tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26968024817696778302024-02-20T16:40:31.624-08:00ANTI ANTI-HADEETHThe entire Anti Hadeeth ideology is destroyed with this one verse from the Quran:
"16:44. (We sent them) with Clear Signs and Books of dark prophecies; and We have sent down unto thee (also) the Message; that thou mayest explain clearly to men what is sent for them, and that they may give thought."Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-10085696212632976432013-01-09T10:22:00.003-08:002013-01-09T10:22:21.422-08:00When Love is a One-Night Stand <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">When I was younger I couldn't understand what women wanted.
This is because women themselves didn't know.
Feminism told them to be independent, to have careers and lovers. But their instincts told them to get married and have children. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Recently Mary, an American woman living in London England wrote:
I am 39, twice divorced, childless and could not understand why it is so difficult for me to find Mr Right. Thanks to your website now I know exactly why. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">I will show one of your articles to my lady friends [who] are very unhappy and complain that most of the men they meet (and we are talking about men over the age of 30, not 15) just want sex and refuse to commit. I have become spiritual as a result of my loneliness and eagerness to procreate. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> In the meantime I will read your articles faithfully and thank God that someone has the guts to come out with the truth. For the past five years I kept asking myself why my life has turned out as unfulfilling as it has whereas my mother didn't have that problem (she was born in 1929). </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Mary is one of millions of men and women (including myself) who do not have families because of a covert campaign of psychological warfare waged against heterosexual society. This Rockefeller-sponsored program of social engineering and eugenics is waged under the guise of "feminism" and "eqality.". The pill, sexual liberation and the mainstreaming of homosexuality are all part of it. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> The aim is to degrade depopulate and destabilize humanity by divorcing sex from procreation and by pretending gender roles are social and not biological in origin.
Women have been brainwashed to usurp the male role and abandon the female. The resulting conflict and confusion leads to a breakdown of marriage and family. This produces dysfunctional people who are obsessed with sex and look to the corporate media and state for values and direction. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> WOMEN'S SELF DEFEATING BEHAVIOR </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Mary identifies the nub of the problem: men "just want sex and refuse to commit."
Young women today act like sex is the only way to attract men. They try to parlay sex appeal into lasting love and family. This is self-defeating. It is sending the wrong message to men.
Ladies, if you want love and family, do not present yourself in sexual terms. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Why try to differentiate yourself in terms that practically any young woman can provide? No wonder you are dumped!
Instead present yourself as potential life partners: wives and mothers. In other words, dress modestly and prepare to be indispensable to the man and children you will love. Learn the skills of a homemaker and helpmate. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> Yesterday a female cashier at Safeway shocked me by smiling. I quickly realized that it was part of her job. Female charm (warmth, grace, cheerfulness, attentiveness, modesty) have been crushed under the jackboot of feminism. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> Ladies, make sure a man is worthy of you. Don't get involved with sexual nomads who haven't time for courtship and marriage.
Sex is the sacred ritual of procreation. Sex should always take place in the context of love, preferably marriage.
Our children are literally part of us. They represent our organic growth. It is healthy, natural and normal to feel possessive about them. They are us. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> PROMISCUITY </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> Promiscuity is not normal or natural for heterosexuals. As I have said elsewhere, the heterosexual bond is built on trust. Trust is based on monogamy.
The Illuminist cult that rules the world portrays traditional morality as "old fashioned." Traditional morality represents the accumulated wisdom of mankind regarding happiness. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Our moral conduct contributes more to our health than diet and exercise.
Monogamy is good for men too. A friend wrote: "Men get their sense of self worth from the love and respect they get from their families, the honest production they create at the work place and they feel good about what they are doing when they believe that they are building a better world for their children. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">All of this has been taken from us Henry. It is so sickening that very few men have the courage to look at any part of it."
Women also depend on a man (their husband) for personal fulfillment. This is why they obsess about love and marriage.
In marriage, a man assumes a responsibility to fulfill his wife as a woman, i.e. as a life partner and mother. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Women are different from men. They are instruments, vehicles. They need to be cared for and used for a higher purpose or they will rot on the vine or explode with frustration.
Sex is a small part of life. We live in a bizarre precarious world and we need to choose real people with character and ability to be our mates. Love grows from day-to-day caring over a long period of time. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> THE FOCUS OF MARRIAGE </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"> Marriage is not about sex and mutual adoration. That gets boring fast. It is about getting things done, doing God's work at home and in society.
They've tried to discredit God by blaming Him for everything that goes wrong. God is not a fixer: He is a spiritual ideal: absolute truth, justice, goodness and love. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Our ability to perceive these ideals is what makes us human.
We are intended to embody these ideals and bring them into the world. If we don't, it won't happen and we will deservedly suffer the consequences. So will our progeny. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">Most people care about their children but pay little heed to the real state of the world they will inhabit.
Thus the proper focus of marriage is not the man and woman, but on God. In particular, the man should have a vision of how he will serve God. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">The wife should choose a man whose vision she can share.
What do women really want? They want to weave a web of love. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS, sans-serif;">This is a family devoted to spiritual ideals.</span></div>
</div>
Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com25tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-24773594120953518692011-07-21T00:23:00.000-07:002011-07-21T00:37:29.836-07:00How A Feminist Daugther Disown Her Mother for Destroying Her LifeEDITOR's NOTE: Confessions of a feminist's daughter about how her mother destroyed her life by imposing the feminist ideology upon her.<br /><br />Notice how Feminists encourage:<br /><br />a. Promiscous sex<br /><br />b. Neglect of parental responsibilities<br /><br />c. Support the practice of abortion<br /><br />d. Destroys the family institution<br /><br />e. Neglect of children<br /><br />f. Infanticide<br /><br />g. Feminism is against human nature<br /><br /><blockquote><!--[if !mso]> <style> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]--><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:browserlevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" name="Hyperlink"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" name="Normal (Web)"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id="ieooui"></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Wingdings; panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:2; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:0 268435456 0 0 -2147483648 0;} @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:1; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:0 0 0 0 0 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} h1 {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-link:"Heading 1 Char"; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; mso-outline-level:1; font-size:24.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; font-weight:bold;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-unhide:no; color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; color:purple; mso-themecolor:followedhyperlink; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} span.Heading1Char {mso-style-name:"Heading 1 Char"; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-locked:yes; mso-style-link:"Heading 1"; mso-ansi-font-size:24.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:24.0pt; mso-font-kerning:18.0pt; font-weight:bold;} span.linktext {mso-style-name:linktext; mso-style-unhide:no;} span.readercommentno {mso-style-name:readercommentno; mso-style-unhide:no;} p.imagecaption, li.imagecaption, div.imagecaption {mso-style-name:imagecaption; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} /* List Definitions */ @list l0 {mso-list-id:1991250360; mso-list-template-ids:1349545212;} @list l0:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Symbol;} ol {margin-bottom:0in;} ul {margin-bottom:0in;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} </style> <![endif]--><h1><span style="font-size:100%;"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1021293/How-mothers-fanatical-feminist-views-tore-apart-daughter-The-Color-Purple-author.html"><span style="">How my mother's fanatical views tore us apart</span></a></span><br /></h1> <p> By <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Rebecca+Walker" class="author">Rebecca Walker</a><br />Last updated at 1:18 PM on 23rd May 2008<br /></p><div class="facebookLikeTop"> <fb:like href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1021293/How-mothers-fanatical-feminist-views-tore-apart-daughter-The-Color-Purple-author.html" width="90" height="30" colorscheme="light" show_faces="false" layout="button_count" ref="LikeButtonTop"></fb:like> </div> <div class="article-icon-links-container"> <ul class="article-icon-links cleared"><li class="first"> <a class="comments-link" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1021293/How-mothers-fanatical-feminist-views-tore-apart-daughter-The-Color-Purple-author.html#comments" rel="nofollow"> <span class="icon"></span><span class="linktext">Comments (<span class="readerCommentNo" rel="1021293">0</span>)</span> </a> </li><li class=" gr3ox"> <a class="addstories-link myst-add myst-article-1021293" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1021293/How-mothers-fanatical-feminist-views-tore-apart-daughter-The-Color-Purple-author.html" rel="1021293|5| nofollow"> <span class="icon"></span> <span class="linktext">Add to My Stories</span> </a> </li><li class=" gr3ox"> <a id="shareLink" class="js-sl share-link" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1021293/How-mothers-fanatical-feminist-views-tore-apart-daughter-The-Color-Purple-author.html#socialLinks"> <span class="icon"></span> <span class="linktext">Share</span> </a> </li></ul> <script type="text/javascript"> DM.has('shareLink', 'sociallinks', { 'id': '1021293', 'eTitle': 'How+my+mother%27s+fanatical+feminist+views+tore+us+apart%2C+by+the+daughter+of+', 'eUrl': 'http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Ffemail%2Farticle-1021293%2FHow-mothers-fanatical-feminist-views-tore-apart-daughter-The-Color-Purple-author.html', 'eShortUrl': '', 'eDesc': 'As+a+revered+feminist+and+author+Alice+Walker+touched+the+lives+of+a+generation+of+women+through+her+iconic+book+The+Color+Purple.+But+one+woman+didn%27t+buy+in+to+Alice%27s+beliefs++-++her+daughter.' }); </script> </div> <p style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size:100%;">She's revered as a trail-blazing feminist and author Alice Walker touched the lives of a generation of women. A champion of women's rights, she has always argued that motherhood is a form of servitude. But one woman didn't buy in to Alice's beliefs - her daughter, Rebecca, 38.<br /></span></p><p style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size:100%;">Here the writer describes what it was like to grow up as the daughter of a cultural icon, and why she feels so blessed to be the sort of woman 64-year-old Alice despises - a mother.</span> </p><p>The other day I was vacuuming when my son came bounding into the room. 'Mummy, Mummy, let me help,' he cried. His little hands were grabbing me around the knees and his huge brown eyes were looking up at me. I was overwhelmed by a huge surge of happiness.</p><div class="clear"> </div> <img src="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05/23/article-1021293-0159B4BB00000578-124_468x487.jpg" alt="Rebecca Walker" class="blkBorder" width="468" height="487" /> <p class="imageCaption">Maternal rift: Rebecca Walker, whose mother was the feminist author of The Color Purple - who thought motherhood a form of servitude, is now proud to be a mother herself</p> <p> </p><p>I love the way his head nestles in the crook of my neck. I love the way his face falls into a mask of eager concentration when I help him learn the alphabet. But most of all, I simply love hearing his little voice calling: 'Mummy, Mummy.' </p><p>It reminds me of just how blessed I am. The truth is that I very nearly missed out on becoming a mother - thanks to being brought up by a rabid feminist who thought motherhood was about the worst thing that could happen to a woman. </p><p>You see, my mum taught me that children enslave women. I grew up believing that children are millstones around your neck, and the idea that motherhood can make you blissfully happy is a complete fairytale.<br /></p><div class="thinFloatRHS"> <img src="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05/22/article-1021293-0159B45700000578-185_233x281.jpg" alt="Rebecca" class="blkBorder" width="233" height="281" /> <p class="imageCaption">Family love? A young Rebecca with her parents</p></div> <p>In fact, having a child has been the most rewarding experience of my life. Far from 'enslaving' me, three-and-a-half-year-old Tenzin has opened my world. My only regret is that I discovered the joys of motherhood so late - I have been trying for a second child for two years, but so far with no luck. </p><p>I was raised to believe that women need men like a fish needs a bicycle. But I strongly feel children need two parents and the thought of raising Tenzin without my partner, Glen, 52, would be terrifying. </p><p>As the child of divorced parents, I know only too well the painful consequences of being brought up in those circumstances. Feminism has much to answer for denigrating men and encouraging women to seek independence whatever the cost to their families. </p><p>My mother's feminist principles coloured every aspect of my life. As a little girl, I wasn't even allowed to play with dolls or stuffed toys in case they brought out a maternal instinct. It was drummed into me that being a mother, raising children and running a home were a form of slavery. Having a career, travelling the world and being independent were what really mattered according to her. </p><p>I love my mother very much, but I haven't seen her or spoken to her since I became pregnant. She has never seen my son - her only grandchild. My crime? Daring to question her ideology. </p><p>Well, so be it. My mother may be revered by women around the world - goodness knows, many even have shrines to her. But I honestly believe it's time to puncture the myth and to reveal what life was really like to grow up as a child of the feminist revolution. </p><p>My parents met and fell in love in Mississippi during the civil rights movement. Dad [Mel Leventhal], was the brilliant lawyer son of a Jewish family who had fled the Holocaust. Mum was the impoverished eighth child of sharecroppers from Georgia. When they married in 1967, inter-racial weddings were still illegal in some states. </p><p>My early childhood was very happy although my parents were terribly busy, encouraging me to grow up fast. I was only one when I was sent off to nursery school. I'm told they even made me walk down the street to the school.</p><div class="thinFloatLHS"> <img src="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05/23/article-1021293-0344E7A90000044D-979_233x309.jpg" alt="Alice Walker" class="blkBorder" width="233" height="309" /> <p class="imageCaption">Alice Walker believed so strongly that children enslaved their mothers she disowned her own daughter </p></div> <p> </p><p>When I was eight, my parents divorced. From then on I was shuttled between two worlds - my father's very conservative, traditional, wealthy, white suburban community in New York, and my mother's avant garde multi-racial community in California. I spent two years with each parent - a bizarre way of doing things. </p><p>Ironically, my mother regards herself as a hugely maternal woman. Believing that women are suppressed, she has campaigned for their rights around the world and set up organisations to aid women abandoned in Africa - offering herself up as a mother figure. </p><p>But, while she has taken care of daughters all over the world and is hugely revered for her public work and service, my childhood tells a very different story. I came very low down in her priorities - after work, political integrity, self-fulfilment, friendships, spiritual life, fame and travel. </p><p>My mother would always do what she wanted - for example taking off to Greece for two months in the summer, leaving me with relatives when I was a teenager. Is that independent, or just plain selfish? </p><p>I was 16 when I found a now-famous poem she wrote comparing me to various calamities that struck and impeded the lives of other women writers. Virginia Woolf was mentally ill and the Brontes died prematurely. My mother had me - a 'delightful distraction', but a calamity nevertheless. I found that a huge shock and very upsetting. </p><p>According to the strident feminist ideology of the Seventies, women were sisters first, and my mother chose to see me as a sister rather than a daughter. From the age of 13, I spent days at a time alone while my mother retreated to her writing studio - some 100 miles away. I was left with money to buy my own meals and lived on a diet of fast food.</p><p><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sisters together</span></span><br /></p><p>A neighbour, not much older than me, was deputised to look after me. I never complained. I saw it as my job to protect my mother and never distract her from her writing. It never crossed my mind to say that I needed some time and attention from her. </p><p>When I was beaten up at school - accused of being a snob because I had lighter skin than my black classmates - I always told my mother that everything was fine, that I had won the fight. I didn't want to worry her. </p><p>But the truth was I was very lonely and, with my mother's knowledge, started having sex at 13. I guess it was a relief for my mother as it meant I was less demanding. And she felt that being sexually active was empowering for me because it meant I was in control of my body. </p><p>Now I simply cannot understand how she could have been so permissive. I barely want my son to leave the house on a play-date, let alone start sleeping around while barely out of junior school. </p><p>A good mother is attentive, sets boundaries and makes the world safe for her child. But my mother did none of those things. </p><p>Although I was on the Pill - something I had arranged at 13, visiting the doctor with my best friend - I fell pregnant at 14. I organised an abortion myself. Now I shudder at the memory. I was only a little girl. I don't remember my mother being shocked or upset. She tried to be supportive, accompanying me with her boyfriend. </p><p>Although I believe that an abortion was the right decision for me then, the aftermath haunted me for decades. It ate away at my self-confidence and, until I had Tenzin, I was terrified that I'd never be able to have a baby because of what I had done to the child I had destroyed. For feminists to say that abortion carries no consequences is simply wrong. </p><p>As a child, I was terribly confused, because while I was being fed a strong feminist message, I actually yearned for a traditional mother. My father's second wife, Judy, was a loving, maternal homemaker with five children she doted on. </p><p>There was always food in the fridge and she did all the things my mother didn't, such as attending their school events, taking endless photos and telling her children at every opportunity how wonderful they were.</p><div class="clear"> </div> <img src="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05/23/article-1021293-0077DA1200000258-674_468x298.jpg" alt="The Color Purple" class="blkBorder" width="468" height="298" /> <p class="imageCaption">Alice Walker's iconic book was made in to a film in 1985, and starred Whoopi Goldberg and Margaret Avery (pictured)</p> <p> </p><p>My mother was the polar opposite. She never came to a single school event, she didn't buy me any clothes, she didn't even help me buy my first bra - a friend was paid to go shopping with me. If I needed help with homework I asked my boyfriend's mother. </p><p>Moving between the two homes was terrible. At my father's home I felt much more taken care of. But, if I told my mother that I'd had a good time with Judy, she'd look bereft - making me feel I was choosing this white, privileged woman above her. I was made to feel that I had to choose one set of ideals above the other. </p><p>When I hit my 20s and first felt a longing to be a mother, I was totally confused. I could feel my biological clock ticking, but I felt if I listened to it, I would be betraying my mother and all she had taught me. </p><p>I tried to push it to the back of my mind, but over the next ten years the longing became more intense, and when I met Glen, a teacher, at a seminar five years ago, I knew I had found the man I wanted to have a baby with. Gentle, kind and hugely supportive, he is, as I knew he would be, the most wonderful father. </p><p>Although I knew what my mother felt about babies, I still hoped that when I told her I was pregnant, she would be excited for me.</p><p><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">'Mum, I'm pregnant'</span></span><br /></p><p>Instead, when I called her one morning in the spring of 2004, while I was at one of her homes housesitting, and told her my news and that I'd never been happier, she went very quiet. All she could say was that she was shocked. Then she asked if I could check on her garden. I put the phone down and sobbed - she had deliberately withheld her approval with the intention of hurting me. What loving mother would do that? </p><p>Worse was to follow. My mother took umbrage at an interview in which I'd mentioned that my parents didn't protect or look out for me. She sent me an e-mail, threatening to undermine my reputation as a writer. I couldn't believe she could be so hurtful - particularly when I was pregnant. </p><p>Devastated, I asked her to apologise and acknowledge how much she'd hurt me over the years with neglect, withholding affection and resenting me for things I had no control over - the fact that I am mixed-race, that I have a wealthy, white, professional father and that I was born at all. </p><p>But she wouldn't back down. Instead, she wrote me a letter saying that our relationship had been inconsequential for years and that she was no longer interested in being my mother. She even signed the letter with her first name, rather than 'Mom'. </p><p>That was a month before Tenzin's birth in December 2004, and I have had no contact with my mother since. She didn't even get in touch when he was rushed into the special care baby unit after he was born suffering breathing difficulties. </p><p>And I have since heard that my mother has cut me out of her will in favour of one of my cousins. I feel terribly sad - my mother is missing such a great opportunity to be close to her family. But I'm also relieved. Unlike most mothers, mine has never taken any pride in my achievements. She has always had a strange competitiveness that led her to undermine me at almost every turn.</p><p>When I got into Yale - a huge achievement - she asked why on earth I wanted to be educated at such a male bastion. Whenever I published anything, she wanted to write her version - trying to eclipse mine. When I wrote my memoir, Black, White And Jewish, my mother insisted on publishing her version. She finds it impossible to step out of the limelight, which is extremely ironic in light of her view that all women are sisters and should support one another. </p><p>It's been almost four years since I have had any contact with my mother, but it's for the best - not only for my self-protection but for my son's well-being. I've done all I can to be a loyal, loving daughter, but I can no longer have this poisonous relationship destroy my life. </p><p>I know many women are shocked by my views. They expect the daughter of Alice Walker to deliver a very different message. Yes, feminism has undoubtedly given women opportunities. It's helped open the doors for us at schools, universities and in the workplace. But what about the problems it's caused for my contemporaries?</p><p><span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:130%;" >What about the children?</span><br /></p><p>The ease with which people can get divorced these days doesn't take into account the toll on children. That's all part of the unfinished business of feminism. </p><p>Then there is the issue of not having children. Even now, I meet women in their 30s who are ambivalent about having a family. They say things like: 'I'd like a child. If it happens, it happens.' I tell them: 'Go home and get on with it because your window of opportunity is very small.' As I know only too well. </p><p>Then I meet women in their 40s who are devastated because they spent two decades working on a PhD or becoming a partner in a law firm, and they missed out on having a family. Thanks to the feminist movement, they discounted their biological clocks. They've missed the opportunity and they're bereft. </p><p>Feminism has betrayed an entire generation of women into childlessness. It is devastating. </p><p>But far from taking responsibility for any of this, the leaders of the women's movement close ranks against anyone who dares to question them - as I have learned to my cost. I don't want to hurt my mother, but I cannot stay silent. I believe feminism is an experiment, and all experiments need to be assessed on their results. Then, when you see huge mistakes have been paid, you need to make alterations. </p><p>I hope that my mother and I will be reconciled one day. Tenzin deserves to have a grandmother. But I am just so relieved that my viewpoint is no longer so utterly coloured by my mother's. </p><p>I am my own woman and I have discovered what really matters - a happy family. </p></blockquote> <span class="fullpost"></span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-83867719043857449082010-11-28T05:43:00.000-08:002010-11-28T05:46:18.056-08:00Dawn of the flexisexual: The new word for the women who refuse to play it straightAND THEY CALL MUSLIMS BARBARIC?????<br /><br /><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333546/Flexisexual-The-new-word-women-refuse-play-straight.html">Dawn of the flexisexual: The new word for the women who refuse to play it straight<br />By Louise Eccles</a>Last updated at 7:13 PM on 27th November 2010<br /> First there was that infamous on-stage kiss between Madonna and Britney Spears.<br /><br />Then Katy Perry sang that she kissed a girl and she liked it.<br /><br />Now a new word has been coined for the growing number of straight women who flirt with bisexuality... flexisexual. <br /><br /> Courting controversy: Britney and Madonna kiss<br />It refers to people who have a sexual preference but refuse to be bound by it.<br /><br />And it seems heterosexual women in their 30s and 40s are leading the trend.<br /><br /> Angelina Jolie: Had a sexual relationship with Jenny Shimizu<span class="fullpost"><br />Psychologist Dr Cecelia D’Felice said: ‘Women are often more open to these experiences when they reach their 40s and are more confident with their sexuality. If an opportunity presents itself they may think “why not”, particularly if they have come out of a long relationship.’<br /><br />Hollywood actresses Angelina Jolie and Drew Barrymore, both 35, have been open about being attracted to women and having flings with them. Jolie, who is now with Brad Pitt, has admitted having a sexual relationship with actress Jenny Shimizu.<br /><br />Twice-married Barrymore has been quoted as saying: ‘Being with a woman is like exploring your own body, but through someone else.’<br /><br />Actress Lindsay Lohan, 24, is among younger flexisexuals who see it as ‘on trend’.<br />When she dated DJ Samantha Ronson she denied being a lesbian and said she was ‘maybe’ bisexual. She has since returned to seeing men, including rugby star Danny Cipriani.<br /><br />Dr D’Felice admitted flexisexuality had become fashionable as a result of its recent celebrity endorsement, but said it had always existed. She added: ‘Women are more fluid about their sexuality than men and are more likely to be attracted to people rather than a certain gender.’<br /><br />Sam Roddick, 39, founder of erotic boutique Coco de Mer, said: ‘It acknowledges the huge number of straight women who do not want to label themselves bisexual and yet may have kissed a girl or fancied their best friend.’ <br /><br />A third of 6,000 women surveyed by Coco de Mer said their favourite fantasy was to have sex with a woman.<br /> Kissed A Girl: Katy Perry's hit song<br /> Explore more:People: Samantha Ronson, Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, Katy Perry, Drew Barrymore, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Danny Cipriani <br /><br />Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333546/Flexisexual-The-new-word-women-refuse-play-straight.html#ixzz16aIY51YrHere And here is the rest of it.</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-41721034922790448482010-09-29T08:46:00.000-07:002010-09-29T08:48:14.256-07:00CHALLENGE FOR PUBLIC DEBATE WITH RAJA PETRA KAMARUDDIN ON THE TOPIC OF ISLAMIC SHARIAHRaja Petra in his latest article decided not to answer my argument, instead creates a “fictitious” Tulang Besi and attacked that fictitious “Tulang Besi”.<br /><br />I do not blame him for doing so because that is what we have come to know in the world of Psychiatry as “Defence Mechanism”. When under threat, defence mechanism will kick in automatically. It’s a knee jerk reaction and everybody knows that.<br /><br />If Raja Petra was writing from his heart or from his mind, he would have chosen to at least address the argument I presented and NOT attack a fictitious <i>TUlang Besi</i>. He would have addressed these facts that I had presented in my earlier postings:<br /><br />1.0 Shariah has been in practiced for 1400 years ago and continues to be in practice to the present day<br />2.0 Islamic Penal Code was removed forcibly by the Colonialists when Muslim lands were invaded by the Europeans i.e. English, French, Belgians, Dutch, Americans etc.<br />3.0 The Muslims themselves were not the ones removing the Islamic Penal Code from their societies or communities. They were forced to do so by their colonial masters<br />4.0 And another fact I did not add in my original posting is that Islamic Penal Code has made a comeback and more and more Muslims wants the Islamic Penal Code to be implemented.<br />5.0 The Susilawati case falls under QISAS and not HUDUD. Raja Petra clearly do not know where the case of Susilawati should be classified showing his deep ignorance of the Islamic Shariah he is criticizing<br />6.0 His usage of the history of Christianity to criticize the Islamic law is clearly a sign of abject ignorance of the Islamic Shariah. The Islamic Shariah DOES NOT FOLLOW the same historical as Christinanity. In fact, it is miles apart. <br /><br />The arguments presented above were largely ignored by Raja Petra. Instead he went on a character assassination routine labeling me as this and that, which is all UNTRUE.<br />The truth is Raja Petra is TAKEN ABACK by the simplicity of the argument I presented. The fact I presented is simple and common knowledge to all that has a fully functional brain. It doesn’t take a person with PHd in Islamic history or law to acknowledge it.<br /><br />Except, of course, Raja Petra.<br /><br />So, in the interest of the TRUTH I hereby CHALLENGE RAJA PETRA to a PUBLIC DEBATE. I am willing to fly up to London just as long the debate is a reality.<br /><br />I am also willing to debate Raja Petra on the issue of Al Hadeeth An Nabawi and it’s legality in the Islam. So let’s settle this issue like men, not like children.<br /><br />My email is malaysiawaves@rocketmail.com. Send me an email RPK, if you think you are on the side of the truth. We can broadcast this debate over the internet and let the world see and hear. Let the world decide whether Tulang Besi is really what Raja Petra had accused him of or that Raja Petra is lying through his teeth.<br /><br />Tulang Besi<br /> <span class="fullpost"><blockquote> <a href=” http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/no-holds-barred/34829-freedom-to-oppose-as-long-as-you-agree-with-me”>Freedom to oppose as long as you agree with me</a><br /><br />Tuesday, 28 September 2010 Super Admin <br />What some people in PAS can’t seem to understand is that PAS is a political party. And as a political party it has every right to propagate and promote its political ideology. And in the case of PAS it is Islamic politics. But PAS can’t deny Malaysians their rights as well. And this right is to reject the PAS brand of politics in favour of some other political ideology.<br />NO HOLDS BARRED<br />Raja Petra Kamarudin<br />I was wondering when Rahman Celcom a.k.a. Tulang Besi would crawl out of his hole in the ground. In case some of you are not aware, Rahman was the person who revealed that Ustaz Hadi Awang, Mustaffa Ali, Hassan Ali and a few other top PAS leaders were engaged in secret talks with Umno soon after the March 2008 general election.<br />People like Rahman and those of his ilk have only one view. And that is if you agree with everything they say, then you are learned (ulamak). If, however, you disagree with what they say, then you are ignorant (jahil).<br />Your status -- whether you are a learned or an ignorant person -- depends on whether you agree or disagree with what these people think and say. In my case, since I disagree with them, then I am an ignorant person.<br />It does not matter where I studied. It does not matter how long I studied. It does not matter from whom I studied. It does not matter how many books I may have read and who wrote those books. I am learned only if I agree with their opinion and am ignorant if I do not.<br />These people are of the view they have the right to propagate, propose, promote, etc., their brand of politics. In this case it happens to be Islamic politics. You and I, however, do not have the right to reject their brand of politics. You must agree with them and not reject them or dispute what they say.<br />Oh, it’s not that they do not believe in freedom of speech, expression, opinion, association, or whatever. They do. But this freedom is only allowed as long as you too share their views as to what is right and wrong and what is permitted and not permitted.<br />For example, if they oppose Ketuanan Melayu, and you too oppose Ketuanan Melayu, then they allow you the freedom to oppose Ketuanan Melayu. Your freedom extends to only those areas of ‘common interest’. But once you part company on certain issues then you forfeit your right to this freedom.<br />Another thing these people believe in is that they have a right to impose their opinion on you. They have a certain opinion and you must accept this opinion. You may not disagree with what they think. Malaysia may be a democracy. But democracy is only allowed as long as you do not disagree with their opinion.<br />Think what you want. Say what you want. Just make sure you think and say what they too think and say and not opposite to that.<br />This is the mentality of Rahman Celcom and those of his ilk. And the fact that they tolerate other religions -- although tolerate is something you do when it is a nuisance -- proves that they are very reasonable people.<br />**********************************************<br />J. Hussain wrote:<br />“In Islamic law, crimes are classified in three ways: hudud, qisas (and) Ta’azir...Hudud crimes are those specifically mentioned in the Koran as transgressing the limits which God himself has placed on people's behavior. The hudud crimes are: theft, highway robbery, drinking alcohol, unlawful sexual intercourse and false accusation of unchastity. Some jurists also include murder and apostasy (al-riddah) among the categories of hudud crimes.”<br />Schacht wrote that hudud is reserved for crimes against Allah for which there can be no mercy or judicial discretion.<br />Further, Al-Awwa adds “unlawful rebellion” to the list of hudud crimes.<br />Schacht sets out the specifics of huhud:<br />“The death penalty either by stoning (the more severe punishment for unlawful intercourse) or by crucifixion or with the sword (for highway robbery with homicide); cutting off hand and/or foot (for highway robbery without homicide and for theft....”<br />Schacht also confirms the rigidity of Islamic law; that hudud is meted out as:<br />“... a right or claim of Allah, therefore no pardon or amicable settlement is possible.”<br />However, in some cases, Muslim law allows a criminal defendant to pay off the victim (diyya) and thus, to escape punishment; an option obviously only available to the wealthy.<br />REFERENCES:<br /> * Al-Awwa, Muhammad Salim, “The Basis of Islamic Penal Legislation”, published in The Islamic Criminal Justice System (Rome: Oceana Publications Inc., 1982), page 127<br /> * Duhaime, Lloyd, Legal Definition of Ta’azir<br /> * Hussain, J., Islamic Law and Society (Sydney: Federation Press, 1999), page 134<br /> * Schacht, J., An Introduction to Islamic Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964), page 175<br />*****************************************<br />Raja Petra went to town attacking the PAS Youth Chief for suggesting Hudud as an alternative. My initial response is : AT LEAST SOMEONE IS THINKING OF A SOLUTION TO THE WORSENING CRIME PROBLEM in Malaysia.<br />Instead of providing a sound alternative, RPK chose to redicule the PAS Youth Chief.<br />He went to cite the failure of Christian laws in Europe from the history of Christianity. The trouble with this argument is that the same cannot be said about Islamic laws or Hudud. The Islamic Penal Code has been in practiced for 1400 years and NO ONE complained about it's implementation.<br />The removal of Islamic Penal Code from the lives of Muslims are mostly the handiwork of Colonials like British, Russians, France, Belgium, Dutch etc when Muslim Lands were invaded by them.<br />In fact, in India, women were prevented from getting inheritence from their fathers because the Common Law of Britain forbids any inheritance to women, at that time, when British first invaded India. For a few hundred years before that women were getting inheritance without any hinderance because they were subjected to Shariah Laws.<br />So, there lies Raja Petra's main weakness in his argument: he cites examples from the history of CHRISTIANITY which DIFFERS greatly from the history of Islam and Islamic Penal Code.<br />As far as history has shown, Islamic Penal Code is practiced by Muslims for the last 1400 years and no one complained about it despite the coming and going of Muslim rulers throughout the ages.<br />So, i beg Raja Petra to come up with a better argument to negate the effectiveness of Islamic Penal Code.<br />Oh, and Raja Petra also made this argument:<br />If this is true then why quote the example of the murder of Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya? This woman was allegedly killed by Indian Hindus, not by Malay Muslims. And since Hudud applies only to Muslims then it does not matter whether Malaysia does or does not implement these Islamic laws. It would not have deterred these Indian Hindus from killing Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya because they would have been exempted from these laws anyway.<br />It so happens, the crime of murder falls under QISAS and not HUDUD. And trust me, anyone would agree to QISAS regardless of their religion.<br />As for me, if a Jewish gentleman name Noah Feldman who actually thinks that Islamic Penal Code is good and practical.<br />Funny, a guy like RPK who claims to be Muslims, giving hell about Islamic laws while a Jewish professor from Harvard wrote and article in the New York TImes to defend the Shariah.<br />How the world has turned upside down. Did I mention the Jewish guy is a professor of law from Harvard?<br />Tulang Besi a.k.a Rahman Celcom<br />ps i've written before about Raja Petra's shallowness in understanding Islam and the Islamic Penal Code. No matter what RPK says, majority Muslims supports the Shariah and wants it's implementation. Hell, even in Britain, the Shariah is being practiced albeit still limited.</blockquote><br /><br /><br /></span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com27tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-30990020174250066832010-09-28T10:50:00.000-07:002010-09-28T10:52:15.708-07:00America's sexual revolution: Engineered by pedophiles<a href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=204969">How 1 secretly twisted scientist destroyed nation's morality laws<br />Posted: September 18, 2010<br /><br />By Drew Zahn<br />© 2010 WorldNetDaily<br /><br /></a><br />A shocking report at WND's "Taking America Back" conference in Miami, Fla., contends the sexual revolution of the 1960s and beyond was manufactured by a single pedophile with deep financial backing.<br /><br />Dr. Judith Reisman, author of "Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America," unveiled at the confab a hidden history of scandal and scientific fraud that she says convinced not only America's legal system but also its culture to unjustifiably embrace sexual deviancy.<br /><br />Reisman explained how Dr. Alfred Kinsey, a scientific pioneer who was lauded in the 1950s for his research and who launched modern-day sexology, received his financial backing from the Rockefeller Foundation in 1941 and used it to twist science and law to fulfill his licentious agenda.<br /><br />For example, Kinsey's landmark study from 1941-1945 claimed to describe the "normal" sexual practices of "everyday" Americans. Reisman contends, however, that Kinsey didn't have access to the majority of "normal" American men and women, who were engaged with World War II at the time, and so he used a tainted sample.<br /><br />"Eighty-seven percent of his subjects," Reisman stated, "were sex addicts, homosexuals, criminals, rapists, prostitutes, pedophiles and prisoners."<br /><br />Reisman further shocked the audience by posting a chart of Kinsey's research detailing how many orgasms children of various ages could be made to experience in a 24-hour period. Reisman quoted Kinsey's defenders, who insisted that the men conducting the experiments were not pedophiles, but merely "trained observers" with stopwatches, counting orgasms among 4-year-olds and even infants. <span class="fullpost"><br /><br />Kinsey's research later claimed that 100 percent of children were capable of being sexually active from birth, so long as they had "help" from adults.<br /><br />Reisman also pointed to studies and surveys by Kinsey that consistently and grossly inflated data to prove that licentious behavior had "no social consequences."<br /><br />The results, she explained, were staggering.<br /><br />"Kinsey radicalized university faculties with his [corrupt and agenda-driven] data, then told the students to ditch 'hypocritical' parental values," Reisman stated, "hence the 'me' generation of sex and drugs was born."<br /><br />Reisman then quoted significant court cases and journals that had so radically shifted from previous legal opinion that the law itself "was divided into pre-Kinsey and post-Kinsey periods."<br /><br />"Pre-Kinsey, sex laws were based on biblical authority and considered an area of 'public rights,' meaning we recognized sex had civil consequences on society," Reisman said. "Post-Kinsey sex laws are based on 'scientific authority' and are considered 'private rights,' which claims sex has no social consequences."<br /><br />"Only seven years ago, the Supreme Court case Lawrence vs. Texas, which struck down all anti-sodomy laws in the nation, was based on Kinsey," Reisman said. "But the Supreme Court was never told it was all based on [intentionally flawed] Kinsey data.<br /><br />"The No. 1 sexpert versus Prop 8," said Reisman, referring to the more recent case in which a federal judge overturned California's prohibition of same-sex marriage, "who was quoted 58 times by [Judge] Walker, was quoting Kinsey data."<br /><br />Reisman also showed the more immediate impact of Kinsey's widespread research in the 1950s, quoting a 1962 Vanderbilt Law Review that opined "even at the age of four or five [a girl] can seduce" a man into committing sexual abuse.<br /><br />The 1969 Georgia law review called child sexual abuse "a minor crime" and said the need to relax laws prohibiting pedophilia should be obvious to all but the "prudish."<br /><br />All of the examples, and several more, Reisman contended, are based on Kinsey's data, which legal scholars accepted despite its dubious origin.<br /><br />Reisman demonstrated the legal shift in America by pointing to changes in the law. In the pre-Kinsey period, the legal age of sexual consent was somewhere between 16 and 21 depending on the state, whereas now it is 12-18. Prior to Kinsey, rape was a crime punishable by death in 18 states, by life sentence in 22. Now, Reisman stated, the standard sentence is six months to four years.<br /><br />No-fault divorce, the decriminalization of adultery and even the decision by the American Psychiatric Association to no longer consider homosexuality a sexual disorder, Reisman said, are the result of using Kinsey data that was specifically manipulated to redefine "normal" and exaggerate deviant behavior.<br /><br />Reisman's final charge to the "Taking America Back" audience was based on the words of a lesbian professor, who in 1998 warned that if the truth about Kinsey were revealed, "50 years of sexual progress is undone; biography is the battleground."<br /><br />Reisman challenged the conference not only to make Kinsey's work known but also to overturn the laws Kinsey "twisted."<br /><br />"Biography is only the battleground if it enters the courtroom," she concluded. </span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-11980964209654097992010-09-28T09:25:00.001-07:002010-09-28T09:25:57.764-07:00PEDOPHILIA: THE TALMUD'S DIRTY SECRETBy Rev. Ted Pike<br />28 Sep 10 (Update)<br /><br />Editor’s Note:<br /><br />This year, top Israeli Rabbi Moti Elon was indicted by police for sex crimes against minors. “Far from being the rabbi of an obscure Hasidic sect, the charismatic Elon is a high-profile leader, educator and media personality, representing the more mainstream religious Zionists and former head of the renowned HaKotel (Western Wall) Yeshiva. He comes from a family of high achievers in law, politics and academia that has drawn comparisons with the Kennedy clan.”<br /><br />In 2006, Elon was restricted by an organization of rabbis in his contact with students, after confessing to sexual relationships with male students. Yet he continued to act as the president of a Talmudic academy in Jerusalem and did not fully honor the agreement. One Ha’aretz commentary says Elon “managed to turn himself into almost a kind of saint” –a fate certainly to be envied by American religious figures turned pedophiles.<br /><br />Dr. Aviad Hacohen, dean of the Sha'arei Mishpat College, in 2007 reported that “95% of sexual offences in Jerusalem were performed by the religious and haredi.” “Several years ago, I began looking into the issue on a data-based level," said Hacohen. "It turned out that the law enforcement authorities, both the police and the prosecutor's office, were aware of the data but refused to expose it based on sectorial affiliation in order to avoid branding a certain group in the population…”<br /><br />Since the following article was written in 2006, cases of Jewish leadership figures in Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Judaism being involved in homosexuality or pedophilia scandals continue to mount not only in Israel, but in New York, where Ultra-Orthodox are strongest. The reason is simple: some of the very greatest rabbis who wrote the Talmud were pedophiles.<br /><br />Read this shocking and timely article for complete documentation.<br /><br /> <br /> <span class="fullpost"><br /> <br />PEDOPHILIA: THE TALMUD'S DIRTY SECRET<br /><br />By Rev. Ted Pike<br />11 Oct 06<br /><br />For nearly a century, the Jewish-dominated Hollywood film industry and big media have conspicuously influenced Christian America away from Biblical morals and values. (See, "Jews Confirm Big Media Is Jewish")<br /><br />Yet, with the hippie rebellion of the early sixties, the Jewish media found exponential opportunities to hasten America’s moral decline. Encouraging drugs and pornography it persuaded America that "free love" and living together outside of marriage were socially acceptable. With astonishing rapidity the movie, TV, and print media helped produce a generation of sexual libertines. By the end of the sixties, it hastened the sexual revolution to its next stage, homosexuality.<br /><br />Now, more than 40 years later, even homosexuality has lost its attraction to many children and grandchildren of the hippie generation. Pedophilia (sex with little boys and girls along with child pornography) is the latest underground obsession sweeping America and the world.<br /><br />Last fall, I alerted the nation to the power of the pedophile lobby in Congress; Sen. Edward Kennedy, long backed by homosexuals in support of the federal anti-hate bill, betrayed them to favor the evidently more powerful and rewarding pedophiles. (See "How Kennedy and His Pedophiles Weakened the Child Safety Bill")<br /><br />Rotten Roots<br /><br />What kind of moral foundations do Jews of the media rest upon, that they could consciously ignite and fan the flames of a sexual inferno that continues to ravage our once Christian society?<br /><br />Virtually all the media moguls who founded Hollywood and the big three TV networks were immigrants, or their children, from predominantly orthodox Jewish communities in Eastern Europe.<br /><br />In the late 19th century, most European Jews were a people of the book. But their book wasn’t the Bible. It was the Babylonian Talmud. To this day, the Talmud remains Judaism’s highest moral, ethical and legal authority.<br /><br />Does the Talmud share Christianity's foundation of wholesome moral values? Hardly. Instead, the Talmud is the sleazy substrata of a religious system gone terribly astray; it is that code of Pharisaic unbelief Christ described as "full of all uncleanness" (Matt. 23:27). Shockingly, Judaism’s most revered authority actually endorses such sins as lying, oath-breaking, and indirect murder. And it even sanctions one of the greatest sins of all: child molestation.<br /><br />Three Year Old Brides<br /><br />When Christ accused the Pharisees of His day of being Satan’s spiritual children, He fully realized what they were capable of. Second century Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai, one of Judaism’s very greatest rabbis and a creator of Kabbalah, sanctioned pedophilia—permitting molestation of baby girls even younger than three! He proclaimed, “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and a day is permitted to marry a priest.” 1 Subsequent rabbis refer to ben Yohai’s endorsement of pedophilia as "halakah," or binding Jewish law. 2 Has ben Yohai, child rape advocate, been disowned by modern Jews? Hardly. Today, in ben Yohai’s hometown of Meron, Israel, tens of thousands of orthodox and ultra-orthodox Jews gather annually for days and nights of singing and dancing in his memory.<br /><br />References to pedophilia abound in the Talmud. They occupy considerable sections of Treatises Kethuboth and Yebamoth and are enthusiastically endorsed by the Talmud’s definitive legal work, Treatise Sanhedrin.<br /><br />The Pharisees Endorsed Child Sex<br /><br />The rabbis of the Talmud are notorious for their legal hairsplitting, and quibbling debates. But they share rare agreement about their right to molest three year old girls. In contrast to many hotly debated issues, hardly a hint of dissent rises against the prevailing opinion (expressed in many clear passages) that pedophilia is not only normal but scriptural as well! It’s as if the rabbis have found an exalted truth whose majesty silences debate.<br /><br />Because the Talmudic authorities who sanction pedophilia are so renowned, and because pedophilia as “halakah” is so explicitly emphasized, not even the translators of the Soncino edition of the Talmud (1936) dared insert a footnote suggesting the slightest criticism. They only comment: “Marriage, of course, was then at a far earlier age than now.” 3<br /><br />In fact, footnote 5 to Sanhedrin 60b rejects the right of a Talmudic rabbi to disagree with ben Yohai's endorsement of pedophilia: "How could they [the rabbis], contrary to the opinion of R. Simeon ben Yohai, which has scriptural support, forbid the marriage of the young proselyte?" 4<br /><br />Out of Babylon<br /><br />It was in Babylon after the exile under Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BC that Judaism's leading sages probably began to indulge in pedophilia. Babylon was the staggeringly immoral capitol of the ancient world. For 1600 years, the world’s largest population of Jews flourished within it.<br /><br />As an example of their evil, Babylonian priests said a man's religious duty included regular sex with temple prostitutes. Bestiality was widely tolerated. So Babylonians hardly cared whether a rabbi married a three year old girl.<br /><br />But with expulsion of the Jews in the 11th century AD, mostly to western Christian lands, Gentile tolerance of Jewish pedophilia abruptly ended.<br /><br />Still, a shocking contradiction lingers: If Jews want to revere the transcendent wisdom and moral guidance of the Pharisees and their Talmud, they must accept the right of their greatest ancient sages to violate children. To this hour, no synod of Judaism has repudiated their vile practice.<br /><br />Sex with a “Minor” Permitted<br /><br />What exactly did these sages say?<br /><br />The Pharisees justified child rape by explaining that a boy of nine years was not a “man” (See, "Judaism and Homosexuality: A Marriage Made in Hell") Thus they exempted him from God’s Mosaic Law: “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination” (Lev. 18:22) One passage in the Talmud gives permission for a woman who molested her young son to marry a high priest. It concludes, “All agree that the connection of a boy aged nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not." 5 Because a boy under 9 is sexually immature, he can't "throw guilt" on the active offender, morally or legally. 6<br /><br />A woman could molest a young boy without questions of morality even being raised: "…the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act." 7 The Talmud also says, "A male aged nine years and a day who cohabits with his deceased brother's wife acquires her (as wife)." 8 Clearly, the Talmud teaches that a woman is permitted to marry and have sex with a nine year old boy.<br /><br />Sex at Three Years and One Day<br /><br />In contrast to Simeon ben Yohai's dictum that sex with a little girl is permitted under the age of three years, the general teaching of the Talmud is that the rabbi must wait until a day after her third birthday. She could be taken in marriage simply by the act of rape.<br /><br /> R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. (Sanh. 55b)<br /><br /> A girl who is three years of age and one day may be betrothed by cohabitation. . . .(Yeb. 57b)<br /><br /> A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabited with her she becomes his. (Sanh. 69a, 69b, also discussed in Yeb. 60b)<br /><br /> It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai stated: A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest, for it is said, But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves, and Phineas (who was priest, the footnote says) surely was with them. (Yeb. 60b)<br /><br /> [The Talmud says such three year and a day old girls are] . . . fit for cohabitation. . . But all women children, that have not known man by lying with him, it must be concluded that Scripture speaks of one who is fit for cohabitation. (Footnote to Yeb. 60b)<br /><br />The example of Phineas, a priest, himself marrying an underage virgin of three years is considered by the Talmud as proof that such infants are "fit for cohabitation."<br /><br />The Talmud teaches that an adult woman’s molestation of a nine year old boy is "not a sexual act" and cannot "throw guilt" upon her because the little boy is not truly a "man.” 9 But they use opposite logic to sanction rape of little girls aged three years and one day: Such infants they count as “women," sexually mature and fully responsible to comply with the requirements of marriage.<br /><br />The Talmud footnotes 3 and 4 to Sanhedrin 55a clearly tell us when the rabbis considered a boy and girl sexually mature and thus ready for marriage. "At nine years a male attains sexual matureness… The sexual matureness of woman is reached at the age of three."<br /><br />No Rights for Child Victims<br /><br />The Pharisees were hardly ignorant of the trauma felt by molested children. To complicate redress, the Talmud says a rape victim must wait until she was of age before there would be any possibility of restitution. She must prove that she lived and would live as a devoted Jewess, and she must protest the loss of her virginity on the very hour she comes of age. “As soon as she was of age one hour and did not protest she cannot protest any more.” 10<br /><br />The Talmud defends these strict measures as necessary to forestall the possibility of a Gentile child bride rebelling against Judaism and spending the damages awarded to her as a heathen - an unthinkable blasphemy! But the rights of the little girl were really of no great consequence, for, "When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (three years and a day) it is as if one put the finger into the eye." The footnote says that as “tears come to the eye again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.” 11<br /><br />In most cases, the Talmud affirms the innocence of male and female victims of pedophilia. Defenders of the Talmud claim this proves the Talmud's amazing moral advancement and benevolence toward children; they say it contrasts favorably with "primitive" societies where the child would have been stoned along with the adult perpetrator.<br /><br />Actually, the rabbis, from self-protection, were intent on proving the innocence of both parties involved in pedophilia: the child, but more importantly, the pedophile. They stripped a little boy of his right to "throw guilt" on his assailant and demanded complicity in sex from a little girl. By thus providing no significant moral or legal recourse for the child, the Talmud clearly reveals whose side it is on: the raping rabbi.<br /><br />Pedophilia Widespread<br /><br />Child rape was practiced in the highest circles of Judaism. This is illustrated from Yeb. 60b:<br /><br /> There was a certain town in the land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants was disputed, and Rabbi sent R. Romanos who conducted an inquiry and found in it the daughter of a proselyte who was under the age of three years and one day, and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest.<br /><br />The footnote says that she was “married to a priest” and the rabbi simply permitted her to live with her husband, thus upholding “halakah” as well as the dictum of Simeon ben Yohai, “A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest.” 12<br /><br />These child brides were expected to submit willingly to sex. Yeb. 12b confirms that under eleven years and one day a little girl is not permitted to use a contraceptive but “must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner.”<br /><br />In Sanhedrin 76b a blessing is given to the man who marries off his children before they reach the age of puberty, with a contrasting curse on anyone who waits longer. In fact, failure to have married off one’s daughter by the time she is 12-1/2, the Talmud says, is as bad as one who “returns a lost article to a Cuthean” (Gentile) - a deed for which “the Lord will not spare him.” 13 This passage says: “… it is meritorious to marry off one’s children whilst minors.”<br /><br />The mind reels at the damage to the untold numbers of girls who were sexually abused within Judaism during the heyday of pedophilia. Such child abuse, definitely practiced in the second century, continued, at least in Babylon, for another 900 years.<br /><br />A Fascination with Sex<br /><br />Perusing the Talmud, one is overwhelmed with the recurrent preoccupation with sex, especially by the most eminent rabbis. Dozens of illustrations could be presented to illustrate the delight of the Pharisees to discuss sex and quibble over its minutest details.<br /><br />The rabbis endorsing child sex undoubtedly practiced what they preached. Yet to this hour, their words are revered. Simeon ben Yohai is honored by Orthodox Jews as one of the very greatest sages and spiritual lights the world has ever known. A member of the earliest "Tannaim," rabbis most influential in creating the Talmud, he carries more authority to observant Jews than Moses.<br /><br />Today, the Talmud’s outspoken pedophiles and child-rape advocates would doubtlessly spend hard time in prison for child molestation. Yet here is what the eminent Jewish scholar, Dagobert Runes (who is fully aware of all these passages), says about such “dirty old men” and their perverted teachings:<br /><br /> There is no truth whatever in Christian and other strictures against the Pharisees, who represented the finest traditions of their people and of human morals. 14<br /><br />Aren’t Christ’s words more appropriate?<br /><br /> Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. (Matthew 23:27, 28.)<br /><br />(Adapted from Ted Pike's book, Israel: Our Duty, Our Dilemma)<br /><br />Endnotes:<br /><br />1 Yebamoth 60b, p. 402.<br />2 Yebamoth 60b, p. 403.<br />3 Sanhedrin 76a.<br />4 In Yebamoth 60b, p. 404, Rabbi Zera disagrees that sex with girls under three years and one day should be endorsed as halakah.<br />5 Sanhedrin 69b.<br />6 Sanhedrin 55a.<br />7 Footnote 1 to Kethuboth 11b.<br />8 Sanhedrin 55b.<br />9 Sanhedrin 55a.<br />10 Kethuboth 11a.<br />11 Kethuboth 11b.<br />12 Yebamoth 60b.<br />13 Sanhedrin 76b.<br />14 Dagobert Runes, A Concise Dictionary of Judaism, New York, 1959.</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-25855036664435436442010-09-27T13:32:00.000-07:002010-09-27T13:33:29.158-07:00Hudud: Raja Petra Has Failed Again to Make His Case<a href="http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/no-holds-barred/34763-is-this-the-best-type-of-leader-that-pas-can-offer">Raja Petra went to town attacking the PAS Youth Chief for suggesting Hudud as an alternative</a>. My initial response is : AT LEAST SOMEONE IS THINKING OF A SOLUTION TO THE WORSENING CRIME PROBLEM in Malaysia.<br /><br />Instead of providing a sound alternative, RPK chose to redicule the PAS Youth Chief.<br /><br />He went to cite the failure of Christian laws in Europe from the history of Christianity. The trouble with this argument is that the same cannot be said about Islamic laws or Hudud. The Islamic Penal Code has been in practiced for 1400 years and NO ONE complained about it's implementation.<br /><br />The removal of Islamic Penal Code from the lives of Muslims are mostly the handiwork of Colonials like British, Russians, France, Belgium, Dutch etc when Muslim Lands were invaded by them.<br /><br />In fact, in India, women were prevented from getting inheritence from their fathers because the Common Law of Britain forbids any inheritance to women, at that time, when British first invaded India. For a few hundred years before that women were getting inheritance without any hinderance because they were subjected to Shariah Laws.<br /><br />So, there lies Raja Petra's main weakness in his argument: he cites examples from the history of CHRISTIANITY which DIFFERS greatly from the history of Islam and Islamic Penal Code.<br /><br />As far as history has shown, Islamic Penal Code is practiced by Muslims for the last 1400 years and no one complained about it despite the coming and going of Muslim rulers throughout the ages.<br /><br />So, i beg Raja Petra to come up with a better argument to negate the effectiveness of Islamic Penal Code.<br /><br />Oh, and Raja Petra also made this argument:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/no-holds-barred/34763-is-this-the-best-type-of-leader-that-pas-can-offer"><blockquote> If this is true then why quote the example of the murder of Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya? This woman was allegedly killed by Indian Hindus, not by Malay Muslims. And since Hudud applies only to Muslims then it does not matter whether Malaysia does or does not implement these Islamic laws. It would not have deterred these Indian Hindus from killing Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya because they would have been exempted from these laws anyway.</blockquote></a><br /><br />It so happens, the crime of murder falls under QISAS and not HUDUD. And trust me, anyone would agree to QISAS regardless of their religion.<br /><br />As for me, if a Jewish gentleman name<a href="http://www.malaysiawaves.com/2008/05/islamic-shariah-offered-most-liberal.html"> Noah Feldman who actually thinks that Islamic Penal Code is good and practical</a>.<br /><br />Funny, a guy like RPK who claims to be Muslims, giving hell about Islamic laws while a Jewish professor from Harvard wrote and article in the New York TImes to defend the Shariah.<br /><br />How the world has turned upside down. DId I mention the Jewish guy is a professor of law from Harvard.<br /><br />Tulang Besi <br /><br />ps i've written before about Raja Petra's shallowness in understanding Islam and the Islamic Penal Code. No matter what RPK says, majority Muslims supports the Shariah and wants it's implementation. Hell, even in Britain, the Shariah is being practiced albeit still limited.Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-16297199817562942032010-02-18T05:38:00.001-08:002010-02-18T05:38:44.222-08:00Temuramah Malaysiakini Bersama Tulang Besi<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/un5pvB9Xckw&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/un5pvB9Xckw&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>. <span class="fullpost">And here is the rest of it.</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-32211739925999183492010-02-17T18:56:00.001-08:002010-02-17T18:56:34.459-08:00SOLAH HAJAT & CERAMAH PERDANA SELANGOR<span xmlns=''><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt'><strong>Nota Editor: </strong>Rekod Tok Guru Nik Aziz memerintah Kelantan 20 tahun menunjukkan bahawa senjata ampuh beliau menentang kezaliman UMNO adalah dengan mengadu kembali kepada Allah SWT. Kerajaan negeri Selangor sekarang ini sedang diserang dalam dan luar. Maklumat saya dapat dari dalaman UMNO, pihak atasan UMNO masih belum berpuas hati Selangor belum jatuh kembali ke UMNO. Alhamdulillah, setiap percubaan mereka gagal dan makan tuan i.e. pembunuhan Tee Beng Hock. Penggunaan SPRM untuk melemahkan serta mensabotaj kerajaan Negeri juga gagal. Percubaan Suwardi Yaakob untuk menjatuhkan MB juga menemui kegagalan yang luhur sehingga ke tahap Nazlee GERAK masuk PKR. Namun, segalanya adalah ketentuan Allah SWT dan bukan kerana kekuatan kita. <br /></span></p><p><br /> </p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt'>Solat hajat ini WAJIB dihadiri oleh SELURUH RAKYAT MALAYSIA tidak kira agama atau bangsa. Saya berharap untuk melihat Stadium Melawati dipenuhi bukan sahaja dengan orang Islam tetapi juga orang bukan Islam. Dicadangkan keseluruhan kepimpinan DAP dan PKR yang bukan Islam untuk turut hadir menunjukkan sokongan. Pakatan Rakyat adalah lemah dan hanya bergantung kepada kekuatan Allah SWT. Biarlah Allah SWT melindungi kita dari kezaliman dan kejahatan UMNO dan Barisan Nasional<br /></span></p><p><br /> </p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt'>Tulang Besi<br /></span></p><p><br /> </p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:24pt'><strong>SOLAH HAJAT & CERAMAH PERDANA</strong></span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p><p> <br /> </p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:13pt'><span style='text-decoration:underline'>BERSAMA</span>;</span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p><p> <br /> </p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:13pt'>DATO' TUAN GURU NIK ABD AZIZ NIK MAT</span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:13pt'>DATO' SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM</span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:13pt'>DATO' TAN SRI KHALID IBRAHIM</span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p><p> <br /> </p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:13pt'>SABTU MALAM AHAD : 20 FEB 2010 @ 7 MALAM</span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:13pt'>STADIUM MALAWATI, SHAH ALAM, SELANGOR</span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p><p> <br /> </p><p><span style='color:navy; font-family:Arial; font-size:13pt'>ANJURAN BERSAMA : PAKATAN RAKYAT SHAH ALAM</span><span style='font-family:Times New Roman; font-size:12pt'><br /> </span></p></span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-57985017948593030542009-10-23T11:10:00.000-07:002009-10-23T11:11:11.559-07:00Explanation from a Prima Damansara Resident on the Khalwat Raid SquadSuddenly the issue of “Anti Khalwat Squad” is popularized by the media, and of course in a negative manner. The report can be read here. (<a href="http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/28035/84/#jc_writeComment">http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/28035/84/#jc_writeComment</a>)<span class="fullpost">And again we see the so call women’s group protesting any effort towards enforcing religious values and eradicating vice and sinful acts. It’s the trend around the world that Women’s Rights Groups are the number one champions of immorality and indecency. Anytime any one tries to do something decent, the women’s group will come to the forefront and resist. I remembered in Turkey when the government tried to pass a law outlawing adultery, it was the Turkish women’s group that came to the forefront resisting the law.<br /><br />Yet, the anti khalwat group (and the adultery law in Turkey) doesn’t discriminate against gender. I mean, it takes two to tango. If you do it alone, then it’s not called khalwat, it’s called masturbation.<br /><br />Below is a quotation from a resident of Prima Damanasara name budaktapah that is taken from Malaysiatoday. Hope we can share the information he gives and form a balanced opinion on the issue.<br /><br />But before that, I’d like to advertise a seminar entitled:<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">“ SIS Pembela atau Perosak Wanita”</span></span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Seminar: Sisters In Islam - Pembela atau Perosak Wanita? </span></span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Ahad, 25 Oktober 2009 08:00 </span></span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Satu lagi seminar anjuran Ikatan Intelektual Nusantara (IKIN) dengan kerjasama HTM dan Muslimah HTM pada 25 oktober 2009 (Ahad). Maklumat lanjut seperti berikut:</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Tarikh: 25 Oktober 2009</span></span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Tempat: Dewan Serbaguna, Jalan 51A/227, Petaling Jaya, Selangor DE</span></span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">Masa: 9.00 Pagi - 1.30 Petang</span></span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;">- Masuk Adalah Percuma, Semua Dijemput Hadir -</span></span><br /></div><br /><br />Start of budaktapah comments:<br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><br />written by budaktapah, October 23, 2009 15:39:09<br />heyyyy...i live there!! sorry that i was not around that weekend. If not, i will gladly joint the khalwat group.<br /><br />to others, please don't bla bla bla, please don't intefere, unless you are living there, unless you are a muslim. If not, please fcuk off.<br /><br />you are talking about the Muslim are trying to impose Islamic rules upon other non-muslim. But whaat about you all non-muslim directly or indirectly are imposing your free lifestyle, your free mingling, your free huha huha among males & females and called it modern-lifestyles. We muslim have compromise a lot, and still you all trying to say like, let them do what they like, let them have free life style, let them fcuk each other and have babies whom we do not know who the father are, let them be drunk and drive a car in the middle of the night and hit my bikes and my neighbour car (this actually happened infront of my unit), let them be drunk and rempit-ing in the middle of the night.<br /><br />Well no more guys. One thing i like living in Prima Damansara is because the area is quite safe. The residents there almost know each other and care about each other and we will protect our area and not letting it became seriously "infested" with bad things, only then we act. How confident you all to allow some youngsters to "berkhalwat" in the middle of the night, and might eventually leads to some naughty behaviour, then some poor lady will become pregnant, she will become scared, give birth then throw the baby into some drain some where.<br /><br />Islam is not about letting things to happen first only then will act, Islam is about prevention.<br /><br />I'm not going to let somebody do whatever they like in my area. If you wish to be like that and say, hey its my house, i pay for it, well please think again cause you are living in an area where others also live. Unless you are staying some where in a jungle all alone, only thennn you can do whatever you like.<br /><br />i am damned mad if you all say that i cannot look after my place, my area. Since the beginning we have our set of conduct to follow, be it in Islam, Hindu, Christian etc. Please do not confuse people by saying what was previously bad, but nowadays is ok to follow, like maybe in the 50s, 60s or 70s, showing your bras is considered obscene, but nowadays is normal.<br /><br />I like to watch chinese kungfu movies, whereas during some scene the actress was strip off their dress and only left with her undergarment dress (something corset like dress) the actress will act to be very very ashamed and will tried to cover herself frantically. but hey, nowadays we all can see the ladies even not ashamed to wear those kind of undergarment-like dresses to offices, to markets, to movies. BUT does we the muslim say anything about it? no we do not, we act as if its your right to wear like that. So please do not say that we the muslim do not compromise.<br /><br />Buttt, when we tried to protect our communities, tried to shield our son, daughters, our brothers and sisters, all hell break loose.<br /><br />Do you know that in Prima Damansara we manage to counter a lot of bad things from happening. Glue sniffing children, rempit-ing, bohsia, penyamun, penyangak. We manage to minimise these things. We are not "Taliban", we are just protecting ourself.<br /><br />So we all must improvise and not start banging everybody because what we the residents there are doing are just what we thought are right to do.<br /><br />Your advise are most welcome, but if you all start to comment with the intention to condemn, please go away.</span></span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-15019884472759356612009-10-22T21:59:00.001-07:002009-10-22T21:59:43.009-07:00Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s Confusion: Shariah vs FiqhHere's is my part of a series of writings about Raja Petra's glaring mistakes in his understanding of Islam and also his attempt to spread his confusion to the masses. <span class="fullpost"><br />Raja Petra in his latest article is quoted to be saying():<br /><span style="font-style:italic;"><a href="http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/28010/84/#jc_writeComment"><br />“However, as I have written in the last few articles, the Shariah is not constant and neither standardised. The interpretation of the Shariah developed over 300 years from the mid-600s to the mid-900s. And there are variants to the interpretation, depending on time and place.<br />Sudan, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, the UK, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc., all have different variants to the interpretation of the Shariah. Some even combine the Shariah with Roman, Greek, English, French, Italian, etc., laws. So which version is Zul talking about?<br />If you want, I can go into detail on the different interpretations of the Shariah. But this will take, maybe, 20 or 30 pages and I am sure many of you would just skip it without bothering to read it because you will find it boring or not of concern to you.”</a></span><br /><br />Apparently, this is the source of Raja Petra’s confusion. He is unable to distinguish between “Fiqh” and “Shariah”. Allow me to quote Noah Feldman from his brilliant article whom I have quoted so many times:<br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html?_r=4&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin&oref=slogin"><br />“In fact, “Shariah” is not the word traditionally used in Arabic to refer to the processes of Islamic legal reasoning or the rulings produced through it: that word is fiqh, meaning something like Islamic jurisprudence. The word “Shariah” connotes a connection to the divine, a set of unchanging beliefs and principles that order life in accordance with God’s will. Westerners typically imagine that Shariah advocates simply want to use the Koran as their legal code. But the reality is much more complicated. Islamist politicians tend to be very vague about exactly what it would mean for Shariah to be the source for the law of the land — and with good reason, because just adopting such a principle would not determine how the legal system would actually operate.”</a>( )<br /><br />In truth, Shariah is a set of laws shown to us from Divine sources that cannot be compromised i.e. prohibition of iqour, fornication, adultery, usury etc. These laws are set and fixed and remain fixed until the end of time.<br /><br />“Fiqh” on the hand is the product of “Ijtihad” which in turn requires “mujtahid” to make interpretations or current circumstances in order to allow shariah to be applied effectively. The Fiqh is where all variations occur because in matters of fiqh, the Quran and Sunnah is silent.<br />Malaysia is already a hybrid state as we speak<br />RPK says:<br /><br /><a href="http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/28010/84/#jc_writeComment"><span style="font-style:italic;">“Yes, that is what the Thesaurus has to say about the word hybrid. So, a Hybrid State, as opposed to a Secular State, Theocratic State, Republic, Monarchy (meaning absolute monarchy and not Constitutional Monarchy), and whatnot, would mean it is a state that is a mixture of two or more systems.<br />Malaysians have a name for this. Malaysians call it rojak. And rojak would be similar to the English salad, except that it is hotter (meaning spicy rather than temperature), a mix of many types of fruits and vegetables. Hey, is the tomato a fruit or vegetable? The jury is out on that one as is the argument about whether the chicken or the egg came first. Did the chicken come from an egg or the egg that came from a chicken?<br />I will let Zul sort this one out as I am sure if he can make sense from a Hybrid State then he can certainly answer the question as to whether the chicken or the egg came first.”</span></a><br /><br />In case RPK has been living elsewhere, Malaysia has been existing as a hybrid state since it’s inception. That is why the various Shariah courts are recognized and never considered to be illegal or ultra vires to the constitution. <br />In fact, shariah courts preceeds the Federal Constitution by about 2 centuries. So, for Raja Petra to think that Malaysia is a secular state is a clear sign of misapprehension. (Read here for more information <a href="http://www.malaysiawaves.com/2009/08/shariah-law-has-been-enacted-in.html">http://www.malaysiawaves.com/2009/08/shariah-law-has-been-enacted-in.html</a>)<br /><br />RPK, you need to stop interpreting Islam from the English version of the Quran. That is your source of confusion. The Quran is in Arabic and it was sent down in Arabic. As such, it must be interpreted and understood in it’s original language.<br />Then only you can tell the difference between confusion and clarity within the Islamic world.<br /><br />Tulang Besi<br /><br /></span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-67111833354681070982009-10-07T20:21:00.000-07:002009-10-07T20:22:48.618-07:00Islam is Against Paganism, not ModernityThe Arabs during the time the Prophet received his appointment as Prophet were steeped in Paganism and pagan cultures. Part of the pagan Arab culture at that time is:<br />a. gambling, <br />b. alcoholism, <br />c. fornication (free sex), <br />d. adultery (free sex), <br />e. nakedness (hence we have the jilbab), <br />f. idolatry,<br />g. disregard for hygiene ( there is a hadeeth on torcher for those who do not clean properly after urinating)<br />h. murder,<br />i. infanticide (otherwise known today as abortion)<br />j. homosexuality <br />and many more.<br /> <span class="fullpost"><br /><br /><br />Many question why the punishment for alcohol in Islam is “harsh” like in the Kartika Sari’s case. In truth, the punishment is not meant for consumption of alcohol. The real enemy behind the punishment is pagan paradigm. The harsh punishment prescribed by Islam for the list above was meant to cleanse the Arabs ( and Muslims) from Paganism.<br /><br />Islam views Paganism as a crime against humanity. So, there is a need to cleanse human beings from going back to their pagan ways and cultures. And it seems that humans, without guidance and enforcement will almost always slide back into paganism subconsciously. <br /><br />We see now in the West that cultures like gambling, alcoholism, free sex, nakedness, infanticide etc is now considered as human rights and no legislation is allowed to be passed prohibiting them. This is where Islam will come into collision with the Western values and culture.<br /><br />The West worships and upholds paganism while Islam strive to clean the human race from it. Islam’s struggle is made harder when Paganism is now masked as “human right” when it is nothing more than a deviation from human nature.<br /><br />Islam on the other hand is painted as being unprogressive and repressive and not in tuned with modernity. Funny thing is that the detractors never seem to bother to mention the fact that 40 years after the law of caning for alcohol was passed, the “Pagan” and backward Arabs came out from the Arabian Peninsula and conquered the Persian Empire and 4/5 of the Roman Eastern Empire, including Spain and 4/5 of Gaul/France.<br /><br />Muawiyyah was able to turn camel riding Arabs in the desert into fighting sailors and defeated the Roman navies thus preventing them from resupplying their garrisons in Alexandria resulting in the fall of the entire Northern Africa territory once belonged to the Roman Eastern Empire<br /><br />So, no. The harsh punishment for alcoholism, among others, helped the Prophet SAW to turn a backward, pagan, uncivilized people of the desert into one of the most prolific empire man has even known in less than 60 years while at the same time destroying the Persian empire and reducing the Roman Eastern Empire to 1/5 of their former territories.<br />Their emperor, Heraklius, went into seclusion and thus insanity after his army was decimated by Khalid Ibnu Walid in Yarmuk ( Jordan).<br /><br />So, I think it’s the other way round. The West is going back to Paganism. That explains their contempt to Christianity and their tolerance for anything that is not Christian including secularism. They even view progress as being anything that turns back Christianity or religion. Their most important vessel towards paganism is of course secularism.<br />\<br />On the hand, Islam despise and had worked tirelessly from day one to turn back the tide of paganism. This explains the tension between Western trends and Islam and I believe the tide will not subside and will forever continue. <br /><br />The West are proud of their models/actresses who parades in clothes that exposes 4/5 of their bodies. It is exactly the culture of the pagan Arabs during the time of the Prophet where women were proud of exposing the cleavages. Hence, Islam prescribed the “jilbab” to cure this element of paganism. The West decides to ridicule the “Jilbab” and labels them as being backward and anti progress when it is them that is sliding into “cave men” mentality.<br /><br />So, the way Western media responded to the Kartika Sari’s caning should not have been a surprise to any Muslim. Since, the Kartika Sari’s punishment is a step towards climbing out of paganism which the West despises so much, It is a slap in the face to Western hypocrisy and western media responded the only way they know, the Pagan way.<br /><br />Tulang Besi<br /></span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com97tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-85184800006008664042009-09-18T23:33:00.001-07:002009-09-18T23:33:34.494-07:00Sisters in Islam Should Mind Their Own BusinessIt is reported that Sisters in Islam (SIS) is planning to <a href="http://www.malaysiainsider.com/index.php/malaysia/38090-sis-files-to-stay-kartikas-caning">appeal the Kartika Sari sentence</a>. This is despite Katika’s own plea for her to be left alone. Kartika herself is willing to go through her punishment and had refused to appeal. Why is SIS acting like a busybody and sticking their nose where it’s not needed?(“<a href="http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/113034">Kartika: Leave me alone, I'll face the music”</a>)<span class="fullpost"><br /><br />For an organization who advocates equality among men and women in Islam, their action to file for appeal on the Kartika Sari sentence is nothing less than an act of hypocrisy. The right stand that SIS should adopt to to commend the Pahang Shariah court for prescribing the same type of punishment to women as they would men.<br />Also, I wonder if SIS finds the whipping punishment prescribed by the civil courts in our country to be more “humane” compared to that of the Shariah courts. For one, the whipping in Shariah court is not meant to physically hurt. That cannot be said about lashings under civil laws. <br /><br />In other words, SIS will tolerate punishment that is more inhumane simply because it is prescribed by a secular court. It’s really the true ideology of Sisters in Islam, secularism. If they’re really interested in fighting for humanity, they should then protest the lashings methods used by the civil laws. That would make more sense and consistent.<br /><br />In truth, SIS is a secular organization, anti to patriarchy, and by extension, anti to Islam. They dislike the Kartika Sari sentence because it is prescribed by a Shariah court. If it came from a secular court, SIS will not even make a noise.<br /><br />Thus far, all of the issues raised by SIS is irrelevant and weak. None of their case against the Shariah courts and shariah law is substantive. All their attacks against Islam and Islamic jurisprudence is nothing more than their own ill feelings towards Islamic law and thus far has provided zero evidence that the Shariah law is discriminatory to women. In short, we have yet to see one proof from SIS showing the Shariah system to be unfair.<br /><br />The good news is majority of Muslims in Malaysia, men and women alike, rejects SIS. They see SIS as nothing more than a loud mouth organization bent on imposing secularism on the Muslims and fighting to their ideology rather than the welfare and benefits of Muslim women in Malaysia.<br /><br />For example, if SIS was really interested in the welfare of Muslim women, they should instead fight for the rights of Muslim women to <a href="http://www.malaysiawaves.com/2009/08/women-in-netherlands-prove-feminism-is.html">work part-time as practiced in the Netherlands</a>. (Refer to my last article entitled "<a href="http://www.malaysiawaves.com/2009/08/women-in-netherlands-prove-feminism-is.html">Women in Netherlands Prove Feminism Wrong</a>")<br /><br />They’d be better of pursuing this type of policy change as compared to trying to shut down the entire Shariah court system in Malaysia. Their current course is just a waste of time as it is based on nothing more than lies and fictitious ideology.<br /><br />SIS is a waste of oxygen for all Malaysians as their existence serves no purpose to the Malaysian public. Their like our tonsils. They should be removed fast if we want to have a healthier life in the future.<br /><br />In conclusion, SIS’s latest move to appeal the Kartika Sari’s sentence is hypocritical, inconsistent to their ideology, waste of time and money and not to mention disrespectful to the wishes of Kartika Sari herself. <br /><br />My advise to SIS is to start looking into their own ideology rather than being a busybody and sticking their noses where they are not needed.<br /><br />Tulang Besi<br /></span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com32tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-31646841706956294262009-09-09T00:47:00.000-07:002009-09-09T00:51:11.147-07:00Islam is Against Paganism, Not ModernityThe Arabs during the time the Prophet received his appointment as Prophet were steeped in Paganism and pagan cultures. Part of the pagan Arab culture at that time is:<br />a. gambling, <br />b. alcoholism, <br />c. fornication (free sex), <br />d. adultery (free sex), <br />e. nakedness (hence we have the jilbab), <br />f. idolatry,<br />g. disregard for hygiene ( there is a hadeeth on torcher for those who do not <br /> clean properly after urinating)<br />h. murder,<br />i. infanticide (otherwise known today as abortion)<br />j. homosexuality <br />and many more.<br /> <span class="fullpost"><br /><br /><br />Many question why the punishment for alcohol in Islam is “harsh” like in the Kartika Sari’s case. In truth, the punishment is not meant for consumption of alcohol. The real enemy behind the punishment is pagan paradigm. The harsh punishment prescribed by Islam for the list above was meant to cleanse the Arabs ( and Muslims) from Paganism.<br /><br />Islam views Paganism as a crime against humanity. So, there is a need to cleanse human beings from going back to their pagan ways and cultures. And it seems that humans, without guidance and enforcement will almost always slide back into paganism subconsciously. <br /><br />We see now in the West that cultures like gambling, alcoholism, free sex, nakedness, infanticide etc is now considered as human rights and no legislation is allowed to be passed prohibiting them. This is where Islam will come into collision with the Western values and culture.<br /><br />The West worships and upholds paganism while Islam strive to clean the human race from it. Islam’s struggle is made harder when Paganism is now masked as “human right” when it is nothing more than a deviation from human nature.<br /><br />Islam on the other hand is painted as being unprogressive and repressive and not in tuned with modernity. Funny thing is that the detractors never seem to bother to mention the fact that 40 years after the law of caning for alcohol was passed, the “Pagan” and backward Arabs came out from the Arabian Peninsula and conquered the Persian Empire and 4/5 of the Roman Eastern Empire, including Spain and 4/5 of Gaul/France.<br /><br />Muawiyyah was able to turn camel riding Arabs in the desert into fighting sailors and defeated the Roman navies thus preventing them from resupplying their garrisons in Alexandria resulting in the fall of the entire Northern Africa territory once belonged to the Roman Eastern Empire.<br /><br />So, no. The harsh punishment for alcoholism, among others, helped the Prophet SAW to turn a backward, pagan, uncivilized people of the desert into one of the most prolific empire man has even known in less than 60 years while at the same time destroying the Persian empire and reducing the Roman Eastern Empire to 1/5 of their former territories.<br /><br />Their emperor, Heraklius, went into seclusion and thus insanity after his army was decimated by Khalis Ibnu Walid in Yarmuk (Jordan).<br /><br />So, I think it’s the other way round. The West is going back to Paganism. That explains their contempt to Christianity and their tolerance for anything that is not Christian including secularism. They even view progress as being anything that turns back Christianity or religion. Their most important vessel towards paganism is of course secularism.<br /><br />On the hand, Islam despise and had worked tirelessly from day one to turn back the tide of paganism. This explains the tension between Western trends and Islam and I believe the tide will not subside and will forever continue. <br /><br />The West are proud of their models/actresses who parades in clothes that exposes 4/5 of their bodies. It is exactly the culture of the pagan Arabs during the time of the Prophet where women were proud of exposing the cleavages. Hence, Islam prescribed the “jilbab” to cure this element of paganism. The West decides to ridicule the “Jilbab” and labels them as being backward and anti progress when it is them that is sliding into “cave men” mentality.<br /><br />So, the way Western media responded to the Kartika Sari’s caning should not have been a surprise to any Muslim. Since, the Kartika Sari’s punishment is a step towards climbing out of paganism which the West despises so much, It is a slap in the face to Western hypocrisy and western media responded the only way they know, the Pagan way.<br /><br />Tulang Besi<br />.</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-56870987395921642392009-09-02T09:34:00.001-07:002009-09-02T09:35:49.744-07:00To Those Who Doubt the Caning Punishment for Alcohol DrinkersThis is an answer to those who doubt the lashing punishment for intoxicants in Islam. <span class="fullpost"><br /><br /><br />Zaharuddin Abd Rahman<br /><br />www.zaharuddin.net<br /><br /> <br />araksebat.jpg<br /><br /> <br /><br />Negarawan Malaysia, Tun Dr Mahathir, berkata di dalam blognya : Tetapi benarkah hukuman ini tepat bagi jenayah minum arak? Beliau kemudiannya berkata :<br /><br />"Dalam Al-Quran terdapat 43 ayat yang menegaskan; "Apabila kamu hukum, hukumlah dengan adil". Apakah mungkin seorang hakim itu tidak adil ataupun tersilap dalam pertimbangannya? Apakah tidak ada dalam Islam belas kasihan bagi yang bersalah buat kali pertama?<br />Saya harap pihak-pihak yang pakar dalam perkara ini dapat menunjuk ayat-ayat Al-Quran dan kitab-kitab yang dirujuk oleh hakim apabila hukuman ini dijatuhkan."<br /><br />Sebagai menyahut pertanyaan Tun tersebut, saya sediakan artikel ringkas ini memberikan input kepada beliau dan mereka yang masih tertanya-tanya.<br /><br />ARAK DAN STATISTIK KEBURUKANNYA<br /><br />Sebelum saya menghuraikan secara ringkas jawapan bagi persoalan Tun Dr Mahathir, izinkan saya meningingatkan pembaca berkenaan arak dan statistik keburukannya, sehingga menyebabkan Islam begitu bersungguh melarang dan meletakkan undang-undang ke atas peminumnya juga. Ia sebenarnya tidak lain kecuali untuk mengutamakan keadilan umum, di atas hak individu.<br /><br />Menurut statistik rasmi di United Kingdom, Alcohol-related crime adalah seperti berikut :-<br /><br />* Hampir 45 - 46 % kejadian jenayah, mangsa meyakini bahawa penyerangnya di bawah pengaruh alkohol (arak).<br /><br />* Angka tadi naik kepada 58% dalam kes serangan oleh individu yang tidak dikenali.<br /><br />* 39% keganasan dalam rumahtangga melibatkan alkohol (arak)<br /><br />* Hampir sejuta serangan ganas yang berlaku dalam tahun 2007-2008, dipercayai dilakukan oleh mereka yang sedang mabuk atau separa mabuk.<br /><br /> (Source: British Crime Survey 2007/08)<br /><br />Manakala di Russia pula, sekitar 72 % kes pembunuhan adalah berkait dengan akibat minuman arak. 42 % pula kes mati bunuh diri hasil dari arak. Menurut Prof Nemtsov, Russia kehilangan (mati) rakyatnya seramai 500,000 ke 750,000 akibat arak. ( sumber )<br /><br />Tanpa had dan kawalan berkesan, lebih menggerunkan di UK statistik menunjukkan 30% kanak-kanak berumur 11 hingga 15 tahun turut minum arak sekurang-kurangnya sekali seminggu. <br /><br />Selain penyebab jenayah, arak juga turut memberi impak amat buruk kepada kesihatan.<br /><br />Seorang doktor di London memaklumkan purata umur pesakit dari kesan arak adalah berumur 20 ke 30 tahun, sebelum ini biasanya mereka yang berumur 50 tahun ke atas sahaja yang kerap ke hospital akibat arak. (rujuk)<br /><br />Dilaporkan oleh organisasi kesihatan, di United Kingdom jumlah penduduk yang dirawat akibat penyakit dari kesan minuman arak bertambah dua kali ganda sejak sepuluh tahun lepas.<br /><br />Secara purata rakyat Britain 'menelan' arak sebanyak 9.6 liters arak keras dan tulen secara tahunan, ia lebih dahsyat dari Russia yang mencatatkan 8.7 liter sahaja. Sedangkan Russia diwartakan sebagai negara yang terbanyak ‘peminum arak' sebelum ini.<br /><br />Hasil dari petikan statistik ringkas ini, adakah masih terdapat pemimpin yang begitu ‘TIDAK BERTANGUNGJAWAB' sehingga sanggup mempertahankan penjualan arak dengan MELUAS tanpa kawalan dan hanya beriman dengan ‘kawalan diri'?, disamping membawakan hujjah hak kebebasan individu, bangsa, agama tertentu dan hak syarikat?.<br /><br />Sebenarnya, membenarkan penjualan arak adalah satu pencabulan hak bagi majoriti masyarakat Malaysia yang lain, kerana ia mendedahkan individu lain dalam keadaan bahaya sebagaimana yang berlaku di UK, Russia dan lain-lain negara aktif arak.<br /><br />HUKUMAN MINUM ARAK DALAM ISLAM<br /><br />Dalam Islam, arak itu sendiri adalah haram atau dilarang. Sama ada minum sedikit atau banyak adalah sama sahaja larangannya. Demikian juga dadah. Sabda Nabi s.a.w<br /><br />ما أسكر كثيره فقليله حرام<br /><br />Ertinya : Apa-apa yang banyaknya memabukkan, maka sedikitnya juga haram ( walaupun belum memabukkan) ( Riwayat Ahmad, Tirmizi, Abu Daud : Ibn HIbban : Sohih )<br /><br />Ayat al-Quran dan hadis berkenaannya terlalu banyak dan amat biasa kita baca. Islam mengakui wujudnya manfaat kecil dari arak tetapi manfaatnya adalah berdiri di atas kehancuran pihak yang lain. Sama seperti judi, yang menang sememangnya gembira namun ia menang di atas kekalahan pihak yang lain.<br /><br />Firman Allah swt :<br /><br />يَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ قُلْ فِيهِمَا إِثْمٌ كَبِيرٌ وَمَنَافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ وَإِثْمُهُمَآ أَكْبَرُ مِن نَّفْعِهِمَا<br /><br />"Mereka bertanyakan kepada kamu tentang arak dan judi, katakanlah (kepada mereka) pada kedua-duanya terdapat dosa yang besar dan kebaikan kepada manusia, dan dosa pada kedua-duanya lebih banyak dari kebaikan" (Al-Baqarah : 219)<br /><br />Lagi Allah menegaskan :-<br /><br />يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِنَّمَا الْخَمْرُ وَالْمَيْسِرُ وَالأَنصَابُ وَالأَزْلاَمُ رِجْسٌ مِّنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ فَاجْتَنِبُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ<br /><br />Ertinya : Hai orang-orang yang beriman, sesungguhnya (meminum) khamar, berjudi, (berkorban untuk) berhala, mengundi nasib dengan panah, adalah perbuatan keji termasuk perbuatan setan. Maka jauhilah ( DIHARAMKAN) perbuatan-perbuatan itu agar kamu mendapat keberuntungan ( Al-Maidah : 90)<br /><br />Terbukti secara teori dalam ilmu Islam dan realiti dari statistik yang diberikan, arak adalah salah satu punca utama jenayah, selagi ruang dan peluang dibuka seluasnya selagi itulah manusia akan melakukan kesalahan mabuk.<br /><br />Kerana itu nabi menyebut :-<br /><br />الخمر أم الخبائث<br /><br />Ertinya : Arak itu adalah ibu kepada kejahatan ( Hadis Hasan : Albani ; Silsilah Ahadith As-Sohihah, 1854)<br /><br />Gunakan kuasa dengan tepat dan adil, selaras dengan perjuangan kamu. Adil dalam konteks arak adalah mengharamkannya dalam penjualan bebas.<br /><br />HUKUMAN SEBAT BAGI PEMINUM ARAK<br /><br />Bagi sesiapa sahaja yang bertanya dari kitab mana, dan buku mana, sumber mana diambil hukuman sebat bagi peminum arak, jawapannya adalah seperti berikut, tindakan mengenakan sebatan bagi peminum arak adalah diambil dari kumpulan hadis-hadis Nabi yang cukup banyak, antaranya :-<br /><br />1) Hadis Nabi :<br /><br />إذا شربوا الخمر فاجلدوهم , ثم إن شربوا فاجلدوهم , ثم إن شربوا فاجلدوهم<br /><br />Ertinya : Apabila mereka minum arak, sebatlah mereka, dan kemudian jika mereka minum lagi, sebatlah mereka dan kemudian jika mereka minum lagi, sebatlah mereka ( Riwayat Abu Daud)<br /><br />2. Hadis Nabi :<br /><br />أن النبي أتي برجل قد شرب الخمر , فجلده بجريدتين نحو أربعين<br /><br />Ertinya : Nabi telah didatangi oleh seorang lelaki yang telah meminum arak, lalu telah disebatnya dengan dua pelepah tamar sebanyak 40 kali (Riwayat Muslim) [1]<br /><br />3. Hadis Nabi<br /><br />كان يضرب في الخمر بالنعال والجريد أربعين<br /><br />Ertinya : Sesungguhnya dipukul (sebat) bagi arak (peminum) dengan kasut-kasut dan pelapah tamar sebanyak 40 kali (Riwayat Muslim) [2]<br /><br />4. Hadis Nabi :-<br /><br />أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم : جلد في الخمربالجريد والنعال , ثم جلد أبو بكر أربعين فلما كان عمر ودنا الناس من الريف والقرى , قال : ما ترون في جلد الخمر؟ فقال عبدالرحمن بن عوف : أرى أن نجعلها كأخف الحدود , فجلد عمر ثمانين<br /><br />Ertinya : Sesungguhnya Nabi s.a.w merotan (sebat) dalam kes arak dengan pelepah tamar dan sepatu, kemudian Abu Bakar ( di zaman pemerintahannya) juga menyebat dengan 40 kali sebatan, di ketika pemerintahan Umar, beliau meminta pandangan orang ramai dari kampong dan desa lalu berkata : Apa pandangan kamu berkenaan sebatan bagi peminum arak?, lalu Abd Rahman Auf berkata : Aku berpandangan kita menjadikannya hudud yang paling ringan (merujuk kepada sebatan qazf) [3], maka Umar membuat keputusan untuk menyebat dengan 80 kali sebatan ( Riwayat Muslim dan Abu Daud)[4]<br /><br />5. Athar sahabat<br /><br />قال علي : جلد رسول الله في الخمر أربعين , وأبو بكر أربعين , وعمر ثمانين , وكل سنة وهذا أحب إليّ<br /><br />Ertinya : Berkata Ali r.a : Rasulullah menyebat peminum arak 40 sebatan, Abu Bakar juga 40 sebatan, Umar menyebat 80 sebatan, semuanya adalah sunnah, dan ini ( merujuk kepada 40 sebatan) adalah lebih aku sukai. ( Riwayat Muslim ) [5]<br /><br />6. Hadis Nabi<br /><br />أن رجلا رفع إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قد سكر ، فأمر قريبا من عشرين رجلا ، فجلدوه بالجريد ، والنعال<br /><br />Ertinya : Seorang lelaki dibawa ke penghakiman Nabi s.a.w kerana telah mabuk (minum arak), lalu Nabi s.a.w mengarahkan sekitar 20 orang lelaki untuk menyebatnya dengan pelepah tamar dan sepatu ( Al-Bayhaqi)[6]<br /><br />Jika dikatakan, itu semuadari hadis, maka apakah pula dalil al-Quran yang menyuruh? jawabnya adalah<br /><br />وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ<br /><br />Ertinya : Kami turunkan kepadamu Al Qur'an, agar kamu menerangkan kepada umat manusia apa yang telah diturunkan kepada mereka dan supaya mereka memikirkan ( An-Nahl : 44)<br /><br />Maka itulah tugas hadis nabi yang bersumber dari kata-kata, perbuatan dan perakuan baginda Nabi s.a.w yang menjadi penjelas kepada Al-Quran.<br /><br />PERBEZAAN TASFIRAN ULAMA<br /><br />Ulama telah bersepakat bahawa mesti dijatuhkan hukuman bagi peminum arak, sama ada ia minum banyak atau sedikit. Namun ulama berbeza pandangan dalam sekurang-kurang dua perkara iaitu :-<br /><br />1) Adakah hukuman sebatan ke atas peminum arak adalah dalam kategori hukuman hudud atau hanya ta'zir.<br /><br />Kebanyakan mazhab seperti Hanafi, Maliki, Syafie meletakkan hukuman sebat ke atas peminum arak sebagai hukuman hudud.<br /><br />Namun demikian, sebahagian ulama lain seperti At-Tabari, Ibn Munzir, As-Syawkani, Ibn Qayyim, Al-Qaradhawi, Al-Uthaymin menganggapnya sebagai ta'zir semata-mata, yang mana ia terserah kepada hakim untuk menentukan jumlah sebatan dan keperluan untuk menyebat atau tidak.<br /><br />Menurut Al-Qaradhawi, ia terbukti sebagai ta'zir kerana wujud pelbagai dalil yang menunjukkan :-<br /><br />a- Jumlah pukulan berbeza mengikut keadaan peminum. Ada yang dikenakan 40 kali dan ada yang dikenakan 80 kali. Sifat hukuman hudud adalah tetap, namun ini berbeza-beza menunjukkan ia hanyalah dari hukuman ta'zir, yang terserah kepada kebijaksanaan hakim menentukan jumlahnya.<br /><br />b- Dalam salah satu hadis yang tesebut di atas, Abd Rahman Auf r.a mencadangkan kepada Umar agar diletakkan hukuman yang paling rendah berbanding hudud, ini menunjukkan hukuman ini adalah ta'zir kerana menurut majoriti ulama, hukuman ta'zir tidak boleh melebihi hudud.<br /><br />c- Cara penjatuhan hukuman juga berbeza, ada yang disebat menggunakan sepatu, ada yang menggunakan tangan, baju dan sebahagian lain menggunakan pelepah tamar[7]. Tidak mungkin hukuman ini dari jenis hudud jika sedemikian kerana hukuman hudud semestinya fixed atau tetap jumlahnya.<br /><br />Berdasarkan penelitian terhadap dalil dan perbincangan para ulama yang panjang lebar dan mendalam, secara peribadi saya cenderung kepada hukuman ini adalah ta'zir dan bukan hudud. Wallahu'alam.<br /><br />2) Jumlah sebatan yang perlu dikenakan.<br /><br />Dalam hal ini, para ulama terbahagi kepada dua kumpulan :-<br /><br />Pertama : Mazhab Hanafi, Maliki, At-Thawry dan Hanbali : Sebatan sebanyak 80 kali sebatan sama ada lelaki atau perempuan.<br /><br />Kedua : Mazhab Syafie : 40 kali sebatan sahaja. Namun jika hakim mendapati kesalahannya berat, hakim boleh menambah sehingga 80 kali sebatan, dan lebih dari 40 sebatan itu dikira sebagai ta'zir , manakala 40 sebatan yang awal adalah hudud.<br /><br /> <br /><br />BOLEHKAH PESALAH TIDAK DISEBAT?<br /><br />Ia bergantung kepada mazhab mana yang dterima pakai oleh Mahkamah Syariah Malaysia, hakim dan negara Malaysia.<br /><br />Jika Hudud<br /><br />Jika kesalahan meminum arak diterima sebagai kesalahan hudud sebagaimana pandangan mazhab Syafie. Pesalah tidak boleh dielak dari hukuman sebat tadi kerana hukuman sebat dikira sebagai hak Allah swt. Hak Allah perlu didahulukan dari sekalian hak makhluk dan sesuatu itu termasuk dalam hak Allah apabila kemudaratannya meluas dan umum, seperti zina, riba, murtad dan sebagainya. Namun pelaksanaan hukuman hudud ke atas seseorang pesalah, boleh ditangguh berdasarkan keperluan tertentu.<br /><br />Dalam kategori ini, semua pesalah walau kali pertama[8] melakukan kesalahan, akan dihukum kerana mudarat ke atas masyarakat umum.<br /><br />Jika Ta'zir<br /><br />Jika kesalahan ini dianggap dari jenis Ta'zir, maka hakim mempunyai kuasa untuk mengampun sama ada atas alasan ia kesalahan kali pertama, ia seorang yang lemah, ia seorang tidak sihat dan sebagainya. Demikian menurut mazhab Syafie.<br /><br />Justeru, sebelum dikritik keputusan hakim, bincangkan terlebih dahulu mazhab mana yang ingin diikuti di Malaysia, khususnya dalam konteks hukum minum arak ini.<br /><br />SEJAUH MANA SEBATAN INI ADIL?<br /><br />Pertama<br /><br />Jika ia benar-benar hudud dan termasuk dalam hak Allah swt, tidak layak manusia yang hina untuk mempersoalkan tentang keadilan, kerana Allah swt sentiasa adil walau menghumban sesorang manusia ke nerakaNya. Allah tetap adil walau Dialah yang menyesatkan sekumpulan manusia dan memberi hidayat kepada sebahagian yang lain. Kerana apa adil? Kerana piawan adil Allah tidak sama dengan manusia yang dicipta. Keadilan Allah adalah kerana dia yang mencipta kita, dan Dia berhak untuk menentukan apa sahaja yang diinginiNya. Jika kita merasakan Allah tidak adil menyesatkan sekumpulan manusia, maka individu tersebut perlu memulangkan nyawa yang Allah berikan kepada mereka dan beredar dari galaksi ciptaan Allah swt ini ke sebuah alam ciptaan sendiri.<br /><br />Kedua<br /><br />Sebatan ini, tidak zalim sama sekali kerana ia bukan bertujuan menyakitkan seperti sebatan ekor pari yang menghakis kulit, daging dan sampai ke tulang. Sebatan ini hanyalah untuk pengajaran, seperti denda cikgu kepada muridnya, ibu kepada anaknya atas tujuan mengajar, atas asas belas kasihan dan bukan dendam kesumat dan ‘geram' memukul.<br /><br />Hasilnya, pelbagai displin sebatan telah ditentukan dalam hukum Islam iaitu [9] :-<br /><br /> * Tidak boleh dipukul wajah dan kemaluan.[10]<br /> *<br /> Alat yang digunakan mestilah tidak besar, bukan tongkat yang besar, ia adalah seperti dahan dan ranting sederhana sahaja.<br /> *<br /> Tidak diharuskan si pemukul mengangkat tanganya melebihi paras ketiaknya, atau tidak boleh terlihat bawah lengannya semasa mengangkat pemukul, dan pukulan tidak terlalu menyakitkan, tidak pula terlalu perlahan.<br /> *<br /> Yang diangkat adalah sikunya sahaja dan bukan lengan.<br /> *<br /> Lelaki disebat secara berdiri, wanita secara duduk.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Adakah jenis pukulan yang sebegini pun dianggap zalim? Jika demikian guru-guru sekolah, ibu bapa, suami memukul, adalah lebih zalim kerana hukumannya tidak dibicarakan di mahkamah.<br /><br />Bagi saya, jika hukuman sebegini pun masih zalim, tentunya yang menuduh ia zalim itu akan jadi lebih zalim kerana bercakap dan mengkritik tanpa ilmu.<br /><br />Cara sebatan di bawah adalah yang dilaksanakan di Arab Saudi. Lebih lembut dari apa yang didemokan di Malaysia<br /><br />Ketiga<br /><br />Sejauh mana pula adilnya orang luar seperti Tun Dr Mahathir dan yang lainnya, mempertikaikan hak seorang hakim dalam membuat keputusan?.<br /><br />Bukankah sang hakim lebih berhak menentukan hukuman yang paling adil disebabkan beliau berada sepanjang sesi perbicaraan dari kedua-dua belah pihak, mendengar pandangan kesemua pembela dan pendakwa. Justeru, adalah TIDAK ADIL bagi orang di luar mahkamah untuk mengkiritk sewenangnya keputusan hakim, sedangkan mereka tidak mempunyai gambaran sebenar di sebalik sesebuah kes. Mungkin sahaja, si pesalah sendiri redha dan ingin hukuman dilaksanakan. Justeru itulah keadilannya.<br /><br />Keempat<br /><br />Bukankah keputusan hakim patut dihormati sebagai menunjukkan autoriti badan kehakiman dari sebarang gangguan luar?. Kita kerap mendengar di mahkamah civil bahawa sebarang keputusan mahkamah tidak boleh dikritik terbuka sama ada di dalam mahkamah atau diluarnya, kerana akan termasuk di dalam kesalahan ‘menghina mahkamah' (contempt of court), lalu mengapa pula pihak yang kurang maklumat di luar ini dengan senang dan mudah mengkritik keputusan mahkamah Syariah?.<br /><br />Kelima<br /><br />Di dalam Islam, adil atau tidak bukan terletak pada logik aqal manusia semata-mata, namun adil yang sebenarnya adalah melaksanakan apa yang diperintahkan oleh Allah swt dan baginda Nabi s.a.w. Kalau dalam konteks kes ini, pesalah juga telah bersedia menjalani hukuman tersebut sebagai satu proses kesedaran dirinya. Adilkah kita mempersoalkan hak pesalah untuk mendapat hukuman.?<br /><br />KESIMPULAN<br /><br />Sebagai kesimpulan kepada beberapa jawapan kepada persoalan yang diutarakan oleh Tun Dr Mahathir.<br /><br /> <br /><br /> * DR. M : Tetapi benarkah hukuman ini tepat bagi jenayah minum arak?<br /><br /> <br /><br />Ye, benar, bukti-bukti berkenaan wujudnya hukuman ini bersumberkan hadis-hadis yang sohih.<br /><br /> <br /><br /> * DR. M : Apakah ada larangan dalam Islam untuk mengkanunkan undang-undang syariah?<br /><br /> <br /><br />Di dalam Islam, tiada larangan sama sekali, malah digalakkan bagi mencapai keseragaman dalam keputusan hakim.<br /><br /> <br /><br /> * DR. M : Jika Kerajaan tidak mengkanunkan undang-undang syariah melalui proses perbahasan dan kelulusan oleh dewan-dewan undangan, atau melalui fatwa oleh ulama-ulama, bolehkah tulisan-tulisan ulama tertentu dijadikan asas hukum mengikut pendapat hakim?<br /><br /> <br /><br />Ini saya tidak pasti, memang sepatutnya tidak boleh hakim menjatuhkan hukuman tanpa undang-undang itu dikanunkan, cuma saya tidak pasti mengapa ia belum dikanunkan. Sepatutnya sesebuah kerajaan negeri bertanggungjawab untuk mengkanunkannya. Namun sebelum ia dikanunkan, pertikaian yang diutarakan oleh Tun memang relevan dalam konteks hukum dunia, namun adalah salah di sisi Islam, kerana semua hukum Islam sepatutnya dikanunkan.<br /><br />Mahkamah ini pula adalah mahkamah Syariah yang khusus untuk hal ehwal orang Islam dan bukannya mahkamah sivil. Justeru apa ertinya sebuah mahkamah dinamakan ‘SYARIAH' jika keputusan yang berlandaskan hukum Islam juga tidak boleh dilaksanakan.? Jika demikian, tiada erti nama ‘syariah' pada sebuah mahkamah Syariah lagi.<br /><br /> * DR.M : Dalam Al-Quran terdapat 43 ayat yang menegaskan; "Apabila kamu hukum, hukumlah dengan adil". Apakah mungkin seorang hakim itu tidak adil ataupun tersilap dalam pertimbangannya? Apakah tidak ada dalam Islam belas kasihan bagi yang bersalah buat kali pertama?<br /><br />Lebih zalim yang mengkritik tanpa ilmu. Hukuman ini adalah adil atau tidak telah diulas di atas, dan ia juga tertakluk kepada penentuan sama ada hukuman sebat peminum arak adalah hudud atau takzir.<br /><br /> * DR. M : Sudahkah kita rujuk kepada Al-Quran berkenaan dengan minum beer (arak) dan hukuman yang perlu dikenakan supaya keadilan tercapai?<br /><br />Oleh kerana dirujuk kepada hukum al-Quran dan Hadis nabi, hukuman tersbeut patut dijalankan. Kerna arak terbukti merosakkan umum dan bukan hanya individu terbabit semata-mata. Cuba lihat dan fahami statistik yang disertakan di atas.<br /><br /> * DR. M : Saya harap pihak-pihak yang pakar dalam perkara ini dapat menunjuk ayat-ayat Al-Quran dan kitab-kitab yang dirujuk oleh hakim apabila hukuman ini dijatuhkan.<br /><br />Jika seseorang itu berkefahaman sesat 'anti hadis', sudah tentu hanya akan mendakwa tiadanya ayat Quran yang specifik sebagai alasan, namun terlalu banyak ayat-ayat al-Quran yang menjelaskan keperluan untuk taat dan mengikuti Rasulullah, bagaimana cara taat? tidak lain dengan merujuk kepada sumber perincian ayat-ayat Al-Quran yang biasanya bersifat umum, sumber itu adalah hadis-hadis Nabi. Tidak menerima Hadis bermakna seseorang itu tidak menerima Al-Quran. Gelaran yang tepat bagi kumpulan yang tidak meyakini hadis, sebenarnya bukan kumpulan 'anti hadis' tetapi golongan anti 'Al-Quran dan Hadis' sekaligus.<br /><br />Kalaulah semua hadis itu tidak boleh dipercayai sebagaimana dakwaan kumpulan sesat 'anti hadis (& Quran) tadi,' bagaimana mungkin boleh wujud ayat-ayat Al-Quran seperti di bawah yang menyuruh kita mengikut Rasulullah? Sudah tentu akan berlaku kontradiksi, dan mustahil Allah akan mengarahkan kita kepada sesuatu perkara yang mustahil atau di luar kemampuan untuk diikuti.<br /><br />Kerana itu jelas bahawa apabila Allah memberitahu bahawa Allah menjaga Al-Quran, maka yang termasuk juga di dalam peliharaan Allah adalah hadis-hadis. Kerana itu sehingga hari ini, kita dapat lihat sistem yang sangat terperinci dalam tapisan sesebuah hadis.<br /><br />Dalam konteks sebatan ini, ayat-ayat yang menjadi sumber hukumannya merujuk kepada semua ayat-ayat yang mengarahkan kita untuk patuh kepada Nabi s.a.w dan mencontohinya, itulah satu-satunya jalan selamat dan diredhai Allah swt . Sebagai contoh ,ayat nya adalah dari Surah Al-Imran ayat ke- 31<br /><br />Ertinya : Katakanlah: "Jika kamu (benar-benar) mencintai Allah, ikutilah aku, niscaya Allah mengasihi dan mengampuni dosa-dosamu." Allah Maha Pengampun lagi Maha Penyayang. ( Ali- Imran : 31 )<br /><br />dan sebuah ayat lagi :-<br /><br />Ertinya : Hai orang-orang yang beriman, taatilah Allah dan taatilah Rasul (Nya), dan ulil amri di antara kamu. Kemudian jika kamu berlainan pendapat tentang sesuatu, maka kembalilah ia kepada Allah (Al Qur'an) dan Rasul (sunnahnya), jika kamu benar-benar beriman kepada Allah dan hari kemudian. Yang demikian itu lebih utama (bagimu) dan lebih baik akibatnya. ( An-Nisa : 59)<br /><br />Jadi bagaimana ingin mengikuti dan merujuk kepada Rasul dalam konteks hukuman bagi peminum arak ini?. Jawapannya sekali lagi, iaitu dengan merujuk kepada hadis-hadis baginda Nabi. sebahagiannya telah disebut di atas. Manakala kitab-kitab rujukannya boleh rujuk senarai kitab yang dirujuk di dalam nota kaki artikel ini. Itulah kitab-kitabnya. Jika mahu melihat gambar kitabnya, saya sertakan salah sebuah darinya yang amat penting. Semoga dapat membacanya dengan faham. <br /><br />AKHIRNYA DIHARAP TUN DR MAHATHIR SUDI UNTUK MEMBACA ULASAN DAN JAWAPAN SAYA KEPADA SOALAN-SOALAN BELIAU INI.<br /><br /> <br />fathbari.jpg<br /><br /> <br /><br />Gambar : Kitab Fathul Bari Syarah Sohih al-Bukhari, Karangan Imam Ibn HajarAl-Asqolani.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Semoga beroleh manfaat, sekian<br /><br /> <br /><br />Zaharuddin Abd Rahman<br /><br />www.zaharuddin.net<br /><br />5 Ramadhan 1430 H<br /><br />26 Ogos 2009<br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br /> <br /><br />[1] Sohih Muslim, mp 1706, jil 11, 216<br /><br />[2] Riwayat Bukhari, no 6391, Jil 6, hlm 2487 ; Sohih Muslim, no 1706, Jil 11, hlm 211<br /><br />[3] Dalam satu riwayat yang lain, Abd Rahman Auf berkata : "Seringan-ringan hudud adalah lapan puluh sebatan". Abd Rahman Auf mencadangkan agar diikut sebatan hudud yang paling ringan iaitu 80 sebatan bagi pesalah qazf. Lalu cadangan ABd Rahman tersebut, diterima Umar r.a.<br /><br />[4] Sohih Muslim, no 1706, jil 11, hlm 215 ; Sunan Abu Daud, JIl 2, hlm 472<br /><br />[5] Sohih Muslim, no 1707, Jil 11, hlm 216<br /><br />[6] Sunan Al-Kubra, Al-Bayhaqi ; Al-Talkhis al-habir, IBn Hajar, no. 2118, jil 4, hlm 144,<br /><br />[7] Rujuk hadis sohih riwayat al-Bukhari, no 6395, Jil 6, hlm 2488<br /><br />[8] Tetapi mestilah pesalah memenuhi syarat-syarat berikut : 1) Islam 2) Sudah baligh dan beraqal 3) buat atas pilihan sendiri dan bukan dipaksa 4) Mengetahui berkenaan haramnya arak. 5) Minum arak dengan jelas sama ada melalui mulut atau suntikan dan sedar. 6) Minuman yang diminum itu memabukkan ( Rujuk MUghni al-Muhtaj, 4/178 ; AL-Muhazzab, As-Syirazi, 5/467 ; Al-Majmu' , An-Nawawi, 22/258)<br /><br />[9] Al-Muhazzab, 5/458 ; Al-Majmu', An-Nawawi, 22/261 ; Al-Mu'tamad Inda As-Syafie, 5/228<br /><br />[10] Dari hadis riwayat Abu Daud, 2/476 </span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-70756177391091435772009-06-05T02:30:00.000-07:002009-06-05T02:31:50.340-07:00KAJIAN SANAD HADIS, ANTARA JOSEPH SCHACHT DAN M.M. AZAMIKAJIAN SANAD HADIS, ANTARA JOSEPH SCHACHT DAN M.M. AZAMI<br />Oleh : Zailani, M.Ag<br />I. Pendahuluan<br />Kajian tentang sumber hukum Islam telah banyak dibahas oleh para pakar,<br />baik di kalangan umat Islam, maupun dari luar Islam. Di antaranya menyangkut<br />dengan sumber hukum Islam, terutama Hadis Nabi saw. Hal ini dapat dipahami<br />bahwa Hadis Nabi mempunyai fungsi yang sangat urgen dalam pertumbuhan dan<br />perkembangan hukum Islam <span class="fullpost"><br /><br />Di samping fungsi Hadis tersebut secara khusus sebagai salah satu sumber<br />dalam penetapan hukum, Hadis juga tidak sama dengan al-Qur’an, sebab al-Qur’an<br />telah ditulis pada masa Nabi dan telah dibukukan pada masa pemerintahan Usman<br />bin Affan. Sedangkan Hadis baru dibukukan pada akhir abad pertamadan awal abad<br />kedua hijrah yaitu pada masa pemerintahan Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (61-101 H)1 yang<br />mana pada masa ini merupakan masa penutup sikap pro dan kontra tentang<br />penulisan Hadis.<br />Disebabkan lamanya tenggang waktu antara Rasulullah dengan masa<br />pembukuan Hadis ini, menjadikan Hadis sebagai sasaran empuk bagi orang yang<br />tidak senang dengan agama Islam, khsusnya oleh kaum orientalis yang ingin<br />menginginkan agar umat Islam tidak percaya kepada Hadis, atau paling tidak<br />membuat umat Islam meragukan sumber hukum Islam yang kedua itu dari hasil<br />penelitian yang mereka lakukan.<br />Salah seorang orientalis yang sangat mengguncangkan dunia Islam oleh hasil<br />penelitiannya adalah Joseph Schacht, salah seorang murid Ignaz Goldziher, yang<br />mengatakan bahwa sanad Hadis itu merupakan buatan para qadhi yang yang ingin<br />melegitimasi pendapat mereka dengan menyandarkannya kepada Rasul, atau<br />kepada tokoh-tokoh yang ada di belakang mereka, yang dikenal dengan teori<br />projecting back. Makalah ini mencoba untuk melihat teori yang dikembangkan oleh<br />Joseph Schacht ini, serta bantahan yang dilakukan oleh para tokoh Islam<br />sesudahnya.<br />Prof. Dr. Joseph Schacht lahir di Silisie Jerman pada 15 Maret 1902.<br />Karirnya sebagai orientalis dimulai dengan belajar pilologi klasik, theologi, dan<br />bahasa-bahasa Timur di Universitas Berslauw dan Universitas Leipzig. Ia<br />meraih gelar Doktor dari Universitas Berslauw pada tahun 1923, ketika ia<br />berusia 21 tahun.<br />Pada tahun 1925 ia diangkat menjadi dosen di Universitas Fribourg, dan<br />pada tahun 1929 ia dikukuhkan sebagai Guru Besar. Pada tahun 1932 ia pindah<br />ke Universitas Kingsbourg, dan dua tahun kemudian ia meninggalkan negerinya<br />Jerman untuk mengajar tata bahasa Arab dan bahasa Suryani di Universitas<br />Fuad Awal (kini Universitas Cairo) di Cairo Mesir. Ia tinggal di Cairo sampai<br />tahun 1939 sebagai Guru Besar.2<br />Ketika perang dunia II meletus, Schacht meninggalkan Cairo dan pindah<br />ke Inggeris untuk kemudian bekerja di Rasio BBC London. Meskipun ia<br />seorang Jerman, namun dalam perang dunia II ia berada di pihak Inggeris. Dan<br />ketika perang selesai, ia tidak pulang ke Jerman, melainkan tetap tinggal di<br />Inggeris, dan menikah dengan wanita Inggeris. Bahkan pada tahun 1947 ia<br />menjadi warga negara Inggeris.<br />Meskipun ia bekerja untuk kepentingan negara Inggeris dan mengkhianati<br />tanah airnya sendiri, namun pemerintah Inggeris tidak memberikan imbalan<br />apa-apa kepadanya. Sebagai seorang ilmuan yang menyandang gelar Propesor-<br />Doktor, di Inggeris ia justeru belajar lagi di tingkat Pasca Sarjana Universitas<br />Oxford, sampai ia meraih gelar Magister (1948) dan Doktor (1952) dari<br />universitas tersebut.<br />Pada tahun 1954 ia meninggalkan Inggeris dan mengajar di Universitas<br />laiden Negeri Belanda sebagai Guru Besar sampai tahun 1959. Di sini ia ikut<br />menjadi supervisor atas cetakan kedua buku Dairah al-Ma’arif al-Islamiyah.<br />Kemudian pada musim panas tahun 1959 ia pindah ke Universitas Colombia<br />New York, dan mengajar di sana sebagai Guru Besar, sampai ia meninggal<br />dunia pada tahun 1969.3<br />Meskipun ia seorang pakar Sarjana Hukum Islam, namun karya-karya<br />tulisnya tidak terbatas pada bidang tersebut. Secara umu, ada beberapa disiplin<br />ilmu yang ia tulis. Antara lain, kajian tentang Manuskrip Arab, Edit-Kritikal<br />atas Manuskrip-manuskrip Fiqh Islam. Kajian tentang ilmu Kalam, kajian<br />tentang Fiqh Islam, kajian tentang Sejarah Sains dan Filsafat, dan lain-lainnya.<br />Karya tulisnya yang paling monumental dan melambungkan namanya<br />adalah bukunya The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence yang terbit pada<br />tahun 1950, kemudian bukunya An Introduction to Islamic Lau yang terbit pada<br />tahun 1960.4 Dalam dua karyanya inilah ia menyajikan hasil penelitiannya<br />tentang Hadis Nabawi, di mana ia berkesimpulan bahwa Hadis Nabawi,<br />terutama yang berkaitan dengan Hukum Islam, adalah buatan para ulama abad<br />kedua dan ketiga hijrah.<br />2. Pembahasan<br />Dalam mengkaji Hadis Nabi, Schacht lebih banyak menyoroti aspek sanad<br />(transmisi, silsilah keguruan) dari pada aspek matan (materi Hadis). Sementara<br />kitab-kitab yang dipakai dalam ajang penelitiannya adalah kitab al-Muwaththa’<br />karya Imam Malik, kitab al-Muwaththa’ karya Imam Muhammad al-Syaibani,<br />serta kitab al-Umm dan al-Risalah karya Imam al-Syafi’i. Menurut Prof. Dr.<br />M.M Azami, kitab-kitab ini lebih layak disebut kitab-kitab Fiqh dari pada kitabkitab<br />Hadis. Sebab kedua jenis kitab ini memiliki karakteristik yang berbeda.<br />Oleh karena itu, meneliti Hadis-Hadis yang terdapat dalam kitab-kitab fiqh<br />hasilnya tidak akan tepat. Penelitian Hadis haruslah pada kitab-kitab Hadis.5<br />Prof. Schacht menegaskan bahwa Hukum Islam belum eksis pada masa<br />al-Sya’bi (w. 110 H). penegasan ini memberikan pengertian bahwa apabila<br />ditemukan Hadis-Hadis yang berkaitan dengan hukum Islam, maka Hadis-hadis<br />itu adalah buatan orang-orang yang hidup sesudah al-Sya’bi. Ia berpendapat<br />bahwa Hukum Islam baru dikenal semenjak masa pengangkatan para qadhi<br />(hakim agama). Pada khalifah dahulu (khulafa al-Rasyidin) tidak pernah<br />mengangkat qadhi. Pengangkatan Qadhi baru dilakukan pada masa Dinasti Bani<br />Umayyah.6<br />Kira-kira pada akhir abad pertama hijrah (+ 715-720 M) pengangkatan<br />qadhi itu ditujukan kepada orang-orang “spesialis” yang berasal dari kalangan<br />yang taat beragama. Karena jumlah orang-orang spesialis ini kian bertambah,<br />maka akhirnya mereka berkembang menjadi kelompok aliran fiqh klasik. Hal<br />ini terjadi pada dekade pertama abad kedua hijrah.<br />Keputusan-keputusan hukum yang diberikan qadhi ini memerlukan<br />legitimasi dari orang-orang yang memiliki otoritas lebih tinggi. Karenanya,<br />mereka tidak menisbahkan keputusan-keputusan itu kepada diri mereka sendiri,<br />melainkan menisbahkan kepada tokoh-tokoh sebelumnya. Misalnya, orang Iraq<br />menisbahkan pendapat mereka kepada Ibrahim al-Nakha’i (w. 95 H).<br />Perkembangan berikutnya, pendapat-pendapat para qadhi itu tidak hanya<br />dinisbahkan kepada tokoh-tokoh terdahulu yang jaraknya masih dekat,<br />melainkan dinisbahkan kepada tokoh yang lebih dahulu, misalnya Masruq.<br />Langkah selanjutnya, untuk memperoleh legitimasi yang lebih kuat, pendapatpendapat<br />itu dinisbahkan kepada tokoh yang memiliki otoritas paling tinggi,<br />misalnya Abdullah ibn Mas’ud. Dan pada tahap terakhir, pendapat-pendapat itu<br />dinisbahkan kepada Nabi Muhammad saw. Inilah rekontruksi terbentuknya<br />sanad Hadis menurut Prof. Schacht, yaitu dengan memproyeksikan pendapatpendapat<br />itu kepada tokoh-tokoh yang legitimit yang ada dibelakang mereka,<br />inilah yang disebut oleh Schacht dengan teori projecting Back.7<br />Kemudian dari itu, menurut Prof. Schacht menuculnya aliran-aliran fiqh<br />klasik ini membawa konsekwensi logis, yaitu munculnya kelompok oposisi<br />yang terdiri dari ahli-ahli Hadis. Pemikiran dasar kelompok Ahli-ahli hadis ini<br />adalah bahwa hadis-Hadis yang berasal dari Nabi saw. harus dapat mengalahkan<br />aturan-aturan yang dibuat oleh kelompok aliran-aliran fiqh. Oleh karena itu,<br />untuk mencapai tujuan ini, kelompok ahli Hadis membuat penjelasan-penjelasan<br />dan Hadis-hadis, seraya mengatakan bahwa hal itu pernah dikerjakan atau<br />diucapkan oleh Nabi saw. Mereka juga mengatakan bahwa hal itu mereka<br />terima secara lisan berdasarkan sanad yang bersambung dari para periwayat<br />Hadis yang dapat dipercaya.<br />Kesimpulan dari teori Prof. Schacht ini adalah baik kelompok aliran-aliran<br />fiqh klasik maupun kelompok ahli-ahli Hadis, keduanya sama-sama pemalsu<br />hadis. Karenanya, sebagaimana yang dikutip oleh Ali Mustafa Yaqub, Prof.<br />Schacht mengatakan : we shall not meet any legal tradition from the prophet<br />which can be considered authentic. (kita tidak akan dapat menemukan satu pun<br />Hadis nabi yang berkaitan dengan hukum, yang dapat dipertimbangkan sebagai<br />Hadis Shaheh.8<br />Untuk membantah teori yang dikemukakan oleh para orientalis,<br />khususnya Prof. Schacht, yang meneliti dari aspek sejarah, maka M.M. Azami<br />menghancurkan teori Schacht ini juga melalui penelitian sejarah, khususnya<br />sejarah Hadis. Azami melakukan penelitian khusus tentang Hadis-Hadis nabi<br />yang terdapat dalam naskah-naskah klasik. Di antaranya adalah naskah milik<br />Suhail bin Abi Shaleh (w.138 H). Abu Shaleh (ayah Suhail) adalah murid Abu<br />Hurairah shahabat nabi saw.<br />Naskah suhail ini berisi 49 Hadis. Sementara azami meneliti perawi Hadis<br />itu sampai kepada generasi Suhail, yaitu jenjang ketiga (al-thabaqah altsalitsah).<br />Termasuk jumlah dan domisili mereka. Azami membuktikan bahwa<br />pada jenjang ketiga, jumlah perawi berkisar 20 sampai 30 orang, sementara<br />domisili mereka terpencar-pencar dan berjauhan, antara India sampai Maroko,<br />antara Turki sampai Yaman. Sementara teks hadis yang mereka riwayatkan<br />redaksinya sama.9<br />Azami berkesimpulan bahwa sangat mustahil menurut ukuran situasi dan<br />kondisi pada saat itu mereka pernah berkumpul untuk membuat Hadis palsu<br />sehingga redaksinya sama. Dan sangat mustahil pula bila mereka masingmasing<br />membuat Hadis, kemudian oleh generasi berikutnya diketahui bahwa<br />redaksi hadis yang mereka buat itu sama. Kesimpulan Azami ini bertolak<br />belakang dengan kesimpulan Schacht, baik tentang rekontruksi terbentuknya<br />sanad hadis, maupun bunyi teks (matan) Hadis tersebut.<br />Sebagai contoh, Azami mengemukakan Hadis yang artinya di mana Nabi<br />saw. bersabda : “ Apabila salah seorang di antara kamu bangun dari tidurnya,<br />maka hendaknya ia mencuci tangannya, karena ia tidak tahu semalam<br />tangannya berada di mana “. Hadis ini dalam naskah Suhail bin Abi Shaleh<br />berada pada urutan nomor 7, dan pada jenjang pertama (generasi shahabat)<br />diriwayatkan oleh lima orang, yaitu Abu Hurairah, Ibn Umar, Jabir, Aisyah, dan<br />Ali bin Abi Thalib.<br />Abu Hurairah sendiri kemudian meriwayatkan Hadis tersebut kepada 13<br />orang tabi’in (generasi kedua). 13 orang tabi’in ini kemudian menyebar ke<br />berbagai penjuru negeri Islam. 8 orang tetap tinggal di Madinah, seorang tinggal<br />di Kufah, 2 orang tinggal di Basharah, seorang tinggal di Yaman, dan seorang<br />lagi tinggal di Syam.<br />Tiga belas Tabi’in ini kemudian meriwayatkan lagi kepada generasi<br />berikutnya (generasi ketiga = Tabi’ Tabi’in), dan jumlah mereka menjadi =<br />tidak kurang dari 16 orang. Mereka tinggal di Madinah (6 orang), Bashrah (4<br />orang), Kufah (2 orang), Makkah (1 orang), Yaman (1 orang), Khurasan (1<br />orang), dan Himsh-Syam (1 orang).10 Maka mustahil 15 orang yang<br />domisilinya terpencar-pencar di tujuh kota yang berjauhan itu pernah berkumpul<br />pada satu saat untuk bersama-sama membuat Hadis palsu yang redaksinya<br />sama, atau mustahil pula, bila mereka secara sendiri-sendiri di kediamannya<br />masing-masing membuat Hadis, dan kemudian diketahui bahwa bahwa redaksi<br />Hadis tersebut secara kebetulan sama. 16 orang rawi di atas adalah hanya dari<br />jalur Abu Hurairah. Apabila jumlah rawi itu ditambah dengan rawi-rawi dari<br />empat jalur lainnya, yaitu Ibn Umar, Jubir, Aisyah, dan Ali, maka jumlah<br />perawi itu akan menjadi lebih banyak.11<br />Dengan demikian apa yang dikembangkan oleh Prof. Schacht dengan<br />teorinya Projecting Back, yang mengemukakan bahwa sanad Hadis itu baru<br />terbentuk belakangan dan merupakan pelegitimasian pendapat para qadhi dalam<br />menetapkan suatu hukum, adalah tidak benar, hal ini sudah dibuktikan oleh<br />Azami dengan penelitiannya bahwa sanad Hadis itu memang muttashil sampai<br />kepada rasulullah saw. melalui jalur-jalur yang telah disebutkan di atas. Hal ini<br />membuktikan juga bahwa Hadis-hadis yang berkembang sekarang bukanlah<br />buatan para qadhi, tetapi merupakan perbuatan atau ucapan yang datang dari<br />rasul saw. sebagai seorang Nabi dan panutan umat Islam.<br />3. Kesimpulan<br />Teori Projecting Back yang dikemukakan oleh Joseph Schacht di atas,<br />terlihat ada kelemahan-kelemahan yang kemungkinan akan muncul dari teori itu<br />sendiri. Kelemahan tersebut di anataranya adalah bahwa bila sanad itu<br />diciptakan oleh seorang qadhi dalam melegitimasi pendapat mereka, maka<br />mustahil akan terdapat banyak jalur dalam satu sanad Hadis. Kemudian apabila<br />Hadis itu berasal dari para qadhi, maka tidak akan mungkin antara qadhi yang<br />terdapat di kufah, umpamanya sama lafaz atau bunyi yang ia ucapkan dengan<br />qadhi yang berada di tempat yang lain. Sebagaimana bantahan yang<br />disampaikan oleh M.M. Azami melalui penelitiannya di atas. Wa Allah ‘A’lam.<br />Catatan Kaki<br />1. Muhammad Ajjaj al-Khatib, Al-Sunnah Qabla al-Tadwin, Bairut, Daar al-Fikr, 1981, hlm. 373.<br />2. Ali Mustafa Yaqub, Kritik Hadis, Jakarta, Pustaka Firdaus, 1995, hlm. 19.<br />3. Abdurrahman Badawi, Mausu’ah al-Mustasyriqin, Bairut, Daar al-Ilmi al-Malayin, 1989, hlm. 252-<br />253.<br />4. Ibid, hlm. 253-255.<br />5. Muhammad Mushthafa Azami, Dirasat fi al-Hadits al-Nabawi wa Tarekh Tadwinih, Bairut, almaktab<br />al-Islami, 1980, hlm. 398.<br />6. Joseph Schacht, An Introductionti Islamic Law, Oxford, Clarendom Press, 1964, hlm. 34.<br />7. Ibid, hlm. 31-32.<br />8. Ali Musthafa Yaqub, op. cit., hlm. 22.<br />9. M. M. Azami, Studies in Early Hadits Literature, Indianapolis-Indiana, American Trust Publication,<br />1978, hlm. 222-223<br />10. Iibid, hlm. 225-226.<br />11. Ibid, hlm 227.</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-21401876358646563462009-02-18T00:18:00.000-08:002009-05-15T20:17:13.002-07:00On The Nature Of Hadith Collections Of Imam Al-Bukhari & Muslim<p align="center"><a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/"><img src="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/isa.jpg" width="327" align="bottom" border="0" height="46" /></a></p> <div align="center"><b class="title">On The Nature Of <u>H</u>adith Collections Of Imam Al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari & Muslim</b> </div> <p align="center"><u><span class="articlename">Kh</span></u><span class="articlename">alid al-<u>Kh</u>azraji, Mu<u>h</u>ammad Ghoniem & M S M Saifullah</span></p> <div align="center"><span class="logocopyblack">© Islamic Awareness, All Rights Reserved.</span> </div> <p align="center"><span class="logocopyblack">First Composed: 3rd September 1999</span></p> <p align="center"><span class="logocopyblack">Last Modified: 24th August 2005</span></p> <center> <p> </p><hr size="1" width="80%" noshade="noshade"> </center> <p><i>Assalamu-`alaykum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:</i></p> <b class="title"><a name="1"></a>1. Introduction</b> <p>Over the years, Christian missionaries have solidified their reputation for embracing zealous new recruits. One fresh addition to this delegation of holy servicemen is the neophyte, Andrew Vargo. More often than not, the missionaries have overlooked the academic backgrounds of these fresh recruits, apparently intoxicated by their impassioned hatred for Islam. Mr. Vargo has recently tried his hand as a student of comparative religion, introducing some of the most fantastic ideas yet to the discourse. Among these ideas is a rather <a href="http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/hadith.htm">boastful claim</a> concerning the collection of <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> by the great Muslim scholar, Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari (<i>d</i>. 256 AH). The highlight of Vargo's claim lies in the following:</p> <blockquote> <span class="fullpost"><p class="bookquote">In fact, it is difficult, in spite of the Muslim "science" of Hadith to know which traditions are strong or weak! For example, Bukhari collected over 600,000 reports, but kept only 7,397 as true!</p> </span></blockquote> <p>This is one of the most popular claims concerning the vast collection of <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> of al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari in the Christian missionary literature and comes with fanciful explanations. For example, Anis Shorrosh, a well-known Arab missionary, says:</p> <blockquote> <p class="bookquoteCN">... Bukhari, collected twenty thousand of them, of which he rejected ten thousand, accounting them untrue. <span class="highlightbookqCN">Of the remaining ten thousand he accepted only 7,275, declaring the rest to be untrustworthy</span>. Abu Da'ud accepted as authentic only 4,800 rules out 50,000.<sup class="referencenumb">[1]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>Similarly we find Norman Geisler and Abdul Saleeb claiming that:</p> <blockquote> <p class="bookquoteCN">...Bukhari, considered to be the most reliable collector, admitted that of the 300,000 hadith he collected, he considered only 100,000 might be true. He then narrowed this number down to 7,275, many of which are repetitions so that the total number is in fact near 3,000. <span class="highlightbookqCN">That means that even he admitted there were errors in over 295,000 of them</span>!<sup class="referencenumb">[2]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>Nearly a similar statement is repeated by Geisler in his <span class="reference">Baker Encyclopedia Of Christian Apologetics</span> to cast doubts on the miracles performed by the Prophet Mu<u>h</u>ammad.<sup class="referencenumb">[3]</sup> Abdiyah Akbar Abdul-Haqq, on the other hand, labels what al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari did not include in his collection as "apocryphal".</p> <blockquote> <p class="bookquoteCN">As to the abundance of the apocryphal traditions, we learn that the famous authority al-Bukhari choose only 7,000 out of a host of 600,000 traditions that were current in his on time.<sup class="referencenumb">[4]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>Similar statements were made by John Ankerberg and John Weldon, who quoted a "Muslim scholar".<sup class="referencenumb">[5]</sup></p> <p>Not surprising is the case of <a href="http://www.rand.org/">Rand Corporation</a>, who have published an interesting report on Islam entitled "<a href="http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1716/MR1716.pdf">Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies</a>". The report has two fold agenda: firstly, to try to create a version of Islam that suits the post-9/11 Western agenda and secondly encouraging creation of divisions in the Muslim society at home and abroad. The Rand Report's recipe to achieve this aim is to encourage and promote the so-called modernist Muslims and play one section of the society against another to split the Muslim society. A small example of it can be seen when the report uses the material from the <i>hadith</i>-rejectors (not surprisingly!) to claim "objectively" that:</p> <blockquote> <p class="bookquoteCN">Even if that were not the case, <span class="highlightbookqCN">objectively speaking, there is little doubt that hadith is at best a dubious, flawed instrument</span>. Consider that Al-Bukhari is the compiler of what is generally considered to be the most authoritative and reliable collections of hadith. He collected 600,000 hadith, examined them for their authenticity, eliminated all but 7,600 of them, deleted some for redundancy, and was left with a collection of about 4,000.<sup class="referencenumb">[6]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>As we shall see, feisty statements such as the above only prove to be self-defeating in the end. This article intends to examine missionaries' thesis in light of the scholarship of Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari, and thereby ascertain the actual worth of their claim.</p> <p>To appreciate the broader perspective, we will also include a discussion of Imam Muslim's <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> collection, <i>insha'allah</i>.</p> <a name="Imam"></a><b class="title">2. Imam Bu<u>kh</u>ari & The Nature Of His Collection</b> <p>Vargo, Shorrosh, Geisler, Abdul Saleeb, Abdul-Haqq and Benard have practically begged the question for us already - where exactly did Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari mention that among the 600,000 <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> in his collection, only 7,397 are to be accepted as 'true'? They maintains the missionary tradition of conveniently omitting any references that would not support their thesis; the mark of a true academicians, indeed! Once again, it is left to the Muslims to enlighten the ill-informed missionaries on this matter.</p> <p>Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari's actual words have been reproduced below:</p> <p align="center"><img src="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/bukhBukhari1.jpg" width="488" align="bottom" border="0" height="251" /></p> <blockquote> <p class="bookquoteCN">* The two <u><i>s</i></u><i>a<u>h</u>i<u>h</u></i> collections did not gather the totality of the authentic <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> as proved by al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari's testimony: "<span class="highlightbookqCN">I have not included in my book <i>al-Jami`</i> but what is authentic, and I left out among the authentic for fear of [excessive] length.</span>(Footnote 2)"</p> </blockquote> <p>Footnote 2 says:</p> <blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">He </span><span class="bookquote">[al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari]</span><span class="bookquoteCN"> meant that he did not mention all the <u><i>t</i></u><i>uruq</i> </span><span class="bookquote">[parallel chains of transmission]</span><span class="bookquoteCN"> for each and every <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i>.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[7]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>To reiterate this in elementary English, Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari selected only a few authentic <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> from his vast collection. However, he left out certain traditions, despite their authenticity, simply to avoid excessive length and repetition in his <span class="reference">Al-Jami`</span> (a discussion about which is given below). If anything, the privilege to make such a gesture is highly complimentary to the authenticity of the Islamic traditions. In another tradition, Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari is also reported to have said:</p> <p align="center"><img src="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/bukBukhari2.jpg" width="377" align="bottom" border="0" height="149" /></p> <blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">He said, I heard as-Sa`dani say, I heard some of our companions say, Mu<u>h</u>ammad Ibn Isma`il said: I selected/published </span><span class="bookquote">[the content of]</span><span class="bookquoteCN"> this book - meaning the <u><i>S</i></u><i>a<u>h</u>i<u>h</u></i> book - from about 600,000 <u><i>h</i></u><i>adiths</i>/reports. Abu Sa`d al-Malini informed us that `Abdullah Ibn `Udayy informed us: I heard al-<u>H</u>asan Ibn al-<u>H</u>usayn al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari say: "</span><span class="highlightbookqCN">I have not included in my book <i>al-Jami`</i> but what is authentic, and I left out among the authentic what I could not get hold of.</span><span class="bookquoteCN">"</span><sup class="referencenumb">[8]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>The above quotation reflects Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari's gallant honesty to admit that he was not able to collect each and every authentic tradition that existed in his day. Rather, his <span class="reference">Al-Jami`</span> is only a partial collection of authentic traditions, despite its massive volume. Furthermore, it should be clarified for the missionaries that the notion of <span class="highlightpara">a partial collection of authentic material</span> is quite different from the notion of <span class="highlightpara">a partially authentic collection of material</span>. However, it is not our aim to offer a course on propositional reasoning. Thus, we leave the point with the hope that they will eventually comprehend this piece of preschool logic.</p> <p>Professor Mus<u>t</u>afa al-A<u>z</u>ami, who offered a devastating critique of Joseph Schacht's work, again clarifies the misunderstanding of many orientalists on this issue:</p> <blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">Al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari did not claim that what he left out were the spurious, nor that there were no authentic traditions outside his collection. On the contrary he said, "I only included in my book <i>al-Jami`</i> those that were authentic, and I left out many more authentic traditions than this to avoid unnecessary length." He had no intention of collecting all the authentic traditions. He only wanted to compile a manual of <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i>, according to the wishes of his Shaikh Is<u>h</u>aq b. Rahwaih, and his function is quite clear from the title of his book <i>al-Jami` al-Musnad al-<u>S</u>a<u>h</u>i<u>h</u> al-Mu<u>kh</u>ta<u>s</u>ar min umur Rasul Allah wa Sunanhi wa ayyamih</i>. The word al-Mu<u>kh</u>ta<u>s</u>ar, 'epitome', itself explains that al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari did not make any attempt at a comprehensive collection.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[9]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>Yet, the missionaries seem to be living under the delusion that the 600,000 <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> of Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari's collection somehow means 600,000 separate narrations or bodies of text. His sloppy study of this issue becomes clear when one learns that a <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> is comprised of both a text (<i>matn</i>) and a chain of transmission (<i>isnad</i>). In the <a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/atit.html">science of <u>h</u>adith</a>, the same text with ten chains of transmission is regarded not as one <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> but rather as ten <u><i>h</i></u><i>adiths</i>, despite the fact that the text attached to each chain is the same in every case.</p> <p>Professor Mus<u>t</u>afa al-A<u>z</u>ami adds:</p> <blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">Now it is clear that when traditionalists give enormous numbers for the traditions, they mean channels and sources of their transmission, and do not mean real numbers of <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i>.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[10]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>Nabia Abbott, a prominent orientalist who conducted an extensive study on <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> literature, observed that the phenomenal growth of the corpus of this literature is not due to growth in content but due to progressive increase in the parallel and multiple chains of transmission, i.e., <i>isnads</i>:</p> <blockquote> <p><span class="highlightbookqCN">... the traditions of Mu<u>h</u>ammad as transmitted by his Companions and their Successors were, as a rule, scrupulously scrutinised at each step of the transmission, and that the so called phenomenal growth of Tradition in the second and third centuries of Islam was not primarily growth of content, so far as the <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> of Mu<u>h</u>ammad and the <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> of the Companions are concerned, but represents largely the progressive increase in parallel and multiple chains of transmission.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[11]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>Take a highly simplified example of one Companion narrating a single <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> from the Prophet to two students: these students themselves teaching that narration again to two pupils each and so on until we reach the time of al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari and his contemporaries. We will find that in al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari's generation at least 16 individuals will be hearing the <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> from their respective teachers. Because each individual chain of transmission counts as a separate <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i>, what started out as a single narration transmitted by one Companion only, has evolved within a short period of time to 16 <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i>; an increase of 1600%. The true nature of affairs, however, being far greater, with a far greater number of Companions transmitting a far greater number of narrations to a far greater number of students. This then is the form in which proliferation took place, the dispersion of narrators and chains of transmission. Using the mathematical application of geometric progression, Nabia Abbott concludes:</p> <blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">... using geometric progression, we find that one to two thousand Companions and senior Successors transmitting two to five traditions each would bring us well within the range of the total number of traditions credited to the exhaustive collections of the third century. </span><span class="highlightbookqCN">Once it is realised that the isnad did, indeed, initiate a chain reaction that resulted in an explosive increase in the number of traditions, the huge numbers that are credited to Ibn <u>H</u>anbal, Muslim and Bukhari seem not so fantastic after all.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[12]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>The implications of explosive increase in of the <i>isnad</i> is dealt with <a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/exisnad.html">here</a>.</p> <b class="title"><a name="3"></a>3. Imam Muslim & The Nature Of His Collection</b> <p>Imam Muslim along the similar lines to that of Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari , is reported to have said:</p> <p align="center"><img src="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/bukhmuslim.gif" width="511" align="bottom" border="0" height="162" /></p> <p>The translation of which is:</p> <blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">[...]. Imam Muslim said: "I have not included in my present book any thing but with proof </span><span class="bookquote">[regarding authenticity]</span><span class="bookquoteCN"> , and I have not left out anything but with proof". He also said: </span><span class="highlightbookqCN">I did not include everything that I judge authentic/<u><i>S</i></u><i>a<u>h</u>i<u>h</u></i>, I only included what received a unanimous agreement, i.e., what fulfilled all the criteria of authenticity agreed upon</span><span class="bookquoteCN"><b> </b>[by the scholars].</span></p> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">And Muslim has presented [his collection] to the scholars of his time, like Imam Abu Zar`ah, and retained what was void of defect, and left out what had some defect.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[13]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>From the above quotation, it is clear that Imam Muslim's collection is also <span class="highlightpara">a partial collection of authentic material</span> and <span class="highlightpara">not a partially authentic collection of material</span>. He followed a certain set of criteria that demanded a proof for the inclusion of each and every <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> in his collection.</p> <b class="title"><a name="4"></a>4. Conclusions</b> <p>Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari's collection of <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> was maintained to be authentic on account of his authority, and it has been maintained as authentic ever since. The missionaries' assertion, that Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari regarded almost 99% of his own collection as spurious, is among the most rash and foolhardy statements ever dared by Christian missionaries. On the contrary, the 7,397 refers to the number of <u><i>h</i></u><i>adiths</i> that Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari chose to include in his <span class="reference">Al-Jami`</span> and left out many authentic narrations from his vast collection for the fear of excessive length.</p> <p>Again, according to the Vargo:</p> <blockquote> <p class="bookquote">In fact, it is difficult, in spite of the Muslim "science" of Hadith to know which traditions are strong or weak!</p> </blockquote> <p>We should wonder whether the neophyte is as quick to demonstrate the same puerile enthusiasm over the question of his <a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/">own religious texts</a>. Regardless, we will quote the famous trial of Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari to show how <a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/asb6.html"><strong><u>maqlub</u></strong></a><sup class="referencenumb">[14]</sup> (changed, reversed) <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> can be identified with ease by a scholar of <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i>:</p> <blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">The famous trial of al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari by the scholars of Baghdad provides a good example of a </span><span class="highlightbookqCN"><i>Maqlub</i></span><span class="bookquoteCN"> <i>isnad</i>. The traditionists, in order to test their visitor, al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari, appointed ten men, each with ten <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i>. Now, each <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> (text) of these ten people was prefixed with the <i>isnad</i> of another. Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari listened to each of the ten men as they narrated their <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> and denied the correctness of every <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i>. When they had finished narrating these <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i>, he addressed each person in turn and recounted to him each of his <i>a<u>h</u>adith</i> with its correct <i>isnad</i>. This trial earned him great honour among the scholars of Baghdad.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[15]</sup></p> </blockquote> <p>Finally, it is worth citing a significant trend in modern Western scholarship of the Prophetic traditions of Islam. For the past several decades, criticism of these traditions has been the Orientalist's whipping post, an opportunity to invalidate the traditions of Islam, which culminated in the work of Joseph Schacht, mentioned earlier. However, this position has practically been reversed in recent times, with the advent of academic honesty on the part of Western scholars. Professor John Esposito of Georgetown University has made the following counter-criticism of Schacht's traditional position: </p><blockquote> <p><span class="bookquoteCN">Accepting Schacht's conclusion regarding the many traditions he did examine does not warrant its automatic extension to all the traditions. To consider all Prophetic traditions apocryphal until proven otherwise is to reverse the burden of proof. Moreover, even where differences of opinion exist regarding the authenticity of the chain of narrators, they need not detract from the authenticity of a tradition's content and common acceptance of the importance of tradition literature as a record of the early history and development of Islamic belief and practice.</span><sup class="referencenumb">[16]</sup> </p></blockquote> <p>The position of Esposito perhaps reflects the growing attitude among Western educational institutions that entertain any study of Islam and its traditions. This is simply evidenced by the fact that Professor Esposito has become one of the reigning authorities on Islam in the West, whose textbooks are considered university standards for courses on Islam.</p> <p>Considering the missionaries' abuse of <u><i>h</i></u><i>adiths</i> to denigrate the Prophet<sup class="superscript">(P)</sup> of Islam, it would be too generous to assume that Vargo, Shorrosh, Geisler and Abdul Saleeb "misunderstood" the nature of the collection of Imam al-Bu<u>kh</u>ari. As for the Rand Corporation's report, their "objectivity" lies in the unverified use of source material. An honest misunderstanding entails at least some understanding of the issue, which doesn't even seem to be their case. Perhaps the Christian missionaries might consider beginning a genuine study of the <a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/atit.html">science of hadith</a> before they embarrasses themselves further.</p> <b class="title">Acknowledgements</b> <p>We would like to thank Abu Hudhayfah for providing us necessary help and allowing us to use his material.</p> <p>And Allah knows best!</p> <p> </p> <p> </p><hr /> <b class="title">References</b> <p>[1] Dr. A. A. Shorrosh, <span class="reference">Islam Revealed: A Christian Arab's View Of Islam</span>, 1988, Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville, p. 22.</p> <p>[2] N. L. Geisler & A. Saleeb, <span class="reference">Answering Islam: The Crescent In The Light Of The Cross</span>, 1993, Baker Books: Grand Rapids (MI), p. 165.</p> <p>[3] "<span class="articlename">Muhammad, Alleged Miracles Of</span>", in N. L. Geisler, <span class="reference">Baker Encyclopedia Of Christian Apologetics</span>, 2002, Baker Books: Grand Rapids (MI), p. 512.</p> <p>[4] A. A. Abdul-Haqq, <span class="reference">Sharing Your Faith With A Muslim</span>, 1980, Bethany House Publications: Minneapolis, p. 45.</p> <p>[5] J. Ankerberg & J. Weldon, <span class="reference">Fast Facts On Islam</span>, 2001, Harvest House Publishers: Eugene (OR), pp. 50-51.</p> <p>[6] C. Benard, "<a href="http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1716/MR1716.pdf">Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies</a>", 2003, <span class="reference">Rand Corporation</span>, p. 67.</p> <p>[7] Mu<u>h</u>ammad Ajaj al-<u>Kh</u>a<u>t</u>ib, <span class="reference">Al-Mu<u>kh</u>tasar al-Wajiz fi `Ulum al-<u>H</u>adith</span>, 1991, Mu'assasat al-Risalah, p. 135.</p> <p>[8] Abi Bakr A<u>h</u>mad Ibn `Ali al-<u>Kh</u>a<u>t</u>ib al-Ba<u>gh</u>dadi, <span class="reference">Tari<u>kh</u> Ba<u>gh</u>dad Aw Madinah as-Salam</span>, 1931 (1349 AH), Volume II, Maktabat al-<u>Kh</u>anji, Cairo & Al-Maktabah al-`Arabiyyah, Baghdad and Ma<u>t</u>ba'at as-S'adah near the State Department, Cairo, pp. 8-9.</p> <p>[9] M. M. al-A<u>z</u>ami, <span class="reference">Studies In Early <u>H</u>adith Literature</span>, 1992, American Trust Publications: Indianapolis (USA), pp. 305-306.</p> <p>[10] <i>ibid.,</i> p. 306.</p> <p>[11] N. Abbott,<i> </i><span class="reference">Studies In Arabic Literary Papyri</span>, Volume II [Qur'anic Commentary & Tradition], 1967, University Of Chicago Press: Chicago (USA), p. 2.</p> <p>[12] <i>ibid.</i>, p. 72.</p> <p>[13] Al-Imam Muhyee ad-Din Abi Zakariyya Ya<u>h</u>ya bin <u>Sh</u>araf al-Nawawi, <u><span class="reference">S</span></u><span class="reference">a<u>h</u>i<u>h</u> Muslim Bi Sharh al-Imam al-Nawawi</span>, Volume I, 1994/1414, Dar al-Khair, p. 1.</p> <p>[14] A <u><i>h</i></u><i>adith</i> is known as <strong><i>maqlub</i></strong> (changed, reversed) when its <i>isnad</i> is grafted to a different text or vice versa, or if a reporter happens to reverse the order of a sentence in the text.</p> <p>[15] S. <u>H</u>asan, <span class="reference">An Introduction To The Science Of <u>H</u>adith</span>, 1995, Darussalam Publishers: Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) available <a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/atit.html">online</a>, quote taken from <a href="http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/Ulum/asb6.html">here</a>.</p> <p>[16] J. Esposito, <span class="reference">Islam: The Straight Path</span>, 1998, Oxford University Press, p. 81.</p>.</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-82622818249650828392008-11-12T05:52:00.001-08:002008-11-12T05:55:18.769-08:00Q&A with Anti HadeethHere are a few common questions raised by Anti Hadeeth and the answers for our good reference.<span class="fullpost"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceName"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceType"></o:smarttagtype> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:trackmoves/> <w:trackformatting/> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:donotpromoteqf/> <w:lidthemeother>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:lidthemeasian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark/> <w:dontvertaligncellwithsp/> <w:dontbreakconstrainedforcedtables/> <w:dontvertalignintxbx/> <w:word11kerningpairs/> <w:cachedcolbalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:browserlevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont val="Cambria Math"> <m:brkbin val="before"> <m:brkbinsub val="--"> <m:smallfrac val="off"> <m:dispdef/> <m:lmargin val="0"> <m:rmargin val="0"> <m:defjc val="centerGroup"> <m:wrapindent val="1440"> <m:intlim val="subSup"> <m:narylim val="undOvr"> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" defunhidewhenused="true" defsemihidden="true" defqformat="false" defpriority="99" latentstylecount="267"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Normal"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="heading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="9" qformat="true" name="heading 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 7"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 8"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" name="toc 9"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="35" qformat="true" name="caption"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="10" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" name="Default Paragraph Font"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="11" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtitle"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="0" name="Hyperlink"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="22" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Strong"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="20" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="59" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Table Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Placeholder Text"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="1" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="No Spacing"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Revision"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="34" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="List Paragraph"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="29" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="30" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Quote"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="60" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="61" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="62" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Light Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="63" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="64" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="65" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="66" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="67" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="68" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="69" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="70" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Dark List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="71" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="72" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful List Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="73" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="19" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="21" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Emphasis"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="31" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Subtle Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="32" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Intense Reference"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="33" semihidden="false" unhidewhenused="false" qformat="true" name="Book Title"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="37" name="Bibliography"> <w:lsdexception locked="false" priority="39" qformat="true" name="TOC Heading"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id="ieooui"></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:1; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:0 0 0 0 0 0;} @font-face {font-family:Verdana; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:536871559 0 0 0 415 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-unhide:no; color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; color:purple; mso-themecolor:followedhyperlink; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} </style> <![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">Question 1<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><span style=""> </span>I must give credit to this Rahman guy from celcom. He is a very smart. I'm not talking about his interpretation/understanding of the religion, but his cunning move of leading this whole polemic into linguistic issue.I find this very interesting, and can't wait what the other party has to say.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Arabic language is the language of the Quran. It is said so in the Quran 10 times. If one where to try to interpret the Quran, one must be able to understand it in it’s original language. To interpret the Quran in it’s translated form is a sure way of introducing mistakes and misunderstanding of the true meanings of the quran.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">Question 2<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">Why muslims are divided? <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><span style=""> </span>2.1 Madzhab<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><span style=""> </span>2.2 Syiah – Sunnah<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Muslims are divided because they are also humans.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b style=""><o:p> </o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">Question 3<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">Dear Ali Cordoba:<br /><br />Can you kindly clarify a point? Are the hadith what the prophet s.a.w actually said, or are those statements are what some people (like Muslim, Bukhari, etc) said the prophet was presumed to have uttered? <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Al hadeeth are reports of what the prophet actually said, done or agreed upon.<span style="color: red;"><br /><br />I am of course excepting the hadith qudzi, that is, those referenced in the Quran.<br /><br />Incidentally the collections of Bukhari are widely viewed to be the most sahih "authentic," but the poor soul was not even born till about 200 years after the prophet's death. <br /> <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The collection of Al Hadeeth is done since the time the Prophet was still alive. Refer to book from MM Azami. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Al Imam Al Bukhari came up with the As Sahih to fit the requirement at that time</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><br />Further, is it true that in the preamble to his extensive collections, Bukhkari humbly declared that he may have omitted some valid hadiths and incldued some false ones?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">This may be true but it is not applicable to his book As Sahih.<span style=""> </span>Al Bukhari has also other collections i.e. At Tarikh Al Kabeer, Al Adabul Mufrad and many more.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">Question 4<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">There are many scientific and logical errors and contradictions in the Book of Bukhari, as well as the other books. Some examples:<br />a.The prophet according to Bukhari in one of the narration tells his companion Abu- Dharr Ghafari that the sun goes around the earth, in the apparent description that he gives (Hadith 421, pg. 283, vol. 4 of M.Muhsin Khan's translation of Sahih Bukhari).<br />This erroneous view was very popular at the time Bukhari compiled his collection. However this is absurd, we know today that the earth rotates around the sun, proven by scientific evidence. The Koran not only corrected this erroneous notion but also gave an accurate description of a round earth centuries before scientists discovered it.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Isn’t it a scientific fact that the sun has it’s own orbit and revolves around the center of the universe?<span style=""> </span>Anyways the wording of the hadeeth does not say outrightly that the “sun revolves around the earth”</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">b. According to Hadith no disease is contagious [<st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Adwa</st1:place></st1:city>]. This as we all know is inaccurate. What about the common cold and viruses like Ebola etc. [Hadith 649, page 435, volume7]<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">This is why it is important to understand Arabic before interpreting the hadeeth. When the Prophet SAW says “no disease is contagious” he was referring to a specific disease plaguing the people of Makkah at that time. He did not speak of it in general terms.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">But since he is speaking in Arabic, everyone understood it in it’s right context.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><br />c. Books of Hadith contain many home-remedies, according to ideas prevalent at that time, which are scientifically absurd. The Hadith mentions there being a cure for every ailment in black cumin seed [Hadith 591, pg.400, vol 7]. This is evidently not true. Can it cure cancer or AIDS, not to mention even the common cold? <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Please bear in mind that the list of diseases known to the people of Mekkah and Madinah at that time is NOT THE SAME as list of diseases known to us. The Hadeeth was meant for the consumption of the people of makkah and madinah of that time.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">All this was before we discovered antibiotics.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">d. Hadith suggests that we drink "camel-urine" to recuperate after an illness [Hadith 590, pg.399, vol.7]. This is disgusting, naturally speaking. Urine is toxic stuff. The Koran places extreme importance on cleanliness and clean eating (tayyab).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">If any it only exhibits the miracle of the Prophet Mohd SAW.<span style=""> </span>The hadeeth DOES NOT suggest anyone to drink camel-urine to cure illness. The camel urine drinking incident only happens that one time.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;">e. The Hadith mentions that "fever" is from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page 417, vol 7]. Atrocious!<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">That’s because it was a common saying at that time that when someone is having a high fever, he is having a “heat from hell”. It was just a local saying at that time. Nothing to be taken in literal.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><br />f.The Hadith books insult the prophet by giving him a contradictory personality. In one instance it mentions that the prophet ate with a leper and in another it mentions that he refused to meet with a leper who had come to take allegiance at his hand and accept Islam. He told the man to leave and accepted his allegiance in absentia.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I have not seen this hadeeth yet. Can u quote me please</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><br />g. The famous Hadith about the fly: "If a fly falls into the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it (in the vessel) and then throw it away [and use the material in the vessel], for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the other there is a healing [Bukhari, Hadith 673, pg. 452, vol 7]<br />Beware world, there is going to be an outbreak of typhoid and cholera if people take the above as "Hadith-truth", just like "gospel truth" made some people get castrated just because it reports Jesus saying, "....and there are some who make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of God." Beware these myths can harm you!<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Sheikh Yusuf Qardhawi in his famous book “Al fatawa al maasirah” has explained this hadeeth.<span style=""> </span>He quoted a research from a Professor in <st1:place st="on"><st1:placetype st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename st="on">Alexandria</st1:placename></st1:place> on extraction of antidote from flies. Please read his answer cause it’s very interesting</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><br />h. According to Hanbel 6/136, 192,213, the prophet "Never urinated in a standing position." However Bukhari in his "authentic" book of Hadith says that the prophet indeed urinated in a standing position. (Bukhari 4/60-64)</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">I will have to get back to you on this cause I’ve never met this contradiction of the hadeeth yet.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: red;">Question 5<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: red;"><span style=""> </span>bananaeel wrote:<br />Menurut sebuah hadith, (kononnya) Nabi Muhammad bersabda, "Umatku akan berpecah kepada 73 kumpulan dan kesemua kumpulan ini akan masuk neraka kecuali satu kumpulan".<br /><br />Hadith translation : "My community will be divided into 73 sects and each of them will end up in Hell save one". <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">Again another confusion caused by ignorance of the Arabic language. Arabs uses the word “seventy” to mean “numerous”. </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: red;">Question 6:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: red;">Various accusations from Rentap against Abu Hurairah, unsubstantiated, of course.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: red;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: black;">All of the issues raised by Rentap are based on lies and hearsay, including the incident where Umar was allegedly to beat up Abu Hurairah.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: black;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: black;">Refer to this url for more explanation <a href="http://www.allaahuakbar.net/shiites/in_defense_of_abu_hurairah.htm">http://www.allaahuakbar.net/shiites/in_defense_of_abu_hurairah.htm</a><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: black;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: black;">Suffice to say that scholars who studies the classical texts in it’s original language have a completely good opinion of Abu Hurairah. Scholars such as:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: black;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif";">(a)Dr. Mustafa al-Siba'i (founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria), in his thesis, al-Sunna wa Makanatuha fi l-Tashri' al-Islami, (Cairo: 1380/1961);<br />(b) 'Abd al-Razzaq Hamza (the head of Dar al-Ahaadeeth in Makka and Imam of Masjid al-Haram),Zulumat Abi Raya amam Adwa' al-Sunna al-Muhammadiya, (Cairo: n.d.); and<br />(c) the definitive response by 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Yahya al-Mu'allami al-Yamani (the Librarian of Masjid al-Haram), al-Anwar al-Kashifa lima fi Kitab Adwa' 'ala al-Sunna min al-Zallal wa l-Tadlil wa l-Mujazafa, (Cairo: 1378) - may Allah have mercy with them all.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif";"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif";"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif";">Wallahualam bissawab</span><span style="color: black;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="color: black;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style=""> </span></p> .</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-60732636477329899922008-09-15T01:40:00.000-07:002008-09-15T01:43:48.069-07:00Revealed: UK's first official sharia courtsThe article is taken from Times Online. Despite many cynics and nay sayers, the plan is still proceeding.<span class="fullpost"><div dir="ltr"><div><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4749183.ece">http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4749183.ece</a></div> <div> </div> <div> <div> <div> <div> <div> <div> <div><span>From </span><span>The Sunday Times</span></div> <div>September 14, 2008<span><span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span>Abul Taher </span></div> </div> <div><div><div> </div></div> <div> <p>ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases. </p> <p>The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence. </p> <p>Rulings issued by a network of five sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court. </p> <p>Previously, the rulings of sharia courts in Britain could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims. </p> <p>It has now emerged that sharia courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network's headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh. </p> <p>Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996. </p> <p>Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case. </p> <p>Siddiqi said: "We realised that under the Arbitration Act we can make rulings which can be enforced by county and high courts. The act allows disputes to be resolved using alternatives like tribunals. This method is called alternative dispute resolution, which for Muslims is what the sharia courts are." </p> <p>The disclosure that Muslim courts have legal powers in Britain comes seven months after Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was pilloried for suggesting that the establishment of sharia in the future "seems unavoidable" in Britain. </p> <p>In July, the head of the judiciary, the lord chief justice, Lord Phillips, further stoked controversy when he said that sharia could be used to settle marital and financial disputes. </p> <p>In fact, Muslim tribunal courts started passing sharia judgments in August 2007. They have dealt with more than 100 cases that range from Muslim divorce and inheritance to nuisance neighbours. </p> <p>It has also emerged that tribunal courts have settled six cases of domestic violence between married couples, working in tandem with the police investigations. </p> <p>Siddiqi said he expected the courts to handle a greater number of "smaller" criminal cases in coming years as more Muslim clients approach them. "All we are doing is regulating community affairs in these cases," said Siddiqi, chairman of the governing council of the tribunal. </p> <p>Jewish Beth Din courts operate under the same provision in the Arbitration Act and resolve civil cases, ranging from divorce to business disputes. They have existed in Britain for more than 100 years, and previously operated under a precursor to the act. </p> <p>Politicians and church leaders expressed concerns that this could mark the beginnings of a "parallel legal system" based on sharia for some British Muslims. </p> <p>Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said: "If it is true that these tribunals are passing binding decisions in the areas of family and criminal law, I would like to know which courts are enforcing them because I would consider such action unlawful. British law is absolute and must remain so." </p> <p>Douglas Murray, the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion, said: "I think it's appalling. I don't think arbitration that is done by sharia should ever be endorsed or enforced by the British state." </p> <p>There are concerns that women who agree to go to tribunal courts are getting worse deals because Islamic law favours men. </p> <p>Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons. </p> <p>The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts. </p> <p>In the six cases of domestic violence, Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment. </p> <p>In each case, the women subsequently withdrew the complaints they had lodged with the police and the police stopped their investigations. </p> <p>Siddiqi said that in the domestic violence cases, the advantage was that marriages were saved and couples given a second chance. </p> <p>Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "The MCB supports these tribunals. If the Jewish courts are allowed to flourish, so must the sharia ones." </p> <p><i>Additional reporting: Helen Brooks</i></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><span class="fullpost">.</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-64210334757505574172008-09-09T18:24:00.000-07:002008-09-13T06:00:20.030-07:00Zaharuddin Rahman Response to Raja Petra's Article on TudungDebat Tudung Wanita : Jawapan Kepada Artikel Raja Petra (Malaysia today) The Great Tudung Debate : A Respond to Raja Petra's Article Zaharuddin Abd Rahman<a href="http://www.zaharuddin.net/"www.zaharuddin.net></a>This writing is a response to Raja Petra Kamaruddin about muslim women's aurat in his popular blog (Malaysia today). <a href="http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/12321/84/"></a>Source<br /><br />RAJA PETRA WROTE :In the article there was a sentence stating: <span class="fullpost">"Apparently, the tudung was 'decreed' for only the Prophet's wives and not for all women..." So I've have looked into the Quran and found some things.<br /><br />"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful." Surah Al-Ahzab (33), verse 59. <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Comment : Firstly, see the words 'so that they may be recognised and not annoyed'. This means at least the face must be visible. It is wrong to say that other women at that time (non Muslim Arabs, Jews, Christians) did not wear the tudung. The truth is that the Jewish and Christian women wore far more conservative tudung than the Muslim women.</em></span> <p></p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Covering the body is also required of men and women in the desert. It has nothing to do with any religion. So when the verse says 'so that they may be recognised' it actually means the women should not cover their face or head in such a way that the people cannot differentiate them from other Christian and Jewish women who also wear tudung and veils. This means there is no such thing as a tudung to cover your head and face. </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>The verse 33:59 says the following in Arabic: </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Ya ayyuhan nabi : O you prophet </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>qul li-azwajika wabanaatika : tell your wives, your daughters </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>wa nisaa i mu'mineena : and the believing women</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>yudneena : to lengthen</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Alayhinna : over them</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>min jalabeebihinna : from their garments/cloaks. </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>There is absolutely NO mention of head or hair or face in this verse. There is no reference to tudung. The reference is to lengthen your garments over your body. This means women must dress decently.</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" > </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><strong><u>UZAR'S COMMENT</u></strong></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Unfortunately, you have misinterpret the verse and understanding it out of its context, i assumed that's because you are not examining the whole structure of the verse, besides i think you did not posses adequate knowledges to do so, or maybe you are also very busy with your <em>sumpah</em></span><span style="font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;"> <span style="font-size:85%;">declaration and malaysian politic issues.</span></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >In reality, as a servant of Allah SWT and the follower of Rasulullah SAW, we are taught to always come back to Al-Quran and Al-Hadith to obtain assurance about the permissibility of a matter. Regarding this, Allah SWT said:- </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p dir="rtl" align="center"> <span style=";font-family:comic sans ms,sand;font-size:130%;" >يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاء الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>"O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies. That will be better, that they should be known (as a free respectable MUSLIM women) so as not to be molested. "(Al-Ahzab: 59)</em><em> </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >It is agreed unanimously by ulama that every verse that is revealed to our prophet Muhammad s.a.w is also intended to Muslim except defined otherwise by our Prophet either in his hadis or by other quranic verses. For example: our prophet has more than four wives at a time, it is called "Khususiyat anbiya" which we are not allowed to follow due to Allah's will and many other logical reasons.</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Therefore, in this case, covering <em>aurat</em> including head, hair, neck and chest is strongly commanded not only for prophet's wives but also to all muslim women. It is not just an Arab's custom due to the sandy desert, but it is indeed a religious commandment. It is also very obvious stated in the above verse where it is mentioned :</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="center"> <span style=";font-family:comic sans ms,sand;font-size:130%;" >وَنِسَاء الْمُؤْمِنِينَ</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Meaning : "<em>the women of the believers"</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Therefore whoever claims they are muslim, they are obliged to uphold and stick to the decree in the verse. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Jilbab is a dress (of similar width to ‘baju kurung') worn by women to cover their bodies. Syeikh Dr Yusof Al-Qaradawi explained that when some women during the Jahiliah period left their houses, they loved to display some parts of their beauty such as the chest, neck and hair until they were being harassed by those wicked men who like to commit zina. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Then, the verse </span><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >above </span><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >is revealed to command Muslim women to EXTEND (and not only) their jilbab so that the parts that could lead to fitnah will be covered. In this way, they would be identified as women who are protected (‘afifah) and a true MUSLIM WOMEN. As a consequence, they would not be molested. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <div align="justify"> <div style="text-align: center;"> <img src="http://www.zaharuddin.net/images/stories/maryam.jpg" alt="Tudung Wanita Islam" vspace="1" width="400" border="1" height="274" hspace="35" /> </div> </div> <p align="justify"> </p> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >The above verse elucidates that covering the aurat is an emblem of a Muslim. Allah SWT also said<em>:</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <div align="center"> <span style=";font-family:comic sans ms,sand;font-size:130%;" >وَمَن يُعَظِّمْ شَعَائِرَ اللَّهِ فَإِنَّهَا مِن تَقْوَى الْقُلُوبِ</span> </div> <p dir="rtl" align="justify"> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>"</em>And anyone who honours the <strong>symbol</strong>s set up by God [shall know that] verily, these [<strong>symbol</strong>s derive their value] from the God-consciousness in the [believers'] hearts " ( Al-Haj : 32 ) </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Therefore, the main reason (‘illah) for the above ruling is to prevent Muslim women from being molested by wicked men. Attires that display women's beauty or women walking and talking in a seducing manner could arouse a man's sexual desire. Such behavior is an indirect invitation to the male for teasing and molestation. (Adapted from kitab Al-Halal wal Haram fil Islam with slight modification) </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >It's also WRONG to say that "so that they may be recognised and not annoyed' mean face must be visible in order to be recognized. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Firstly : Is it acceptable to say that we can only recognised a women by looking at her face? Of course not, we can easily recognized them by many other ways, either by listening to her voice or many other things besides her face.</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Secondly : Most of the Jahiliyyah womens are not wearing tudung at all and some of them wearing improper veils.( Refer Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 3/285). It is also stated clearly in the hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah, Rasulullah s.a.w. said: </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>"Two are the types of the denizens of Hell whom I did not see: (1) people having flogs like the tails of the ox with them and they would be beating people (unjust rulers); (2</em><em>) </em><strong><em>the women who would be dressed but appear to be naked, who would be inclined (to evil) and make others incline towards it</em></strong><strong><em>.</em></strong><em> Their heads would be like the humps of the </em><em>bukht</em><em> camel inclined to one side. </em><strong><em>They will not enter Paradise and they would not smell its odour whereas its odour would be smelt from such and such distance</em></strong><em>"</em><strong><em> </em></strong><em>(Narrated by Muslim, Sohih). </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >The JAHILIYYAH womens are said to wear attire but is still naked because they do have cloth on their body but it does not cover the aurat because it is transparent and exposes their skin; like the wearing of many women today. (Al-Halal Wal Haram Fil Islam, Dr Yusof Al-Qaradawi) </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >‘Bukhtun' in the hadith is a type of camel that has a big hump. Women's hair looks like the hump of a camel when it is pulled and tangled over their head. This shows that Jahiliyyah womens are not covering their head and hair. As for Christian and jews womens who you said wore tudung also at the time of prophet Muhammad s.a.w, you have to provide evidences on that. Besides, do you sure how Christian women exact attire in Mekkah and medina at that time?, Jewish people are too small to take into account and yet we don't know what are their tudung types. The most important, whatever types of thier tudung, we msulim has our own <em>tudung </em>with certain standards and conditions and it is a religious commandment. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Although the hadith was revealed thousand years ago, the Prophet s.a.w. was able to warn us of what would happen now. Today there are various saloons that set hair for women with million types of fashion and sadly men are the hair setter at most of these saloons. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>RAJA PETRA WROTE :</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>2) "And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed." Surah An-Nur (24), verse 31.</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Raja Petra Comment : Again there is no mention of head (ru'usa) in this verse or face (wujuh/wajh). Please note the words 'draw their veils over the bosoms'. The arabic is as follows:</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>walyadribna : and strike / cover</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>bi khumurihinna : with their outer garments </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Ala : over / upon </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>juyoobihinna : their bosoms / breasts</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Women are told to cover their chests/bosoms/breasts. That is all. This tallies with the earlier verse 33:59 above where the women are told to lengthen their clothes/garments. There is absolutely no mention of head (ru'usa), face (wujuh) or hair.</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><strong><u>UZAR'S COMMENT FOR NUMBER 1 & 2 :</u></strong></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Raja Pete, it is very obvious that you are not analyzing the verse properly. Your simplistic interpretation is incorrect again, Almighty Allah has said :-</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="center"> <span style=";font-family:comic sans ms,sand;font-size:130%;" >وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَى جُيُوبِهِنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Meaning : And tell the believing <strong>women</strong> to lower their veil and to be mindful of their chastity, and not to display their charms [in public] beyond what may [decently] be apparent thereof..</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >So you look Pete, why are you only focusing on some words of the verse and didn't give proper attention to the others. You have translated ‘Al-Khumur' wrongly, as that because of your <em>harfiah </em>(word by word)translation and <em>harfiah </em>understanding also, that kind of translation cannot help you in understanding the word correctly. The "al-Khumur" word will provide you the answer on your own created question and false assumption which you said : "There is absolutely NO mention of head or hair".</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >The true meaning of khumur (veil) is anything that is used to cover the head. Meanwhile ‘juyub' (the plural form of jaibun) is the curvature of the breast that is not covered with cloth. Therefore every woman must cover not only their head but also their chest including their neck and ears and all other parts that may lure a male. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >In order to understand Quranic text correctly, he/she must comprehend and find the exact usage of terminologies and words in Arabic language. A person should also know how a term or word is being used in the Arabic community because Quran is using Arabic language. Therefore it is good to have knowledge on conservative Arab's (especially at the time of prophet s.a.w) way of life before he/she can get the true intended meaning; For this reason, we must refer to the <em>tafseer</em> book by great Muslim scholars to avoid ourselves from false impression. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >That's also why it's better for those who wish to learn Islam in depth to pay a visit to Arabic countries in order to get some feels and get used to the usage of certain word by contemporary Arabs, it can give you some more clue in order to understand Arabic language in the Quran. </span> </p> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >When Allah swt said "Khumurihinna" , so we must know, in a standard Arabic language </span><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >what does it mean by "khumur", so the answer is veil which cover their head, hair, ear etc and then, when a person said "khumur" in front of knowledgable arab person, what he will understand?. Of course, it s a veil also. This fact has been </span><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >told by many great classic Muslim scholar like Imam At-Tabarii ( died 301 H) in his famous tafseer book Jami al-Bayan and also Imam Ibn Katheer . (Tafsir At-Tabari, 18/120 ; Tafsir AL-Quran Al-'Azim, 3/285))</span> </p> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Besides the <em>khumur</em> which is a veil which covers the women head, and <em>juyub</em> which covers womens' neck, breast and chest, the verse also stress on :- </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="center"> <span style=";font-family:comic sans ms,sand;font-size:130%;" >وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Meaning : that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof"..</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Do you understand what ‘beauty and ornaments' means in this verse? </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >According to Syeikh Dr Yusof Al-Qaradawi, the adornment mentioned in the above verse refers to anything that is worn to beautify oneself; either natural beauty like face, hair and body; or manmade beautification like dress, embellishment, make-up and others. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >In the above verse, Allah commanded women to conceal the adornment without any exemption. However, the exemption was "what is apparent". The scholars therefore have differences in opinion about the meaning and extent of "what is apparent" but all of them agreed unanimously that hair and head are included. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >That is due to the following hadith :- </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Saidatina Aisyah r.a narrated that her sister Asma' binti Abu Bakar entered the house of the Prophet s.a.w wearing attire made of transparent material that showed her skin. The Prophet s.a.w turned away from her and said: </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>"Hai Asma'! Verily when a woman has achieved puberty, she should not reveal her body except for this and this - showing the face and the palms (hands)." (Narrated by Abu Daud)</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Although there is a discussion about narrators of this hadith, it is strengthen by many other hadith that allows revealing of the face and the palms if it does not bring any harm (fitnah). (Al-Halal Wal Haram Fil Islam) </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >This hadis also supporting the fact that women head and hair are ‘<em>aurat</em> and must be covered by muslim womens, only the face and palm or hand can be seen by the public.</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Yes, there is discussion on what is the meaning of "what is apparent" which ALLOWED TO BE SEEN but it is not about hair, neck and head. Ibnu Abbas r.a, one of the great companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) interpreted "what is apparent" is eyeliner and ring. Anas Bin Malik r.a is also of the same opinion. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Therefore, the body parts where the eyeliner and the ring are worn (i.e. the face and the palms) would also be considered as apparent. This also the opinon of the Tabien like Said bin Jubair, 'Atha', Auza'i and others. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >However, Ummul Mukminin Aisyah r.a, Qatadah and a few others considered bracelet as something apparent. Therefore, the wrist (place of wearing a bracelet) is also considered as apparent if it does not cause any harm (fitnah). Regarding the limit from the wrist to the elbow, it is still under discussion among the scholars; therefore it is better to cover parts between the wrist and the elbow. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>RAJA PETRA SAID </em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>3) In order to interpret the Quran, we have to go to people who have knowledge about it. In what circumstance the verse was revealed, etc. But not just any scholar who says that they know.</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Comment : We DO NOT interpret the Quran. May I suggest something much simpler? Why not we just read it? If we look at the Quran in its arabic and then look at the translated words just a little carefully, we will understand it. You DONT EVEN have to know Arabic. For example the arabic word for HEAD (kepala) is NEVER mentioned in any of the verses quoted above. Neither are the arabic words for face and hair. So how do the translators include head, face and hair? Someone must explain this.</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><strong><u>UZAR'S COMMENT </u></strong></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >I have responded to this false statement and it's no longer concern us.</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Do you think that Allah will only use <em>ru'asa</em> to express head and <em>sya'run</em> as hair?.. no you are wrong Mr Pete, for example Allah s.w.t forbids us from saying ‘Ah' to our parents. So it is permissible to say ‘uh' and <em>bull shit</em> to your parent only because it is not mentioned in the Quran?.</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >When Allah forbids ‘ah' so its include all thing that has similar effect and covering not only bad words but also bad behaviour and actions towrd your parent. It is called in Usul Fiqh as Qiyas al-Awla or also can be considered as <em>‘umum al-lafz </em>will carry all meaning under it<em>.</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >So, women's head and hair falls under the words "al-khumur"in the verse. As simple as that.</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >As for the last part of Raja Petra's article, some of the hadith has been misquoted so i don't need to respond. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><strong>‘DON'T JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER'</strong> <strong>MYTH</strong></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >I always come across with this expression and I believe you are the same. The following are the words of those women who do not cover their aurat who always claim to posess pure and kind hearts although they are wearing indecent outfits which reveal their aurat. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >"Even women who put on hijaab commit crime nowadays, indulging in adultery, free-mixing and a lot more" A woman share her thought. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >"In fact, we too are well-behaved, we do not bother others, we do not backbite and we stay away from bad things" The woman added. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Is it a sound argument? Is it true that the external appearance does not matter in Islam? Some of them are even one step ahead in their arguments that they reason with the meaning of an authentic hadith of the Prophet, which is: </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><strong><em>"Verily Allah does not look at your physical being, your outer appearance nor your wealth, but He looks at your heart and your deeds" (Narrated by Muslim). </em></strong></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >I feel sorry and dishearten looking at those who when arguing, easily throw out hadith in supporting their whims; indeed, they only utilize Islam in the matter that bring benefits to them. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >An employee was caught playing game during working hours by his employer while he has yet to prepare the document requested by him. The employer thus said, "How are you going to excel in your carreer if this is your attitude towards work." </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >The employee responded, "You may see me outwardly as playing games but my heart is sincere and I performed my duty excellently." </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Do you think that the employer believe in what his employee had said? Does Allah consider one's heart as pure and good through disobeying His commandments? </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Indeed, something is only regarded as pure and good by measuring it with the scale of Allah and His Rasul, and not merely with the scale of our minds. If we refer to the scale of Islam, the Prophet SAW had said which means: </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>"Beware, in the body there is a piece of flesh; if it is sound, the whole body is sound and if it is corrupt the whole body is corrupt, and hearken it is the heart" (Narrated by Muslim)</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Based on this hadith, Islamic scale necessitates that the purity of one's heart is apparent in its first stage, which is one's actions. It means that when one's actions always transgress against the commandments prescribed in Islam, it signifies the filth of one's heart. On the other hand, if the external actions submit to the commandment of Islam, thus it should be considered as good in the first stage, which is the external scale of lay people. Nevertheless, the second stage, which is whether one's intention is for seeking Allah's pleasure or for things such as showing off, we should leave the judgment only to Allah. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Therefore, we can judge a book by its cover in certain cases, such as in the case when the fundamentals of Islam are being transgressed; the cover is consequently reflecting what is inside the heart of a person. </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Judging based on that which is apparent, does go along with the hadith: </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p dir="rtl" align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:comic sans ms,sand;font-size:130%;" >إنما أنا بشر , وإنكم تختصمون إلىّ , ولعلّ بعضكم أن يكون ألحن بحجته من بعض , فأقضي بنحو ما أسمع , فمن قضيت له من حق أخيه شيئاَ فلا يأخذه , فإنما أقطع له قطعة من النار </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Which means: "Verily I am only a human being, and you always presented arguments for me to solve. It may be that some of you are better in presenting argument than others. Therefore, I give out rulings based on what I have heard only. He, for whom I have made a ruling that violates the rights of the other party (due to the lack of skill of the person in presenting argument), does not take it. For verily, it will be for him a slice from the slices of hellfire" (Narrated by Abu Dawood, At-Tirmidzi and others; Refer Naylul Awtar, 8/632, no 3920). </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >This hadith clearly shows that a judge in Islam will give a ruling based on the information and the evident proofs presented to him. Similarly, in the case of covering aurat, if one reveals the aurat, it is a sign of transgression against Allah's commands. Thus, how would it be possible for this kind of heart to be perceived as a sound heart in Islam? </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Women should realize that when the aurat is not covered properly, every single man who looks at it will be held accountable for every single gaze. The woman, on the other hand, is not going to be held accountable for that one sin merely; rather she will be held accountable for all the gazes from men that fell on her aurat. Just imagine how sinful she is for revealing the aurat only in one day. This is based on the Prophet's word: </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p dir="rtl" align="center"> <span style=";font-family:comic sans ms,sand;font-size:130%;" >من سن في الإسلام سنة سيئة فعليه وزرها ووزر من عمل بها من غير أن ينقص شيئاً </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ><em>Which means: "Whosoever initiates a wrongdoing, upon him are a sin and the sin of every single person who does it without his sin being reduced even a little..." (Narrated by Ahmad and others-Authentic)</em></span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Included in the meaning of intiating is that someone intiates the revealing of her aurat in that day causing the man who looks at her to be held accountable. In fact, the woman herself is sinful for every single eye that sets on her aurat. Would this type of heart be considered as pure? After mountains of sins had rusted it? </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Verily Allah is All Just and the Most Merciful. Rush towards Allah's love and mercy by obeying Him. For those who are hardhearted, no words can be shared except; be certain that Allah is true, His Rasul is true, and Paradise and Hellfire are true. If believe in them, why are the actions speak otherwise? </span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" >Thanks for you time.</span> </p> <div align="justify"> </div> <p align="justify"> <span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms,geneva;font-size:85%;" ></span></p>Regards,</span>.Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com25tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-58588748743519950452008-09-09T07:20:00.001-07:002008-09-09T07:22:37.969-07:00Reply to Observer in Malaysia Today pt 2Continuation of my reply to the article <a href="http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/12421/84/">"Replying ANTI ANTI Hadeeth</a> ". <span class="fullpost"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:applybreakingrules/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> <w:usefelayout/> </w:Compatibility> <w:browserlevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id="ieooui"></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@SimSun"; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} /* List Definitions */ @list l0 {mso-list-id:119303402; mso-list-template-ids:-831894070;} ol {margin-bottom:0in;} ul {margin-bottom:0in;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">This Observer dude is also trying to confuse the Arabic behind the verse An-Nur 31. Observer says:<br /><br />“<i>You say that the 'khumur' is a cloth used to cover the head. Then you say that this same cloth must be pulled over the chest. If the women are required to do this, then along the way there is someting called their 'face' which is located between the head and the chest</i>.”</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The way I see it, human face IS located between their heads and chest. What are u ranting about here, Observer?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Observer is trying to change the meaning of the Quran as well. He says:<br /><br /><i>“Since you talk about grammar and arabic language, the subject of this statement is covering over the breasts (ala juyubihinna) or 'tutup dada'. Dont twist the grammar ok.”</i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Noticed that he wants to deny COMPLETELY the fact that An Nur:31 INSTRUCTS the covering of “<i>Juyub”</i>(cleavages) with “<i>Khumur/Khimar” </i>(head cover).<span style=""> </span>After trying to cloud and confuse the explanation by going ring around the rosy, Observer finally comes to this conclusion. And how does he do it? He denies the part “Walyadrib bikhumur” in An Nur:31</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Observer depicts the trait of a classic loser. When cornered, change the rule of the game.<span style=""> </span>In short, the man is as confused as a monkey in a library.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">And the explanation provided by Quinary is much more elegant and steeped in intellectual tradition. Observe:<br /><br />“<b><i><span style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">My response :</span></i></b><i><br />This depends largely on what is the interpretation of the word khumur. I am not sure whether this friend of Raja <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Petra</st1:place></st1:city> speaks Arabic (which I am quite sure this anonymous friend of his has no arabic knowledge), but one thing not highlighted is the fact that khumur (the plural word of khimar) means something to cover, and what was normally referred to as head cover (tudung). The classical arabic dictionary, aqrib al-mawarid defines khimar as :<br />"all such pieces of cloth which are used to cover the head. It is a piece of cloth which is used by a woman to cover her head."<br /><br />Imam Abu'l-Fida ibn Kathir said: "Khumur is the plural of khimar which means something that covers, and is what is used to cover the head. This is what is known among the people as a khimar."<br /><br />So linguistically, khimar does not only mean something to cover, it is commonly used at that time to refer to head cover (tudung). So now we can see that khimar can be used as :<o:p></o:p></i></p> <ol start="1" type="1"><li class="MsoNormal" style=""><i>A piece that covers<o:p></o:p></i></li><li class="MsoNormal" style=""><i>Something specifically used to cover the head / head cover / tudung”<o:p></o:p></i></li></ol> <p class="MsoNormal" style="">Observer also demonstrate his confusion about Al Hadeeth. He asks:<i><o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style=""> </span>“Secondly you are accusing people of being anti hadeeth. Can you please explain exactly what you mean by 'anti hadeeth' ? Which hadeeth are you talking about? Do you have a complete collection of all the hadeeth? Is there such a thing as a complete collection of hadeeth in the first place? Please be honest. My friends at IKIM are still resolving that the hadeeth collections of Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah are incomplete. Tell me how can anyone reject something that is incomplete?”<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Anyone and their uncle knows the meaning of Al Hadeeth and Anti Hadeeth. Go back to Sekolah Rendah Agama and learn the meaning. You must’ve missed that part way back when you were in Sekolah Agama.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><br />As for IKIM collection of Abu Dawud and Ibnu Majah, it’s really weird as the collection has been confirmed a long time ago and there is hardly any issue. Maybe the IKIM people are not really competent OR Observer just don’t understand what the IKIM people are doing. I would bet on the latter.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Next, Observer asks about the meaning of “Jumhur Ulama”. He says;</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i>“About khimar you say "Jumhur ulama' picked the second definition as the correct one." What do you mean by jumhur ulama? Please tell us EXACTLY (I really mean EXACTLY) how many ulama were involved in deciding on this particular jumhur. What were their names? Who classified them as ulama? What were the names (EXACTLY) of the people who classified these ulama as ulama? ont simply say 'Jumhur ulama' to mislead the people. Give us the EXACT details of the ulama as well as their jumhur”.<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i><o:p> </o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The reason why Observer ask stupid question like this is because he doesn’t know what Jumhur Ulama is but he’s already rejecting it.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The simple explanation is “jumhur” means “majority” or “most”. In other words, in a specific issue, scholars or ulama will comment on the issue or problem and majority of them supports a specific outcome.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It’s been in existence for a long time. And we refer to the books or opinions expressed orally. It’s not a big problem at all except for ignoramus like Observer.</p> .</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-63037404700422834442008-09-09T06:43:00.000-07:002008-09-09T06:55:20.642-07:00An Observer that is not so Observant: A Reply to Article in MalaysiaToday (pt 1)A person by the name of “An Observer” commented on an article I posted entitled “<a href="http://antiantihadeeth.blogspot.com/2008/09/answer-on-mtoday-article-on-tudung-from.html">Answer on MTODAY Article on Tudung from Quinary"</a>. An apparently, it is published in the anti Islam website, MalaysiaToday.<o:p></o:p> <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal;">Why I say he is not observant is because the writer thinks that the article is written by me.<span class="fullpost"> He says:<o:p></o:p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b>“</b><span style="font-size: 9pt;">Dear Anti Anti Hadeeth,<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Firstly you are NOT a woman. You are lying. You are Abdul Rahman aka Cabearth aka Tulang Besi. You are the owner of the website ANTI ANTI HADEETH <a href="http://antiantihadeeth.blogspot.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">http://antiantihadeeth.blogspot.com/</span></a>. I do not know why the people like you who claim to be Muslims like to tell so many lies. “<span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <h3><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal;">In truth, it is written by a blogger name Quinary. She wrote her response entitled “</span><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://widejournal.blogspot.com/2008/09/raja-petras-great-tudung-debate.html">Raja Petra's The Great Tudung Debate - My Response</a></span>”. <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal;">But, because the observer is not so observant, he missed out this fact. I, in fact, mention the name Quinary in the title and at the bottom of the article.<o:p></o:p></span></h3> <h3><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal;">Second point, the Observer says that :<o:p></o:p></span></h3> <p class="MsoNormal"><b>“</b><i>I believe that you have outdone Imam Ghazali, Imam Syafie, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Hambali, Imam Maliki, Imam Jabar al Karuti and all the other Imams and ulama because none of them has said that whether a woman covers her head or does not cover her head is her personal choice and 'does not affect our aqidah'</i>.”</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">My problem with this statement is that it is a lie. If one were to open Imam Syafiee’s book “<i>Al Umm”</i>, clearly he stated the “compulsion” of wearing “hijab” for women. In fact, all of the Al Imam Al Arbaah ( the four Imam) says states the same fact?<span style=""> </span>It’s funny where u get this nonsense from?</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Then he went on rambling:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">“<i>For your information, the ulama say that the hair on the head is considered part of the woman's aurat. And it is part of the aqidah for a woman to cover her aurat. Since her hair is aurat, then she must cover her hair. And since her hair grows on her head, she must therefore cover the head. Covering the aurat is definitely part of aqidah. How can you say that it does not affect our aqidah?”<o:p></o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><i><o:p> </o:p></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style=""> </span>It’s clear that Observer don’t know the difference between <i>Aqidah</i> and <i>Ibadah</i>.<span style=""> </span>The entire subject of <i>Aurah </i>is not an issue related to <i>Aqidah</i>(creed)<span style=""> </span>but it reflect Observer’s level of knowledge of Islam.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Third, Observer also says refered to an Orientalist from <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Oxford</st1:place></st1:city> name Patricia Crone. Observer says that Patrica claims there is not proof of existence of Prophet Mohd Saw because there is no coin showing the Prophet’s name. Also, she claims that the people of Kufah prays in the Western direction. Observer also claim that Patricia Crone referred to books written by</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">It’s either Particia is making a false claim or Observer is not very observant. But, it’s the trait of people like Observer and Raja Petra. Their main reference is Western, Christian and Jewish Orientalist. They rely upon these people blindly for their source in understanding Islam. The fact that people like Observer have no ability to understand Arabic confirms the fact that he doesn’t refer to scholars of Islam at all except through Western, Christian and Jewish Orientalists eyes.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Little does people like Observer know, Orientalist contradicts each other. If Patricia Crone says that Prophet Mohd’s existence cannot be confirmed, another Orientalist name Nabia Abbott confirms the existence of Al Hadeeth and even linked directly to the Prophet. Nabia says:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">[quote]</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">... the traditions of Muhammad as transmitted by his Companions and their Successors were, as a rule, scrupulously scrutinised at each step of the transmission, and that the so called phenomenal growth of Tradition in the second and third centuries of Islam was not primarily growth of content, so far as the hadith of Muhammad and the hadith of the Companions are concerned, but represents largely the progressive increase in parallel and multiple chains of transmission.[11]</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">[11] N. Abbott, Studies In Arabic Literary Papyri, Volume II [Qur'anic Commentary & Tradition], 1967, <st1:placetype st="on">University</st1:placetype> Of <st1:placename st="on">Chicago</st1:placename> Press: <st1:city st="on">Chicago</st1:city> (<st1:country-region st="on"><st1:place st="on">USA</st1:place></st1:country-region>), p. 2.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">[/quote]</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">A reference to the article by Patricia Crone shows that she relies heavily on PHYSICAL EVIDENCE to support her work But, at the same time she didn’t study the “papyrus” or “manuscripts” plus various oral traditions that is abundance and great in numbers. It is probably because Patricia Crone is not trained enough to read and understand Classical Arabic and as such she is unable to appreciate the massive and abundance evidence </p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Now Nabia Abbot chooses to study the abundance of evidence and she confirms the existence of Prophet Mohd SAW thus making Particia looking like an idiot. <span style=""> </span>In addition, another orientalist, J Robson, wrote a book entitled “<i>The Isnad of Muslim Tradition</i>” actually proving the soundness of the Isnad system.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">(End of Part 1)</p> </span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-85320717132259787742008-09-08T19:26:00.000-07:002008-09-09T11:24:15.769-07:00Answer on MTODAY Article on Tudung from Quinary<div class="post hentry uncustomized-post-template"> <a name="213766359277994320"></a> <div class="post-body entry-content"> This is an article written by Quinary. It is a good rebutal to Raja Petra's article in MToday about wearing tudung in Islam.<span class="fullpost">I read the news in The Star yesterday of some Muslim bodies including JAKIM which lodged a police report against Malaysia Today's editor, Raja Petra for allegedly insulting the Malays, Muslim and Islam. I was hoping that they were referring to a real insult done by Raja Petra, but much to my disappointment, the articles which are said to <span style="font-style: italic;">insult </span>these Muslim bodies are the articles with title <span style="font-style: italic;">I promise to be a good, non-hypocritical Muslim</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;">Not all arabs are descendants of the Prophet</span>. If these two articles <span style="font-style: italic;">insulted </span>these Muslim bodies, then I have nothing to say than this : <span style="font-weight: bold;">you guys are being unnecessarily sensitive Malay Muslims</span>.<br /><br />That makes me think of whether those who lodged the police report really went through the articles, at least to read it entirely, or they just look at the title and jumped to the conclusion, or they actually do not understand English? Which one of the above factors is true then? In my opinion, those two articles referred to initially didn't tickle me even a bit. I think JAKIM should find something better to do than to lodge a police report on those two articles.<br /><br />Today, however, Raja Petra published another article on head cover (tudung), <a href="http://117.120.1.155/2008/content/view/12321/84/"><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 51, 255);">The Great Tudung Debate</span></a>. This one does attract my attention, though I must say that it is nowhere near to being an insult to me. <span style="font-weight: bold;">I am not insulted at all, </span>as this sort of view has been around for some times, especially by those anti-hadith clan or quranist. But as a head-covering-muslim-woman, I do believe I should put some respond in my blog over what I understand it to be. <span style="font-weight: bold;">I do want to stress though, that I am not at all trying to belittle any of the non-head-covering women, as I do believe that this is something personal that does not affect our aqidah</span>, and I do respect and accept the differences in opinion. The below respond is to present another side of the view, just so some people will not take this matter lightly.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">I do believe though, that Raja Petra has touched this tudung issue at a very wrong place</span>. This should be settled at ummah level first before opening it like that for public scrutiny. Among the statement published in The Great Tudung Debate article (which was said to be written by Raja Petra's anonymous friend) is this comment on An-Nur 31:<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(204, 51, 204); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">Again there is no mention of head (ru'usa) in this verse or face (wujuh/wajh). Please note the words 'draw their veils over the bosoms'. The arabic is as follows:</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(204, 51, 204); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">walyadribna : and strike / cover</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(204, 51, 204); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">bi khumurihinna : with their outer garments</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(204, 51, 204); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">Ala : over / upon</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(204, 51, 204); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">juyoobihinna : their bosoms / breasts</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(204, 51, 204); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">Women are told to cover their chests/bosoms/breasts. That is all. This tallies with the earlier verse 33:59 above where the women are told to lengthen their clothes/garments. There is absolutely no mention of head (ru'usa), face (wujuh) or hair.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">My response :</span><br />This depends largely on what is the interpretation of the word <span style="font-style: italic;">khumur</span>. I am not sure whether this friend of Raja Petra speaks Arabic (which I am quite sure this anonymous friend of his has no arabic knowledge), but one thing not highlighted is the fact that khumur (the plural word of khimar) means something to cover, and what was normally referred to as head cover (tudung). The classical arabic dictionary, aqrib al-mawarid defines khimar as :<br /><i>"all such pieces of cloth which are used to cover the head. It is a piece of cloth which is used by a woman to cover her head."<br /><br /></i>Imam Abu'l-Fida ibn Kathir said: <i>"Khumur is the plural of khimar which means something that covers, and is what is used to cover the head. This is what is known among the people as a khimar."</i><br /><br />So linguistically, khimar does not only mean something to cover, it is commonly used at that time to refer to head cover (tudung). So now we can see that khimar can be used as :<br /><ol><li>A piece that covers</li><li>Something specifically used to cover the head / head cover / tudung<br /></li></ol>While I recognise and respect the fact that Raja Petra's friend choose to pick the first definition of khimar, we should go a step further in trying to find whether the Qur'an is referring to the first or the second definition. Common linguistic factor should be taken into consideration, at the time when the verse was sent down. Jumhur ulama' picked the second definition as the correct one.<br /><br />When the verse An-Nur 31 was revealed, the term used : <i>walyadribna bikhumurihinna</i><br />See how it was designed : <i>bi-khumuri-hinna</i> : with their khumur<br />The khumur was designed to be ma'rifah, not nakirah. Looking at it closely, this khumur is already there on the women's body. Before this verse was sent down, where is it that the khumur was used? <span style="color: rgb(255, 102, 102); font-weight: bold;">Are we saying that the women of Arabia at that time march around topless that God asked them to now put on their shirt to cover their breast?</span><br /><br />No, they didn't march around topless. They wore their khimar on their head. This is not suprising, that's the tradition at that time. In fact, we know that the Christians used that as well, as they are required to do so in the Bible via <span style="font-weight: bold;">Corinthian 11</span>. The difference is that :<br /><i><br /></i>Imam Abu Abdullah Qurtubi said: <i>"Women in those days used to cover their heads with the khimar, throwing its ends upon their backs. This left the neck and the upper part of the chest bare, along with the ears, in the manner of the Christians. Then Allah commanded them to cover those parts with the khimar." </i><br /><br />The practice to wear khimar to cover hair is already there within the society, but now this verse commanded that it is extended to be used to cover breast to make it more meaningful in the modesty business. Why such a hassle to ask the women to cover breast once again using another piece? Then ask a woman to stand wearing a baju kurung, and another using baju kurung with tudung to cover their breast. See the difference.<br /><br />That is if we want to rely solely on Qur'an. There are other hadith explaining this as well (though some might just refuse to accept it) .<br /><br />The article further quote this statement :<br /><span style="color: rgb(204, 102, 204); font-style: italic;font-family:verdana;font-size:100%;" ><strong style="font-size: 12px;">We DO NOT interpret the Quran. May I suggest something much simpler? Why not we just read it? If we look at the Quran in its arabic and then look at the translated words just a little carefully, we will understand it. You DONT EVEN have to know Arabic. For example the arabic word for HEAD (kepala) is NEVER mentioned in any of the verses quoted above. Neither are the arabic words for face and hair. So how do the translators include head, face and hair? Someone must explain this.</strong></span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-weight: bold;">My Response </span>:<br />I beg to differ. There are times when we don't even have to mention something specifically in order to refer to something. If I ask my husband to wear an underwear, that means I want him to cover his private part, no? Should I then have to specifically say this "Darling, please use this underwear to cover your penis (pardon me for the word)" instead? If I just say "Darling, please wear this underwear", would he then use the underwear to cover his feet or head instead? Do I need to mention the private parts when I ask him to wear it, when underwear is already known to be used as something to cover the private parts?<br /><br />This is where the knowledge in Arabic is important in interpreting things. When we understand khimar to be something covering our hair, whether or not it mentions head and hair, it does not matter anymore. Do not take lightly of the importance of Arabic language in explaining the Qur'an. Those who don't speak arabic might not realise the efficiency of arabic language that even its grammar is vital in interpreting it correctly. Remember how did some people failed to realise that arabic grammatical aspect of the verse in Hud : 114 is important, that they <span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">wrongly</span> came to the conclusion that there should only be 3 prayers in a day?<br /><br />And for those who left their comments on that article in Malaysia Today accusing Muslim women with head-cover as oppressed or that sort, please learn to respect other people's belief. I wrote something on this quite some times ago in <a href="http://widejournal.blogspot.com/2008/08/head-cover-muslim-women.html">Muslim Women Dress Code and Oppression</a>. </span></div> <div class="post-footer"> <div class="post-footer-line post-footer-line-1"> <span class="post-author vcard"> Posted by <span class="fn">Quinary</span> </span> <span class="post-timestamp"> at <a class="timestamp-link" href="http://widejournal.blogspot.com/2008/09/raja-petras-great-tudung-debate.html" rel="bookmark" title="permanent link"><abbr class="published" title="2008-09-07T15:28:00+08:00">3:28 PM</abbr></a> </span> <span class="reaction-buttons"> </span> <span class="star-ratings"> </span> <span class="post-comment-link"> </span> <span class="post-backlinks post-comment-link"> </span> <span class="post-icons"> <span class="item-control blog-admin pid-1247047524"> <a href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3763717376309159376&postID=213766359277994320" title="Edit Post"> <img alt="" class="icon-action" src="http://www.blogger.com/img/icon18_edit_allbkg.gif" /> </a> </span> </span> </div> <div class="post-footer-line post-footer-line-2"> <span class="post-labels"> <a href="http://widejournal.blogspot.com/search/label/Women" rel="tag"><br /></a> </span> </div></div></div>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-46078443146514176322008-08-21T11:23:00.001-07:002008-08-21T11:25:41.713-07:00Hadeeth Must Be Understood in the Correct ContextHadeeth is looked upon negatively because of the ignorance of certain detractors when they read it.<span class="fullpost"> <p class="MsoNormal"><b><u><br /><o:p><span style="text-decoration: none;"></span></o:p></u></b>We see so many instances of anti-hadeeth exponents spreading their writings claiming their so-call total submission to the Quran. They came up with numerous argument arguing against Al Hadeeth of the Prophet.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">In this article, I will attempt to show why such misunderstanding occurs. In one word, the main reason for such confusion is ignorance. Specifically, ignorance in the the Arabic language. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">One will notice that the <span style=""> </span>Modus Operandi of every Anti Hadeeth is to take the <b>literal translations</b> of the Hadeeth and then make commentaries on them. All of their criticism against Al Hadeeth is solely based upon the <b>literal translation</b> of the hadeeth.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The trouble with this method is that the Arabic language doesn’t exist only in the literal form. The Arabic language also exist in the figurative form called <b><i>majaz.<o:p></o:p></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">By taking a hadeeth in from it’s literal meaning is not doing the hadeeth justice since not all the hadeeth is spoken to refer to it’s literal meaning.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">For example, the hadeeth that True Muslim likes to quote:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><br />‘Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 232: Narrated Abu Huraira: “Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established till the buttocks of the women of the tribe of Daus move while going round Dhi-al-Khalasa." Dhi-al-Khalasa was the idol of the Daus tribe which they used to worship in the Pre Islamic Period of ignorance. ‘</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Another example TM quotes:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Allah’s Apostle said, “The woman is like a rib; if you try to straighten her, she will break. So if you want to get benefit from her, do so while she still has some crookedness.” - Volume 7, Book 62, Number 114</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The word “while she still has some crookedness some crookedness” here actually refers to a deal with a women using methods of somewhere between hard and soft.<span style=""> </span>In other words, the Prophets says that in dealing with women one should not be too hard or too soft. Those who understands Arabic don’t find this hadeeth weird.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><o:p> </o:p></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Because TM is dumb when it comes to Arabic language, he fail to see that the phrase “the buttocks of women….move…” refers to “dancing around the Dhi-Al-Khalasa”.<span style=""> </span>In making fun of this hadeeth, he makes a complete fool of himself.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><br />And you will see this pattern throughout the entire anti hadeeth literature. And u will also see TM’s brand of ignorance throughout their hadeeth criticism.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Unfortunately for anti hadeeth Majaz also exist in the Quran. For instance in 02:187</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12pt; text-align: justify;">[2:187 ……, and eat and drink, until the white thread appear to you distinct from its black thread…….</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12pt; text-align: justify;">By Anti Hadeeth methodology timing for fasting during Ramadhan is determine by visual differentiation between a white thread and a black thread.<span style=""> </span>But how can this be?. Everyone knows that if we put a black and white thread in a dark room, we can never tell the difference between the two. Furthermore, one’s eyes is able to tell the difference between them whether it’s night or day.</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;">The real meaning of white thread is dawn and black thread is dusk. The words “black thread” and “white thread” are figurative and cannot be taken literarily. This is an example of “ majaz” in the Quran.</p> <p>Another example is 59:21-22 </p> <p><span class="hyg"><b><i>21.</i></b><i> Had We sent down this Qur'an on a mountain, verily, thou wouldst have seen it humble itself and cleave asunder for fear of Allah. Such are the similitudes which We propound to men, that they may reflect. </i></span><i><o:p></o:p></i></p> <p><span class="hyg"><b><i>22.</i></b><i> Allah is He, than Whom there is no other god;- Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. <o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">Taking the literal translation of the verses above would force us to believe that mountains have the same faculties and abilities as humans. But, logic tells us that this is ludicrous.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">To adopt the anti hadeeth’es methodology would render the Quran as ludicorous.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">The verse above demonstrates to us another type of Majaz of the “similitude” type. It is used to signify the heavy responsibility of the Quran upon human beings. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">Bear in mind there exist many types of <i>Majaz </i>in the Arabic language and the Quran uses them all.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">One will noticed that each time the anti hadeeth methodology is applied, it carries similar implication upon the Quran. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">OTHER FACTORS IN UNDERSTANDING THE HADEETH PROPERLY<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">Among factors to be considered when interpreting the hadeeth are as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span class="hyg"><span style="font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="">v<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr"><span class="hyg"><b>Context</b> : The context of a hadeeth must be considered. Sometimes a hadeeth may sound strange when taking out of context but when it is put into it’s context it makes perfect sense. For example the hadeeth:<o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span class="hyg"><b>“</b>……meats become bad because of the Jews…” (Bukhari).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;"><span class="hyg">The context of the hadeeth was uttered during the “Khandak” war. After the Musyrikeen had withdrawn from the Madinah lines, the Prophet was ordered to deal with the Jewish for treason. As the order was to be executed immediately, the army of the Prophet had to march all day until the reach the Citadels where the Jews lived. As a result, meats that was prepared for celebration of victory became bad after being exposed for a long time. Thus, such words was uttered signifiying the Prophet’s frustration in the Medinan’s Jews’es treachery. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span class="hyg"><span style="font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="">v<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr"><span class="hyg"><b>Aborogation : </b><span style=""> </span>Certain decrees were made by the Prophet as a temporary measures which in turn the Prophet SAW had repealed. In short, aborogation. Examples such as the prohibition of writing down of the hadeeth of the Prophet, the prohibition of women from visiting the grave and many more.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span class="hyg"><span style="font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="">v<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr"><span class="hyg"><b>Timing<span style=""> </span>:</b> <span style=""> </span>Certain hadeeth is spoken in the time of peace and certain hadeeth are spoken in the time of war. If understood within the correct timing, they provide a clear picture.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span class="hyg"><span style="font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="">v<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr"><span class="hyg"><b>Arabic Local Slang (Ammeyyah):</b> The Prophet SAW uses figurative, metaphorics in his hadeeth which is prevalent among the people of his time. For instance the hadeeth:<o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;"><span class="hyg">”</span><i> The Hadith mentions that "fever" is from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page 417, vol 7]. <o:p></o:p></i></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify;">The truth is, it is common among Arabs at that time to use the “heat of hell” as<span style=""> </span><br /><span style=""> </span>comparison to high fevers.<span class="hyg"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span class="hyg"><span style="font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="">v<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr"><span class="hyg"><b>Expression of Miracles of the Prophet:</b> Example, the drinking of camel urine, the separation of the moon into two parts and many more.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify;"><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="">v<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr"><span class="hyg"><b>Timing </b>: The timing of a hadeeth has to be understood properly as well. For instance the hadeeth </span></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 0.5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span class="hyg"><span style="font-family: Wingdings;"><span style="">v<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr"><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">IGNORANCE IS THE MAIN FACTOR BEHIND ANTI HADEETH IDEOLOGY<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><span style=""> </span>I have stated this once and I will state this again. Ignorance is the main reason why anti hadeeth thrives. They are completely ignorant of the Arabic language and choose to interpret Islam while being void of knowledge.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">The same people are referred to by the Quran by these verses:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">The other push-factor towards this ideology is total fanaticism towards western secular liberal paradigm.<span style=""> </span>These people are afraid to call themselves Muslims and feel ashamed of Islam.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">They, then, uses the Anti Hadeeth ideology to misinterpret the Quran to fit it into the western secular mold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><b>CONFUSION INTRODUCED BY ANTI HADEETH IDEOLOGY</b><br /><br />The version I sent to Raja Petra contained tables and cannot be published on the blog, this particular part of the article was not presented properly.<br /><br /><b>1) Confusion No. 1:</b> Punishment For theft and fornication as stated in the Quran (05:38 and 05:02)<br /><b>Anti Hadeeth Way:</b> Punishment can be carried out without due process because the Quran does not prescribe due process resulting in chaos and absolute anarchy in the society.<br /><b>The Truth:</b> The way punishment is carried out as stated in 05:38 and 05:02 is shown by the Prophet SAW. In the hadeeth, due process was clearly demonstrated to us.<br /><br /><b>2) Confusion No. 2:</b> Inheritance to children who had murdered their parents (04:11 states on inheritance)<br /><b>Anti Hadeeth way:</b> The murdering children are allowed to receive their inheritance. Hurrah for the Menendez brothers.<br /><b>The Truth:</b> There is a hadeeth stating exceptions to children who murder their parents.<br /><br /><b>3) Confusion No. 3:</b> Consuming the carcass of dead animals (The Quran prescribe to it’s followers that animals which are to be consumed must be properly slaughtered - 05:03)<br /><st1:street st="on"><st1:address st="on"><b>Anti Hadeeth Way</b></st1:address></st1:Street><b>:</b> It will cover all types of animals including sea animals. In short, the next time the Anti Hadeeth open their can of sardines, they will have to ensure that the sardines are slaughtered properly.<br /><b>The Truth:</b> There is a hadeeth making -exceptions to sea-living animals i.e. fish, squid<br /><br /><b>4) Confusion No. 4:</b> In 05:38, there is no mention of minimum limits for a thief to be qualified for amputation<br /><st1:street st="on"><st1:address st="on"><b>Anti Hadeeth Way</b></st1:address></st1:Street><b>:</b> Even if a man steal a clove of garlic, he will be amputated.<br /><b>The Truth:</b> There is a hadeeth stating that only is the value of loot is more than ¼ of a deenar will a thief have his hands amputated.<br /><br /><b>5) Confusion No. 5:</b> The Quran states many times about <st1:street st="on"><st1:address st="on">Az Zakah<br /> <b>Anti Hadeeth Way</b></st1:address></st1:Street><b>:</b> There is simply no methodology at all for the anti hadeeth to follow.<br /><b>The truth:</b> The methods are clearly mentioned in the sunnah, ijma and qiyas.<br /><br /><b>6) Confusion No. 6: </b>Various ibadah clearly mentioned in the Quran, i.e fasting, solat, al hajj, jihad, sadaqah, inheritance, marriage, divorce, commerce etc<br /><b>Anti Hadeeth Way:</b> AN ABSOLUTE MESS. There is absolutely no methodology shown in the Quran, so the anti hadeeth will be practicing such ibadah at best by guessing.<br /><b>The Truth: </b>The method to carry out all the ibadah above is as shown to us by the Prophet as recorded in the Al Hadeeth.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">I’m sorry for the rather late response to True Muslim ( TM) ridiculous rant on Hadeeth but allow me to highlight some of his grave mistakes. We should start by highlighting TM’s inherent weaknesses in his understanding of the Quran:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="MsoNormal" style="">In spite of his reference to 17 occurances of the word Hadeeth in the Quran, he has failed to show that any of them refers to the Al Hadeeth of the Prophet SAW.</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="">He has failed to disapprove the existence of death penalty in the Quran. His reference to Sigmund Freud in interpreting 02:54 is not only laughable but also the biggest joke to date</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="">He has failed to provide us methodology on how he interprets the Quran since he rejects the “Arabic Grammar” altogether as being human-made. Any linguist can tell u that grammar is derived and never made by anyone.</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="">He fail to bring proof of Imam Bukhari declaring other than the 7000 hadeeth in his As Sahih as being unauthentic. To me that makes TM a blatant liar.</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="">Since he claims that Hadeeth comes from the Bible, then he also must answer, based on his parallel, why Al Quran is also not from the Bible based on the prohibition of pig example. To date he has been clueless.</li><li class="MsoNormal" style="">Al Kitab and Al Hikmah is not the same as Al Hikmah when it is spoken alone. This proves the existence of a second form of Revelation which TM has failed to deny until now.</li></ol> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">and many more. What is weird is that despite his inability to provide decent explanation to his own inconsistency, he goes on to write about other topics.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">THE ISSUE OF AUTHENTICITY OF SAHIH BUKHARI</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">TM’s entire case is based on the booklet found at <a href="http://www.central-mosque.com/biographies/asqalani2.htm">http://www.central-mosque.com/biographies/asqalani2.htm</a> which is a secondary source. His entire case cannot be considered credible at all since he didn’t really refer to the original text. That explains why in his article no reference is made to his source at all. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">So, what he’s trying to debunk is merely what somebody else says about the Sahih Bukhari and not the book itself.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">TM quotes this reference from Al Fath Al Bari:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">“For Bukhari’s text has not come down to us in a single uniform version, but exists in several ‘narrations’ (riwayat), of which the version handed down by al-Kushaymani (d.389) on the authority of Bukhari’s pupil al-Firabri is the one most frequently accepted by the ulema”. (see “<a href="http://www.central-mosque.com/biographies/asqalani2.htm%20and%20www.thesaurus-islamicus.li"><span style="color: aqua;">Ibn Hajar Asqalani and his Commentary Fath al-Bari</span></a>”)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">And he makes this ridiculous claim:<br /> <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">“What they have are bits and pieces of information that have been sorted and put together over a period of almost 600 years. And to them this has become '<b>the most authentic book after the book of Allah'.”<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">Here we see TM making a mountain out of a mole-hill for nothing. The truth is:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="MsoNormal" style="color: aqua; text-align: justify;">All of the transcripts can be traced back to Imam Bukhari.<o:p></o:p></li></ol> <ol style="margin-top: 0in;" start="1" type="a"><li class="MsoNormal" style="color: aqua; text-align: justify;">Some of the transcript are incomplete compared to others.<o:p></o:p></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color: aqua; text-align: justify;">They serve as cross check to one another.<br /> <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br /> <!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p></li></ol> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">I fail to see why this is a problem. What is means is that Al Sahih was recorded over a number of versions of manuscripts. But, each manuscript is authentically traced back to Al Bukhari’s pupils.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">This happens because Imam Bukhari’s pupil did not <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">Based on this, he makes his ridiculous claim that Sahih Bukhari exists in bits and pieces <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">His other rants in trying to show As Sahih Bukhari is not written by Al Imam Al Bukhari is a big joke by anyone’s standard. Suffice to say that manuscripts dating back to the time of Imam Bukhari exists in the hundreds all over the world. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: aqua;">What TM deliberately tries to confuse himself with is the fact that Sahih Bukhari is also recorded by thousands of Imam Bukhari’s students. In turn each students will provide their own commentaries. The differences in versions is due differences in the commentaries of Bukhari’s students and not in the contents.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: aqua;">Imam Bukhari left the task to record his As Sahih to his students and the fact that the manuscripts are all the same in terms of content proves there is no discepencies. The identities of the students are also verified to be Bukhari’s and the authenticity of the manuscript can be cross checked with other versions.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: aqua;">TM made another statement that reflects his ignorance:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: aqua;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">WHY ANTI HADEETH ARE ABLE TO CONVINCE CERTAIN QUARTERS INTO ACCEPTING THEIR LIES</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The real reason why Anti Hadeeth carries any credibility is that all of those who subscribe to their beliefs is ignorance.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The main area of ignorance is of course the Arabic language. </p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Modus Operandi of every Anti Hadeeth is to take the translation of the Hadeeth and then make commentaries on them. The commentaries are based upon the literal translation of a hadeeth.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The trouble with this method is that the Arabic language doesn’t exist only in the literal form. The Arabic language also exist in the figurative form called <b><i>majaz.<o:p></o:p></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">By taking a hadeeth in from it’s literal meaning is not doing the hadeeth justice since not all the hadeeth is spoken to refer to it’s literal meaning.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">For example, the hadeeth that TM likes to quote:</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><br />‘Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 88, Number 232: Narrated Abu Huraira: “Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established till the buttocks of the women of the tribe of Daus move while going round Dhi-al-Khalasa." Dhi-al-Khalasa was the idol of the Daus tribe which they used to worship in the Pre Islamic Period of ignorance. ‘</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><o:p> </o:p></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Because TM is dumb when it comes to Arabic language, he fail to see that the phrase “the buttocks of women….move…” refers to “dancing around the Dhi-Al-Khalasa”.<span style=""> </span>In making fun of this hadeeth, he makes a complete fool of himself.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><br />And you will see this pattern throughout the entire anti hadeeth literature.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Here we also see the hypocrisy of the Anti Hadeeth seeing that Majaz also exist in the Quran. For instance in 02:187</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;">[2:187 ……, and eat and drink, until the white thread appear to you distinct from its black thread…….</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;">By Anti Hadeeth methodology timing for fasting during Ramadhan is determine by visual differentiation between a white thread and a black thread.<span style=""> </span>But how can this be?. Everyone knows that if we put a black and white thread in a dark room, we can never tell the difference between the two. Furthermore, one’s eyes is able to tell the difference between them whether it’s night or day.</p> <p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;">The real meaning of white thread is dawn and black thread is duck. The words “black thread” and “white thread” are figurative and cannot be taken literarily. This is an example of “ majaz” in the Quran.</p> <p>Another example is 59:21-22 <a name="21"></a></p> <p><span style=""><i><o:p> </o:p></i></span></p> <p><span style=""><span class="hyg"><b><i>21.</i></b></span></span><span class="hyg"><i> Had We sent down this Qur'an on a mountain, verily, thou wouldst have seen it humble itself and cleave asunder for fear of Allah. Such are the similitudes which We propound to men, that they may reflect. </i></span><i><o:p></o:p></i></p> <p><a name="22"><span class="hyg"><b><i>22.</i></b></span></a><span class="hyg"><i> Allah is He, than Whom there is no other god;- Who knows (all things) both secret and open; He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. <o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><i><o:p> </o:p></i></span></p> <p><span class="hyg"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">Taking the literal translation would force us to believe that mountains have the same faculties and abilities as humans. But, logic tells us that this is ludicrous.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">The verse above demonstrates to us another type of Majaz called similitude to explain the heavy responsibility of the Quran upon human being. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">Bear in mind there exist many types of <i>Majaz </i>in the Arabic language and the Quran uses them all.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p><span class="hyg">In short, should we apply the same methodology used by Anti Hadeeth on the Quran, we will render the Quran ridiculous.<o:p></o:p></span></p>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2696802481769677830.post-74895278825480532382008-08-21T06:09:00.000-07:002008-08-21T06:13:04.580-07:00Clearing Some Misguided Understanding Of Al Hadeeth An NabawiySo much have been floated in the net about Al HAdeeth An Nabawiy, and this is a small attempt to refute some of the hadeeth misunderstood by certain irresponsible quaters.Here is the beginning of my post. <span class="fullpost"> <p class="MsoTitle"><br /></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><b><u><o:p><span style="text-decoration: none;"> </span></o:p></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Apparently, the Anti Hadeeth is in bed with some American Evengelical Christians in defaming the good name of Al Hadeeth. The Anti Hadeeth sect apparently speak in the same tone with their “Jerry Fallwell”’s counterpart when commenting on a number of hadeeth.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Here, I wish to list down some of the accusations and try to provide the true explanation of the hadeeth.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">1.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">How do you explain Bukhari vol. IV, no. 543 where it states that Adam was 60 cubits tall?</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION: The more complete wording in al-Bukhari and Muslim adds "in the heaven" (fi al-Sama'), i.e. in an other-worldly context. Similarly, when the Prophet saw Ibrahim (AS) in the heaven he said he was so tall that he could hardly see his head as narrated from Samura ibn Jundub in Sahih al-Bukhari.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">2.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">Satan lives in the nose over night. He can be flushed out if you snort water up and then out the nose. (Bukhari vol. IV, no. 516; Muslim vol. I, no. 462) How big is Satan? Is he in everyone's nose? Is he omnipresent?</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : That's right. There are satans up our noses. But only in the noses of “smucks” who makes an issue out of this hadeeth. “Devil” is another way of representing danger or "dirtiness". The "devil" by itself is considered as “unclean” in Islam, so in this context of the hadeeth, it is used in place of smudge or dirt. The trouble with Anti hadeeth and their Evengelical counterparts is that they take the Hadeeth from it’s translation.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">3.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">Muhammad forbade the game of chess! (Muslim vol. IV, no. 5612)</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : No he didn't. Read the hadeeth properly next time and stop reading it from it's translation</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">4.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">Muslims have one intestine while non-Muslims have seven! (Muslim vol. III, no. 5113-5115)</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : Another way of explaining 05:03 in the Quran. It shows that a Muslim is limited in terms of the things he can eat and drink as opposed to non muslims. This is another example of Majaz. Taking it in it's literal form is either stupid or very stupid.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">5.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">Fevers are from the fire of hell and can be cooled by water.(Bukhari vol. IV, nos. 483,486)</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : I've explained this before, it's a common saying among Arabs at that time that when one has a high fever, one is having a heat from hell. Another idiotic understanding of the hadeeth taken literally from it’s translation.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">6.0 If you lift up your eyes towards heaven while praying, your eyes will be snatched out!</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : Another example of “Majaz”. Anyone taking the hadeeth literarily is either blind or should blind himself like Kassim Selamat, for his/her eyes is useless.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Ampunkan mak Kassim</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">7.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">We should drink camel urine as a medicine</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : We should? The hadeeth doesn't say that it applies to all? Anyways, it's another form of the Prophet's miracle</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">8.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">A She-Monkey gets stoned / condemned, for 'adultery??! (Islam recognises human moral laws for the animal kingdom!!!). Narrated Amru bin Maimun: "During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it - the she monkey had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them."</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : Secular-Liberalists feels very offended by this hadeeth because they have to accept the fact that their value system is lower than that of monkeys. Even monkeys regard adultery as a crime punishable by death. They, on the other hands, view it as tolerable or acceptable. Kindda like pigs.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">9.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">Muhammad was a dog hater. He thought that angels could not enter a house if a dog was there and that black dogs were devils. Thus he ordered dogs to be killed and forbid the selling of dogs. Why were only black dogs supposedl;y possessed by shaitans/devils in Islam?</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;"><o:p> </o:p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : The term "black dog" is another way of expressing "fierce looking dogs". And the word "devil" is used to mean "extreme danger". As much as we know that a devil is dangerous, we should also regard a "fierce dog" as dangerous. Nowadays, dogs that has been caught biting onto a human will be put to death summararily. The practice is common until today.</p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="">10.0<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span dir="ltr">People turn into rats, pigs and monkeys. (Bukhari vol. IV, nos. 524, 627; Muslim vol. IV, no. 7135). Abraham's father was turned into an animal (Bukhari vol. IV, no.569)</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">EXPLANATION : The Quran says that Jews were turned into apes, 02:65. So, what is so unusual about these Al Hadeeth? God can change anyone into anything and there are many verses in the Quran about it. For example, the example of Moses staff turning into snakes.</p> .</span>Tulang Besihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08770865110328319255noreply@blogger.com2