VIDEO Aljazeera: Rezim Nigeria Membantai Kaum Muslim

Monday, February 15th, 2010

HTI Press. Televisi Aljazeera mempublikasikan video pembantaian kaum muslim Nigeria yang dilakukan oleh Polisi Nigeria. Polisi dan tentara rezim Nigeria menembak kaum Muslim yang sedang berunjuk rasa pada musim panas tahun lalu dalam rangka menuntut penerapan hukum Islam, dan mengganti kurikulum Barat yang dijalankan di Nigeria. Dalam video tersebut memperlihatkan polisi Nigeria menembaki dengan jarak [...]

Posted in Headline, Video | 43 Comments »

A United Muslim

When one thinks of the Muslim world, it conjures up images of poverty, corruption and war. Many negative connotations exist about the state of the Muslim world which continues to occupy news space and newspapers. The global media tends to neglect the achievements of the Muslim world and the contributions it made to humanity. The Muslim world has a rich history of development and discovery, the results of which are being reaped today.


Over the last decade, the call for a united Islamic world i.e. the Khilafah has gained momentum and this momentum continues to grow. The possibility of a united Muslim world behind one ruler (Khaleefah) is something that the Muslim Ummah can achieve as this was achieved in the past and even western historians have testified to this fact. The Muslim lands currently posses:

• The Largest population in the world, 1.6 billion
• Largest army in the world
• Control of half of the world's oil and many other natural resources
• Control key strategic naval straits (A third of the world's oil travels through the straits of Hormuz which is between Iran and UAE) and airspace
• Largest land mass
• Nuclear weapons

The golden period of the Ummah saw many technological developments. Muslims utilised technology which Europe at that time could not even dream of. For example, some of the technology we take for granted today would not have existed if mathematical concepts such as algebra did not develop during the golden period of Islam. Computers which are used today would not have been possible if mathematical concepts such as algorithms did not exist. Many scholars such as Donald Routledge Hill express the view that Islam was the driving force behind the Muslim achievements while Robert Briffault even sees Islamic science as the foundation of modern science.

Oliver Joseph Lodge wrote in the Pioneers of Science: "The only effective link between the old and the new science is afforded by the Arabs (Muslims). The dark ages come as an utter gap in the scientific history of Europe, and for more than a thousand years there was not a scientific man of note except in Arabia"

Through the application of Islam, the Ummah was bound by the Islamic systems, this allowed Muslims and non-Muslims to live in peace and security. The Muslim Ummah has to return to its previous position, the one of leadership and honour as this is the only position that will save the Muslim Ummah from the crisis it is currently facing.

If the Khilafah existed today, it would embrace technology, develop an economy that distributes wealth efficiently and establish law and order. The key to a successful state is to have a government that actually takes care of its citizens, as this will allow the Ummah to make advances since their basic needs are being taken care of. Islam makes it an obligation upon the ruler to fulfil the rights of its citizens and this is the reason why the Khilafah was successful in the past. The Khilafah will make use of its resources so that the needs of its citizens are met. Whereas today, the Ummah with its great reserves of mineral resources labours in poverty. No individual or company will have a monopoly over basic utilities that are essential to the Khilafah such as the water sources and oil wells because the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم said in a hadith narrated by Abu Dawud:

"The people are partners in three things: water, green pastures and fire (energy)."

The Muslim lands have no shortage of energy resources; however most of the Muslim lands suffer from load shedding and crumbling infrastructure. The majority of the Muslim world faces an energy crisis. The root problem of the energy crisis within the Muslim world is the attempts by many governments in privatising such resources. Privatisation has lead to increased prices of such basic commodities which ensures the masses labour in poverty. The Khilafah brings its assets together and develops the necessary infrastructure so that the citizens of the Khilafah can benefit from them. The large oil reserves (56% of world oil reserves are in the Middle East, Source: EIA) which exist in the Middle East will be used to fulfil the basic energy requirements of the citizens of the Khilafah as energy commodities will be transferred to all parts of the state. This energy policy is one example of what the Khilafah can do to develop

A number of Muslim countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia and Turkey have developed aspects of their industry that has allowed them to make technological advancements, especially in their military industries.

Pakistan has been successful in developing defence hardware such as cruise missiles which are capable of carrying nuclear warheads, aircrafts and the famous Al - Khalid tank (ranked 7th amongst tanks). If the Muslim armies were to unite under one leader, this army would be the largest army in the world with a force of over 3 million personnel.

The Muslim lands have many strengths and advantages. One key advantage that a united Muslim world has, is control over strategic international airspace and naval straits. During the time of Sultan Muhammad Al Fatih, the Muslims had control over the straits of Bosphorus and ships of other nations could only pass through the Bosphorus if the Islamic state gave permission. In the same way the Khilafah will have control over key strategic straits such as the Bosphorus and Hormuz and control over the airspace that comes under the lands it controls; hence the Khilafah will decide which nation can travel through its straits and fly over its airspace. As a result countries such as the US will find it hard to launch attacks on the Muslim world as the Khilafah will restrict American manoeuvrability.

If the US was not allowed to pass through the straits of Hormuz and use the airspace of Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, it would have been very difficult for the US to attack Iraq and Afghanistan. Fighter Jets cannot fly non-stop from the US to Iraq or Afghanistan, hence the US requires local air bases and aircraft carriers for its operations.

The Khilafah will face many challenges on its emergence and this cannot be underestimated. Due to this, achieving technological development and improving the current situation of the Muslim world will take time, however the key issue is that a united Muslim world has the potential to become a super power. In the current climate the Muslim world has achieved certain milestones and if a sincere Islamic leadership arises, this leadership will guide the Muslim world to new heights and the Khilafah will become the beacon of light for the whole of mankind InshAllah.

The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "Indeed Allah gathered up the earth for me so that I saw its eastern and western parts, and indeed the dominion of my Ummah will reach what was gathered up for me from it." [Sahih Muslim]

http://www.khilafah.com/images/stories/Places/islamic%20history/caliphatemap.jpg

http://www.khilafah.com/images/stories/Places/islamic%20history/caliphatemap.jpg

Poligami Dalam Perspektif Sejarah, Politik Dan Syariat Islam
Khamis, 07 Januari 2010 11:30
POLIGAMI DALAM PERSPEKTIF SEJARAH, POLITIK, DAN SYARIAT ISLAM
(Bahagian Pertama)

PENDAHULUAN
Poligami merupakan salah satu isu yang tidak pernah putus diperdebatkan oleh masyarakat Islam; sama ada dengan tujuan untuk menjelaskan hukum syarak berkaitan dengan sistem kekeluargaan Islam atau di satu sudut lain, dijadikan modal utama para pejuang feminisme dan kaum liberalis untuk menyerang Islam kerana poligami seringkali dianggap sebagai hukum yang merendahkan dan menghinakan wanita. Melihat kenyataan perdebatan yang tidak kunjung usai berkenaan pro-kontra poligami mutakhir ini, maka artikel ini ditulis sebagai usaha untuk mengupas masalah poligami ini dari perspektif yang komprehensif.

Tujuan penulisan ini adalah:

Pertama, untuk meninjau isu poligami dari tinjauan historis (sejarah), serta untuk menyenaraikan pihak-pihak yang terlibat secara langsung dalam isu perdebatan pro-kontra poligami ini;

Kedua, untuk meninjau isu poligami dari tinjauan politik, iaitu untuk membongkar motif politik di sebalik pelbagai peraturan pemerintah yang mempersulitkan amalan poligami.

Ketiga, untuk meninjau poligami dari tinjauan normatif (syariah Islam) iaitu dengan menjelaskan hukum poligami di dalam Islam dan membantah pendapat-pendapat yang mengharamkan poligami.

SEJARAH PERDEBATAN PRO-KONTRA POLIGAMI
Sepanjang lebih 1300 tahun (sehingga abad ke-18 M atau 13 H), para ulama tidak pernah berbeza pendapat dalam membincangkan tentang hukum poligami (ta'addud al-zawjat). Seluruh ulama pada ketika itu sepakat tentang kemubahan (kebolehan) berpoligami berdasarkan nas-nas dan dalil yang bersifat qath'i (pasti). Abdurrahman Faris Abu Lu'bah di dalam kitab beliau Syawa`ib al-Tafsir fi al-Qarni al-Rabi’ ‘Asyara al-Hijri hal. 360 :

" Menurut para fuqaha', pernikahan dengan lebih dari satu isteri bagi seorang lelaki adalah ketentuan syariah yang sudah tetap (syar'un tsabit) dan sunnah/ jalan yang diikuti (sunnah muttaba’ah). Tidak pernah para fuqaha' memperdebatkan masalah ini, meskipun mereka berbeza pendapat di dalam kebanyakan bab dan masalah fikih. Ini kerana hukum tersebut (kebolehan berpoligami) didasarkan pada dalil qath’i tsubut (pasti bersumber dari Rasulullah) dan qath’i dalalah (pasti maksudnya) dan tidak ada sebarang ruang ijtihad untuk memperdebatkannya"

Para imam madzhab yang empat, iaitu Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, Imam Syafi’i, dan Imam Ahmad, telah bersepakat bahawa hukum poligami adalah mubah. Hal ini disimpulkan melalui kitab al-Fiqh ‘Ala Al-Madzahib Al-Arba’ah karya Syaikh Abdurrhaman Al-Jaziry Juz IV hal. 206-217 (Beirut : Darul Fikr, 1996) yang membahaskan tentang pembahagian nafkah dan bermalam kepada para isteri (mabahits al-qasm bayna al-zawjat fi al-mabit wa al-nafaqah wa nahwihima).

Di dalam kitab Maratib al-Ijma’, Ibnu Hazm menyatakan bahawa para ulama bersepakat bahawa apabila seorang lelaki muslim menikahi maksimum empat orang wanita sekaligus, maka hukumnya adalah halal. (Ibnu Hazm, Maratib al-Ijma’, hal. 62) [Lihat Ariij Binti Abdurrahman As-Sanan, Adil Terhadap Para Isteri (Etika Berpoligami), [Jakarta : Darus Sunnah Press, 2006], hal 41].

Maka, terbuktilah bahawa selama lebih 1300 tahun, tidak pernah ada perdebatan tentang hukum kebolehan berpoligami di kalangan seluruh umat Islam.

Persoalannya, sejak bilakah sebenarnya muncul isu pro-kontra poligami ini seperti yang sering ditimbulkan akhir-akhir ini?. Sebenarnya perdebatan pro-kontra poligami ini hanya muncul pada abad ke-19 M (bersamaan 14 H) ketika imperialisme Barat menjaja ideologi sekular dan menancapkan kukunya di pelbagai belahan Dunia Islam.

Di dalam situasi serangan pemikiran terhadap syariah Islam oleh para kafir penjajah ini, maka muncullah beberapa modernis dan puak liberalis dari kalangan orang Islam sendiri yang menggugat dan menolak poligami. Di antaranya ialah, Sayyid Ahmad Khan (1817-1898), Ameer Ali (1849-1928), Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905), Qasim Amin (1863-1908), dan Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (1888-1958) [Lihat Maryam Jameelah, Islam and Modernism, Lahore : Muhammad Yusuf Khan and Sons, 1988].

Sayyid Ahmad Khan misalnya, berpandangan bahawa asas pernikahan di dalam Islam adalah monogami, manakala poligami adalah satu pengecualian (perkara yang di luar dari norma dan kebiasaan). Maka, poligami tidak diperbolehkan kecuali dalam keadaan tertentu dan bersyarat [Busthami M. Said, Gerakan Pembaruan Agama Antara Modernisme dan Tajdiduddin, hal. 141].

Muhammad Abduh dalam Tafsir Al-Manar (yang ditulis oleh muridnya Rasyid Ridha) di dalam Juz IV hal. 346-363 juga berpegang dengan pendapat yang sama dengan Sayyid Ahmad Khan. Intinya, asas pernikahan di dalam Islam adalah monogami, bukan poligami. Poligami diharamkan kerana ia akan menimbulkan dharar (bahaya) seperti konflik di antara isteri dan anggota keluarga, dan hanya dibolehkan dalam keadaan tertentu atau darurat sahaja [Tafsir Al-Manar, Juz 4/350].

Pendapat Abduh ini seterusnya diikuti oleh para pemikir lain, baik yang dikenali sebagai kelompok modernis/liberalis mahupun yang sekadar pengikut kepada ulama-ulama tersebut. Antaranya ialah Syaikh Al-Bahiy al-Khuli, Syaikh Abdul Muta’al Ash-Shaidiy, dan Abdul Aziz Fahmi [Lihat telaah atas pemikiran tafsir ketiga tokoh ini di dalam Fadhl Hasan Abbas, Ittijahat al-Tafsir fi al-‘Ashr al-Hadits, I/114-115].

Selain itu, pendirian Abduh yang anti poligami sedikit sebanyak turut mempengaruhi Jamaluddin al-Qasimi (Tafsir al-Qasimi/Mahasin al-Ta`wil, V/30), Ahmad Musthafa al-Maraghi (Tafsir al-Maraghi, IV/183), Muhammad Izzat Darwazah (at-Tafsir al-Hadits, IX/11-13), Abdul Karim Khathib (at-Tafsir al-Qur`ani li al-Qur`an, II/697), Dr. Wahbah Zuhaili (Tafsir al-Munir, IV/242), dan Ali Nasuh ath-Thahir (Tafsir Al-Qur`an al-Karim Kama Afhamuhu, I/309). Para “ulama” ini bolehlah dikatakan mempunyai pandangan yang ' senasab' iaitu berasal dari idea Abduh.

Hakikatnya, pandangan golongan ulama yang anti-poligami ini bukanlah sebenarnya berasal dari mereka. Mereka hanyalah menceduk pandangan dari para orientalis atau missionari Kristian/ Katholik. Perkara ini bukanlah suatu yang mengejutkan di kalangan masyarakat barat memandangkan ajaran agama mereka yang menolak amalan poligami. Maka, tidak hairanlah jika penganut agama tersebut sangat menghinakan dan mencemuh amalan poligami yang dibolehkan di dalam Islam

Di dalam kitab Akhthar al-Ghazw al-Fikri ‘Ala al-‘Alam al-Islami karya Dr. Shabir Tha’imah hal. 53 (Beirut : ‘Alam al-Kutub, 1984), disebutkan bahawa poligami merupakan salah satu ajaran Islam yang paling sering dikecam oleh kaum missionaris. Di dalam kitab lain, al-Tabsyir wa al-Isti’mar fi al-Bilad al-Arabiyah hal. 42-43 (Beirut : Maktabah Arabiyah, 1986) Dr. Musthafa al-Khalidi dan Dr. Umar Umar Farrukh menerangkan, bahawa poligami telah menjadi sasaran hinaan atau kritikan oleh kaum orientalis kafir, seperti W. Wilson Cash, di dalam bukunya The Moslem World in Revolution (London : 1926), hal. 98. Orientalis Noel J. Coulson mengatakan, bahawa keadilan di antara isteri adalah sangat mustahil dapat dipenuhi, dan kerana itu, poligami perlu dilarang sama sekali (Lihat Noel J. Coulson, “Konsep Tentang Kemajuan dan Hukum Islam”, dalam Ahmad Ibrahim dkk (Ed.), Islam di Asia Tenggara, [Jakarta : LP3ES, 1990], hal.170]

Kesimpulannya, serangan terhadap hukum poligami sebenarnya bukanlah isu yang baru bermunculan sejak akhir-akhir ini. Sebaliknya, ia telah bermula sejak abad ke-19 M. Kecaman tersebut juga bukanlah datang dari para ulama kaum muslimin, tapi sebenarnya adalah berasal dari kaum orientalis atau missionari kuffar dan seterusnya diteruskan pula oleh kaum modernis/ liberalis seperti Sayyid Ahmad Khan dan rakan-rakannya. Akhirnya, pandangan dari kaum modernis inilah yang telah diambil dan dijadikan sebahagian dari peraturan-peraturan keluarga Islam oleh para pemimpin sekular di negara-negara kaum muslimin.

Maka, dari sini kita boleh melihat tiga tahapan serangan ke atas hukum poligami. Pertama, serangan kaum orientalis dan misionaris. Kedua, serangan tersebut diteruskan pula oleh para pemikir modernis/ liberalis seperti Abduh dan lain-lain. Ketiga, serangan tersebut telah diformalisasikan di dalam bentuk peraturan dan undang-undang keluarga Islam oleh para pemimpin kaum muslimin.[Mohammad Baharun, Isu Zionisme Internasional, hal. 53; Dr. Abdul Majid al-Muhtasib, Ittijahat al-Tafsir fi al-‘Ashr al-Rahin, hal. 187].

Jika dilihat sekali imbas, kaum liberal/ modernis ini seakan-akan membela Islam kerana kebijakan mereka mempergunakan dan memutarbelitkan penafsiran ayat-ayat Al-Quran dan hadis-hadis tertentu bertujuan untuk mengaburi pemahaman umat Islam sehinggalah timbul pemahaman bahawa hukum poligami adalah haram dan dilarang di dalam Islam. Abul A’la Al-Maududi –rahimahullah— mengkritik pandangan kaum modernis/ liberalis ini dengan tegas dan tepat di dalam ucapan beliau,

“Demikian pula tentang idea larangan poligami, tidak lain ia hanyalah barangan asing yang diimport ke negara kita dengan alasan palsu yang disandarkan kepada Al-Qur`an.” [Abul A’la Al-Maududi, Al-Islam fi Muwajahah Tahaddiyat al-Mu’ashir, hal. 259].

Maka, jelaslah bahawa penentangan terhadap poligami itu hakikatnya bukanlah kerana ia adalah perbuatan dosa dan dilarang di sisi syariat Islam. Ia tidak lain adalah kerana terikut-ikut dengan pandangan masyarakat barat yang menganut agama Nasrani (Kristian) yang memandang bahawa poligami itu adalah barang najis yang sangat dibenci oleh mereka. Perlu juga dijelaskan di sini bahawa agama Nasrani secara de facto tidak pernah mengharamkan poligami kerana tidak ada satu pun ayat Injil yang melarang kebolehan berpoligami.

Amalan monogami yang dijalankan oleh masyarakat Eropah adalah semata-mata tradisi kekeluargaan yang diwarisi dari bangsa Yunani dan Rom. Ketika masyarakat Rom berduyun-duyun memeluk agama Nasrani pada abad ke-4 M, mereka tetap meneruskan tradisi nenek moyang mereka yang melarang amalan poligami. Maka, peraturan monogami secara normatifnya, bukanlah ajaran agama Nasrani, melainkan adalah adat warisan lama yang secara sosiologis telah berkembang sejak kaum Yunani dan Rom menganut agama berhala (paganisme)

Pihak gereja hanya meneruskan larangan poligami dan menganggapnya sebagai norma agama Nasrani, sedangkan di dalam lembaran-lembaran Kitab Injil sendiri tidak pernah menyebutkan adanya larangan poligami. [Lihat Sayyid Sabiq, Fikih Sunnah, Jilid VI/157; H.S.A Alhamdani, Risalah Nikah : Hukum Perkawinan Islam, hal. 79-80; Ahmed Deedat, The Choice Dialog Islam-Kristen, hal. 85-88; David C. Pack, The Truth About Polygamy,http://www.thercg.rg].

Inilah sekilas penjelasan tentang sejarah pro-kontra poligami di dalam tubuh umat Islam, termasuklah kaitannya dengan sejarah poligami di dalam masyarakat Eropah. Kesimpulannya, serangan terhadap poligami jika dikaji secara mendalam adalah merupakan sebahagian dari Perang Pemikiran (al-Ghazwul Fikri) di antara kaum imperialis kuffur barat yang beragama Kristian dan berideologi sekular-kapitalis, dengan kaum muslimin yang meyakini Islam sebagai ideologi.

Malangnya, Perang Pemikiran itu nampaknya telah dimenangi oleh puak imperialis Barat yang kafir, dengan dukungan kaum intelektual liberal dan para penguasa sekular. Buktinya banyak negara-negara kaum muslimin yang melarang atau membatasi poligami dengan syarat-syarat yang tidak pernah disebutkan di dalam Al-Quran dan sunnah RasulNya. Contohnya, Tunisia (Undang-Undang Status Peribadi tahun 1957), Morokko (Undang-Undang Tahun 1958), Iraq (Undang-Undang tahun 1960), Pakistan (Ordinan Hukum Keluarga Muslim Tahun 1961), Indonesia (Undang-Undang 1/1974), Mesir (Undang-Undang Jihan Tahun 1979, pindaan 1985), dan sebagainya. (Lihat Noel J. Coulson, ibid.; Taufik Adnan Amal & Samsu Rizal Panggabean, Politik Syariat Islam, [Jakarta : Pustaka Alvabet, 2005], hal. 140).

Sesungguhnya, negara-negara umat Islam yang melarang poligami ini bukanlah sedang mengamalkan ajaran Islam, melainkan sedang bertaqlid buta kepada imperialis Barat-Kristian, untuk menjalankan ajaran palsu agamanya yang anti poligami,. Lebih menyedihkan, mereka menjustifikasikan penipuan mereka dengan memutarbelitkan penafsiran Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah oleh kaum modernis yang menjadi ejen-ejen Barat.

MOTIF POLITIK DI SEBALIK PEMBATASAN POLIGAMI
Berdasarkan tinjauan sejarah di atas, kita dapat mengungkap motif hakiki di sebalik pembatasan atau larangan poligami oleh para pemimpin sekular di negara-negara kaum Muslimin. Motif ini dibongkarkan dengan sangat jelas oleh Abdurrahim Faris Abu Lu’bah di dalam kitabnya Syawa`ib al-Tafsir fi al-Qarni al-Rabi’ ‘Asyara al-Hijri hal. 360. Menurut beliau, tujuan dari seluruh usaha menghalang atau membataskan poligami adalah semata-mata untuk mengubahsuai institusi keluarga masyarakat Muslim agar mengikuti model institusi keluarga masyarakat barat di Eropah, khususnya selepas mereka mengalami revolusi pemikiran (Enlightenment) pada abad ke-17 M (liyu’ida tanzhima al-usrati fi al-mujtama’ al-Islami ‘ala ghirari tanzhimi al-usrati fi al-mujtama’ al-gharbiy). Tujuan akhir di sebalik semua ini tidak lain dan tidak bukan adalah untuk menghancurkan institusi kekeluargaan Islam dan seterusnya digantikan dengan model penjajah kafir.

Inilah motif politik mereka, walaupun mereka (para pemimpin dan pejuang anti-poligami) bermanis kata dan menyebarkan propaganda bahawa pembatasan poligami yang mereka lakukan adalah semata-mata untuk "melindungi wanita" atau dalih-dalih palsu yang lain. Bohong!. Sesungguhnya ucapan-ucapan mereka hanyalah tipu daya agar umat Islam 'terpancing' untuk sedia diatur oleh undang-undang batil yang intinya adalah tradisi kafir barat.

Institusi keluarga masyarakat barat bukanlah model ideal bagi kaum muslimin. Kedua-duanya merupakan entiti yang berbeza secara mendasar dari segi akidah, identiti, norma dan sejarah. Institusi keluarga di barat dibentuk oleh ajaran gereja yang mewarisinya dari kaum Yunani dan Rom. Malah perilaku seks bebas, penzinaan, homoseksual, lesbian, dan pelbagai lagi jenis seks luar tabii tidak dianggap sesuatu yang mengaibkan di Eropah . Anak-anak zina yang tidak diketahui nasab keturunannya bukan lagi sesuatu yang pelik bagi mereka. Hal-hal ini tidak ditemukan di dalam ajaran Islam, malah akan dikenakan hukuman uqubat yang tegas. Maka, akal waras yang manakah yang masih mengakui bahawa institusi keluarga Barat jauh lebih baik atau bertamadun dibandingkan hukum kekeluargaan Islam yang memelihara kemuliaan dan kehormatan manusia, lelaki dan wanita, dengan menghalalkan monogami dan poligami???!!. [Abdurrahim Faris Abu Lu’bah, Syawa`ib al-Tafsir, hal. 360-361].

Wujudnya peraturan dan undang-undang yang membataskan dan meletakkan syarat-syarat bertujuan untuk menyukarkan amalan poligami sebenarnya telah merombak institusi kekeluargaan Islam dan membenarkan proses transformasi sosial untuk meniru gaya hidup masyarakat Barat.

Persoalannya, relakah anda sebagai seorang Muslim yang meyakini akidah dan syariat Islam sebagai yang terbaik; untuk dipaksa menjalani gaya hidup Barat yang jelas-jelas Kafir?

Apakah para pemimpin kaum muslimin dan pejuang anti-poligami ini sudah tidak punya mata, telinga, akal dan hati nurani sehingga tidak mampu menilai betapa bejat dan rosaknya masyarakat dan institusi keluarga di Barat?

Adakah mereka tidak tahu bahawa 75% anak-anak di barat adalah anak zina? Adakah mereka tidak tahu bahawa satu pertiga (31%) daripada masyarakat di Amerika yang sudah berumahtangga melakukan hubungan seksual dengan pasangan lain? Adakah mereka tidak tahu bahawa majoriti masyarakat mereka tidak menganggap bahawa hubungan seksual dengan pasangan lain sebagai tindakan yang salah, memalukan dan berdosa?

Adakah masyarakat dan keluarga rosak seperti ini yang dicita-citakan oleh para pemimpin sekular umat Islam hari ini?! [Lihat James Patterson & Peter Kim, The Day American Told the Thruth, New York : Plume Book, 1991].

Dr. Shabir Tha’imah di dalam salah satu bukunya menyebutkan usaha-usaha mereka ini sebagai “penjajahan moden” (al-isti’mar al-hadits). Istilah ini muncul di kalangan bangsa-bangsa lemah yang terjajah melalui bentuk baru pasca Perang Dunia II. Penjajahan moden ini adalah dominasi, orientasi, dan eksploitasi generasi muda negara bekas jajahan tersebut, di mana mereka bertindak tidak ubah seperti peranan penjajah sebelumnya yang menjajah dengan tangan besi (wa huwa laysa fi haqiqatihi illa as-saytharah wa at-tawjih wa al-istitsmar ‘an thariq abna’ al-balad alladziy kaanat fiihi qabdhah al-isti’mar wa ta’mal amalaha biquwwati al-hadid wa an-nar). [Dr.Shabir Tha’imah, Akhthar al-Ghazw al-Fikri ‘Ala al-‘Alam al-Islami, [Beirut : ‘Alam al-Kutub, 1984], hal. 50].

Kesimpulannya, jika umat Islam sebelum Perang Dunia Ke-II dijajah secara langsung oleh Barat melalui perang fizikal, maka kini pasca Perang Dunia Ke-II, umat Islam dijajah oleh para pemimpinnya sendiri yang menjadi tangan-tangan dan boneka kafir Barat. Inilah hakikat yang terjadi ketika pemimpin umat Islam menerapkan peraturan dari Barat (seperti pembatasan poligami) ke atas umat Islam dengan kekuatan dan paksaan.

Akan Bersambung……

Petikan:
http://www.mykhilafah.com/fokus-muslimah/1856-poligami-dalam-perspektif-sejarah-politik-dan-syariat-islam

A Forgotten Lesson of the 10th of Muharram (Ashura)

Thursday, 29 December 2009 7:33
















Muharram is a blessed month, of which the 10th is a unique date. Muslims are recommended to fast on the 9th and 10th or the 10th and 11th.

There are many events in history which have taken place on this date, but in our time, a very important lesson continues to be overlooked each year. This, we must not allow to continue.

Muharram is a blessed month of which a lot has been written and so will not be repeated here albeit as a brief reminder. What is of greater significance for us in today's time is a political lesson in the martyrdom of Hussain (RA).


Historically, the 10th of Muharram is a special and a unique date like no other that connects many of Allah's (SWT) Prophets (AS).

On this day...

1. Allah (SWT) saved Sayyidina Nuh (AS) and his companions in the ark.
2. Allah (SWT) spoke directly to Sayyidina Musa (AS) and gave him the Commandments. Also on this day,
3. Sayyidina Imam Hussain (RA) achieved the honour of Martyrdom.

No doubt the 10th is a unique and momentous day which should be remembered. A day which links many of the Prophets together in struggle against tyranny and forgiveness.

However the last event listed carries a special significance for us because Imam Hussain (RA) struggled against Yazid who had usurped the right to become the Khaleefah and attempted to force himself on the ummah. A man can only become the rightful Khaleefah with the pledge of allegiance. No man can be a ruler without the consent of the ummah. Yet, Yazid attempted to circumvent this sunnah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Imam Hussain (RA) stood up to this political tyranny and paid with his life.

No man can be a ruler by force nor can a man be a ruler by birthright. It is only the pledge of the ummah that crowns a man a ruler. This a a fundamental principle in Islamic ruling which today has been disregarded.

This lesson was taught to us the very day after which the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم left for a better abode. The dispute which grouped the Muslims into Sunni and Shia was over who should be the first Khaleefah. Abu Bakr (RA) was voted in as the first Khaleefah and hence he was the rightful Khaleefah. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم didn't appoint his successor, not as an oversight, but to establish the principle that the ummah has the right to choose her ruler. Neither was the successor of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed due to birthright, as this would have legalised monarchical rule. Even when Bani Hanifah placed a condition on giving the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم their support on the successor coming from their tribe, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not stipulate who that would be because it was the ummah's right to choose.

In short, the ruler is appointed by the people on condition he rules by Islam. The ummah today is plagued by dictators and agents who rule over her. It is high time the ummah took back her right and appoints the rightful Khaleefah. The sacrifice of Hussain (RA) is once again being called for.

http://www.khilafah.com/index.php/concepts/islamic-culture/8385-a-forgotten-lesson-of-the-10th-of-muharram-ashura

Categories of Hadith

Wednesday, 16 December 2009 19:45 Sheikh Taqiudeen an-Nabhani






The khabar (report) which is synonymous to the terms hadith and sunnah is divided, in terms of the line of transmission (sanad), into the khabar mutawatir (continuously recurrent report) and khabar ahad (isolated report).











Mutawatir

The mutawatir comprises of four issues, and these are:

1. The number of transmitters should be such that they are a group and not be restricted to any specific number. So whatever number proves to be a group, that is considered mutawatir. However, the minimum requirement is five. Four is not enough, because four are in need of another to attest their integrity (tazkiyah) if nothing is known about them when they give testimony for zina. The group accredited for tawatur (continuous transmission) is that it should not need any attestation (tazkiyah) so as to be definite by the mere notification of the report.


2. It should preclude collusion on a possible lie. It differs according to the difference between persons and locations. So five people like 'Ali b. Abi Talib are sufficient to consider their report as mutawatir. However for other types of people, five may not be a sufficient figure. Five transmitters who have not met from five different countries may be enough for the report to be considered as muttawatir, for they did not meet together in one place for collusion to occur. Probably a notification by the same number of people in one country may not suffice.

3. That they transmit the report from a group like them from the beginning to the end of the transmission, in a manner that precludes collusion on a possible lie, even if they were not of the same number. In other words, the first two conditions should be met in every tier of transmitters.

4. The basis of their report should be sensory perception, like hearing and the like, but not what is established by pure reason, because the pure reason can make mistakes if not based on sensory perception, thus not indicating certainty.

The value of the mutawatir report is that it yields positive knowledge ('ilm daruri). It is what one is compelled to accept, such that he is unable to refuse it. It is compelling, because it does not require study, meaning the mutawatir report imparts certainty (yaqin).

The mutawatir report is divided into two categories:

1. The verbal (lafzun) mutawatir like the hadith: 'Whosoever intentionally lies about me, let him reserve his place in the Hellfire.' and the hadith of wiping on the socks (khuff), hadith of hawdh (river in paradise), hadith of intercession (shafa'ah) and the hadith of raising the hands in prayer.

2. The mutawatir by meaning (ma'nun), such as when the transmitters concur on a matter occurring in different incidents such as the sunnah of the morning prayer being two rakats, a category which does exist. Numerous mutawatir hadiths have been reported even though the 'Ulema differ on what constitutes mutawatir according to their different views about the mutawatir report.



Khabar ul-ahad

As for the isolated report (khabar ul-ahad). It is the report whose narrators have not reached the number required for the muttawatir, whether it was reported by one or four narrators, meaning it is the report which falls short of the preceding four conditions for the mutawatir report. It is divided, in terms of the number of narrators, into three categories:

1. Gharib (Alien)

It is the report narrated by a single transmitter, meaning there is a single narrator throughout the narration at any stage in the isnad (line of transmission). It is divided into: gharib in isnad only, and gharib in isnad and matn (wording of hadith) together. There is no such report as gharib only in matn. The gharib in matn and isnad is that whose narration is by a single narrator. For example the hadith prohibiting and donating the sale of wala'a (patronage). The gharib in isnad and not in matn is the matn narrated by a group of Sahabah, but a single transmitter narrated it from another Sahabi, like the hadith: ‘Actions are judged according to intentions.'

2. Aziz (scarce)

It is a report transmitted by more than one narrator but less than four, meaning it is narrated by two or three narrators, even at one tier. It is called aziz (scarce) due to its rarity.

3. Mashur (famous)

A report which has been narrated by more than three narrators, but still it did not reach the level of mutawatir. It is called mashur due to it being clear and widely mentioned on the lips of people, irrespective of a sanad (chain) being found for it or not found. It is also the mustafid (abundant). It has two categories: mashur according to the scholars of hadith and mashur for the general public.

The first is like the hadith of Anas, that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم made du'a (qunut) for one month against (the tribes of) Ra'al and Dhakwan.

The second category is like the hadith: 'A Muslim is someone from whose (sharp) tongue and hands other Muslims are safe.'

Not every mashur report among people is sahih. Some ahadith which have no basis or are entirely fabricated may become famous and well known. These are many, like the hadith: ‘the day of your fast is (identical to) the day of your sacrifice', which has no basis. The Khabar al-ahad also, whether gharib, aziz or mashur, the isnad has a termination point, either ending with the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم or with a Sahabi or tabi'i. In terms of the end of the chain (isnad) there are three types:

1. Marfu'

It is a report which has been specifically ascribed to the Prophet in terms of his actions, sayings, consent or description, whether the one who attributed it to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was a Sahabi, tabi'i or someone who came after them. An example of that is when the Sahabi says: ‘we used to do or say such and such (thing) during the lifetime of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم , ‘or when he was among us', or ‘when he was amongst us', or ‘we did not see anything wrong with such and such thing', or the Sahabah used to do or say such and such (thing); or such and such (thing) was said during the lifetime of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.

Another example is when the Sahabi says: ‘We were ordered to do such and such (thing)', or ‘we were forbidden from doing such and such (thing)' or ‘such and such (thing) is from the Sunnah'.

It is also considered a marfu' report when the Sahabi says: 'We used to do or say such and such (thing)' even if they did not attribute it to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, because it indicates a consent. Likewise, the saying of Anas b. Malik is considered as a marfu' report when he said: ‘The Prophet's doors used to be knocked using the fingernails', and when Anas said; Bilal was ordered to double the azan and make iqamah one.'

Similarly the tafseer of the Sahabah concerning the cause of revelation comes under the rule of marfu'. Anything other than that from the tafseer of the Sahabah is not considered part of the hadith. That is because the Sahabah performed many ijtihads in explaining the Qur'an and they disagreed as a result. We find also many of them used to narrate isra'illiyyat from the people of the Book. That is why their tafseer is not considered part of the hadith, let alone considered as a marfu' hadith.

2. Mawquf

It is the narration from the Sahabah in terms of their sayings and actions. It is specifically related to the Sahabah. Its isnad can be continuous or broken. It is the report many of the Fuqaha and muhaddithun also call ‘athar'. The mawquf does not serve as a proof, because Allah سبحانه وتعالى said:

وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانتَهُوا
"And whatsoever the Messenger gave you, take it, and whatsoever he forbade you abstain (from it)." [59:7]

This means that whatever came to us from other than the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم do not take it. Therefore, there is no proof in the saying of anyone except Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم. It is not permitted to ascribe it to Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, because it is a mere possibility and not a prevalent opinion (zann), and possibilities are not recognised.

3. Maqtu'

It is not the same as munqati'. It is that whose chain stops at the Tabi'i in terms of sayings and actions. A proof is not established by it, and it is weaker than the mawquf.

Categories of the Khabar al-Ahad

The khabar al-ahad (isolated report) in its three forms: gharib, 'aziz or mashur, whether marfu', mawquf or maqtu' is divided by the scholars of hadith, in terms of its acceptance or rejection, into three categories: sahih, hasan, da'eef. The following is a clarification of each category:

1. Sahih

The hadith whose isnad continues through transmission of the reliable ('adl) narrator whose retention is accurate (dhabit) from another reliable (‘adl) transmitter who has an accurate retentive ability, and so on until the end of the chain, and is not shadh (irregular) or mu'allal (defective).

In other words, the isnad of the hadith continues through by the transmission of the reliable ('adl) and accurate (dhabit) narrator from another of same quality until it ends with Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم or a Sahabi or someone after him.

The statement of the scholars of hadith that the ' the isnad of the hadith continues through the transmission of the reliable ('adl) and accurate (dhabit) narrator from another same as him', excludes the mursal, munqati' and mu'dhil hadiths, from the category of sahih.

The mursal is what the Tabi'un have narrated from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم without mentioning the Sahabi.

The munqati' is when a single narrator is omitted in one or more places in the isnad.

The mu'dhil has two or more narrators missing from one or more places in the isnad.

These three all have discontinued isnads which takes them out of the sahih category. The statement that "the hadith should not be shadh" (irregular) excludes from the sahih hadith the shadh report where a trustworthy narrator goes against the narration of narrators who are more reliable than him. Their statement: ‘It should not be mu'allal (defective)' excludes from the sahih hadith the mu'allal report which has a defect. The 'illah (defect) consists of a weakness in the hadith, causing its rejection, a matter which appears to the critics when collecting and examining the various transmission routes of the hadith.

For example, the chain of a narrator being continuous while a group has transmitted it as mawquf. Their statement: ‘By the transmission of the reliable (‘adl) narrator', it excludes the report narrated by a transmitter whose apparent and hidden condition is not known, majhul al-'ayn (not known personally), or he is known to be weak. Such a hadith is not considered as sahih. Their statement: ‘by the transmission of a narrator who has accurate retentive ability (dhabit)' excludes what has been narrated by someone who is not retentive and aware, that is his transmission is negligent and he commits many mistakes. This report is not considered a sahih hadith, rather, all the conditions which have been clarified should be met in the sahih ahadith. If one condition is missing then the hadith is not sahih.

2. Hasan

It is a report whose collector is known and its transmitters are well known. It is the most regular hadith, and most scholars accept it, and it is used by the fuqaha generally, meaning that in its isnad there are no narrators that have been charged with lying, nor it is a shadh (irregular). It is of two types:

First: a hadith whose isnad is not free from a transmitter who is mastur (of hidden condition) and whose capacity is not realized, but not negligent nor prone to make many mistakes or charged with mendacity. However, a hadith of similar matn might have been narrated from another way, and it is thus excluded from being shadh or munkar (rejected).

Second: The narrators must be known for their trustworthiness and honesty, but they do not attain the level of the transmitters of the sahih category in retention and percesion; and what he narrates of reports singularly is not considered as munkar (rejected), nor is the matn irregular (shadh)or defective (mu'allal). So the hasan ahadith is the report transmitted by a reliable ('adl) narrator who is of lesser retentive capacity, but its isnad is continuous and not irregular (shadh) or defective (mu'allal). The hasan hadith is used as proof exactly as the sahih hadith.

3. Da'eef

It is the hadith which does not have the qualifications of the sahih or hasan hadiths. The weak hadith is not used as evidence at all. It is a mistake to say that when a da'eef hadith comes via numerous lines of transmission then it rises to the level of hasan or sahih. For when the hadith is weak because its narrator has actually committed transgression or has been accused of actual lying, and the hadith came through other lines of transmission which are of this type, then it has increased in iweakness. As for when the meaning contained in the da'eef hadith is also contained in the sahih ahadith, then the sahih hadith is cited and the da'eef hadith is rejected. Therefore, the da'eef hadith is not used as proof in any way whatsoever.

The accepted hadith (maqbul) and the rejected hadith (mardud)

It becomes clear from dividing the hadith into sahih, hasan and da'eef, that the hasan and sahih hadiths are both advanced as proof and the da'eef hadith is not. What makes the hadith acceptable or rejectable is the examination of the sanad (chain), transmitter and matn. If a narrator is not omitted from the sanad and whose omission would not lead to the inability of attesting to the reliability of the omitted narrator; and the narrator's integrity is not questioned; and the matn is not weak nor it does contradict certain parts of the Qur'an or Sunnah mutawatir or definite ijma'a, in this case the hadith is accepted, acted upon and advanced as a shar'ai evidence, whether sahih or hasan.

As for when the hadith is contrary to these qualifications, it is rejected and not educed as proof. Therefore, the rejected hadith is the hadith rejected due to omission from the sanad of a narrator which results in the inability to attest the reliability of this narrator, or due to a narrator's integrity being questioned, or due to the weakness of the (matn) of the hadith or its contradiction to the Qur'an, hadith and Ijma'a which are definite.

Various types of hadith come under the hadith mardud (rejected) which do not exceed the following descriptions:

1. Mu'allaq

When there is one or more narrators are consecutively missing from the beginning of the sanad in a blatantly obvious manner. The term 'more' is more general to include the whole or part of the isnad. Also included, is the omission of the whole chain such as when the muhaddith or hadith compiler, says: Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said so or did such and such thing.

2. Mu'dil

Is a chain in which two or more narrators are missing from one or more places, such as when the tabi ut-tabi'i omits a tabi'i and sahabi from the isnad. But it does not include the statement of authors from the fuqaha when they say: 'Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said'. Or their statement 'from Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم'. This is not (mu'dil), because that is not transmission, rather it is quoting and educing a proof which is valid.

3. Munqati'

When a single narrator is missing before the Sahabi in any one place wherever it is, even if they are many, such that the missing narrator is not more than one from each place, so it will be munqati' in these places. Also considered to be munqati' is the chain in which there is an obscure narrator (mubham).

An example of a transmitter being omitted is what has been narrated by 'Abdur Razzaq > ath-Thawri > Abu Ishaq > Zayd b. Yathi' > Hudhayfa, which goes back to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم that he said: "If you assigned it (authority) to Abu Bakr, indeed he is powerful and honest."

The isnad has breaks in two places. First, 'Abdur Razzaq did not hear from ath-Thawri but rather narrated it from al-Nu'man Ibn Abi Shaybah al-Jundi who narrated it from ath-Thawri. The second, ath-Thawri did not hear it from Abu Ishaq but rather narrated it from Shurayk who narrated it from Abu Ishaq. The hadith, therefore, is rejected. An example of a transmitter being obscure is what is narrated by Abu al-'Ala b. 'Abdullah b. Shukhayr > two men > Shaddad b. Aws the hadith of: 'O Lord! I ask you to make me steadfast in the matter.' Therefore, the hadith is rejected due to the presence of an unknown (majhul) narrator in the transmission.

4. Shadh

When a reliable transmitter narrates a hadith which contradicts what others have narrated. It is not shadh if a reliable narrator transmits something no one else has narrated, because the narration of a reliable transmitter is accepted even if others have not narrated it, and it is used as proof. That is like the hadith: ‘Actions are judged according to intentions'. Only 'Umar narrated it and from him only 'Alqama narrated it. A single narrator, Muhammad b. Ibrahim al-Tamimi narrated from him, and from him only Yahya b. Said al-Ansari narrated and from him Yahya b. Said, then there was a proliferation of transmission routes. Therefore, the shadh is only when a reliable narrator transmits something which contradicts what has been narrated by others, meaning the accepted narrator transmits a report that goes against the report which is more stronger than it.

5. Mu'allal

A hadith which is found to have a defect ('illah) and impairs its authenticity through it appears to be sound. This applied to the isnad whose transmitters are reliable and which apparently includes the conditions of authenticity.

6. Munkar

What a single unreliable transmitter narrates alone. The munkar is the narration of a weak narrator which contradicts the report of a transmitter who is less weak.

7. Mawdu'u

The hadith mawdu'u is the fabricated hadith. The fabricated hadith is the worst among the weak ahadith. The narration of such hadith is not allowed if its condition is known except when it is linked to clarifying its fabricated status.

A hadith is known to be fabricated when the forger acknowledges its fabrication or something which takes the position of a confession. The fabrication can be understood from the condition of the transmitter, such as the narrator following the whims of certain leaders in his lies. Or while he is attributing the hadith he is caught out as a consummate liar, where the report is not narrated from any way other than him, nobody supported him and he has no witness. It could be also understood from the condition of what has been narrated, meaning the state of the matn, if it is deficient in its wording or meaning or it contradicts parts of the Qur'an, mutawatir sunnah and definite Ijma'a.

There are different types of hadith fabricators. The ones causing most harm are those associated with zuhd (pious ascetics), who fabricated Hadiths hoping to get reward for what they alleged. The danger is that people accept their fabrications, trusting and depending on them. Then, maybe a forger fabricated a saying coming from himself so he narrated it. Probably, he took a saying from the sages or others and falsely ascribed it to Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم.

From the fabricated ahadith are the ahadith about the merits of the Qur'an, surah by surah, especially narrations on the authority of 'Ubay b. Ka'b and those from Abu 'Ismah > 'Ikrimah > Ibn 'Abbas. Their fabrication has been established from the study (cross refrences) of scholars and through the confession of Abu 'Ismah. It has been narrated that he said: 'I saw that the people had turned away from the Qur'an and occupied themselves with the fiqh of Abu Hanifah and the maghazi of Muhammad b. Ishaq, so I forged these ahadith seeking reward in the Hereafter.'

This is a selection of the types of rejected ahadith, but they are not all the possible types that could be mentioned. There are many types of rejected ahadith for which mentioning a part is sufficient as an example for the criterion by which the acceptable hadith is identified from the rejected hadith.

A hadith is not rejected because it does not meet the conditions for the category of sahih as long as its sanad, transmitters and matn are acceptable, meaning it is hasan because its narrators are of lesser reliability than the narrators of the sahih hadith. Or if there was a mustur, (a transmitter whose record is unknown) or he had a bad memory, but he has been strengthened by a qarinah (indication) that weighs up its acceptance, such as when it is strengthened by another narrator agreeing with it or by a witness, meaning, strengthened by a narrator thought to be alone (in narration) or by another hadith. One should not be over strict in rejecting a hadith as long as it is possible to accept it according to the requirements of the sanad, transmitter and matn. Especially when the majority of the ‘ulema have accepted it and the fuqaha have generally used it. It is then worth to be accepted, even if it does not meet the conditions of the sahih, because it comes under hasan. Just as one should not be over strict in rejecting a hadith, at the same time it is not allowed to be complacent with respect to the hadith, thus accepting the hadith which is rejected due to the sanad, transmitter or matn.

The Mursal Hadith

The mursal hadith is the hadith from which a Sahabi has been omitted. For example, when the Tabi'i says that Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said or did such and such thing, or such and such thing was done in his presence. A representative example would be the hadith of a tabi'i who has met a number of companions and has sat down to learn from them like 'Ubaydullah b. 'Adiy b. al-Khiyar, then Sa'id b. al-Musayyab and their likes when they say (directly) that: Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said'. It is well known that all of the Tabi'un are treated equally, ie what the tabi'i narrated from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم without mentioning the Sahabah, without a difference between the older or younger tabi'I, because it is well known that they are treated equally.

The muhaddithun, scholars of usul (usuliyyoon) and the imams have differed over the use of the mursal hadith as proof. There were those who did not use it, and considered it to be rejected like the munqati' hadith; and there were those who did accept its use. Those who do not accept it reject it for a defect (illah), which is a transmitter, who is not known, has been omitted form the isnad, and who might be unreliable. The consideration in narration is reliability and certainty, so there is no proof in the unknown transmitter. This is the reason for rejecting the mursal ahadith. The reason is correct and the rejection of a hadith according to it is correct, but this does not apply to the mursal hadith, because the transmitter who has been omitted is a Sahabi. Even though he is not known in terms of his identity, he is known as a Sahabi. As stated previously the Sahabah are all trustworthy ('udul). They cannot be unreliable. They are rather definitely trustworthy. The reason for which they would reject the hadith does not apply to the mursal, nor is there any other reason to reject it.

Since the mursal fulfils the conditions of the matn, sanad and narrator, no harm is there from omitting the Sahabi as long as it is known that he is a Sahabi, and thus by definition is trustworthy. Thus mursal hadith is a proof and should be used as an evidence.

It might be said that the reason is that there is a possibility that a tabi'i narrated from a tabi'i like himself who narrated from the Sahabah. The ommision of a Sahabi does not mean the ommision of only one narrator, but the break in the chain means that it is possible that two narrators have been omitted, one of them satisfying the conditions of integrity, which is the Sahabi, while the other narrator is dubious, who is a tabi'i. Therefore, there is a possibility in the hadith of a jarh (invalidation) or absence of accuracy (dhabt), so it is rejected. The response to this is that the definition of the mursal hadith is that: it is a report narrated by a tabi'i from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم without mentioning the Sahabi'. The narration of a Tabi'i from a Tabi'i who is not known does not come under this definition. Even if we accept this possibility, that a Tabi'i is omitted and the Sahabi is not mentioned, this possibility of omission is by way of suspicion, which does not reach the level of possibility. This is because it is suspected the tabi'i narrated it from another tabi'i whom he did not mention nor mention the Sahabi i.e. he assumes that a Tabi'i has been ommited. There is no evidence for this hypothetical assumption. It is merely suspicion, which has no value and the judgement on the hadith is not based on it. It should not be said that an unknown narrator (majhul) has transmitted it, because there is no one to whom a narration has been ascribed so as to say that one is a majhul (unknown). Therefore, the mursal hadith is not cosidered to be from the rejected ahadith, rather it is accepted and used as proof.

The hadith Qudsi

The hadith qudsi is what has been transmitted to us as isolated reports from Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, with its isnad going back to his Lord. It is from His سبحانه وتعالى speech, for it is attributed to Him, which is present in the majority of cases. The attribution to Him, is an attributiuon of composition, because He is the One Who spoke it first. It could be attributed to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, because he is the one informing about Allah سبحانه وتعالى. This is different to the Qur'an which is attributed to no one except to Him سبحانه وتعالى, so it is said: Allah سبحانه وتعالى said'.

On the other hand, in the hadith qudsi, it is said: Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said in what he narrates from his Lord'. The narrator of the hadith qudsi has two characteristics, firstly, he may say: ‘Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said about in (what) he narrates from his Lord'. Secondly, he may say: ‘Allah سبحانه وتعالى said concerning that which Rasool Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم narrated from Him'. They have the same meaning.

The difference between the Qur'an and the hadith qudsi is that the wording and the meaning in the Qu'ran are from Allah سبحانه وتعالى and through clear revelation. As for the hadith qudsi, the wording is from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم, and the meaning is from Allah سبحانه وتعالى through ilham (inspiration) or sleep. The Qur'an's wording is a miracle, revealed through the medium of Jibreel. The hadith qudsi is not a miracle and without any medium. The difference between the Qur'an, hadith qudsi and all other ahadith is that the Qur'an is the wording that is brought down by Jibreel to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. The hadith qudsi is the notification of its meaning by Allah سبحانه وتعالى through ilham (inspiration) or sleep, so the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم informed people of it with his own words. As for the rest of the ahadith they are like the hadith qudsi in that their meaning is from Allah سبحانه وتعالى and their wording is from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and without attributing them to Allah سبحانه وتعالى. The designation of the hadith attributed to Allah سبحانه وتعالى as the hadith qudsi is a terminological designation.

The inability to prove the authenticity of a hadith from its sanad does not indicate that it is a weak hadith

The strength of the sanad is considered a condition for accepting a hadith. However, it should be known that judging the sanad of a specific hadith as weak does not necessarily mean the hadith is weak in itself. For example, it might have another isnad, unless an imam stated that it has not been narrated except from this line of transmission. So, whoever finds a hadith with a weak isnad, it is more inclusive to say that it is weak through this isnad, but the text cannot be judged as weak unrestrictedly without qualification. Therefore, the rejection of the isnad does not necessitate the rejection of the hadith. However, there are ahadith which are not proved from the perspective of the isnad, but when passed from people to people they accepted their authenticity, so did not need to ask for the isnad. There are many example of this such as the hadith: 'There shall be no bequest (wasiyyah) to an heir' and the hadith: ‘the blood money (diyyah) is due on the immediate blood relatives ('aaqilah)', and many others.



The above article is taken from the book Shakhsiya Islamiyya Volume 1 by Sheikh Taqiudeen an-Nabhani, founder of Hizb ut-Tahrir

Politics: An Integral Part of Islam

Recently, Saudi Arabia's interior minister warned the pilgrims that they should not involve politics in Hajj. The current rulers in the Muslim lands are attempting to prevent Muslims from gathering and discussing issues and ideas which are pertinent to the future of the Ummah. Politics which is the act of "taking care of the affairs of the Ummah according to Shar'a rulings" is an integral part of Islam. We must take it upon ourselves to reclaim Islam and discuss the issues affecting the Muslim Ummah in all gatherings.

Prior to the commencement of Hajj, Saudi authorities were warning pilgrims not to stage any protests during the ritual. Saudi Arabia's interior minister Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz said, "It is not permitted to undertake any actions which are not part of the ritual... and we will not permit anyone to damage the hajj or the pilgrims."

Hajj is an amazing journey where Muslims have an opportunity to strengthen their relationship with Allah سبحانه وتعالى. It is also an event where Muslims from every corner of the earth gather together as one Ummah to strengthen the bonds of brotherhood. Today, the pilgrims are grouped according to the nation states they belong to. Furthermore, Muslims are not given an opportunity to bond with each other, by getting to know one another and discuss our condition as Allah سبحانه وتعالى has revealed:

إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَى وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا

"We have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may know each other." [Al-Hujraat, 49:13]

Obstructing the Ummah: Hajj and Beyond

The discouragement of Muslims gathering and discussing the affairs of the Ummah is not only seen at the time of Hajj. Rather, this is a recurring theme throughout the Muslim world. Rulers regularly prevent Muslims from gathering and discussing issues and ideas which are pertinent to the future of the Ummah. Such preventions are usually enforced with great hostility and aggression:

• Palestine - In November 2007, 36-year-old Hisham Baradi died in a hospital after Palestinian police shot him in cold blood. According to reports, riot police and other security forces moved in on members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir as soon as they left masjids in the cities of Ramallah, Nablus and Hebron aiming to march in non-violent demonstrations planned against the treacherous Annapolis Conference attended by Abbas and other Arab rulers.

• Turkey - In July of this year, KöklüDeğişim Magazine organized a Khilafah conference in Istanbul. Two weeks prior to the conference, the organizers received permission from the Governor of Istanbul and notified him of the speakers along with a summary of their speeches. On the day of the conference - in the early morning - the Turkish police arrested (without any resistance) 200 speakers and attendees which led to the cancellation of the conference.

• Bangladesh - In September of this year, Muslims in Bangladesh organized a peaceful rally outside the national masjid after Jummah prayers calling for the re-establishment of the Khilafah and a unified Muslim Army. The rally, which was attended by several thousand Muslims was prevented by the police. Furthermore, they arrested 30 Muslim activists.

• Pakistan - In October of this year, 30 members of Hizb-ut-Tahrir were arrested in Islamabad while they were having a seminar in a residential home.

Islam: A Complete Way of Life

Islam is more than a mere set of rituals; rather it is a complete way of life. Islam does not confine the relationship between man and his Creator to his personal sphere. Instead, Islam properly recognizes that man needs guidance from Allah سبحانه وتعالى in all affairs, especially in the matters of siyasah (politics), which is "taking care of the affairs of the Ummah according to Shar'a rulings". As such, it is part of our Deen to be concerned with the affairs of our brothers and sisters across the world. Allah سبحانه وتعالى revealed:

إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ فَأَصْلِحُوا بَيْنَ أَخَوَيْكُمْ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ

"The believers are nothing else than brothers. So make reconciliation between your brothers, and fear Allah, that you may receive mercy." [Al-Hujraat, 49:10]

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "You will see the believers in their mutual kindness, love and sympathy just like one body. When a limb complains, the whole body responds to it with wakefulness and fever." [Muslim & Bukhari]

The ayah and hadith make it clear that it is part of our Deen to be concerned about the Ummah. Just as our hearts fill with joy when we see our brothers and sisters in their success, we are also overwhelmed with sadness and pain when we see their hardship and suffering. As a result, it is only natural that when we meet our fellow Muslims - be it at Hajj or after prayer at the masjid - that we discuss our problems and the solutions on how to resolve them.

Siyasah in the Gatherings of Muslims

When we look to the example of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Sahabah (ra), we see that the Muslims gathered and engaged in siyasah (politics) be they in Hajj, or outside of Hajj.

In the Hujat-al-Wada sermon which occurred during the Prophet's صلى الله عليه وسلم Hajj, RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم discussed many issues that concern the affairs of Muslims including the property of a Muslim, riba, the obligations of men towards women and the equality of all Muslims with the exception of their Taqwa.

The masjid itself (which today is known only as a place of Juma, Jamat, Qiyamul-Layl and maybe some Islamic education) used to be the center of all activities. During the time of RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم it was a place to congregate and discuss the affairs of the Ummah. For example, the news of Zayd (ra), Jafar (ra) and Abdullah ibn Rawaha (ra) being martyred at the Battle of Mua'ta was relayed to the Muslims by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in the masjid while he was on the minbar.

After the death of RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم and prior to burying his body - an action which Shar'a requires urgency - the Sahabah (ra) gathered, discussed and debated as to who should be the leader of all Muslims. It was after heated discussions that Abu Bakr (ra) was nominated as the Khaleefah. Only after the appointment of Abu Bakr (ra) was the body of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم buried.

During the Khilafat of Abu Bakr (ra) the tribes in the Arabian Peninsula apostatized and rebelled against the Islamic State. He then gathered the Sahabah (ra) in the masjid to discuss whether the Muslims should declare war on the apostates and rebels. When Umar (ra) was the Khaleefah, he used to meet the Wulaa (governors) during Hajj to discuss their activities and any issues of the Muslims in the region.

We can also see throughout the Islamic history stories of how the Ummah would not let any wrong pass by their eyes without correcting it even if it was the doing of a governor or the Khaleefah himself. Those in authority did not respond by imprisoning, suppressing or torturing these people rather they were quick to correct themselves as they understood the great responsibility and accountability they had before Allah سبحانه وتعالى.

When Umar (ra) was the Khaleefah, he received some cloth and distributed it equally amongst the Muslims by giving them one piece each. When he was on the minbar it was apparent that he was wearing 2 pieces of cloth. Immediately, Salman al-Farsi (ra) said, "By Allah, we will not hear you, because you prefer yourself to your people." At this point Abdullah ibn Umar (ra) explained that he gave his father his cloth. Salman al-Farsi (ra) responded by saying: "Now we shall hear you."

In another incident, Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan who was a governor ordered a person to sell a silver utensil received from the spoils of war for payment to the soldiers who went out in battle. The news of (this state of affairs) reached Ubada bin Samit (ra) and he stood up and said, "I heard Allah's Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم forbidding the sale of gold by gold, and silver by silver, and wheat by wheat, and barley by barley, and dates by dates, and salt by salt, except like for like and equal for equal. So he who made an addition or who accepted an addition (committed the sin of taking) interest." So the people returned what they had received. This reached Mu'awiya and he stood up to deliver an address. He said, "What is the matter with people that they narrate from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم such tradition which we did not hear though we saw him and lived in his company?" Thereupon, Ubada bin Samit (ra) stood up and repeated that narration, and then said, "We will definitely narrate what we heard from Allah's Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم though it may be unpleasant to Mu'awiya. I do not mind if I do not remain in his troop in the dark night."

Seeking Solutions

The Ummah is seeking solutions to the problems that are currently plaguing it. The Muslims are growing tired of insincere rulers who would rather host a concert with scantily clad women than permit our Muslim sisters to wear the niqab at universities, as has happened in Egypt. It is fear that drives these despotic rulers to try their utmost to clamp down on any sincere gathering of Muslims working to free the Ummah of the problems that ail it. They are aware that they are sitting on borrowed thrones which do not rightfully belong to them, but rather belong to a sincere leader who will rule only by what Allah سبحانه وتعالى has revealed and fear no one but Him. It is only then that we can see this great Ummah return to the state that it was. Insha-Allah we will again see rulers who follow the method of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and fulfil their covenant towards Allah سبحانه وتعالى and the Ummah.

With ample evidence that all of Islam was discussed and that there was no separation between the rituals and other aspects of Islam we must take it upon ourselves to reclaim Islam from the treacherous rulers. By obeying only the commands and prohibitions of Allah سبحانه وتعالى we must return Islam back to the norm by making Muslim gatherings such as Hajj, the masjid and even family gatherings an arena to discuss the current affairs of the Muslim Ummah.

May Allah سبحانه وتعالى replace the current rulers with one who will work with the Ummah to resolve our issues in a manner that is pleasing to Allah سبحانه وتعالى.

وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتُ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاء بَعْضٍ يَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ وَيُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاَةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَيُطِيعُونَ اللّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ أُوْلَـئِكَ سَيَرْحَمُهُمُ اللّهُ إِنَّ اللّهَ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ

"The believers, men and women, are Auliya' of one another; they enjoin (on the people) Al-Ma‘ruf, and forbid (people) from Al-Munkar; they perform As-Salat, and give the Zakat, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah will have His Mercy on them. Surely Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise." [At-Tawba, 9:71]