|
|
Mana2 manusia yg mengaibkan kisah Aisyah dan Baginda Rasullullah saw, maka Allah swt PASTI akan mengaibkan dirinya bukan sahaja di dunia, malah di akhirat kelak.
Ini kerana, setiap yg Dia syariatkan KHAS utk Aisyah dan Baginda Rasullullah saw itu ada hikmahnya. Maka, meneladani sesuatu ilmu HANYA yg disyariatkan oleh baginda Rasullullah saw (iaitu hanya bersama isterinya ketika usia 9 tahun -Sunnah). Dan mana2 pihak yg MENGHALANG perkahwinan anak perempun bawah umur 9 tahun itu "dirinya bukan Allah" dan mereka2 yg membenarkan perkahwinan perempuan berusia 6-8 tahun itu hakikat "dirinya adalah Allah".
Dan dajjal2 itu pasti dari kalangan "dirinya Allah"!
Nau'zubillah huminzalik |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mengenal Allah pun, RAMAI yg gagal, celah lagi membezakan hak Allah dan hak manusia.
Kembali kpd AlQuran dan Sunnah itu BUKAN SETAKAT berkata2 dalam beramal, akan tetapi memahami ilmuNya dgn sebenar2 iman kpd Allah.
Kita hanya perlu dengar dan taat akan apa yg Allah perintahkan, dan bukan pula menjadikan diri sendiri Allah agar manusia dengar dan taat yg kita perintahkan. Itu sebenar2 syirik kpd Allah. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mbhcsf at 9-2-2017 09:56 PM
saya menerima PM yg menyatakan saya telah discredit Ibn Ishaq
adakah salah saya? atau pendapat scholar yg ternama yg DISCREDIT ibn Ishaq juga salah ?sila lihat sumber sumber yang menyatakan bahawa ISNAD ibnu Ishaq itu diragui.
so , adakah saya salah ? saya bersedia menarik balik sekiranya terbukti penceritaannya tentang sejarah Nabi Muhammad SAW itu benar - maksudnya tak lebih dari 8 periwayatan sejarah yg menceritakan Nabi lakukan itu ini tanpa isnad.
sedangkan scholars yg ternama tidak mengambil periwayatan daripadanya?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mbhcsf at 9-2-2017 10:12 PM
Inaccurate, Twisted & Fabricated Stories about Prophet Mohammad
Because the principles of Islam are so great, haters of Islam find it difficult to attack Islam directly so they resort to attacking Prophet Mohammad by bringing up fabricated stories from unreliable history books such as Ibn IssHaaq's Sirat Rasul Allah (Biography of Allah's Messenger), Al-Waqidi's Kitab al-Tarikh wa al-Maghazi, Ibn Sa'd's Kitab Tabaqat Al-Kubra, and Al-Tabari's Tarikh Al-Tabari.
Ibn IssHaaq wrote a history book, not a Hadith book. Such history books at his time did not pay attention to tracing the chain of transmitters for their stories.
Ibn IssHaaq's (also spelled as Ibn Ishaq) name means the Son of Isaac.
Ibn IssHaaq (born in 704 - died in 770) is unreliable for several reasons:
- Stories he narrated did not have proper chain of transmitters.
- He was Shiite. Shia lie a lot and justify it using Taqiya doctrine.
- He made favorable statements about Jewish tribes which were hostile to the Muslims.
- He accepted Jews as sources for transmitted stories.
Imam Malik, the founder of one of the 4 Sunni Mazhabs (Schools of Thought) called Ibn IssHaq a liar. Some Muslim scholars claim Ibn Ishaq included verses in his book that he knew were not authentic.
Western non-Muslim researchers also criticized Ibn IssHaaq:
"False ascription was rife among the 8th century scholars (versus Bukhari who lived in the 9th century) and that in any case Ibn Ishaq and contemporaries were drawing on oral traditions." ( Cook, M: Muhammad, Oxford 1983. pg. 65)
Even the famous Polemist and anti-Islam author Robert Spencer admits in his book The Truth about Muhammad , that "However, Ibn Ishaq's life of Muhammad is so unashamedly hagiographical that its accuracy is questionable." (Spencer, Robert: The Truth about Muhammad, Regnery Publishers, 2006 pg. 25) Despite his negative opinion regarding Ibn IssHaaq, out of the 400 footnotes of Robert Spencer's book, 120 footnote refer to fabricated stories from Ibn Ishaq's book. Because Robert Spencer hates Islam so much that he is willing to present these stories as if they are true, even though he knows that their source is unreliable.
Al-Waqidi is one of the least respected Historian. The following is the opinions of Muslim scholars about Al-Waqidi:
- Abd Allah Ibn Ali al-Madini and his father said: "Al-Waqidi has 20,000 Hadith I never heard of." And then he said: "His narration shouldn't be used." and considered it weak.
- Yahya Ibn Muaen said: "Al-Waqidi mentioned 20,000 false hadith about the prophet."
- Al-Shafi'i said, "Al-Waqidi is a liar."
- Ibn Hanbal said, "Al-Waqidi is a liar."
- Al-Bukhari and Abu Hatim al-Razi said: Al-Waqidi's work should be discarded. Al-Bukhari said he didn't write a single letter by transmitted by Al-Waqidi.
- Ibn al-Madini said: "He forges Hadiths".
- Al-Dhahabi said: "Consensus has settled on his weakness."
Al-Tabari who included Ibn IssHaaq's book in his multi-volume Tarikh Al-Tabari has the following disclaimer in the introduction to the book:
"...if I mention in this book a report about some men of the past, which the reader of listener finds objectionable or worthy of censure because he can see no aspect of truth nor any factual substance therein, let him know that this is not to be attributed to us but to those who transmitted it to us and we have merely passed this on as it has been passed on to us."
All of the following stories appear in Ibn IssHaaq's book and some of them also appear in other history books:
1. The alleged murder of Abu Afak
Abu Afak was allegedly an old Jewish Poet who lived in Madina at the time of the Prophet Mohammad and wrote a poem making fun of Prophet Muhammad and the Early Muslims. The story alleges that Prophet heard of these verses and ordered killing of Abu Afak. A Muslim man named Salim Ibn Umayr went forward and killed Abu Afak with a sword (Ibn IssHaaq, page 675).
This story was mentioned in Ibn IssHaaq and Al-Waqidi’s history books. The chain of reporters of the story from eye-witnesses of the event till Ibn IssHaaq or Al-Waqidi must be examined and verified. So, our legitimate question is: where is the Isnad (chain of reporters)? There is no Isnad for this story. This story has no isnad at all; neither Ibn IssHaaq (or his disciple Ibn Hisham) nor Al-Waqidi (or his disciple Ibn Sa'd) provided such Isnad! In this case, the story is rated by Hadith scholars as "...of no basis", indicating that it has reached the lowest degree of criticism regarding its Isnad. This is in fact a proper scientific position because we cannot accept such a problematic story without evidence or reliable chain of reporters.
In brief, we cannot accept such a baseless story - according to scientific criteria of Hadith criticism. We are therefore obliged to reject the story of the killing of Abu 'Afak. So, again this story is 100% false and fictional. Furthermore, this story is not found in Hadith books .
2. The alleged torture of Kinana Ibn Rabi Ibn Al-Huqaiq
The story as narrated in Ibn IssHaaq’s book: Kinana al-Rabi (a Jew), who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir (Jewish Tribe), was brought to the Messenger (Prophet Mohammad) who asked him about it. He denied knowing where it was. A Jew came (Tabari says "was brought"), to the Messenger and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every early morning. When the Messenger said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it, I shall kill you?" He said "Yes". The Messenger gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest, he refused to produce it, so the Messenger ordered Al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he (Al-Zubayr) kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he (Kinana) was nearly dead. Then, the Messenger delivered him (Kinana) to Muhammad bin Maslama who struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud. (Ibn IssHaaq, page 515)
There is no Isnad (chain of transmitters) for this story. Islam prohibits torture so it is impossible that he was tortured. Most likely, this false story was circulated by the Jews to discredit Islam. Only Ibn IssHaq and Tabari (Historian) narrated it in their books.
3. The killing of Sallam Ibn Abul-Huqaiq
According to this story, Prophet Mohammad (s.a.w.) allegedly wanted a man called Sallam ibn Abul-Huqaiq (who was a Jew) to be killed. So a group of Muslims broke into his house, pushed his wife away and killed Sallam. (Ibn IssHaaq, p. 482-483 )
The Isnad (chain of transmitters) of this story contains untrustworthy individuals so it cannot be relied upon. Furthermore, this story doesn't appear in Hadith collections.
4. The killing of Sarah, a freed slave
Another fake story claims that Prophet Muhammad allegedly commanded his men to kill a freed slave named Sara, who used to make fun of him, wherever they find her. She was eventually found and trampled to death by a mounted soldier. (Ibn IssHaaq p. 551)
It seems that this woman, Sarah, was probably Jewish, so this story was most likely fabricated by the Jews or Jews who pretended to be Muslims. This story is not found in Hadith books such as Bukhari, Muslim, etc.
5. The killing of the Ten Meccans
Another false story being circulated by haters of Islam is Prophet Muhammad's alleged killing of ten Meccans (six men and four women) just for making fun of him.
This story is also found in both Ibn IssHaaq's book as well as in Ibn S'ad's "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir". Ibn Sa'd was known to be the scribe of Al-Waqidi, Ibn Sa'd's book is derived from Al-Waqidi's book. Al-Waqidi, as we have stated in the beginning of this article, is one of least respected historians at his time.
Neither Al-Waqidi nor Ibn Sa'd were eye-witnesses to the killing of the Meccan Ten; they were simply collectors of stories.
It is also worthwhile mentioning that: “ ... Al-Waqidi was attacked by strict practitioners of Hadith for his loose Isnad usage ...” (Tarif Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought in the Classical Period, 1994, Cambridge University Press, p. 48)
According to Encyclopedia of Islam, Al Waqidi has been frequently criticized by Muslim writers, who say that he is unreliable. Even Imam Shafi, founder of one of the 4 Sunni Mazhabs (Schools of Thought) says that "the books written by Al-Waqidi are nothing but heaps of lies".
This story about the killing of ten Meccans is not mentioned in any Hadith book.
6. The killing of al-Huwayrith
According to this story, Al-Huwayrith insults and makes fun of Prophet Muhammad. Prophet Muhammad allegedly orders that Huwayrith be killed and allegedly Ali kills Huwayrith. (Ibn IssHaaq, p. 551)
This story is found in Ibn IssHaaq and Al-Tabari's history book. Al-Tabari acknowledges that some of the stories in his book could be false or inaccurate. No chain of transmitters is listed for this story. It has not been mentioned in Hadith books.
7. The Killing of an anonymous One-Eyed Shepherd
The story alleges that a one-eyed Shepherd authored a poem making fun of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) and Islam. A Muslim man, called Amr, after hearing this poem, killed the one-eyed Shepherd while he was sleeping. Amr later told Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) who allegedly praised Amr for his deed. Like the rest of these stories from Ibn IssHaaq’s book, this story is most likely false. It doesn’t have a chain of transmitters (Isnad). This story is only narrated in Ibn IssHaaq’s book. It is not mentioned in Hadith books.
8. The Killing of Abdullah bin Khatal and His Two Singing Girls
The story goes like this. Abdullah bin Khatal was a convert to Islam. He later apostated and his two singing girls start singing songs making fun of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.). The Prophet did not like this and allegedly ordered all three of them to be killed. Abdullah was allegedly killed by two Muslims. One of his girls was also allegedly killed too. However, the other girl managed to get away and survive. (Ibn IssHaaq, p. 551)
This story is only found in Ibn IssHaaq and is not mentioned in any Hadith book. The Isnad (chain of transmissions) for this story is broken and very weak. Thus, we can safely say that this story like the rest is false. And we've already seen that Prophet Muhammad did not order the killing of women from the above quoted Hadith. This story was most likely made up by Jews of Madinah and Ibn IssHaaq probably got this fabricated tale from them.
9. The alleged killing of Asma bint Marwan The first story that critics of Islam spread around is the killingof Asma bint Marwan, a woman from the tribe of Aus. She is said to have been a poetess who made fun of Prophet Muhammad saying that he killed many of their chiefs (not true). According to the story, when Prophet Muhammad heard this, he allegedly asked a Muslim named Umair to kill her. He brutally murdered her and Prophet Muhammad praised him for this deed.
The story of the killing of Asma' bint Marwan is mentioned by Ibn Sa'd in Kitab At-Tabaqat Al-Kabir[10] and by the author of Kinz-ul-'Ummal under number 44131 who attributes it to Ibn Sa'd, Ibn 'Adiy and Ibn 'Asaker.
What is interesting is that Ibn 'Adiy mentions it in his book Al-Kamel on the authority of Ja'far Ibn Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn As-Sabah on authority of Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ash-Shami on authority of Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj Al-Lakhmi on authority of Mujalid on authority of Ash-Shu'abi on authority of Ibn 'Abbas, and added that: “...this isnad (chain of reporters) is not narrated on authority of Mujalid but by Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj and they all (other reporters in the chain) accuse Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj of forging it.” (Ibn 'Adiy, Al-Kamel, Vol. 6, p. 145)
It is also reported by Ibn al-Gawzi in Al-'Ilal (Vol. 1, p. 279) and is listed among other flawed reports.
So according to its Isnad (chain of transmitters), the report is forged - because one of its reporters is notorious for fabricating Hadith. Hence, such this story is rejected and 100% false. Moreover this story is not mentioned in reliable Hadith books like Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, etc.
10. Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) said: "Will you listen to me O Quraish? By him who holds my life in His hand, I bring you slaughter." (Ibn IssHaaq, p. 130)
Prophet Mohammad made this statement to a group of pagan men from Quraish Tribe who were very hostile toward Muslims. They viciously abused and insulted the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) and Muslims for no reason. Prophet Mohammad (s.a.w.) tried to be patient and did not respond for a while, but the pagans did not stop their attacks. Eventually, the prophet Muhammad broke his silence and rebuked these vile pagans.
Given the fact that this story appears only in Ibn IssHaaq, and as we have proved above, this book is very unreliable, it possible that the Prophet did not actually make that statement.
However, even if he did make that statement, it is a reasonable statement, in light of the fact that pagans were initiating and continuing their insults against Muslims, so his response was to frighten them a little so that they think twice before attacking Muslims.
It is well known that Prophet Mohammad & the Muslims, coming from his exile in Medina, eventually managed to conquer Mecca bloodlessly and he granted amnesty to Quraish Tribe and the pagan people of Mecca who had been very hostile to Muslims for many years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sila nilaiakn
i dont mind tarik balik tapi what about his periwayatan tanpa isnad?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mbhcsf at 9-2-2017 10:13 PM
1. saya dikatakan telahdicredit ibn ishaq
2. saya hanya menyampaikan apa yg scholar ternama Islam kata tentang Ibn Ishaq berdasarkan penelitian mereka
3. Adakah pihak yg menyatakan ketidak setujuan atau mempersoalkan validity ibn Ishaq juga dianggap discredit - adakah ini dosa sedanglan lihatlah penceritaan sejarah ibn ihsaq yg menulis dengan penulisannya mengundang kritikan penganalisis sejarah zaman itu pun?
sekiranya ya , i will tarik balik seperti mana seorang menyuruh saya lakukan but - my point is kalau ada pandangan yg diutarakan bersabit hadis palsu ( al waqidi ) yg diriawayatkan oleh Ibn Ishaq adakah layak seseorang dikatakan discredit?
sedangkan scholars Islam meneliti karyanya juga berpendapat sedemikian?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mbhcsf at 9-2-2017 10:23 PM
Ibn Ishaq menulis bhn yg diargui kesahihannya terutama dalam isnab sumber dia dan ini dijadikan bhn mencerca Nabi Muhammad SAW -
adakah kesan tulisan ibn ishaq ini ( tengok bhnnya yg diragui kesahihannya pun digunakan against rasullullah saw ) ini lebih ringan berbanding pandangan scholars islam yg lain tentang Ibn Ishaq yg meemang sumbernya depa sangsi pun.
sedangkan kita tahu sesiapa yg menyampaikan sesuatu yg palsu berkenaan rasulullah saw adekan disebit dalam hadis mutawattir - apa hukumnya spreading lies about rasulullah saw...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sila fahamkan kenyataan Ibn Hisham yg saya tebalkan klausa/ ayatnya - yes Ibn Hisyam itu telah memetik ibn ishaq dan telah menyaring sumber yg dianggap palsu dan tak sahih atau diragui, tengok betapa jujurnya Ibn Hisyam ...
( adakah ini Ibn Hisyam bin urwah ke? )
Ibn Hashim himself claimed:
"God willing I shall begin this book with Isma'il son of Ibrahim and mention those of his offspring who were the ancestors of God's apostle one by one with what is known about them, taking no account of Isma'il's other children, omitting some of the things which has been recorded in this book in which there is no mention of the apostle and about which the Quran says nothing and which are not relevant to anything in this book or an explanation of it or evidence for it; poems which he quotes that no authority on poetry whom I have met knows of; things which it is disgraceful to discuss; matters which would distress certain people; and such reports as al-Bakka'i told me he could not accept as trustworthy - all these things I have omitted. But God willing I shall give a full account of everything else so far as it is known and trustworthy tradition is available.
[The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Karachi Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth Impression 1995, p. 691] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by MohdNizamCY at 10-2-2017 03:42 AM
Umat baginda Rasullullah di zaman ini keliru, termasuklah juga MAJORITI dari para ulama dan umarak itu sendiri. Mengapa Allah tidak ajarkan kefahaman agama (jalan yg lurus)?
Hakikatnya, sesuatu yg dipilih itu bengkok tidak akan sama sekali Dia luruskan!
Kita tahu makna Sunnahtullah dan Sunnah Rasullullah, akan tetapi hakikatnya kita tak faham pun dalam beramal menurut hak2 yg Dia syariatkan.
Sunnatullah berarti tradisi Allah dalam melaksanakan ketetapanNya sebagai Rabb yang terlaksana di alam semesta atau dalam bahasa akademis disebut hukum alam.
Apabila Allah mengahwinkan baginda Rasullullah saw dgn Aisyah, maka itulah SUNNAHTULLAH! Mana2 ulama yg terdahulu "mengubah" hakikat sebenar yg berlaku TERGOLONG dari kalangan ulama2 yg FASIK. Ini bersesuaian dgn hadis dari baginda Rasullullah saw yg menyatakan, "Di akhir zaman yg paling jahat, ulama yg memandang dunia. Tabiatnya busuk bak bau bangkai, Siapa tercium kan mati jiwanya".
Wahai ulama dan umarak. Mengajilah SETEBAL MANA PUN ILMU, yang akan memahamkan anda hanyalah ALLAH. Dan bila mana Dia fahamkan menerusi hamba2nya yang TIDAK SEPERTI KAMU, maka berhati2lah akan azab api neraka yg sudah disediakan kpd para pendusta.
Moga2 yg membaca TAHU, tiada gunanya jika Allah tidak ilhamkan TAQWA meskipun PHD dalam bidang AGAMA ISLAM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salam kembali... saya masih menanti jawapan kamu:
1. Adakah kamu Muslim, Kristian, atau bukan mana-mana?
2. Adakah kamu percaya bulat-bulat semua translation bible?
Selagi kamu tak menjawab soalan ini, ia hanya menampakkan kamu di pihak yang menyokong anti-Islam
Kalau kamu selak balik beberapa jawapan awal yang MENYANGGAH tuduhan copy paste tu, sikit pun kamu tak komen, SEBALIKNYA kamu lari pula kepada persoalan lain yang saya belum jawab:
If xbetul,betulkanlah..give the correct answer and reason, sbb tu i tanye ,for ordinary people like me it seems correct, so bg la hujah2 u balik.. as example,betul ke nabi muhammad kahwin dgn 9 years old child,yes or no?
Saya boleh jawab, tapi saya nak tunjukkan di sini, taktik puak ANTI-ISLAM, dia copy paste isu-isu yang memburukkan Islam (seperti isu memburukkan Nabi Muhammad), kemudian minta jawapan/komen di media sosial. Kalau ada jawapan yang diberi, dia alih isu lain pula.
Nampak tak, kamu juga berperanan seperti anti-Islam, yang mana saya dah buktikan ada FITNAH dari copy paste tu (selak balik jawapan saya), kamu buat tak kisah...
Saya saja jawap sikit-sikit nak tengok sifat dan attitude kamu, adakah kamu orang Islam yang betul-betul nak bersihkan tuduhan-tuduhan tu, atau kamu nak cabar orang Islam dengan tuduhan demi tuduhan...
Setakat ni saya nampak kamu macam nak cabar orang Islam, tapi kalau telahan saya salah, maafkan saya. Kalau kamu JAWAB soalan saya, saya akan teruskan jawab soalan yang kamu bawa tu.... BOLEH?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..Atheist. replied at 9-2-2017 11:48 PM
kalau jahil, byk2 membaca........ jangan terus keliru
Ekau pun ikut orang punya cerita,adik beradik burung kakak tua le ni...apa yang kau lakukan semalam pun kau tak ingat,kencing pukul berapa,berak pukul berapa,makan pukul berapa,tidur pukul berapa,setiap perkataan yang semalam kau ucapkan ada kau ingat????? Tak payah nak ikut-ikut cakap orang,ni kan lagi cerita 1400 tahun dulu...bila orang ajar burung kakak tua cakap 'selamat pagi' dia pun ucap le selamat pagi berulang2 ...dah tak kira pagi ke,tengahari ke,petang ke ,subuh ke...selamat pagi,selamat pagi, cam kau le.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..Atheist. replied at 10-2-2017 11:35 PM
kesiannya kau nie...........
Kasihan le kat diri kau... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salam... saya masih menanti jawapan tuan pembuka thread:
1. Adakah kamu Muslim, Kristian, atau bukan mana-mana?
2. Adakah kamu percaya bulat-bulat semua translation bible?
Nampaknya tuan pembuka thread macam tak berminat nak jawab.... kalau dia Islam, senang saja nak mengaku. Maka selagi tiada jawapan, saya anggap tuan pembuka thread adalah seorang KRISTIAN, melainkan dia tampil untuk menafikan.
Saya quote sikit:
Post time 6-2-2017 09:15 AM
As Muslims, we are not suppose to judge, we accept all religion, race, color or creed and after all one of the five pillars of Islam is the belief of the existence of the 4 holy books.
By spreading such messagess, does it make you a good Catholic?
Kat atas sebut 'as Muslims', kemudian diikuti pertanyaan 'does it make you a good Catholic'...
Lanjutannya, menunjukkan artikel itu mewakili Kristian pula:
We Christians are living in a majority Muslim country and we, especially our children in the schools, will be increasingly confronted with
The teachings of Prophet Muhammad vs. Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. We should have some basic understanding of both teachings so that we could defend and contend for o
Apa pun, tuan pembuka thread tidak menjawab soalan saya samada beliau Muslim, Kristian, atau bukan mana-mana. Namun kenyataannya yang 'macam' mudah percaya terhadap tuduhan dan dakwaan itu, dan juga penggunaan perkataan 'kasar' kepada Nabi Muhammad SAW, menampakkan beliau bukanlah seorang Islam, tetapi mungkin beliau ingin tahu jawapan dari pihak Muslim, atas sebab-sebab yang beliau tidak nyatakan dengan jelas..
Alasan untuk counter hujah kat tempat lain (dirahsiakan) alasan yang lemah. Kalau sumber kat tempat tu dah tak boleh dipercayai, tiada guna nak counter kat situ.... kan?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mnm77 at 13-2-2017 12:03 PM
Untuk tidak menghampakan pembaca bebenang ini, saya teruskan juga cuba menjawab isu yang kedua pula (yang pertama dah terbukti FITNAH):
Yang kedua...
Muhammad said “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” (Muslim 1:33)
Jesus said “He who lives by the sword will die by the sword” (Matthew 26:52)
Berkaitan: “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”, ini sebahagian dari hadith yang selalu diambil 'out of context' oleh pihak anti-Islam nak buat tuduhan masuk Islam secara paksa. Hadith itu merujuk kepada pihak musyrikin (penyembah berhala) yang khianat pada perjanjian dengan orang Islam dan memerangi orang Islam.
Dalam Al-Quran, Surah Al-Kafirun, sudah JELAS disebut BAGIMU AGAMAMU, BAGIKU AGAMAKU, dan Al-Quran merupakan sumber PALING TINGGI dalam Islam, TIADA PAKSAAN untuk peluk AGAMA ISLAM. Hadith tu pula diambil dengan salah faham kerana mengambil terjemahan luar konteks apa yang berlaku pada masa tersebut, kemudian buat GENERALISASI. Ini BUKAN kaedah yang betul.
Dari hadith tu, 'fight'/lawan/perang BUKAN MAKSUD UMUM hadith tersebut. Kalau itu lah yang kena difahami terjemahan hadith itu, maka setiap orang Islam kena bunuh orang bukan Islam, selagi tak masuk Islam (INI BUKAN AJARAN ISLAM). Ia khusus kepada pihak yang khianat pada perjanjian dan perang orang Islam, ketika zaman Nabi Muhammad SAW.
Nampak tak, ada salah faham, quoting hadith 'out of context'?
Kalau rajin nak baca artikel yang ditulis dengan lebih mendalam, boleh baca sini (saya tiada masa nak tulis panjang, dan artikel dalam link di bawah ni tiada kaitan dengan saya):
https://donotsaytrinity.wordpres ... until-they-testify/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of course, carry on , you are not disappointing us at all... this is about the haq...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mnm77 at 14-2-2017 08:53 AM
Now for the third:
Muhammad stoned women for adultery. (Sahih Muslim 4206)
Jesus said “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” (John 8:7)
1. The reference above is not good for hadith referencing. Should include publisher, or is it the original hand written Sahih Muslim? The original one is not numbered like that, it is numbered according to books (kitab) and chapters (bab). Different publishers used different numbering methods, there were some who combined all the books (collection of books of ahaadith in Sahih Muslim), some use different arrangement of the books. So, referencing Sahih Muslim is best by book and chapter, not merely numbering.
2. The case for stoning, that was due to the women herself kept persisting to be punished, and prophet was reluctant at first. Read here the full story:
'Abdullah b. Buraida reported on the authority of his father that Ma'iz b. Malik al-Aslami came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and said:
Allah's Messenger, I have wronged myself; I have committed adultery and I earnestly desire that you should purify me. He turned him away. On the following day, he (Ma'iz) again came to him and said: Allah's Messenger, I have committed adultery. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) turned him away for the second time, and sent him to his people saying: Do you know if there is anything wrong with his mind. They denied of any such thing in him and said: We do not know him but as a wise good man among us, so far as we can judge. He (Ma'iz) came for the third time, and he (the Holy Prophet) sent him as he had done before. He asked about him and they informed him that there was nothing wrong with him or with his mind. When it was the fourth time, a ditch was dug for him and he (the Holy Prophet) pronounced judg- ment about him and he wis stoned. He (the narrator) said: There came to him (the Holy Prophet) a woman from Ghamid and said: Allah's Messenger, I have committed adultery, so purify me. He (the Holy Prophet) turned her away. On the following day she said: Allah's Messenger, Why do you turn me away? Perhaps, you turn me away as you turned away Ma'iz. By Allah, I have become pregnant. He said: Well, if you insist upon it, then go away until you give birth to (the child). When she was delivered she came with the child (wrapped) in a rag and said: Here is the child whom I have given birth to. He said: Go away and suckle him until you wean him. When she had weaned him, she came to him (the Holy Prophet) with the child who was holding a piece of bread in his hand. She said: Allah's Apostle, here is he as I have weaned him and he eats food. He (the Holy Prophet) entrusted the child to one of the Muslims and then pronounced punishment. And she was put in a ditch up to her chest and he commanded people and they stoned her. Khalid b Walid came forward with a stone which he flung at her head and there spurted blood on the face of Khalid and so he abused her. Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) heard his (Khalid's) curse that he had huried upon her. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Khalid, be gentle. By Him in Whose Hand is my life, she has made such a repentance that even if a wrongful tax-collector were to repent, he would have been forgiven. Then giving command regarding her, he prayed over her and she was buried.
(Sahih Muslim, Kitab Hudud)
3. What is the punishement of adultery as in bible? Here is some references, if these references are wrong, please ask your Christians friend to verify and rectify where necessary:
Proverbs 6:32
He who commits adultery lacks sense; he who does it destroys himself.
Leviticus 20:10
“If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
John 8:3-11
The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”
Deuteronomy 22:22
“If a man is found lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman. So you shall purge the evil from Israel.
Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
Nampaknya hukum pasal ZINA dalam Bible, hampir sama dengan hukum Islam.... yang ni orang Kristian sendiri pun tak faham kah?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..Atheist. replied at 11-2-2017 02:01 AM
semoga tuhan zeus mengasihani kamu
La....kata athiest...kot masih percaya tuhan??? Tuhan zeus ni athiest juga ke? Eh! Tak kan pulak tuhan jadi athiest...adik beradik cacing ko ni... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mnm77 at 15-2-2017 08:26 AM
@Wal..Hal
Tuduhan/isu ke-empat:
Muhammad permitted stealing from unbelievers (Bukhan 44:668, Ibn Ishaq 764)
Jesus said “Thou shalt not steal” (Matthew 19:18)
Tuduhan yang ni adalah FITNAH. Cuba bagi rujukan penuh 'Bukhan'? Atau Sahih Bukhari?
Rujukan Ibn Ishaq dikira maklumat atau cerita sejarah dan tidak dapat disahihkan semua maklumat sejarah itu, yang mana yang selari dengan sumber yang sahih dan kuat, baru diterima. Yang bertentangan dengan yang sahih dan yang kuat, ditolak.
Dalam Al-Quran dah jelas, mencuri merupakan kesalahan yang besar, hukuman kepada pencuri adalah potong tangan, dan sesiapa yang bertaubat atas kezalimannya, sesungguhnya Allah Maha Pengampun (maksud ayat dari surah Al-Maidah, 38-39)
Orang Islam tidak dibenarkan mencuri, samada sesama orang Islam mahupun pada orang bukan Islam. Dalam kes PERANG, apabila musuh tewas dan lari dari medan perang, dibenarkan ambil harta musuh, ini adalah ghanimah (harta rampasan perang), bukannya mencuri. Membunuh adalah jenayah, tapi dalam perang, BUNUH bukanlah jenayah bila pertahankan agama dan negara. Orang Islam mahupun bukan Islam, bila berperang tidak dapat elak dari berlaku pembunuhan....
Tuduhan yang mengatakan dibenarkan mencuri dari orang bukan Islam itu merupakan FITNAH dari pihak ANTI-ISLAM. Sila buktikan dengan rujukan yang penuh, COPY PASTE pun dah tak betul 'Bukhan' tu rujukan apa yang sebenarnya?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Berkaitan:
Muhammad permitted stealing from unbelievers (Bukhan 44:668)
Mungkin hadith yang dimaksudkan hadith di bawah ni
(numbering of hadith based on the website):
http://hadithcollection.com/sahi ... ith-number-668.html
Sahih Bukhari Volume 003, Book 044, Hadith Number 668.
Narated By 'Abaya bin Rafa'a bin Raft' bin Khadij : My grandfather said, "We were in the company of the Prophet at Dhul-Hulaifa. The people felt hungry and captured some camels and sheep (as booty). The Prophet was behind the people. They hurried and slaughtered the animals and put their meat in pots and started cooking it. (When the Prophet came) he ordered the pots to be upset and then he distributed the animals (of the booty), regarding ten sheep as equal to one camel. One of the camels fled and the people ran after it till they were exhausted. At that time there were few horses. A man threw an arrow at the camel, and Allah stopped the camel with it. The Prophet said, "Some of these animals are like wild animals, so if you lose control over one of these animals, treat it in this way (i.e. shoot it with an arrow)." Before distributing them among the soldiers my grandfather said, "We may meet the enemies in the future and have no knives; can we slaughter the animals with reeds?" The Prophet said, "Use whatever causes blood to flow, and eat the animals if the name of Allah has been mentioned on slaughtering them. Do not slaughter with teeth or fingernails and I will tell you why: It is because teeth are bones (i.e. cannot cut properly) and fingernails are the tools used by the Ethiopians (whom we should not imitate for they are infidels)."
1. Booty = Ghanimah (harta rampasan perang). Dalam perang, haiwan yang ditinggalkan musuh juga termasuk harta rampasan perang.
2. Hadith tu BUKAN PASAL membenarkan curi dari non-Muslim, hadith tu pasal cara menyembelih haiwan ketika perjalanan atau ekspedisi perang dan tiada alatan sesuai (pisau) untuk sembelih.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by mnm77 at 16-2-2017 04:13 PM
@Wal..Hal
Tuduhan/isu/dakwaan ke-5:
Muhammad permitted lying (Sahih Muslim 6303, Bukhari
49:857)
Jesus said “Thou shalt not bear false
witness.” (Matthew 19:18)
Ni dah sah TAK FAHAM Islam, pastu sebarkan benda yang dia tak faham! Hadith tu bukan pasal konteks membenarkan penipuan dalam semua keadaan, hadith tu PASAL orang yang melakukan PERDAMAIAN bukanlah dikira pembohong.
Ikut Hukum Islam, menipu adalah DILARANG (ini hukum UMUM), kecuali dalam kes tertentu, dibolehkan (sekadar perlu) untuk mendamaikan.
Sahih Muslim Book 032, Hadith Number 6303.
Chapter : Forbiddance of telling a lie and the cases in which telling of lie is permissible.
Humaid b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of 'Uqba b. Abu Mu'ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).
Sahih Bukhari Volume 003, Book 049, Hadith Number 857.
Narated By Um Kulthum bint Uqba : That she heard Allah's Apostle saying, "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar."
Hukum pasal menipu dan berbohong, ikut Islam dah cukup JELAS, DILARANG, kalau rajin cari, akan jumpa banyak dalilnya... cukup saya bagi satu dalil dari Al-Quran:
...Laknat Allah ke atas pendusta (Aal-'Imran, 61)
Dua hadith di atas juga tiada kena-mengena dengan PERSAKSIAN (witness)
Jesus said “Thou shalt not bear false
witness.” (Matthew 19:18)
Lain kali kalau nak buat perbandingan, cari hadith pasal persaksian! Dalam Islam, persaksian palsu (false witness) adalah DITEGAH, ia merupakan dosa yang besar.
Inilah cara puak anti-Islam sebar fitnah, ambil hadith luar konteks, buat perbandingan yang salah pastu tabur fitnah! Siapa yang percaya copy paste tu, senang-senang dia termakan fitnah puak anti-Islam!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 9-2-2017 07:36 PM
