Washington state, where she was attending a conference. The driver and her two female passengers were returning to the hotel from dinner in the Mercedes rental when they became lost and tried to use the Hertz-provided GPS. The woman told police she was following the satellite navigator's instructions but must have made a wrong turn just after midnight on Wednesday. One woman exited the Mercedes as soon as it entered the water while the other two tried to stay with the car as long as they could, climbing onto the side door frames. But they eventually abandoned the vehicle as it drifted out towards the centre of the marsh. A local fire official said the women were trying to reroute their path when they came upon a boat ramp near the entrance to a highway, and apparently kept driving into the water. "I don't know why they wouldn't question driving into a puddle that doesn't seem to end," the official told US network ABC News . "In sitcoms they parody something like this. To actually see it is surprising". No one was injured in the incident but the costly Mercedes four-wheel drive could be destined for the scrap heap.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp.../378773/1/.html

No flaming pls. healthy discussion of the possibilities. 1. some IU scanning based car parks cant enter. they dun allow bikes 2. save 50% of the ERP cost wat abt the legality issues?

Home > ST Forum > Story July 7, 2008 I AM confused and annoyed by policies affecting car ownership in Singapore. As a motorist, I am of the view that there are more and more cars on the roads nowadays, so the Government has to set up more Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) gantries and raise ERP rates to control traffic. My question is simple. What happened to the original purpose of the certificate of entitlement (COE)? Isn't it supposed to be the ultimate tool to limit the number of cars on the road? If the COE is doing its job well, why are the roads so choked that the authorities have 'no choice' but to set up ERP gantries everywhere to control traffic? Let's see what went wrong. First, for the past few years, the number of COEs grew, and car prices tumbled to a low five-figure sum. Second, car loans stretched to 10 years, with banks and dealers offering cash-back deals and zero downpayments. Third, additional registration fee taxes were reduced. The road tax has also been lowered. Simply put, the measures made cars cheaper and many people flocked to buy them - and many of those shouldn't own a car at all. I estimate at least half the car owners today earn less than $5,000 a month. Why are they buying a car? With ever-increasing oil prices and inflation, one will soon need to pay more than $1,500 a month for a small Japanese car, including loan instalments, petrol, maintenance and repair, parking, road tax, insurance and so on. And now, the new scheme will allow cash rebates to scrap cars, in order to turn drivers back to public transport. This is not wrong, but we are not using the system correctly. In the first place, we should make it very difficult to own a car, but we are doing the exact opposite by making it easy for people to own a car and subsequently 'converting' them back to public transport. This is moving one step forward and two steps back. Asking a car owner who has been driving for a decade to convert back to taking buses is like asking someone who is used to getting water from the tap to fetch water from a well again. A better solution is to limit car loans to five years, with a minimum 50 per cent downpayment. This will weed out thousands of people who can ill-afford a car. And yes, make the COE useful again by releasing fewer of them. Tan Wee Liang