aflaha blog

MANFAAT CENGKEH

2021-10-20T01:38:00.006-07:00

Cengkeh mengandung nutrisi seperti kalium, mangan, kalsium, magnesium, natrium, zinc, folat, antioksidan, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, dan vitamin K.

1. *Menjaga kesehatan sistem pencernaan*

Menjaga agar sistem pencernaan berfungsi dengan maksimal. Cengkeh merangsang sekresi enzim pencernaan, mengurangi perut kembung, mengatasi iritasi lambung, dispepsia, dan mual.

Selain itu, menurut pakar kesehatan, bagi Anda yang memiliki masalah diare dan disentri kronis, sepertinya Anda harus mendapatkan khasiat cengkeh.

2. *Melindungi fungsi hati*

Cengkeh mengandung antioksidan, di mana hal itu adalah sebuah kondisi ideal untuk melindungi organ dari efek radikal bebas, terutama hati.

Dalam jangka panjang, metabolisme dapat meningkatkan produksi radikal bebas dan profil lipid, serta mengurangi antioksidan di hati.

Guna membantu dalam menangkal efek ini, Anda bisa mendapatkan manfaat cengkeh karena sifat hepatoprotektifnya. Meski begitu, klaim terhadap hal ini membutuhkan penelitian lanjutan.

3. *Mengontrol kadar gula darah*

Manfaat cengkeh bagi kesehatan berikutnya adalah kemampuannya mengontrol gula darah. Pada pasien yang menderita diabetes, jumlah insulin yang diproduksi oleh tubuh tidak mencukupi atau tidak diproduksi sama sekali. Ekstrak dari cengkeh meniru insulin yang dengan cara tertentu membantu mengendalikan kadar gula darah.

4. *Menguatkan tulang*

Ekstrak hidrokarbon dari cengkeh termasuk senyawa fenolik seperti eugenol dan turunannya, seperti flavon, isoflavon, dan flavonoid. Ekstrak ini sangat membantu dalam menjaga kepadatan tulang dan kandungan mineral tulang, serta meningkatkan kekuatan tulang dalam kasus osteoporosis.

5. *Meningkatkan sistem kekebalan tubuh*

Kuncup bunga kering cengkeh mengandung senyawa yang membantu dalam meningkatkan sistem kekebalan tubuh dengan meningkatkan jumlah sel darah putih.

*Manfaat cengkeh bagi kesehatan lanjutannya adalah membersihkan tubuh dari racun berbahaya dan mikroba*

Dengan mengonsumsi beberapa cengkeh, maka kesehatan tubuh akan meningkat.

*Dengan sifat anti-inflamasi yang dimilikinya, cengkeh mampu mengobati peradangan dan infeksi*

6. *Mengatasi sakit gigi*

Manfaat cengkeh berikutnya yang jarang digunakan adalah mengatasi nyeri akibat sakit gigi. Senyawa eugenol yang ada di dalam cengkeh mampu mengurang nyeri di gusi dan gigi. Selain itu, senyawa eugenol juga efektif mengatasi peradangan dan infeksi.

7. *Mengobati tukak lambung*

Penipisan lendir lambung atau sering disebut asam lambung kerap menimbulkan tukak lambung. Kondisi ini bisa terjadi dari berbagai macam faktor seperti infeksi atau stres. Konsumsi cengkeh saat Anda mengalami tukak lambung dipercaya mampu mengobati kondisi tersebut.

Sebuah penelitian mengungkapkan, minyak esensial dari cengkeh bisa meningkatkan produksi lendir lambung. Lendir lambung sendiri mempunyai fungsi sebagai penghalang asam lambung sekaligus mencegah luka pada dinding lambung akibat cairan asam lambung.

8. *Menghambat pertumbuhan bakteri*

Sifat antibakteri yang dimiliki cengkeh mampu menghentikan pertumbuhan bakteri penyebab infeksi.

Minyak cengkeh dipercaya mampu membunuh bakteri E.coli. Selain itu, cengkeh juga membantu menghentikan pertumbuhan berbagai jenis bakteri di mulut.

9. *Mencegah ejakulasi dini*

Minyak cengkeh dipercaya mampu mencegah ejakulasi dini. Sebuah penelitian mengungkapkan, mengoleskan krim yang mengandung bunga cengkeh dengan bahan lain seperti ginseng ke penis, hal itu dapat mencegah terjadinya ejakulasi dini.

10. *Membantu mengatasi batuk berdahak*

Senyawa eugenol yang terdapat di dalam cengkeh merupakan espektoran yang membantu mengeluarkan dahak pada penderita batuk berdahak.

11. *Mengatasi nyeri tenggorokan*

Manfaat cengkeh lanjutannya adalah membantu menghilangkan sensasi gatal saat radang tenggorokan

Sumber :

https://www.google.com/amp/s/doktersehat.com/khasiat-jitu-cengkeh/amp/

https://www.alodokter.com/simak-berbagai-manfaat-cengkeh-untuk-kesehatan

https://www.google.com/amp/s/doktersehat.com/khasiat-jitu-cengkeh/amp/

🌱 Terapi Futur : Menjaga dan Meperbaharui Iman

2021-10-19T18:08:00.004-07:00

Upaya pertama yang harus dilakukan sebagai terapi dari penyakit futur adalah dengan menjaga dan memperbaharui iman. Sebab iman bertambah dan berkurang. Bahkan iman bisa usang.

Imam Al-Hakim dan At-tabrani meriwayatkan bahwa Nabi bersabda:

إن الايمان ليخلق في جوف أحدكم كما يخلق الثوب فاسأل الله أن يجدد الإيمان في قلوبكم

Sesungguhnya iman benar-benar bisa menjadi usang di dalam tubuh seseorang dari kalian sbagaimana usangnya pakaian. Maka memohonlah kepada Allah supaya memperbarui iman di hati kalian!

Di dalam hadits lain beliau bersabda, "Tidak ada satu hati pun kecuali di sana ada mendungnya, seperti mendung yang menutupi rembulan. Jika saat rembulan bercahaya, tiba-tiba mendung menutupinya, maka gelaplah. Dan jika mendung itu menyingkir darinya rembulan pun bercahaya (lagi)

Sesungguhnya menjaga iman dan memperbaruinya adalah penjagaan dengan izin Allah dari banyak penyakit hati. Futur adalah salah satunya. Karena itulah Syaikhul Islam Ibnu Taimiyah senantiasa menjaga iman dan memperbaruinya.

Sehubungan dengan ini Allah berfirman, "Wahai orang orang yang beriman!" (Al-Baqarah (2): 104)

"Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang bertakwa apabila mereka dibayang-bayangi pikiran jahat (berbuat dosa) dari setan, mereka pun segera ingat kepada Allah, maka ketika itu juga mereka melihat (kesalahan-kesalahannya)." (Al-A'raf (7): 2011

Dari sinilah iman akan bertambah dan terjaga.

... untuk menambah keimanan atas keimanan mereka (yang telah ada). * (Al-Fath (48): 4)

"Adapun orang-orang yang beriman, maka surat ini menambah imannya." (At-Taubah [9]: 124)

Diantara perkara yang dapat menambah iman adalah memperbanyak amalan, menjaga shalat Sunnah Rawatib, menjaga Qiyamullail dan shalat Tahajjud, serta tidak meninggalkan shalat Witir, baik di saat bermukim maupun saat bepergian. Begitu pula dengan puasa sunnah, dahaga di siang hari, dari tidak menyia-nyiakan hari-hari yang utama untuk diisi dengan puasa sunnah.

Termasuk yang juga dapat menambah iman adalah bersedekah dengan sembunyi-sembunyi, mempererat tali silaturahmi, berbakti kepada kedua orang tua, serta berbaik hati, berbuat baik, dan mempedulikan fakir miskin dan anak yatim. Tidak ketinggalan pelaksanaan umrah, haji, bersegera ke masjid, i'tikaf.

Ibadah-ibadah ini memberi energi iman bagi seorang mukmin, la dapat menjadi bekal di perjalanan. la pun dapat meringankan musibah dan memudahkan kesulitan. Adalah Rasulullah jika dilanda suatu kesulitan, sesegera mungkin beliau mengerjakan shalat. Beliau pernah bersabda, "Mari kita beristirahat dengan shalat, wahai Bilal.

Sumber : 🌐 http://wahdah.or.id/

Orang-orang yang sering shalat ini masuk neraka, mengapa?

2015-09-27T22:35:00.000-07:00

Pada saat hari perhitungan amal kelak pada hari kiamat kelak, hal yang pertama kali akan dihisab adalah shalat. Hal ini menunjukkan betapa pentingnya ibadah yang satu ini. Di dalam Alquran, perintah yang paling sering Allah katakan adalah perintah tentang shalat. Ada banyak ayat yang memerintahkan kita untuk selalu mendirikan shalat.

Dalam sebuah hadits, Rasulullah bersabda, “Sesungguhnya pertama kali yang dihisab (ditanya dan diminta pertanggungjawaban) dari segenap amalan seorang hamba di hari kiamat kelak adalah shalatnya. Bila shalatnya baik maka beruntunglah ia dan bilamana shalatnya rusak, sungguh kerugian menimpanya.” [HR. Tirmidzi]

Untuk itu, sangat penting bagi kita untuk selalu mendirikan shalat. Namun, dizaman yang sudah modern seperti sekarang ini tampaknya banyak orang yang sudah mulai memandang remeh shalat. Bahkan hanya karena suatu alasan yang sepele saja, seseorang dapat dengan mudah meninggalkan shalat.

Bahkan saat ini banyak orang yang menganggap bahwa shalat itu hanya sebagai rutinitas ibadah semata. Ada juga seseorang yang melaksanakan shalat karena terpaksa dan lain sebagainya. Hal-hal seperti inilah penyebab seseorang yang rajin shalat tetapi masuk neraka, karena dalam melaksanakan ibadah tersebut mereka tidak secara ikhlas melakukannya.

Dan berikut ini ada beberapa golongan orang yang rajin shalat tetapi masuk neraka.

1. Shalat tetapi Suka Berdusta

Berdusta merupakan salah satu dosa besar dan diancam siksa yang pedih di akhirat kelak. Dizaman seperti ini, kebohongan tampaknya sudah menjadi suatu kebiasaan di kalangan masyarakat. Padahal, sekecil apapun sebuah kebohongan akan tetap dianggap sebagai dosa besar.

Meskipun ada seseorang yang rajin shalat dan beribadah, namun apabila lisannya suka berbohong maka shalat dan ibadahnya akan sia-sia semata. Karena kebohongannya itu akan menghapus amal-amalnya. Dan apabila ia mati dalam keadaan tidak bertaubat kepada Allah, maka dia akan dimasukkan kedalam neraka.

Allah SWT berfirman:

“Sesungguhnya yang mengada-adakan kebohongan, hanyalah orang-orang yang tidak beriman kepada ayat-ayat Allah, dan mereka itulah orang-orang pendusta.” [QS. An-Nahl ayat 105]

Berbohong menunjukkan salah satu ciri dari golongan orang-orang yang munafik. Untuk itulah mengapa kita sebagai umat Islam harus menjauhi yang namanya perbuatan dusta, karena itu dapat menyengsarakan kita baik di dunia dan di akhirat.

2. Shalat tetapi Minum Minuman Keras

Hal ini sering kita jumpai dikalangan masyarakat, banyak sekali orang yang melakukan shalat tetapi suka meminum minuman keras. Inilah akibatnya apabila menganggap shalat hanya sebagai sebuah rutinitas semata, sehingga dalam melaksanakannya tidak dibarengi dengan hati yang ikhlas.

Minuman keras adalah segala jenis minuman yang memabukkan. Dan minuman semacam ini sangat dilarang oleh agama Islam. Kebanyakan, orang yang shalat belum tentu bisa terhindar dari minuman keras (khamr).

Rasulullah sendiri mengatakan bahwa setiap minuman keras itu adalah induk dari segala macam kejahatan, bahkan Rasulullah juga melarang setiap muslim untuk mendekati khamr, apalagi meminumnya. Baik sedikit

atau banyak, khamr adalah barang haram yang tidak boleh diminum oleh orang yang beragama Islam.

Rasulullah juga melaknat orang-orang yang berhubungan dengan minuman keras (khamr), untuk itu sebagai umat Islam wajib hukumnya untuk menghindari khamr dan menjauhinya. Dan segeralah bertaubat apabila pernah meminumnya, karena meskipun shalatnya rajin, tapi apabila suka meminum khamr maka neraka akan menjadi tempat kembalinya.

Rasulullah bersabda, “Barangsiapa minum khamr, pasti Allah memberi minum kepadanya dari air panas neraka Jahannam” [HR. Al Bazzar]

3. Shalat tetapi Percaya Dukun

Orang yang shalat tetapi ia percaya dengan dukun atau tukang ramal adalah salah satu orang yang dapat dikatakan shalat tetapi ia masuk neraka. Seperti kita ketahui, dukun adalah orang yang mengaku bahwa dirinya mengetahui perkara-perkara ghaib dan tersembunyi.

Dalam hadits riwayat Imam Muslim, orang yang percaya kepada dukun makan shalatnya tidak akan diterima selama 40 hari. Selain itu, percaya dengan dukun adalah termasuk dalam kategori dosa besar.

Karena hanya Allah sajalah Yang Maha Mengetahui segala sesuatu. Percaya kepada dukun juga dapat dikategorikan sebagai perbuatan musyrik, karena dukun itu adalah orang yang bersekutu dengan bangsa jin. Dan jika kita mempercayainya, maka kita akan terkena dosa syirik.

Untuk itu, apabila ada orang yang shalat tetapi mempercayai dukun, benda pusaka, dan sejenisnya, maka ia akan terancam dosa yang sangat besar.

Rasulullah bersabda, “Barangsiapa yang mendatangi tukang ramal atau dukun kemudian ia membenarkan apa yang dikatakannya itu, maka sesungguhnya ia telah inhkar terhadap apa yang telah diturunkan kepada Nabi Muhammad SAW” [HR. Abu Dawud, at Turmudhi dan Ibnu Majah]

4. Shalat Tapi Suka Bergunjing Keburukan Orang Lain

Allah SWT berfirman,

“Apakah yang memasukkan kamu ke dalam Saqar (neraka)?” Mereka menjawab: “Kami dahulu tidak termasuk orang-orang yang mengerjakan shalat, dan kami tidak (pula) memberi makan orang miskin, dan adalah kami membicarakan yang bathil, bersama dengan orang-orang yang membicarakannya, dan adalah kami mendustakan hari pembalasan, hingga datang kepada kami kematian”. Maka tidak berguna lagi bagi mereka syafa’at dari orang-orang yang memberikan syafa’at.” [QS. Al-Muddaththir ayat 42-48]

Dalam ayat diatas, salah satu penyebab orang masuk neraka adalah karena suka membicarakan keburukan orang lain. Orang yang mendirikan shalat, tetapi suka membicarakan kejelekan orang lain maka ia akan ditempatkan didalam neraka Saqar.

Allah melarang kita untuk membicarakan aib orang lain, Allah berfirman:

“Hai orang-orang yang beriman, jauhilah kebanyakan purba-sangka (kecurigaan), karena sebagian dari purba-sangka itu dosa. Dan janganlah mencari-cari keburukan orang dan janganlah menggunjingkan satu sama lain. Adakah seorang diantara kamu yang suka memakan daging saudaranya yang sudah mati? Maka tentulah kamu merasa jijik kepadanya. Dan bertakwalah kepada Allah. Sesungguhnya Allah Maha Penerima Taubat lagi Maha Penyayang.” [QS. Al-Hujarat ayat 12]

5. Shalat tetapi Mengabaikan Anak Yatim

Orang-orang yang shalat tetapi mengabaikan anak yatim adalah termasuk dalam golongan orang-orang yang mendustakan agama. Hal ini sudah jelas diterangkan dalam Alquran surat Al-Ma’un.

Maka, orang yang shalat tetapi tidak mau menolong orang miskin, mengabaikan anak yatim, dan enggan menolong sesama adalah termasuk dalam orang-orang yang celaka. Sehingga, sekalipun ia ahli ibadah maka ia juga dapat masuk ke neraka karena ia menyia-nyiakan anak yatim.

Jangan lupa bagikan ke teman anda dan beritahu mereka soal ini jangan sampai orang yang anda sayangi masuk neraka kelak.

Penaklukan Konstantinopel: Energi Juang Sang Penakluk

2015-08-30T02:50:00.003-07:00

Untuk para pejuang Islam, semuanya bermula dari kalimat kenabian yang disampaikan Nabi Muhammad pada tahun ke-5 Hijriyah:

”Konstantinopel pasti akan takluk, sebaik-baik panglima adalah panglima pada waktu itu dan sebaik-baik prajurit adalah prajurit pada waktu itu”

Hadits tersebut seperti menjadi energi yang luarbiasa. Sejarah kemudian mencatat ada banyak percobaan penaklukan Konstantinopel, 2 kali era Ummayah (diantaranya melibatkan sahabat besar Abu Ayyub Al-Anshori), beberapa kali diera setelahnya dan 4 kali di era Utsmaniyah (Ottoman).

"Sejarah kemudian mencatat bahwa akhirnya tanggal 29 Mei 1453 Kota yang tak pernah takluk selama 11 abad ini akhirnya takluk..."

Sejarah kemudian mencatat bahwa akhirnya tanggal 29 Mei 1453 Kota yang tak pernah takluk selama 11 abad ini akhirnya takluk, benteng kokohnya tak mampu lagi menahan gempuran pasukan besar yang dipimpin seorang pemuda hebat bernama Sultan Mehmet (Muhammad) II. Setelah penaklukan Konstantinopel, Sultan ketujuh Ottoman ini kemudian bergelar Sang Penakluk, atau Alfatih, sehingga namanya dicatat sejarah dengan sebutan Sultan Muhammad AlFatih.

Persiapan Penaklukan

Persiapan penaklukan secara teknis disiapkan oleh Sultan Mehmet II pada tahun 1452. Sultan membangun benteng Rumeli untuk melengkapi benteng Anadolu yang dibangun kakeknya di wilayah Asia untuk memastikan kontrol pada Selat Bosphorus. Sultan menyiapkan meriam terbaik dan terbesar pada era itu untuk memastikan adanya peralatan yang cukup untuk menghancurkan dinding tebal Konstantinopel, beliau mempekerjakan seorang ahli meriam asal Hungaria.

Sultan juga membangun aliansi dengan banyak pihak, diantaranya adalah tentara Serbia yang menjadi sekutu dalam penyerbuan ini. Sultan juga membentuk kesatuan angkatan laut yang lebih besar dengan menambah 16 kapal besar. Sultan juga merapikan pasukannya, memilih ulang dan melakukan penambahan serius sehingga pasukannya mencapai lebih dari 160 ribu orang secara total.

Sultan menyiapkan meriam terbaik dan terbesar pada era itu untuk memastikan adanya peralatan yang cukup untuk menghancurkan dinding tebal Konstantinopel.

Akan tetapi persiapan sebenarnya sudah berlangsung sejak kakek dari kakeknya Sultan Mehmet. Orhan Ghazi memulainya dengan menaklukan bursa 3 April 1326. Bursa menjadi titik awal yang sangat penting sebelum penaklukan besar tersebut. Kerja Orhan dilanjutkan anaknya Murad I yang memulai ekspansi Eropa, lalu cucunya Sultan Bayazid menuntaskan penguasaan Eropa dengan menjadikan Edirne sebagai ibukota.

Selanjutnya, Perang Nicopolis dan Perang Varna menjadi beberapa titik penting yang kemudian resmi memotong Konstantinopel dari peta tanah Eropa secara teritorial. Sehingga, seolah Konstantinopel tinggal segitiga kecil dikelilingi kekuasaan Ottoman.

Kerja keras antar generasi ini sungguh luarbiasa. Akan tetapi, benteng Konstantinopel bukanlah benteng yang mudah ditaklukkan, tiga kali percobaan penaklukan dilaksanakan di era sebelum Sultan Mehmet, yang terakhir adalah 8 tahun sebelum kelahiran Sultan Mehmet II oleh ayahnya Sultan Murad II, akan tetapi semuanya masih berujung kegagalan hingga akhirnya pengepungan besar disiapkan oleh Sultan Mehmet tahun 1452.

Kronologi Penaklukan

Tepat tanggal 6 April 1453 menjadi awal sampainya pasukan Sultan Mehmet II ke bibir benteng Konstantinopel ditandai dengan membangun tenda kesultanan di dekat pintu St. Romanus. Pada saat yang sama, armada laut dibawah Komando Baltaouglu Sulaiman Bey juga sudah mulai melakukan pengepungan di sepanjang benteng kelas 2 di pantai Konstantinopel di Laut Marmara. Dari arah Asia, Zaganos Pasha memimpin pasukan.

Tanggal 6-7 April 1453 hujan peluru meriam mulai dilakukan untuk menghancurkan dinding kota, serangan meriam sudah mulai membuat gentar para penghuni kota, namun hanya memberikan efek kehancuran yang kecil saja.

Pada 9 April 1453 serangan untuk memutus rantai yang membentang cari Acropolis ke Galata mulai dilakukan oleh Sulaiman Bey dan armadanya, tapi belum berhasil. Perang laut terus berlangsung dengan ketat sampai tanggal 12 April, beberapa kapal Ottoman tenggelam. Kegagalan penyerbuan laut ini sedikit menurunkan moral Pasukan Ottoman.

Pada malam 18 April 1453 Sultan memerintahkan serangan lebih besar, akan tetapi belum banyak berpengaruh, bahkan pada 20 April pasukan laut mengalami pukulan telak dengan gagalnya menghentikan 3 kapal bantuan Papacy yang berisi makanan dan senjata dari Italia masuk ke Konstantinopel via Selat Golden Horn. Hal ini sedikit membuat Kaisar Bizantium merasa diatas angin dan kemudian menawarkan perdamaian dan meminta Pengepungan diakhiri.

Usulan ini tentu saja ditolak Sultan, beliau bertekad meneruskan pengepungan. Akan tetapi, sejarah mencatat bahwa sebenarnya Sultan sudah mulai sedikit goyah, apalagi salah satu panglima senior Çandarli Halil Pasha cenderung pada usulan untuk menarik pasukan. Akan tetapi surat dari guru spiritual beliau yaknis Syaikh Ak Syamsuddin menguatkan hati Sultan untuk tetap melanjutkan pengepungan sampai beroleh kemenangan. Dukungan spiritual melecut semangat Sultan yang kemudian menghadirkan ide yang menakjubkan yakni memindahkan kapal yang ada di Dolmabache Bay naik melalui jalur darat untuk bisa masuk Golden Horn.

"Dukungan spiritual melecut semangat Sultan yang kemudian menghadirkan ide yang menakjubkan yakni memindahkan kapal yang ada di Dolmabache Bay naik melalui jalur darat untuk bisa masuk Golden Horn"

22 April 1453, pasukan Ottoman sukses menaikkan 72 kapal dan mendarat masuk ke Golden Horn di Kasimpasa. Serangan cemerlang ini membuat kaget dan terpukul pasukan Kaisar. Apalagi tembok benteng di tepi Golden Horn adalah yang terlemah, sering disebut benteng kelas 3 karena hanya satu lapis saja.

72 kapal dengan amunisi lengkap itu langsung menggempur dinding Konstantinopel. Terjadilah pertempuran laut yang sengit dan memaksa sebagaian pasukan penjaga benteng utama untuk membantu sisi Golden Horn. Berpindahnya pasukan ini membuat pertahanan di dinding utama benteng menjadi melemah. Serangan ini sukses meningkatkan moral pasukan Ottoman. Kritoboulos mencatat dengan takjub sampainya 72 kapal Ottoman ke Golden Horn.

Pasukan Ottoman terus menggempur dan menunjukkan keunggulannya. 28 April 1453 Sultan menawarkan perdamaian ke Kaisar Byzantium, Sultan menjanjikan keamanan atas jiwa dan harta penduduk Konstantinopel jika kunci kota diserahkan, akan tetapi Kaisar menolak tawaran damai tersebut.

Sepanjang awal Mei pengepungan terus berlangsung. Diantara catatan yang menarik adalah pertempuran bawah tanah pada 16 Mei 1453, ketika pasukan Serbia yang berkoalisi dibawah Pasukan Sultan berhasil melakukan pengeboran hingga sejauh sekitar 3 km dan membuat banyak terowongan untuk bisa menyerbu masuk Kota Konstantinopel. Akan tetapi serangan mereka berhasil dideteksi pasukan Kaisar dan terjadilah pertempuran didalam terowongan bawah tanah.

Serangan terus berlanjut

Tanggal 25 Mei 1453 Sultan kembali menawarkan perdamaian dan meminta agar Kaisar menyerahkan Kota Konstantinopel. Pada tawaran ini Sultan bukan saja berjanji menjaga jiwa dan harta penduduk kota bahkan berjanji menjaga keselamatan Kaisar dan pengikutnya hingga mereka keluar kota dan diizinkan pergi kemanapun mereka menghendaki. Akan tetapi tawaran yang disampaikan Sultan melalui Isfendiyar Beyoglu Ismail Bey ini kembali ditolak Kaisar.

Tanggal 26 Mei 1453 tersiar rumor bahwa beberapa negara Eropa khususnya Hungaria sedang menggerakkan pasukan untuk membantu Kota Konstantinopel dan akan menyerang pasukan Ottoman. Mendengar rumor ini, Sultan mengambil keputusan untuk menyiapkan serangan besar-besaran dan menunjuk Zaganos Pasha untuk menyiapkan serangan.

27 Mei 1453 menjadi tanggal penting dimana serangan besar dimulai dengan sangat massif. Serangan ini sukses memporakporandakan banyak sisi benteng kota. Tanggal 28 Mei Sultan mengistirahatkan sebagian besar pasukannya, menguatkan dorongan moral dan spiritual dan menyiapkan serangan terbesarnya esok hari. Di hari yang sama, di Gereja Hagia Sophia, Kaisar mengumpulkan penduduk kota, mengajak semua penduduk untuk mempertahankan kota dan melaksanakan misa besar.

Tanggal 29 Mei serangan besar dilakukan dengan dahsyat dan akhirnya benteng berhasil dijebol, pasukan elit Ottoman memasuki kota dan akhirnya Pasukan Ottoman resmi menguasai dan menaklukkan Kota. Resmilah Sultan Muhammad II mendapat gelar AlFatih, the conqueror, sang penakluk.

Konsekuensi dari Penaklukan

Takluknya Konstantinopel memberikan banyak pengaruh besar pada perubahan peta kawasan. Beberapa kerajaan kecil (beylik) yang tadinya independen menyatakan bergabung dibawah Ottoman, beberapa kerajaan muslim non Turki juga menyatakan bergabung. Bahkan Mekkah dimana kiblat ummat Islam berada juga menyatakan dukungannya terhadap Ottoman melalui surat Sharif Mekkah ke Sultan Fatih. Tahun 1458 Yunani takluk dan menjadi vilayet (propinsi) dibawah Ottoman. Juga kemudian Bulgaria.

"Dari sekelompok kaum nomaden, menjadi menetap, berperadaban bahkan menghadirkan pola administrasi pemerintahan yang hebat"

Dari sekelompok kaum nomaden, menjadi menetap, berperadaban bahkan menghadirkan pola administrasi pemerintahan yang hebat. Dari beylik kecil yang didirikan Osman Ghazi, kini Ottoman menjadi semuah imperium yang dihormati, menguasai dua lautan dan menjadikan Laut Marmara menjadi danaunya Turki Utsmani.

Setelah penaklukan, Khilfah Turki Utsmani menjadi penentu utama percaturan politik dunia. Kedaulatan muslim menjadi semakin kuat. Dan perang Salib yang dicanangkan Paus menjadi terhenti, bahkan sebaliknya, Turki memulai kampanye penaklukan sebagain wilayah Eropa. Di sisi lain, para intelektual dan seniman dari Byzantium bermigrasi ke Italia, dan mereka berkontirbusi besar saat kebudayaan baru Renaissance bermula.

Sumber : www.selasar.com

Social Justice in Islam

2009-05-03T03:10:00.000-07:00

onislam.net

A gathering of intellectuals was convened at the Law College of Ranchi on December 14, 1991, under the persidentship of Mr. Justice Satishwar Rao. On that occasion I addressed the meeting on the topic of 'Social Justice in Islam.' The text of my address, including some later additions, is as follows.

Social Justice means equality in law, or justice for all. Prior to the advent of Islam. This kind of social justice was almost unknown either in theory or in practice. It was left to Islam then to establish equal justice for the first time in human history. This reversal of the old order is so established a fact that every non-Muslim thinkers have acknowledged it. For instance, Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) writes in one of this letters.

'If ever any religion approached to this equality in any appreciable manner, it is Islam and Islam alone.' (p. 379).

The contribution of Islam in this respect can be placed under three headings: first, the formulation of a complete ideology of human equality and justice; second the giving of powerful incentive to adopt this ideology; and third, the establishment of a living example of equality and justice in all walks life.

THE CONCEPT OF EQUAL JUSTICE

In ancient times the concept of human inequality, which was prevalent everywhere, gave rise to social injustice in every society.

For example, the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, regarded certain classes of individuals as natural slaves. Although there were other thinkers who did not subscribe to this view, slavery continued to be widespread in Rome and Greece, and indeed, throughout the entire world of antiquity.

In modern times, this concept has been further strengthened by Darwin's theory of evolution, according to which mankind was regarded as having achieved differing levels of development, the apex being white European civilization.

The superstitious concept of racial differences, handed down to us from ancient times, paved the way for social discrimination. And such discrimination found an academic basis in modern times in Darwin's theory of evolution, which purported to show that in the evolutionary process, some groups had made distinctive progress while many other groups had been left far behind. That is to say that certain groups attained a superior level, while others remained in a primitive condition.

Thanks to this theory of evolution, the European nations came to regard other nations as being inferior to them--hence the concept of 'the white man's burden' according to which the white races considered themselves invested with the natural right to subjugate the rest of the world in order to civilize it. This was the logic behind the colonialism of modem times. These concepts, in some measure, are still extant.

The world of today can be broadly divided into two parts--the traditional and the scientific. The former appears undeveloped and the latter developed. But from the standpoint of social justice, there is no difference, because in both, beliefs which form a permanent obstacle to social justice still persist.

The traditional world is influenced to a large extent by believers in Karma, the theory that anyone born today necessarily shoulders the burden of his past deeds. As they see it, that is a law of nature, as such, has to be submitted to unquestioningly. A belief of this nature obviously stifles any possible incentive for social justice. In the light of such a belief 'injustice' simply becomes 'nature's verdict.' The human being has to suffer in this world for his misdeeds in his previous life cycle. Given this state of affairs, it is just not possible for anyone to alleviate human suffering. That being so, how can there be any motivation to act out of a sense of justice?

The scientific world is likewise under the influence of this concept of human inequality, but for another reason--the general acceptance gained by the theory of evolution. The concept of the biological evolution of life seeks to explain the differences in the existing species, advancing the theory that in the process of evolution some have gone forward while others have been left behind. For instance, Darwin claims that the female of the human species remained at a primitive stage in the evolutionary process while 'man has ultimately become superior to woman'. By the same token, the blacks of Africa, the pygmies and other dwarfish races have been 'left behind.' Because of this theory, the scientific world cannot be sympathetic to the supposedly backward, or under evolved races.

The theory has been advanced that if people suffer a variety of afflictions, it is 'their own fault.' That is to say that those who are made to feel inferior in the treatment they receive from others are, in fact, suffering the consequences of their own shortcomings. It is as if they were fated to be the victims of injustice; the perpetrators are not, therefore, to be blamed.

With the advent of Islam, all such ideas based on an inherent inequality lost ground. In different ways, and with great persistence Islam presented to the world the concept that, in spite of outward differences, all human beings are equal. All are entitled to equal social status and equal rights. No one is inferior or superior. Here are two references from the Qur'an and Hadith respectively.

Men, we have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you might get to know one another. The noblest of you in Allah's sight is the most righteous of you. Allah is wise and all knowing (49:13).

According to this verse of the Qur'an, the differences of color and race found among human beings is for the purpose, not of discrimination, but of identification. Men in essence are equal. What really distinguishes one man from another is character. His superiority can therefore bespoken of only in terms of the degree to which a man is honorable. The truly honorable man is one who is God--fearing and who recognizes and fulfils the rights of God and his fellow men.

On the occasion of the final pilgrimage, the Prophet delivered his last sermon while sitting oh his camel. One of the things he said is recorded in these words:

'O people, listen carefully, your Lord is one Lord, there is no doubt about it. Your ancestor, is one ancestor, there is no doubt about it. Listen well to my words: no Arab has any superiority over a non--Arab, and no non—Arab is superior to an Arab. No black is superior to a brown or red, and no red superior to any black. If there is any superiority in anyone it is due to his God--fearing qualities. Have I conveyed the message?' the Prophet asked the people. The people answered from all corners, 'Indeed so! God be witness.' Then the Prophet said: 'Let him that is present tell it unto him that is absent.'(Al-Jamili Ahkam al-Qur'an, 16:342)

This declaration was made by the Prophet in the final year of his life at a time when the whole of Arabia had been conquered. As such, it wasnot the declaration of a reformer, but of a ruler of the time. His definition of human equality was not just listened to as a theory, but was immediately put into practice--nay, enforced in society.

In his declaration, the Prophet told the people that just as there is one Creator of this world so all the human beings in this world were born of one man and woman. All human beings were thus equal, being each other's brothers and sisters. They might differ in respect of appearance, but as to honor, status and the right to legal justice, there was no difference between them.

So far as human status is concerned, Islam clearly states that if people have been placed on different rungs of the social ladder, this is not a matter of having been favored with or deprived of social distinction but of their being under divine trial. God has created man in this world in order to test him. Worldly goods and position (or the lack of them) are used by God as instruments of this test. They are like examination papers set by the Almighty. Opulence and penury are both intended to be states in which man is tested. He should, therefore, stop suffering from inferiority or superiority complexes, and should consider instead whether he is going to pass or fail this test.

THE INCENTIVE FOR EQUAL JUSTICE

Modern psychological and biological research on race has clearlyupheld the teachings of Islam, so that from the academic point of view,other theories stand refuted. Molecular biology, too, has opened a whole new field of research in modern times. A team of genetic experts in the USA, convinced by the evidence they already had that all of humanity had common ancestor, have attempted to trace that single progenitor across the millennia. Placed in this perspective, all differences of color, physiognomy, physique, etc. are purely relative, and do not necessarily constitute different racial characteristics. All modern research points to human beings as members of one Great Family, all bound together by the same biological brotherhood. (Newsweek, January 11, 1988).

A number of books and research papers have lately been published on this subject. The Race Question in Modern Science by J. Comas published by UNESCO in 1956) has a chapter on 'Racial Myths' which is worth studying. In spite of these academic findings, no great material changes have occurred. Those nations who had come to consider themselves superior are still acting under this misapprehension, while nations consider inferior are still subjected to injustice in new and varied forms. The reason is that to attain social reform, theory by itself is not sufficient. Along with it, a powerful incentive is essential. And this is exactly what is provided by the Qur'an.

As well as enjoining justice, (16:90) the Qur'an holds out the promise of reward for one's deeds. It also informs us that a complete record is constantly being made of human actions. After death, everyone will find himself standing in God's court, where he will receive his just deserts. No perpetrator of cruelty will escape God's punishment. That time has to come when man will suffer the consequences of his deeds. 'On that day mankind will come, divided in terms of vice and virtue, into groups to be shown their labors. Whoever does an atom's weight of good shall see it and whoever does an atom's weight of evil shall see it also.' (99:6-8)

This concept of accountability alerts man to the necessity of being extremely punctilious in his dealings with others. He then sees how essential it is to be just to everyone, if he is to save his own self. He avoids wronging others so that he may not be punished by God. In the absence of any concept of accountability, social justice figures in our lives as a need felt by others, not by ourselves. But once werecognized that there is such a thing as accountability, social justice becomes a prime necessity for everyone, including ourselves. And who can neglect his own needs?

The concept of accountability is such a strong check that it restrains one not just from oppression, but from even any semblance of it. Once when the Prophet was at home with his wife, Umm Salmah, he called the maidservant, who took some time in coming. Seeing signs of anger onProphet's face, Umm Salmah went to the window and looked outside where she saw the maid at play. When the latter came in, the Prophet happened to have a misvak ( a stick used for cleaning the teeth) in his hand. 'If it wasn't for the fear of retribution on the Day of Judgement,’ he told the maid, 'I would have hit you with this misvak.'

In ancient times the beating of slaves was considered a natural right. But the mentality created by Islam put a stop to this practice, whatever the faults of the slaves. This was because the Muslims were afraid lest they beheld accountable for this act in the eyes of God.

The Prophet once came across Abu Masood Ansari beating his slave. "You should know, Abu Masood ", he said, 'that God has more power over you than you have over this slave.' Abu Masood trembled hearing these words of the Prophet. 'Messenger of God,' he said, "I am freeing this slave for God's sake," 'If you had not acted thus, the flames of Hell would have engulfed you," the Prophet told him.

This incident shows that Islam, by obliterating outward differences, brings all men on the same footing. Abu Masood had at first considered himself to be on a different footing from his slave in a purely material sense where he was respectable and powerful, the slave was lowly and weak. But when the Prophet reminded him that in the eyes of God he stood on exactly the same ground as his slave, he immediately humbled himself.

Material differences in standing bring about social injustice. When these differences are obliterated, social inequality will, of necessity, disappear.

It is undeniable that all incidents of oppression and social injustice are the result of inequality between man and man. Some are powerful,others are weak. Some are rich, others are poor. Now what happens is that the powerful and the wealthy come to regard themselves as being superior to the weak and the poor. They imagine they can oppress others with impunity, their elevated positions being enough to safeguard them from any attempt at retaliation.

But Islam tells us that every man's fate is the concern of God. All moral issues are finally to be judged in the divine court. God being infinitely more powerful than all of the powerful men in the world. He will pronounce His verdict and enforce it with absolute justice towards one and all. At that time no mortal creature will be able to escape God's verdict.

In this way, human affairs are no longer matters to be settled amongst men. They become matters to be settled between man and God. On the one side stands God, and on the other side stands all of humanity.

So, when faced with God, no one is powerful. Everyone feels himself in the same state of humility as he had supposed was the state of other human beings 'weaker than himself.

When this consciousness is created in a man, he dare not, whatever the circumstances, be unjust to others. This undoubtedly gives him the greatest incentive to bring about social justice.

In an atheistic society where people do not believe in God, such a check is not possible. Where there is no belief in God, human affairs must be settled between man and man. And in that situation there can be no conviction that all men are equal, for the differences between them will remain all too obvious. In the absence of a divine overlord, such differences can never be leveled out, and if their effects are to be negated, it can only be done by taking matters between man and man and turning them into matters between man and God. Everyone should have the conviction that there is a God above all men, that all issues must finally be settled by Him, and that no one may challenge His verdict.

There are other religions besides Islam which have the concept of God. But, owing to human interpolations in their scriptures, their particular concept of God has, for all practical purposes, become ineffective. For instance, in Christianity, God's son atoned for the sins of humanity by his crucifixion. In Judaism salvation is granted in advance to its adherents as their birthright. In Hinduism, the monistic concept of God serves no practical purpose.

In terms of Islamic Monotheism, God is a separate being, and all human beings are His creatures and His servants. Such a belief arouses in man the feeling of humility. Contrary to the Hindu concept, God in Islam is the sole supreme Being: man has no part in that divinity. In Hinduism, man is a part of God--a concept which produces the opposite feeling of superiority. While Islamic monotheism awakens in man the consciousness of his being God's servant, Hinduism encourages man to say, 'I am God.' The former creates the psychology of humility, unlike the latter which fosters pride. When the members of a society are flawed by pride, it is well-nigh impossible to bring about an atmosphere of social justice.

FAILURE OF MODERN INSTITUTIONS

Amnesty International, an organization known as a watchdog of human rights, set up its headquarters in London thirty years ago. Thirty

years is a long time for such an organization to have been functioning, but, in all that time, it has not been able to serve humanity in anyway except for publishing reports in the newspapers.

It is significant that on the completion of thirty years in December, 1991, the organization did not see fit to hold any celebrations. Asked why this was so, a representative of the organization, a Ms France Scinto, replied that there really wasn't anything to celebrate.

Every year on December 10, the United nations celebrates the Day of Human Rights. This year the statement issued by Javier Peres de Cuellar, the UN Secretary General, lamented the blind use of force and the barbaric treatment meted out to people notwithstanding the universal Declaration of Human Rights which had been issued under the auspices of the United Nations.

What is the reason for the failure of these institutions to establish peace and justice? It can be explained by the fact that peace and justice in human life cannot be established solely on the basis of appeals and statements in the newspapers. What is required is an ideology which enshrines correct human values, and which might properly serve as the basis for an intellectual revolution. Those reformed along these lines should in turn reform the social institutions, and wherever the reins of government fall into their hands, they should establish peace and justice in society by constitutional means.

Only once in the course of history have all these conditions been fully met. That was when the Prophet and his Companions succeeded in establishing a system based fairly and squarely on peace and justice. Neither his predecessors nor his successors ever attained such a resounding success.

AN EXAMPLE OF EQUAL JUSTICE

Islam's third great contribution to social justice was the example it itself set in according to the same honor and respect to all human beings, whether they were weak or strong, kings or commoners, be it in family circles, social life, positions of power or in the government, by the same token, no one could escape punishment for his sins.

The history of Islam abounds in examples of justice for all. Here only a few incidents are mentioned in brief.

1. In ancient times, it was unthinkable for a girl of noble birth

or even of any free person, to be married to a slave. The Prophet, wishing to break with this tradition, decided to arrange a marriage between his own first cousin, Zaynab bint Jahash (d. 20 AH), who belonged to the Banu Hashim, the most respectable clan of the Quraysh tribe, and Zayd ibn Haritha, a black Negro slave. This most extraordinary event served as an important example of Islamic justice.

2. The Ka'aba, the most holy place of worship, was considered

sacrosanct in all its parts. Therefore, when the call to prayer had to be made from its roof, it was only a person of noble birth who could ascend it. A man of lowly birth performing this religious duty was not be countenanced. After the conquest of Mecca, the Prophet broke with this tradition by asking a Negro slave, Bilal ibn Rubah to go up on to the roof of the Ka'aba and give the call to prayer (Azan).

This was a unique event, not only in Arab history but also in

world history of ancient times. Had Islam not become dominant, people would certainly have killed Bilal for his 'arrogance'. They did, however, voice strong reactions against this act, which is an indication of how shocking it had appeared to them. For example, Utaba ibn Usyad of Mecca thanked God that his father was no more and could not, therefore, witness this horrible sight on that day. Harith ibn Hisham asked, 'couldn't Muhammad have found someone other than this Black crow?' (AL-Jame Lil Ahkam AL-Qur'an, 16/341).

3. Ali ibn abi Talib, the fourth caliph, lost his coat of armor. One day he saw a Christian of Kufa selling the same coat of armor. This case was brought to the then Qazi Shurayh bin al Alharith. Ali went to his court like a commoner where he was asked by the Qazi to produce two witnesses. Ali then brought forward his son Hasan and his slave Qambar. The Qazi rejected the evidence of his son on the grounds that the evidence of a son in support of his father is not acceptable. Thus the reigning Caliph lost his case. However, the Christian was so greatly impressed at the display of such equality in the court of Islam between the king and commoner, that he himself admitted that Ali was right. The coat of armor did belong to him (Azmath-e-Sahaba, pp. 32-33).

4. Once during the caliphate of Umar Faruq, the second Caliph, Amr

ibn al-Aas, who was the then governor of Egypt, arranged a horse race in which his own son was also to participate. His son's horse lost, however to a young, native Copt. The son, Muhammed ibn Amr, was enraged and lashed the Copt boy with a whip, saying, 'Take that! That will teach you to beat the son of a nobleman!' The Copt came to Medina and complained to the Caliph, who took it upon himself to institute an inquiry. When he found that the Copt had been beaten unjustly, he immediately sent an emissary to Egypt to summon the governor and his son before him forthwith. When they arrived, he handed the Copt a whip to flog them, just as he himself had been flogged.

In the presence of the governor, the Copt started whipped his son, stopping only when he was satisfied that the punishment had been severe enough. Then the Caliph addressed himself to the governor: " O Amr, since when have you enslaved people who were born free? (Azmat-e-Sahaba, pp.40 - 41)

5. Palestine was conquered during the Caliphate of Umar Faruq.

To sign certain agreements with the conquered nation, he had to travel to Palestine. When he left Medina, he was wearing rough clothes and had only one servant and one camel. He said to his servant, 'If I mount the camel and you go on foot, it will not be fair to you. And if you mount the camel while I go on foot, that will not be fair to me. And if we both sit on the camel's back, that will be an injustice to the camel. So, it would be better if all three of us took turns.'

So taking it by turns, Umar Faruq would ride and the servant would walk, and vice versa, and then both would take a turn of walking so that the camel should be spared. Travelling in this manner, they reached the gates of Palestine, where the inhabitants gaped at the sight of the Caliph going on foot while his servant rode the camel, for it was the latter's turn to ride

as they approached their destination. In fact, many Palestinians failed to make out who was the Caliph and who was the servant. (Taamir ki Taraf, pp..56-57).

Through its intellectual revolution and the practical examples it set, Islam thus created a history which had an impact on almost the whole of the inhabited world of that time. This revolution was so powerful that its effects could still be felt one thousand years later.

After the Prophet, the period of Sahaba (The Prophet's companions) and of Tabiin, (the companions of the Prophet's companions) is known as the golden age of Islam. But the effects of the Islamic revolution lasted far beyond this period, continuing to leave its imprint on human society in various forms across the centuries. Even Muslim kings dared challenge it. Many examples of their submission to Islam can be cited. An incident relating to Jehangir, the Mughal emperor, has been very effectively portrayed by Maulana Shibli Nomani in the form of a poem entitled, 'Adl-e-Jahangiri.'

Jahangir's Queen, Noor Jahan, once inadvertently killed a poor man. It happened at some hunt, when a washerman, straying into her line of fire, was hit and mortally wounded. When he died, the matter was brought to court, where the Qazi passed the death sentence on the Queen. Neither the king nor the Queen dared refuse the Qazi's sentence. Finally, the issue was resolved only when the washerman's wife pronounced herself willing to accept the blood-money, as is provided for under Islamic law. (If the victim's next-of-kin refuses to accept the blood-money, the culprit is sentenced to death-murder for murder).

Now let us take an example of conduct which is the very opposite in spirit. The British ruler, James 1, (1566-1625) a contemporary of the Indian ruler, Jahangir (1569-1627), claimed that he was above the law and could exercise his judgement independently. The then British chief Justice, Sir Edward Cook, (I552-1634) differed with him on this issues, so that when John Beat, a British merchant, once refused to pay tax on imported currants(an order given personally by James 1) because no law to this effect had been passed by parliament, Sir Edward took the side of Beat. Enraged, the King exclaimed, 'Am I subject to the law? To say so, is treason!' Justice Cook did not waver from his standpoint. As a result he was removed from his post by the King. It is a matter of historical record that legal differences with the king eventually broke his judicial career.

When the case of the King and Justice Cook came to the British privy Council, the then Attorney General, Francis Bacon, upholding the legalsupremacy of the king said: 'Judges should be lions, but yet lions under the throne.' (1/92).

According to time-honored legal traditions in Britain, there were two kinds of law: common law and legal prerogative. For the public there was one set of laws and for the king and nobles quite another. The King was above the law. His word, in fact, was law. It was not until the advent of Islam that this division was abolished and the same set of laws was enforced for all. The rule of the King had perforce to give pride of place to the law of the land.

THE IMPACT ON HISTORY

Shortly before his death on the eve of his last pilgrimage, the Prophet of Islam gave a sermon which came to be known as the sermon of the Final pilgrimage. One of the historic declarations made in this sermon was: 'Everything pertaining to paganism now lies beneath my feet." 'With these words, the Prophet announced the advent of a new age, an age freed by him of all superstition and ushered in with the special succor of God.

This historic change was first wrought within Arabia, then it spread beyond its frontiers, ultimately making itself felt throughout the entire world. This resulted in the eradication of the division in society between free men and slaves and the inception of the rule of law all over the world. It also caused all such philosophies as sanctioned injustice and social inequality to lose in influence. Now, any philosophy based on human inequality finds no ground on which to flourish.

One example of this in modem times is provided by Hitler, according to whom the German race was superior to all others. Firm in this belief, he put forward the idea that it was their birthright to assert their supremacy over all other nations. 'He regarded inequality between races and individuals as part of an unchangeable natural order and exalted the Aryan race as the sole creative element of mankind.' (8/967).

But what a fate awaited Hitler! His popularity in Europe rapidly waned and he was finally deserted even by his own minions in his own country. In utter frustration, he committed suicide in a bunker in Berlin, thus annihilating not only himself but the Nazi movement which he had set in motion.

The influence of the social revolution brought about by the Prophet is still alive, not only in Muslim countries, but indirectly throughout the entire inhabited world. On the question of social justice, or equal justice researchers have acknowledged that if ever any system has truly attained this end, it is Islam. One such acknowledgement by Swami Vivekanand, has been mentioned above. Now the question arises as to how Islam, managed to succeed in this when other religions or systems failed. There are two important reasons for this. One is that Islam gives us a complete ideology in favor of human equality. The other is that it provides humanity with a historical example of that ideologyput into practice.

These are the points on which other religions have failed. To make this point clear, I shall cite here two examples from Hinduism and Christianity.

Hinduism as has been explained above, divides humanity as a matter basic belief into two parts. Its very philosophy demands a high position for one group and a low position for another. The existence of this belief makes it impossible to mete out equal treatment to both groups. Those who live by this system can never regard themselves as being equal to those who appear inferior to them by birth.

Here it is pertinent to mention the Backward Classes Commission set up by the President of India in 1953, with Kaka Sahab Kalelkar as its chairman. After making a survey which was completed in 1955, it presented a 262 page report which was published in 1956 by the Government press.

This report (available in the Delhi Public Library, Delhi) stated that the caste system of India was of a very different nature from the class system prevalent elsewhere. In India, this system is not traceable purely to economic causes as is generally the case in other countries. Its roots, on the contrary, go much deeper, being enshrined in the system of beliefs. According to the report, 'it is the peculiarity of India that it recognized the social differences inherent in human nature and gave them an institutional and mystical form with a religious and spiritual background.'

What the Kalelkar Commission states is borne out by the facts. It is indisputable that social differences in India have been traced to qualities inherent in human nature. Given this belief, they are an inevitable and natural reality. In a society where, of necessity, such a concept exists, the ideas of obliterating these differences and of having equal justice cannot have any general appeal.

A similar obstacle to equality is condoned even by Christianity.

Here I should like to refer to a report prepared by a team of five Christian journalists and published in the Sunday Review (Times of India) of December 22, 1991. According to this report, the number of converts to Christianity from low castes is more than fifty percent, these being known as Dalit Christians. 'Those who came over from the backward Hindu strata, still find themselves bogged down in discrimination by the Church.'

Dalit Christians are prevented from burying their dead in grave yards along with upper caste Christians. They cannot marry into upper caste Christian families. In many churches they have separate seating arrangements. They are discriminated against in educational institutions run by Christians themselves. The caste prejudice extends even to the Christian clergy. This is specially true to the Catholic Church whose priests are almost totally drawn from the upper or middle classes. In Kerala, where Christianity has thrived for 2,000 years, caste is evident on a social level. The caste factor surfaces time and again, causing intense anguish to members of the Dalit Christian communities.

When Dr. Casimir Gnanadickan, Catholic Archbishop of Madras was asked about this, he admitted that a strong caste system existed with the Church set-up. 'I agree, it was a retrograde step. But sometimes the power of faith cannot break reality.'

It is true that Christianity does not teach human inequality or social injustice. But what is lacking in Christianity is a powerful,historical example of human equality. The mission of Christ did not reach beyond the invitation to faith. It did not reach the stage of practical revolution. That is why, in the first phase of Christianity no such example of human equality could be set. In the absence of telling precedents, belief alone is not sufficient to bring about any practical change.

The Islamic system is totally different from those of Hinduism and Christianity. In it, there exists a complete ideology in favor of human equality, while alongside it there exists a perfect, practical example. On both counts, the first phase of Islam set the course of Islamic history for all eternity. And Islamic history will continue forever in the same direction, for there is no influence powerful enough in the world to alter its course. [www.alrisala.org]

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan

The Prophet Muhammad’s Message of Peace

2009-05-03T03:07:00.002-07:00

A major part of the Prophet’s mission was to bring peace to the world. One of the ways in which he strove towards this end was to attempt to convince people that all men and women, albeit inhabiting very different regions of the world, and seemingly different from one another in color, culture and language, etc., were in fact each other’s blood brothers and sisters. His message was crucial, for a proper relationship of love and respect can be established only if that is how human beings regard one another. To inculcate such feelings, the Prophet would preach to his followers: "You are all Adam’s offspring and Adam was made of clay." And in his prayers to his Creator, he said, "O Lord, all your servants are brothers."

The Prophet would exhort his followers to live in peace with their fellow men, saying, "A true believer is one with whom others feel secure—one who returns love for hatred. He used to teach believers that anyone who would return love only when love was given belonged on a lower ethical plane. The true believer never reasons that it is only if people treat him well that he will treat them well in return. He is accustomed rather to doing good to those who mistreat him, and to refrain from harming those who do him injury. The Prophet himself set the example. All his recorded words and actions reveal him as a man of great gentleness, kindness, humility, good humor and excellent common sense, with a great love for all people and even for animals.Despite his position as leader, the Prophet never believed himself to be greater or better than other people. He never made others feel small, unwanted or embarrassed. He urged his followers to behave kindly and humbly, releasing slaves whenever possible, and giving in charity, especially to very poor people, orphans and prisoners—without any thought of reward.

He would tell people that "every religion has some special characteristic, that of Islam being modesty." In the absence of such a virtue, no community can have lasting peace. The Prophet’s own modesty, coupled with great strength of character, is depicted in a well-known story of an old Meccan woman who hated the Prophet. Every morning when the Prophet passed by her house, she would empty a basket of rubbish on his head from the upper story of her house. He never once remonstrated with her about this. One day, when the Prophet passed through this area, no rubbish fell on his head. Thinking that the old woman must be ill, he went upstairs to inquire how she was, and found her ill in bed. When she discovered that the Prophet had come to see her, she began to weep: "I ill-treated you, and now you come to inquire after my health!" Ultimately, she became one of his followers. What strength of character, what patience and tolerance the Prophet evinced in refusing to be provoked, preferring rather to show kindness and magnanimity to one who had wished him ill.

His was a high moral character, so that even if badly treated by others, he went on returning good for evil. People harmed him, yet he would pray for them. He would remain patient in the face of oppression and, regardless of the provocation, he would refrain from becoming incensed. In setting this example, his ulterior aim was to fashion souls which were God-oriented, which found God so great that everything else paled into insignificance. He wanted everyone to have such boundless peace of mind that nothing could disturb them. Such balanced individuals, would never then became a prey to worldliness. Totally free from negative reaction, they would then be able to turn everything in this world, whether material or spiritual, into food for more profound thought, rather than into pretexts for rash and vengeful action. The essence of this philosophy is expressed in one of the Prophet’s sayings: "Nine things the Lord has commanded me:Fear of God in private and in public;Justness, whether in anger or in calmness;Moderation in both poverty and affluence;That I should join hands with those who break away from me;and give to those who deprive me;and forgive those who wrong me;and that my silence should be meditation;and my words remembrance of God;and my vision keen observation." (Razin)Throughout the first thirteen years of his prophethood, Prophet Muhammad preached in Mecca, but it was in the face of bitter opposition from the Meccans. When it became impossible for him to stay there, he left for Medina. Wars were waged against him, but he showed his antagonists that the power of peace was far greater than that of war. The peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah is a clear example of this, when the Prophet agreed to every demand his antagonists made on the sole assurance that peace would subsequently prevail.

His life’s experience ranged from penury to prosperity, from defeat to success, yet whatever the degree of well-being or hardship, he steadfastly trod the path of moderation. At all times and right till the end, he remained and patient and grateful servant of the Almighty, bringing his message of peace and tolerance to mankind.

By Saniyasnain Khan

Islam in the Modern World

2009-05-03T03:01:00.000-07:00

The Prophet of Islam made a number of notable predictions which have been recorded in the books of hadith. One of these being that, in the final phase of human life on earth, the word of Islam will reach all human beings inhabiting this world. In other words, future times will see the intellectual ascendancy of Islam.

However, if the word of God is to be brought into every home, conditions must exist which will favor the success of such a mission. Without such conditions no such goal can be reached. Fortunately, recent studies show that as a result of revolutions occurring over the last several years, conditions now prevail which are more conducive than ever to the communication of the Islamic message. That process having been set in motion, individuals from different communities have begun embracing Islam in countries all over the world. Now, the need of the hour is for servants of God to arise and, by fully availing of new opportunities, play a decisive role in the last and most significant chapter of Islamic da‘wah.

Da‘wah is the real strength of Islam. It is through da‘wah that Islam makes continuous progress. That is why, in every age, believers have seen fit to engage themselves in this task. Today, there are greater opportunities than hitherto to make Islamic da‘wah a success. The communication of the message of God has certainly been going on in every age. But now modern circumstances have made it possible for this task to be performed with a greater degree of efficacy than ever before, and on a truly universal scale.

Today, opportunities to carry out da‘wah work are legion. But I shall cite only a few examples to illustrate my point.

Proof of the Existence of God

Rationalists have habitually attempted to deny the existence of God by asking, "If God created the universe, who created God?" Now, as we are nearing the end of the 20th century, it has become possible to answer this question on a purely rational level. This new possibility arises out of the big bang theory, which has now gained general acceptance among cosmologists. With the big bang theory, we have necessarily to accept a first cause underlying the creation of the universe. That is, if there were no cause, the universe would not have existed. It has made it possible for us to tell the rationalists that all along they have been giving their attention to a wrong set of options. In their view, a choice had to be made between a universe with God and a universe without God, whereas the real choice was between a universe with God and no universe at all. Since we cannot opt for a non-existent universe, we are compelled to choose the universe with God.

Validity of Inferential Argument

To prove Islamic belief in the unseen world, our religious scholars have so far used inferential argument. That is, they suppose an unknown reality on the basis of a known reality. The rationalists’ view of this argument was that its method was academically invalid, as it was based on the principle of indirect argument. They demanded to be given an argument of a direct nature. Only then would they accept it.

In this matter—as in material matters—the river of science has been flowing in favor of Islam. The above objection had apparently carried weight in the days when the study of science was macro-cosmic in scope. But as soon as scientific research began to delve into the micro-cosmic world, the balance tipped in favor of inferential argument. For it was revealed that the deeper realities of nature itself were those which did not come under the sphere of direct argument. For instance, the establishment of the existence of oxygen or X-rays is arrived at by indirect or inferential argument. Modern philosophers, such as Bertrand Russell, have demonstrated that inferential argument is as valid as indirect argument.

That is why, in science itself, inferential argument is held to be valid. Without it, scientific study could not be continued in the microcosmic world. In this way, a new chapter on unseen realities has been opened for the da‘is.

I was once asked by a non-believer by what set of criteria I establish the existence of God. I replied that it was the self-same criteria on which he himself relied. He remained silent at this. For he knew full well that his own scientific concepts were proved by means of inferential argument. So when inferential argument is valid in non-religious fields, it will certainly be valid in the field of religion.Historical Credibility of the Qur’an

In the present time, all manner of things, including religious scriptures, are being subjected to investigation in the spirit of free inquiry. A permanent discipline has been set up for this special study, called historical criticism, or higher criticism. Under this general heading, all great religious scriptures, including the Qur’an and the Bible, have been subjected to historical inquiry.

The results of these studies are entirely in favor of the Qur’an. They show that the Qur’an is the only religious scripture which is a historically accredited work. The rest of the books, having been shown to be dogmatic rather than historical, have lost their formal status as purveyors of eternal truth. Such research has provided a new and powerful argument in favor of Quranic veracity. That is to say, it is only the Qur’an which enjoys historical credibility. No other religious scripture is of similar merit.

This scientific discovery has brought Islam to the position of undisputed victory, for no other religion is capable of facing this academic test.

Scientific Verification

In ancient times, superstitious notions about every object of nature were given great credence, as is evident from the literature of those days. Now in modern times, when nature has been scientifically studied, many ancient concepts have been discredited. Books written in the pre-scientific age are now suspect—as belonging to the age of superstition. Even religious scriptures have not emerged unscathed, for the periodic interpolation of superstitious notions has reduced them to the level of non-sacred literature.

The Qur’an, on the contrary, being a preserved book, is exceptionally free from such apocryphal additions. There are numerous references to nature in the Qur’an, but none of these descriptions clashes with facts discovered by science. After making a study of several such statements enshrined in the Qur’an, Dr Maurice Bucaille concludes:

"In view of the level of knowledge in Muhammad’s day,

it is inconceivable that many of the statements in

the Qur’an which are connected with science could

have been the work of a man. It is, moreover, perfectly

legitimate, not only to regard the Qur’an as the

expression of a Revelation, but also to award it a

very special place, on account of the guarantee of

authenticity it provides and the presence in it of

scientific statements which, when studied today,

appear as a challenge to explanation in human terms."

Passing Modern Tests

New methods to determine the antiquity of ancient objects have been evolved in modern times. One of these, called carbon-14 dating or radio-carbon dating, was developed just after the second world war. It gave the stamp of credibility to many facts which had hitherto remained unauthenticated. It was applied in one famous instance to a mummified body, believed to be that of Merneptah, a contemporary of Moses. The mummy, discovered by Professor Loret in one of Egypt’s pyramids, did amazingly prove to date back to the time of Moses, when subjected to this new technique of dating.

This same method of carbon dating was applied to the Shroud of Turin, an old linen cloth bearing the imprint of a human face—always thought to be the covering in which Christ was wrapped after his crucifixion. According to this belief, the cloth had to be two thousand years old. But carbon dating revealed that it dated back no further than the middle of the fourteenth century.

There are so many examples of this nature, that it is not possible to deal with all of them. Suffice it to say that they are symbolic of how modern sciences, on the one hand, discredit ancient religions while, on the other hand, they strengthen the credibility of Islam.

The Last Word

In modern times, great new opportunities have arisen for Islamic da‘wah. This has made it possible for the first time to fulfill the prediction of the word of God being brought into each and every home. They point the way to Islam gaining the position of an ideological super power on a universal scale. But there is one necessary condition which is indispensable to the achievement of this goal. We shall have to adopt the same strategy in modern times as that adopted by the Prophet of Islam in the 19th year of his prophethood.

This historical strategy has come to be called the Hudaybiyya principle. This entails putting an end to the kind of controversies which create tensions between the da‘i and the mad‘u. Without a normal atmosphere, free of friction, no da‘wah action can be set in motion. Today the same controversial situation has come to exist between da‘i and mad‘u as was found between the Prophet and his hearers after the emigration. We must, therefore, follow the same Hudaybiyya principle as the Prophet did. This is the demand of the times, and in this lies the secret of all Muslim success.

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan

Sumber : http://www.alrisala.org

Kisah Heroik Penaklukan Andalusia

2009-05-03T02:48:00.000-07:00

Salah satu kisah yang paling terkenal tentang perjuangan Thariq bin Ziyad menuju Andalusia adalah sebuah peristiwa heroik yang dilakukan Thariq, membakar kapal-kapal yang ia dan pasukannya gunakan untuk menyeberangi Selat Gibraltar. Setelah itu Thariq mengatakan, “Lautan terbentang di belakang kalian, musuh-musuh berada di hadapan kalian, dan tidak ada jalan selamat bagi kalian kecuali dengan pedang!!”

Kisah ini sangat popular di masyarakat, namun ternyata –mungkin kita tidak pernah mendengarnya- peristiwa ini dilemahkan oleh para ulama sejarah. Di antara yang melemahkan kisah tersebut adalah Dr. Raghib as-Sirjani. Berikut ini kami kutipkan pendapat beliau mengenai keabsahan kisah tersebut.

Menurut Raghib as-Sirjani, kisah ini masih diperdebatkan (debatable) di kalangan sejarawan. Ada yang mengatakannya shahih benar-benar terjadi dan tidak sedikit pula yang mengatakan kisah ini palsu. Alasannya adalah:

Pertama, tidak ada riwayat yang shahih mengenai peristiwa ini. Umat Islam yang memiliki keistimewaan dengan ilmu jarh wa ta’dil (ilmu yang meneliti tentag periwayatan) menimbang bahwa seorang periwayat haruslah orang-orang yang terpercaya. Dan tidak ada seorang pun yang terpercaya dari kalangan umat Islam yang meriwayatkan kisah ini. Kisah ini diriwayatkan dari riwayat orang-orang Eropa yang menulis tentang peristiwa Perang Sidonia atau Perang Lembah Barbath.

Kedua, kebijakan pembakaran kapal ini harus dengan izin atau koordinasi dengan para pembesar Kerajaan Umawiyah, seperti amir Afrika Utara, Musa bin Nushair atau Khalifah al-Walid bin Abdul Malik karena merekalah yang mengizinkan Thariq berangkat ke Andalusia. Atau pasti ada kabar bahwa Musa bin Nushair dan khalifah meminta penjelasan mengapa Thariq melakukan hal yang dapat membahayakan belasan ribu nyawa kaum muslimin. Atau juga ada koordinasi dengan para ulama untuk menimbang mafsadat dan madaratnya. Semua catatan sejarah yang mengatakan Thariq bin Ziyad membakar kapal-kapalnya tidak menyebutkan semua pertimbangan di atas. Tentu saja hal in mendatangkan keraguan.

Sebagaimana kita ketahui di kisah sebelumnya bahwa Thariq bin Ziyad selalu berkoordinasi dengan Musa bin Nushair dalam kebijakan yang dia lakukan.

Ketiga, sumber-sumber Eropa berperan besar dalam tersebarnya kisah ini. Mengapa demikian? Karena logika mereka tidak mampu memahami, bagaimana bisa 100.000 pasukan Visigoth Nasrani, di negeri dan tanah mereka sendiri, mereka benar-benar mengenal medan pertempuran, dikalahkan oleh sekelompok kecil pasukan asing yang hanya terdiri dari belasan ribu pasukan saja?! Kisah ini berkembang lantaran sebuah asumsi pasukan Islam tidak ada lagi pilihan lagi kecuali tenggelam di laut atau mati di medan perang.

Demikianlah penafsiran orang-orang Nasrani Eropa, dan pemahaman mereka ini bisa dimaklumi karena mereka tidak mengetahui janji Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala dalam firman-Nya.

كَمْ مِنْ فِئَةٍ قَلِيلَةٍ غَلَبَتْ فِئَةً كَثِيرَةً بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ مَعَ الصَّابِرِينَ

“Berapa banyak terjadi golongan yang sedikit dapat mengalahkan golongan yang banyak dengan izin Allah. Dan Allah beserta orang-orang yang sabar”. (QS. Al-Baqarah: 249)

Keempat, tidak pernah tercatat dalam sejarah peperangan umat Islam, umat Islam merasa kecut berhadapan dengan musuh-musuhnya sehingga mereka butuh motivasi tambahan dengan membakar kapal-kapal mereka. Kaum muslimin berangkat berperang dengan tujuan utama kemenagan atau syahid di jalan Allah.

Kelima, kekalahan dalam peperangan adalah sebuah kemungkinan yang bisa saja terjadi. Oleh karena itu Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala membolehkan pasukan yang berjihad untuk mundur dengan alas an agar bisa bergabung dengan pasukan yang lain.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا لَقِيتُمُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا زَحْفًا فَلَا تُوَلُّوهُمُ الْأَدْبَارَوَمَنْ يُوَلِّهِمْ يَوْمَئِذٍ دُبُرَهُ إِلَّا مُتَحَرِّفًا لِقِتَالٍ أَوْ مُتَحَيِّزًا إِلَىٰ فِئَةٍ فَقَدْ بَاءَ بِغَضَبٍ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَمَأْوَاهُ جَهَنَّمُ ۖ وَبِئْسَ الْمَصِيرُ

“Hai orang-orang yang beriman, apabila kamu bertemu dengan orang-orang yang kafir yang sedang menyerangmu, maka janganlah kamu membelakangi mereka (mundur). Barangsiapa yang membelakangi mereka (mundur) di waktu itu, kecuali berbelok untuk (sisat) perang atau hendak menggabungkan diri dengan pasukan yang lain, maka sesungguhnya orang itu kembali dengan membawa kemurkaan dari Allah, dan tempatnya ialah neraka Jahannam. Dan amat buruklah tempat kembalinya.” (QS. Al-Anfal: 15-16)

Jadi Allah Ta’ala memberi peluang pasukan Islam untuk mundur apabila mereka sudah pasti melihat kekalahan dan merugikan umat Islam lainnya, dengan syarat hal itu sebagai strategi perang atau bergabung untuk menambah jumlah pasukan lainnya. Kebijakan membakar kapal adalah keputusan yang membahayakan pasukan, merugikan kaum muslimin, dan bertentangan dengan syariat. Fiqih seperti ini sangat diragukan terjadi pada seseorang yang diangkat menjadi panglima perang semisal Thariq bin Ziyad.

Keenam, sebagaimana disebutkan Ibnu Adzari dalam al-Bayan al-Maghrib 2:6, dan al-Himyari dalam al-Raudh al-Mu’thar Hal. 35, tidak semua kapal yang membawa pasukan Islam menyeberang ke Andalusia milik Thariq bin Ziyad, ada beberapa di antaranya milik dari Raja Julian. Julian adalah salah seorang yang tidak senang dengan kekuasaan Roderick yang zalim. Dengan demikian, Thariq harus mengembalikan kapal-kapal yang ia pinjam bukan malah membakarnya.

Dari poin-poin di atas, Raghib as-Sirjani menyimpulkan bahwa peristiwa pembakaran kapal ini adalah kisah fiktif yang sengaja dibuat untuk menafikan kekuatan keimanan pasukan Islam dan pertolongan yang Allah berikan dengan kesabaran mereka. [Kisahmuslim.com]

Sumber: Qishshatu al-Andalus min al-Fathi ila as-Suquth

Disusun oleh Nurfitri Hadi