By: DR. MOHD. ASRI ZAINUL ABIDINAlmost every week I received a visit of various 'branded' great groups from many places and part of them are not muslim. Among them are a devoted reader of my writings. They ask my opinion about various issues. From what that become a focus to non-muslim is terrorism issue.
As a result of international media education, they seemingly saw a close link between islam and terrorism. The asked why islam used the term 'jihad', which finally gave rise to terrorism in this world?
I asked them since when they felt this terrorism issue was associated with Islam? They replied: since several years lately, specifically after 9/11 event. I asked them: Prophet Muhammad s.a.w has been sent since 1,400 years ago and his teachings were spread almost to the whole world and he ever built a great civilisation. Why then just today you heard of terrorism and Islam?
Then what is the definition of terrorism for you till media said Palestinians are terrorist, whereas Israel killed women and children everyday and why are they not labelled as terrorists?
On what basis are the iraqis murdering the American military terrorists? Why isnt america, who bombed and invaded their country - raping n murdering the iraqi folks, not listed as terrorists?"
On what definition is taking hostages, which is done by several muslims, considered as inhumane crime , whilst America arresting many muslims with no evidence watsoever was not publicize as atrocious violence?
If we calculate the number of westerners killed by a clan of people that called themselves muslims compared to the total number of muslims killed by sophisticated weapons of America and its allies, which is more?
On what basis that u gave islam a terrorist image just because of the actions of several groups associated with Islam, but you did not see the image of christian religion or jewish as terrorists for their actions done by the believers of those religions that are governments and rulers accredited by themselves?
On the basis of what that you give terrorist image to Islam because the action of several clans associated with Islam, but you not see the image of Christian religion or Jewish as terrorists whereas their action are done by the believers of those religions that behave as government which are accredited by them?
Let me speak; in fact, nobody agreed with terrorism, only western's media in a most part behave unjustice in defining terrorism and who is terrorist.
Since long time ago Islam spread justice and fairness among mankind. Just look, so many non-Muslim minority group can live in a middle of Muslim community throughout the world. Look at our country, Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia and other countries. Although perhaps there are several shortcomings, they have not been tortured; no vicious blood spill.
Nevertheless, another situation occurred against muslim minority in most countries. See the fate of muslims in bosnia, Burmese, Russia and several other countries. Even in the malay community, non-muslim fellow can trade and prosper in the midst of muslim malay village, a scenario which is difficult to be found in other situations.
My message is: terrorism or blood spilling of other religion is not a habit of a muslim and of course not the teaching of Islam. How can the teaching of islam be associated with terrorism when the rules of war in Islam itself is so rigid and tight.
Before the existance of The agreement of Geneva, Islam, for the past 1,400 years ago has already imposed various disciplines and rules in war itself. Even if the agreement of Geneva does not exist, it is still compulsory for the muslims to comply with the stipulated war regulations. Not merely to take care of the government's credibility but that is the religion's directive.
War in Islam is not to multiply bloodshed but instead to preserve truth and justice. Allah said in chapter al-Baqarah verse 190: (meaning) "and fight in the way of Allah those who fight against you, and do not go beyond limit (extreme), indeed Allah do not like those who are extreme."
In hadith narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim, Prophet Muhammad said: Dear mankind! Do not aspire to meet with the enemy, ask for protection from God. Nevertheless if you meet them also, you must be patient (perservere do not move).
To that Islam decides that bloodshed is only in battlefields. Do not fight or kill enemies that are not involved in the war.
To make sure that the discipline is strictly complied with, many muslim scholars had with much emphasis focused that there be no bloodshed for the following classes:"
First: Women who do not fight in battle and child. In hadith from Ibn Umar, he said: "Indeed a woman found killed in a war (take part by the prophet) then the prophet even prohibit kill women and child." (Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim).
Second: Old people and sick people. They cannot be killed, except if worried action and planning design in war. This can be hinted with women which does not help war.
Third: Those who are religious at temple. The prove is Ibn Abbas's story, he said: When Rasulullah remits troop then he decree that: Go out (to jihad field) with the name of Allah, fighting in the way of Allah those who are atheist with God. Do not contravene an agreement, do not betray a booty, do not damaged a corpse, do not murder children and temple members. (Ahmad's story, said Ahmad Muhammad Syakir: Sanad this hadith hasan.)
Said al-Syaukani (die 1250H): To this hadith evidence that cannot kill anyone from non-muslim that only religious as priest as they do not harmful to Moslem people. (:Al-Syaukani, Nail al-Autar, jld 8, m.s. 74, Beirut: Dar al-Jil)
Fourth: Plenty employees and farmers. Jumhur theologian said they cannot be killed. The prove is, Hanzalah al-Katib's hadith, he said: "We battle along with Rasulullah, then we pass through a woman those killed. Then public gather to it, then design give space to the king (to see him). Majesty decree that: He This (stated women) no also battling. Then the prophet direct a man while decree that: Go to Khalid ibn al-Walid, speak to him: Indeed Rasulullah commands it with he said: Do not murder children (in a part story: women) and asif (wage taker)." (Abu Story Daud, Ibn Majah And Ahmad. Al-Albani assess it as genuine (see: Al-Albani, Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Sahihah, jld 2, m.s. 314, Riyadh: Maktabah al-Maarf li al-Nasyr).
This wage taker were the only on duty prepared food, or clean army camp and such it. While they not involved in the battle field, then they cannot be killed.
Fifth: Delegates and diplomats. Said Abdullah bin Mas'ud: "Has become a sunnah that delegates cannot be killed". (Abu Daud's story, Ahmad, al- Bazzar, Abu Ya'la. Their Sanad-sanad is hasan ( al-Hathaimiy, Majma al-Zawaid, jld 5, m.s. 314, Beirut: Dar al-Rayyan)
After you see such a tight rules, is that possible for you to accuse Islam promotes bombing in public place? If the action so made above Islam's name, it is a betray to Islam. After Islam ban this action, why is Western's media link this to Islam, whereas at the same time not link America's cruel act with Christian, India with Hindu or Israel with Jewish? Although ban text as Islam does not pronounced clearly in other religion.
After understanding the fact that Islam forbid this reckless terrorism, Western should ask; if true there are Muslims do it, it means that they are not afford to get a grip on with Islamic discipline, why this matter happened? I say again, Islam does not responsible for public murder.
What happen is action out of control. This happens when emotion control mind and wrong knowledge control action. Without could be denied, excessive emotion and boil over without this control come caused bad attitude and brutal demonstrated by some power of Western against Muslim world especially to Iraq and now Palestine.
Because, somebody that customary behave, suddenly become brutal , we must ask the cause of it. Islam is not like Western films allow hero terrorism in the name of revenge, however if world want solution to this disease, we shall cure his cause.
Then they ask me: why there must be chapter jihad in Islam? This can bring about tension between religion. I speak; if you see Islam as religion only managing mosque, then sure jihad issue very strange to be discussed. Nevertheless Islam is a complete religion that involve in all living system.
Which might as complete religion in various issue; economy, administration, education and others, suddenly not discuss question of war. If that happens, it shows imperfect in Islamic system. In the sense, Islam let beauty system that it built been violated or destroyed.
We must know that, war exist in history of mankind. This is because when there are exist a clan that behave brutal and oppress other party, or like exploiting force as a solution then sure war sparked. Then , the party whose been oppressed are forced to involve in war arena.
Thus to defend themselves, they was forced to traverse also, as happened to Iraq and Palestine. Hence, we look each countries would create their army. That is basic needs. Even though not to battle with other parties, it is for defending border and sovereignty.
This is because tender attitude and friendly with all parties not able to ensure one country will not be attacked. Greedy and greedy feelings that exists to other country will threat one government even though diplomacy bastion built. To that, then each countries make training and their military system.
Clearly, that discussing war and weapons issue, not necessarily reflect brutal attitude or terrorism. Instead it claim socialising. Even war defend the truth is favored by natural tendency of mankind.
That is why war films reflect victory on the side considered true, are liked by world community. Then Islam is the syumul (complete) religion. Come to resolve human life issue at all levels. So it is impossible for Islam not to discuss war subject or named - from the aspect its term - jihad qitali or war jihad.
Why so because there is jihad chapter in Islam then this religion sentence terrorist, but military system create by each country especially Western, not regarded as terrorists? Or why do not get penalised Hollywood's film producer as terrorists?
I wish to remind, because this jihad chapter by clear is in Koran and al sunah, Muslims cannot deny it. Deny jihad warfare means deny Islamic prove. Nevertheless they shall state to the world by the right meaning of jihad in Islam. Whether may Islam to discuss nationhood issue suddenly not mention military chapter?
Only that happens today, availability of a few Muslims abuse jihad chapter or breaching discipline that laid down by religion. Genuine Islam protest their action absolutely.
Nevertheless, for Muslim countries that was been attacked by the force of imperialists, is world want to say to Muslim people, you all must silent and do not defend person so as was jihad, and jihad is terrorism? Is this universal justice?
As said by Arab people: "He beats me, but he the one who cry. He abuse me, but he the one that report."
- DR. MOHD. ASRI ZAINUL ABIDIN is a Mufti of Perlis State Government.
Source : Utusan Malaysia
On what definition is taking hostages, which is done by several muslims, considered as inhumane crime , whilst America arresting many muslims with no evidence watsoever was not publicize as atrocious violence?
If we calculate the number of westerners killed by a clan of people that called themselves muslims compared to the total number of muslims killed by sophisticated weapons of America and its allies, which is more?
On what basis that u gave islam a terrorist image just because of the actions of several groups associated with Islam, but you did not see the image of christian religion or jewish as terrorists for their actions done by the believers of those religions that are governments and rulers accredited by themselves?
On the basis of what that you give terrorist image to Islam because the action of several clans associated with Islam, but you not see the image of Christian religion or Jewish as terrorists whereas their action are done by the believers of those religions that behave as government which are accredited by them?
Let me speak; in fact, nobody agreed with terrorism, only western's media in a most part behave unjustice in defining terrorism and who is terrorist.
Since long time ago Islam spread justice and fairness among mankind. Just look, so many non-Muslim minority group can live in a middle of Muslim community throughout the world. Look at our country, Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia and other countries. Although perhaps there are several shortcomings, they have not been tortured; no vicious blood spill.
Nevertheless, another situation occurred against muslim minority in most countries. See the fate of muslims in bosnia, Burmese, Russia and several other countries. Even in the malay community, non-muslim fellow can trade and prosper in the midst of muslim malay village, a scenario which is difficult to be found in other situations.
My message is: terrorism or blood spilling of other religion is not a habit of a muslim and of course not the teaching of Islam. How can the teaching of islam be associated with terrorism when the rules of war in Islam itself is so rigid and tight.
Before the existance of The agreement of Geneva, Islam, for the past 1,400 years ago has already imposed various disciplines and rules in war itself. Even if the agreement of Geneva does not exist, it is still compulsory for the muslims to comply with the stipulated war regulations. Not merely to take care of the government's credibility but that is the religion's directive.
War in Islam is not to multiply bloodshed but instead to preserve truth and justice. Allah said in chapter al-Baqarah verse 190: (meaning) "and fight in the way of Allah those who fight against you, and do not go beyond limit (extreme), indeed Allah do not like those who are extreme."
In hadith narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim, Prophet Muhammad said: Dear mankind! Do not aspire to meet with the enemy, ask for protection from God. Nevertheless if you meet them also, you must be patient (perservere do not move).
To that Islam decides that bloodshed is only in battlefields. Do not fight or kill enemies that are not involved in the war.
To make sure that the discipline is strictly complied with, many muslim scholars had with much emphasis focused that there be no bloodshed for the following classes:"
First: Women who do not fight in battle and child. In hadith from Ibn Umar, he said: "Indeed a woman found killed in a war (take part by the prophet) then the prophet even prohibit kill women and child." (Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim).
Second: Old people and sick people. They cannot be killed, except if worried action and planning design in war. This can be hinted with women which does not help war.
Third: Those who are religious at temple. The prove is Ibn Abbas's story, he said: When Rasulullah remits troop then he decree that: Go out (to jihad field) with the name of Allah, fighting in the way of Allah those who are atheist with God. Do not contravene an agreement, do not betray a booty, do not damaged a corpse, do not murder children and temple members. (Ahmad's story, said Ahmad Muhammad Syakir: Sanad this hadith hasan.)
Said al-Syaukani (die 1250H): To this hadith evidence that cannot kill anyone from non-muslim that only religious as priest as they do not harmful to Moslem people. (:Al-Syaukani, Nail al-Autar, jld 8, m.s. 74, Beirut: Dar al-Jil)
Fourth: Plenty employees and farmers. Jumhur theologian said they cannot be killed. The prove is, Hanzalah al-Katib's hadith, he said: "We battle along with Rasulullah, then we pass through a woman those killed. Then public gather to it, then design give space to the king (to see him). Majesty decree that: He This (stated women) no also battling. Then the prophet direct a man while decree that: Go to Khalid ibn al-Walid, speak to him: Indeed Rasulullah commands it with he said: Do not murder children (in a part story: women) and asif (wage taker)." (Abu Story Daud, Ibn Majah And Ahmad. Al-Albani assess it as genuine (see: Al-Albani, Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Sahihah, jld 2, m.s. 314, Riyadh: Maktabah al-Maarf li al-Nasyr).
This wage taker were the only on duty prepared food, or clean army camp and such it. While they not involved in the battle field, then they cannot be killed.
Fifth: Delegates and diplomats. Said Abdullah bin Mas'ud: "Has become a sunnah that delegates cannot be killed". (Abu Daud's story, Ahmad, al- Bazzar, Abu Ya'la. Their Sanad-sanad is hasan ( al-Hathaimiy, Majma al-Zawaid, jld 5, m.s. 314, Beirut: Dar al-Rayyan)
After you see such a tight rules, is that possible for you to accuse Islam promotes bombing in public place? If the action so made above Islam's name, it is a betray to Islam. After Islam ban this action, why is Western's media link this to Islam, whereas at the same time not link America's cruel act with Christian, India with Hindu or Israel with Jewish? Although ban text as Islam does not pronounced clearly in other religion.
After understanding the fact that Islam forbid this reckless terrorism, Western should ask; if true there are Muslims do it, it means that they are not afford to get a grip on with Islamic discipline, why this matter happened? I say again, Islam does not responsible for public murder.
What happen is action out of control. This happens when emotion control mind and wrong knowledge control action. Without could be denied, excessive emotion and boil over without this control come caused bad attitude and brutal demonstrated by some power of Western against Muslim world especially to Iraq and now Palestine.
Because, somebody that customary behave, suddenly become brutal , we must ask the cause of it. Islam is not like Western films allow hero terrorism in the name of revenge, however if world want solution to this disease, we shall cure his cause.
Then they ask me: why there must be chapter jihad in Islam? This can bring about tension between religion. I speak; if you see Islam as religion only managing mosque, then sure jihad issue very strange to be discussed. Nevertheless Islam is a complete religion that involve in all living system.
Which might as complete religion in various issue; economy, administration, education and others, suddenly not discuss question of war. If that happens, it shows imperfect in Islamic system. In the sense, Islam let beauty system that it built been violated or destroyed.
We must know that, war exist in history of mankind. This is because when there are exist a clan that behave brutal and oppress other party, or like exploiting force as a solution then sure war sparked. Then , the party whose been oppressed are forced to involve in war arena.
Thus to defend themselves, they was forced to traverse also, as happened to Iraq and Palestine. Hence, we look each countries would create their army. That is basic needs. Even though not to battle with other parties, it is for defending border and sovereignty.
This is because tender attitude and friendly with all parties not able to ensure one country will not be attacked. Greedy and greedy feelings that exists to other country will threat one government even though diplomacy bastion built. To that, then each countries make training and their military system.
Clearly, that discussing war and weapons issue, not necessarily reflect brutal attitude or terrorism. Instead it claim socialising. Even war defend the truth is favored by natural tendency of mankind.
That is why war films reflect victory on the side considered true, are liked by world community. Then Islam is the syumul (complete) religion. Come to resolve human life issue at all levels. So it is impossible for Islam not to discuss war subject or named - from the aspect its term - jihad qitali or war jihad.
Why so because there is jihad chapter in Islam then this religion sentence terrorist, but military system create by each country especially Western, not regarded as terrorists? Or why do not get penalised Hollywood's film producer as terrorists?
I wish to remind, because this jihad chapter by clear is in Koran and al sunah, Muslims cannot deny it. Deny jihad warfare means deny Islamic prove. Nevertheless they shall state to the world by the right meaning of jihad in Islam. Whether may Islam to discuss nationhood issue suddenly not mention military chapter?
Only that happens today, availability of a few Muslims abuse jihad chapter or breaching discipline that laid down by religion. Genuine Islam protest their action absolutely.
Nevertheless, for Muslim countries that was been attacked by the force of imperialists, is world want to say to Muslim people, you all must silent and do not defend person so as was jihad, and jihad is terrorism? Is this universal justice?
As said by Arab people: "He beats me, but he the one who cry. He abuse me, but he the one that report."
- DR. MOHD. ASRI ZAINUL ABIDIN is a Mufti of Perlis State Government.
Source : Utusan Malaysia
Categories:
The Way of Life
0 comments:
Post a Comment