. FFI | Document | Artikel | Forum | Wiki | Glossary | Prophet Muhammad Illustrated

Mengapa Dalam Hukum Zinah Lelaki Aman Menghamili Wanita?

Seluk beluk ttg hak/kewajiban wanita, pernikahan, waris, bentuk2 pelecehan hak2 wanita dlm Islam dll.

Postby checev » Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:45 pm

Mengapa hukuman pria lebih ringan daripada hukuman wanita? Mengapa bayi yang tidak berdosa itu harus mati karena kesalahan ibunya?

Ditunggu dulu sampe melahirkan. Setelah selesai menyusui baru hukuman dilaksanakan. (Seperti yg dicontohkan pada Jaman Nabi)
FYI, PRIA atau WANITA dirajam kalo udah NIKAH, dicambuk kalo BELUM NIKAH.
Mengapa hukumannya demikian kejam?
Mohon jangan jawab karena Tuhan bilang begitu.

Siapa yg bikin hukuman itu???
Anda nanya ke saya???,,,Dude, u r barking to the wrong tree.
I want ask you,Adadeh, why do we need to have a half bald during manchus? Why don’t just have a complete bald or a quarter?
Frankly speaking, I don’t know why since it’s God who command it.

Inilah salah satu sebab saya tidak percaya ini semua aturan hukum dari Tuhan.

Jadi aturan freesex, boleh Orgy, boleh Swoop Istri/Suami, One night stand itu dari Tuhan??
Anyway, it's up to you. Yours is for u, mine is for me.

Setelah selesai membahas berita ini, profesor saya bertanya apakah orang2 Jawa khususnya atau Indonesia umumnya butuh hukum biadab yang dibuat bangsa Arab itu di Indonesia? Hukum2 biadab itu hanya cocok untuk orang2 biadab, katanya....bla..bla..bla..

Menurut anda apakah ZINAH beradab?
Apakah anda setuju dengan One Night Stand(mau sama mau)?
Nah kalo anda jawaban anda iya, then forget to discuss it further, it serves no purpose.

btw,
HUDUD itu dilaksanakan setelah,Rukun Islamnya udah mantap, then ada amar ma'ruf nahi mungkar (yg menghilangkan chances to get close with zinah) then upon a mukmin society the HUDUD should be applied with the guidance of the Amir.

Ibaratnya,kucing di kurung di dalam kamar kemudian disediain ikan asin dideketnya, namun jika ia mendekat,kita pukul sebagai hukuman. Ini ibarat pelaksanaan HUDUD tampat ada da’wah/conditioning yg cukup. That 's the Ushul Fiqh in implementing the HUDUD.

HUDUD bukan mencegah perbuatan KEJI DAN MUNGKAR (e.g. pemerkosaan pembantu di Mid east, korupsi di tanah air tercinta), SHOLAT lah yg MENCEGAH perbuatan KEJI dan MUNGKAR.

HUDUD adalah sebuah TOPI/turban/songkok/gear head setelah menjalankan syariah Islam(syariah dalam definisi general).

Essensi dari HUDUD berbeda dengan Staatblad,
Contoh:
1. Supaya ngga ada pemberontakan : Dikeluarkan Undang2 Subversi.
2. Supaya ngga ada perampokan: Dikeluarkan KUHPidana

Kalo diHUDUD:
1. Pencuri dipotong TANGANnya, supaya diakhirat ngga dihukum malah dapat PAHALA karena keimanannya.
Adapun i'tibar,pelajaran, tiu kembali ke diri masing2.

2. PEZINA di RAJAM, sebagai supaya diakhirat ngga dihukum malah dapat PAHALA karena bukti keimanannya.

HUDUD adalah semacam converter, perbuatan jahat (mencuri) tapi malah jadi perbuatan baik. (condition apply)

Jadi Anda SALAH FAHAM jika mengira HUDUD adalah untuk MENGHILANGKAN/MENCEGAH Perbuatan KEJI DAN MUNGKAR.
Karena Allah sendiri yg bilang kalo: SHOLAT itu mencegah PERBUATAN KEJI DAN MUNGKAR.

Dia tidak BILANG HUDUD itu mencegah PERBUATAN KEJI DAN MUNGKAR.

Kalo ADA ULAMA/KYIA yg ingin MENYAPU perbuatan KEJI dan MUNKAR dengan HUDUD,,bisa diketawain ama orang kampung.
Karena itu ibarat orang mau MASAK SAYUR ASEM pake Blast Furnace, hasilnya: sayur asem ilang,pancinya pun raib.
------------------------------------------------------------
Mengenai Prof temen anda,give him my regard and tell him that ARABS is by Blood/DNA and a MOSLEM is by a will/faith.
------------------------------------------


For I#$% Bangsat: i'm trying to discuss, not to debate since my beloved Prophet ask us to avoid debate.
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Postby Adadeh » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:05 am

Siapa yg bikin hukuman itu???
Anda nanya ke saya???,,,Dude, u r barking to the wrong tree.

This is the source of the problem. You just accept this extremely cruel and unjust law because someone told you this is God's order. For me, that's a blind faith. You have a brain to examine and deterimine what's good and bad. Throwing rocks to someone to cause him/her dead as punishment is just wrong and quite barbaric, no matter what this person did. Therefore, no sane government in this modern world embraces such a law anymore. If this is God's law, then it should pass the test of time, should be accepted according to human values, which are given by Him also, throughout the rest of time.

I want ask you,Adadeh, why do we need to have a half bald during manchus? Why don’t just have a complete bald or a quarter?

The manchurians didn't hurt anybody for shaving their hair this or that way. Your question is completely irrelevant. We are talking about a hedious law that takes away human's life by stoning them, okay?

Frankly speaking, I don’t know why since it’s God who command it.

If you don't know, then try to find out. Is it possible that it's comming from someone who claimed that he's God's messenger and he's so twisted that he just blurred out cruel laws disregarding human's values and rights?

Menurut anda apakah ZINAH beradab?

No, it's not acceptable, it should be avoided with all cause because it damages marital relationship, it hurts a lot of people's feeling, it may cause bigger problems with unwanted babies, and so on. The same goes to one-night-stand relationship. I believe in healthy and responsible sexual relationship within marital bond. But adultery or sexual betrayal is personal problem between the people who are involved in the relationship, and it's not the government's business to punish or to interfere with them. If a wife betrays her husband, then he can divorce her, they can go the the court to dismiss the marriage. Why does the government need to kill her? She didn't try to kill her husband, she didn't put his life in danger. Why need to shed blood for such personal matters between couple?

And how come commiting adultery is considered as the most henious crime, while commiting mass rape is allowed in Islam? The Qur’an in Sura 33:50 grants men the right to use slave girls sexually. Bukhari 7,62,137 talks about Muslim warriors who used to have sex with women captured in war. But because they did not want to impregnate them and wanted to return them for ransom after raping them, they went to Muhammad asking about coitus interruptus (spilling the sperm on the ground). The prophet did not prohibit the raping of the women but rather said do not do coitus interruptus because if God has destined for a soul to be born it would be born anyway. See also Bukhari 8.77.6.

How can this be all make sense? How God can be so darn stupid to make such laws? The Creator of the whole universe with gazillion galaxies full with extremely smart creatures with consiences to distinguish good and bad, but He Himself can't even make such simple law to deal with adultery and rape. For me, this clearly proves that God is not the one who created Sharia.
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

Postby checev » Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:14 pm

You just accept this extremely...bla..bla..bla

Completely wrong...Dude.
Here is my step that arrive me to HUDUD. It's quite a long story. Try to simplify it:

1. is there any God?
If yes, continue to No2.
if No, then enjoy my life.
My research conclusion is: there is God(Supreme Being)

2. Does He "try" to communicate with humankind?
If Yes, continue to No3.
If No...why bother with God.
My conclusion is: it makes no sense if God just leave the creature without make them knowing him (don't care). He should build up some kind of "communication" with human/creature...If He does, then the idea of Religion can serve this very well.

3. There are so many Religions. Which one should I chose?
Hereby, I chose Islam because it explains about God straight forward.
3.1. Hinduism: Krishna is God? I remember the conversation between Krishna and Arjun just before Arjun change his mind to joint the Mahabharata war (he was hesitate to joint). It show me, that Krishna is nothing but human. A Noble human in fact.

3.2. Christianity: Jesus Son of God?

3.3. Heavenly bodies are merely looks like a history to me.

3.4. Jews: God only chose Israel??? Meanwhile I'm 100% Gentiles. The Khazar, though they follow the Talmud, The Chosen people still does not recognized them as the Chosen People.

4. Islam:
4.1. God is one and only one; it's not half times two.
4.2. He is preserving everything.
4.3. He beget not, nor begotten.
4.4. He does not need from His creature (including me)
That's struck me, Islam is the TRUE RELIGION.
If Islam is a FALSE RELIGION, then I should create a New Religion yet it makes me feel like a fool. Btw, it’s no way for me to accept that there is no God. My consciousness concludes that there is a God.

In Automation there is so called,” Emergency Button” if you press it, other triggers is void /nullified. In same way, if the religion cannot define “God” correctly then “Emergency Button is pressed”…I don’t event bother to think about how good is their service, management, charity, etc….in fact, the atheist can do better on this.
So if you want me to “murtad”, give me a definition of God which is better than Islamic definition.

------------------------------------------------------------
The Creator of the whole universe with gazillion galaxies full with extremely smart creatures with consiences to distinguish good and bad, but He Himself can't even make such simple law to deal with adultery and rape.

About the (1) IMPLEMENTATION of (2) HUDUD, have read about the "the Cat inside the ROOM"? I see no defect or void in it.

The facts that you cannot understand HIS decision making pattern, does not bother me at all since GOD is more intelligent than us. Ibarat Anak SD ngga “mudeng” ama keputusan Professor  it’s normal

It's prove me that HUDUD is created by OMNIPOTENT not by Human who have fear.

If somebody ask me(human) to create a Law about ZINAH, I will make the LAW in such a way that people will not again me. I will make the law similar to how you(Adadeh) define the Zinah Law
For example:
adultery or sexual betrayal is personal problem between the people who are involved in the relationship, and it's not the government's business to punish or to interfere with them. If a wife betrays her husband, then he can divorce her,
..bla..bla..bla

if God fear me, then why should I call him God.

In fact, the way HUDUD is defined, even drive me to believe that IT IS NOT DEFINED BY HUMAN.
If it's define by HUMAN,it'll sound like this:
adultery or sexual betrayal is personal problem between the people who are involved in the relationship, and it's not the government's business to punish or to interfere with them. If a wife betrays her husband, then he can divorce her,
..bla..bla..bla
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Postby ali5196 » Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:17 pm

1. BENTUK ATAU ISI ?

checev wrote:[3. There are so many Religions. Which one should I chose? hereby, I chose Islam because it explains about God straight forward.


Anda lebih mementingkan "straightforward"nya atau sikap ke-Ilahi-an ? yang lebih penting BENTUK atau ISInya ? "Straightforward" belum tentu benar, belum tentu bermoral.

I can be straightforward with you but it does NOT mean I am right. kalau anda nanya jalan ke saya, saya jawab "straightforward", padahal mustinya belok ke kiri.

You see what I am saying ?

Anda bilang:

"4.1
God is one and only one; it's not half times two" = HOW DO YOU KNOW ? And WHY is two BAD ?
"4.2
He is preserving everything" = so ?? Does it mean good ? I can preserve my dead cat. Does that show goodness ???
"4.3 He beget not, nor begotten. He does not need from His creature (including me)" YES, HE MOST CERTAINLY DOES ! YOUR ALLAH NEEDS YOU. Kalau tidak mengapa capek2 "ngutus nabi" utnuk mengingatkan kalian ? HE NEEDS YOU TO FILL HIS 'SYURGA' !

Gitu lho mas. Ini yang maksud kita, anda harus cari tahu dulu, harus telaah dulu. Sampai disini anda copy nggak jalan pikir kita ?

Jadi kita tentukan dulu mana yang lebih penting; BENTUK atau ISI. Kadang bentuk kadonya dari luar rada murahan, tapi isinya diamond.

2. IRASIONALITAS
"It's prove me that HUDUD is created by OMNIPOTENT not by Human who have fear." No my friend. It proofs 1+1 = 3.

"The facts that you cannot understand HIS decision making pattern, does not bother me at all since GOD is more intelligent than us. Ibarat Anak SD ngga “mudeng” ama keputusan Professor."
Friend, Profesor bisa more intelligent, but NOT always MORAL. Cara berpikir ini yagn mengakibatkan orang selalu takut2 akan mereka yang posisinya lebih tinggi. Rakyat yang tidak mau dicekoki adalah rakyat yang berani menuntut tanggung jawab penguasanya. Anak kecilpun harus berani tanya sama profesor, "prof, mengapa anda suruh saya terjunkan diri ke sungai ? prof aja loncat duluan, nanti baru saya menyusul !" Nah, itu ciri2 anak yang nggak mau ditekan, anak yang punya pemikiran logis.

I hope useful my contribution ini.
ali5196
Translator
 
Posts: 17308
Images: 135
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 5:15 pm

Postby Adadeh » Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:04 am

Iya, gue juga punya pertanyaan2 yang sama dengan ali5196. Please answer them one by one Checev.

I had a problem believing whatever Muhammad said about God because his behaviour and deeds don't portray him in any way as a messenger of God. It's just as simple as that.

Also, you haven't answer my question how come God made a law to punish adultery so severely but allow mass rape? Adultery is perhaps the most heinous crime in Qur'an, but then why allow Muslims to rape women?
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

Postby checev » Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:48 pm

Ok then, I agrees with u guys.
Let’s discuss it point by point.
Anyway, kadang gwa bypass pertanyaan2 Adadeh, karena banyaknya point yg dia sampaikan, hence, I pick one of them which is probably the core of the discussion.
------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, here is my core belief about God.
1. Without disregard ur belief, I don't believe in the existence of God but one (Why is "ONE GOD" wrong? ).
2. God should be Omnipotent (Why is "the Omnipotent of God" wrong? ).
3. God shouldn't be limited by Space and Time.

Please show me that any of my core believe is wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------
Case study (in reply to Adadeh's):
1. Tsunami, Katrina, earth quake in South Asia, show me that God "KILL" HUMAN.
2. HE kills hundred thousand of human, what did they do for this "punishment"?
3. Should we protest HIM?
Those catastrophes show me that HE INDEED KILLs them.

My point is:
1. God KILL “pezina” for his/her adultery.
2. God KILL a social worker (e.g. in tsunami) for no reason.

Or put it this way,

1. I kill the guy who gets my daughter pregnant and let me bear the medical fee.
2. I kill the guy who do nothing wrong to me.

Which one is more justifiable?
In other word, if you "accept" God’s action in Point 2, why can't you accept the other?
In short, if you accept my 2nd Action, why can’t the first?

Adadeh, please give comment, I would appreciate it .
------------------------------------------------------------
“Bentuk” atau ”Isi”? (in reply to Ali5196's)
How do you define them?
Kalo menurut saya:
1. "BENTUK" = Discussion on syariah/aturan2/agama/HUDUD/dll.
"ISI" = Discussion on “God” .

2."BENTUK" ==> Pahitnya Racun, Pahitnya Obat, Manisnya Tart, Enaknya Sashimi, Sumanto's ("the cannibal from java") favorite food.
"ISI" ==> BERGUNA/TIDAK BERGUNA BAGI TUBUH

3. "BENTUK" == WWI, WWII, The War of the Three Kingdoms, Natural Disaster, Starvation which leading to death, Plane Crash, Stoning ed to DEATH etc etc
"ISI" == GOD "KILL" 'em all.

4. "BENTUK" == MEMUKUL tengkuk anak yg tersendak, "MENUSUK" pasien dng jarum, MEMOTONG kaki pasien yg tetanus, CUT someone's throat during emergency (He/She get heart attack/electrical shock) for temporary artificial breathing.
"ISI" ==Menyelamatkan

Irrationality
Is God a rational being???
Anyway, rationality is nothing to do with TRUE/FALSE.

Following statement, If (A => Rational) Then (A => TRUE) is a "don't care state" in the "TRUTH TABLE". It's marked as "X".

Anyway, "TRUTH TABLE" is a well-known method to simplified a long and complicated statements into a shortest one, without changing the final value (T, F, X)

Cerita untuk ilustrasi gwa punya point:
Ada dua ekor semut (suami istri) yg MIGRASI dari dari Pasar Minggu ke Kerawang,let say, setelah 2 bulan berjalan maka sampailah mereka ke Karawang.
2 minggu kemudian mereka pun punya keturunan dan,waktu berjalan, tumbuhlah jadi semut junior.
Suatu hari si semut Junior Hilang. dan baru ditemukan esok harinya.
ketika di interogasi si Semut Junior bahwa dia kemaren ke Pasar Minggu.
Tentu saja, si semut Senior bilang itu irrasional.
tapi si Semut Junior bilang bahwa dia pagi tadi dia tertidur di buah salak waktu bangun, ia sudah ada di Pasar Minggu. Kemudian sorenya tertidur di Buah Rambutan and waktu bangun sudah ada di Karawang lagi.

Sebenarnya pagi tadi ada pedagang yg menjual salak ke Pasar Minggu kemudian Beli Rambutan dari Pasar Minggu (tentu saja dia naik trucknya).

Di domain Semut, kejadian itu Irrasional, tapi di Domain kita, hal itu rasional aja, karena si Junior naik trucknya pedagang tadi.
Atau,
Seandainya kita balik ke jaman dulu, and bilang ke Pangeran Diponegoro bahwa dari Gua Selarong ke Amsterdam itu bisa ditempuh dalam waktu kurang dari sehari....mungkin dia bilang "nda'..nda'...nda' masuk akal iku".
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Postby Adadeh » Sat Nov 12, 2005 7:15 am

Checev,
I disagree with your concept of God based on your believe (Islam). Please understand that I want to focus my answer on the credibility of Muhammad as a messenger of God. For me, a messenger of God should be a noble person who gives moral guidances and examples for entire human being that can endure the test of time and should remain valuable and acceptable throughout generation after generation.

When we evaluate examples set by Muhammad., we see a man who raided caravans and villages, massacred unnamed people, looted them, enslaved their wives and children, raped them and committed all sorts of atrocities worthy of the worst gangsters. None of that affects the faith of these believers. Nothing can shake them and wake them up.

Shouldn’t you check first the credentials of Muhammad? What if Muhammad lied? We have evidences that Muhammad lied! We also have Muhammad’s own words encouraging his followers to lie if telling the truth does not make them achieve their goals. Of course he did not like anyone lie to him. He severely punished and warned those who kept some of the stolen booty after the raids. But he did not see anything wrong in lying to others for his own gain or as he put it, in the cause of Allah. In fact he said "war is a game of deception". How such person can be trusted? With what we know about him, isn’t it foolish to believe in his tale about God? If he is shown to be mistaken in almost everything that can be verified, how can we trust his description of things we cannot verify?

Anyway, here is my core belief about God.

How did you come out with all of these understanding? Did you thought about it with your own logic or because Muhammad told you so? If it is based on your logic, then please explain to me why such an Omnipotent God is unable to create civilized and just law for human being?

1. Tsunami, Katrina, earth quake in South Asia, show me that God "KILL" HUMAN.

I don't see it that way. For me, tsunami is a natural dissaster that caused the loss of hundreds of thousands human lives. If God needs to punish some place or community so severly, I think it should be Jakarta instead, the center of all corruptions and crimes in Indonesia. But no, I don't believe God kills people literally as punishment by using natural dissaster.

God KILL “pezina” for his/her adultery.

No way. This relates to my question in the previous posting:
how come God made a law to punish adultery so severely but allow mass rape?
Where is the logic behind this? If God doesn't want us to use our logic to judge His decision (IF it indeed comes from Him), why then He bothers to give us ability to think in the first place?
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

Postby checev » Sat Nov 12, 2005 3:55 pm

Adadeh, I never said tsunami is a PUNISHMENT.
1. Tsunami, Katrina, earth quake in South Asia, show me that God "KILL" HUMAN.
2. HE kills hundred thousand of human, what did they do for this "punishment"?
3. Should we protest HIM?

In contrary, semua itu maksudnya:
My point is:
1. God KILL “pezina” for his/her adultery.
2. God KILL a social worker (e.g. in tsunami) for no reason.


Please read carefully, jangan bikin statement atas nama saya,padahal saya tidak mengatakan hal itu. Kacau kalo diskusi terus gini....
------------------------------------------------------------

Adadeh, kayanya kita perlu diskusi satu point aja dulu. Kalo begini terus my otak bisa exhausted. karena omongan gwa selalu di salah artiin/ di paraphrased ama leu terus.

Really,,, give-up talk to u kalo begini dulu. Kalo ngga psti dengan apa yg saya maksud. Mending konfirmasikan dulu ke saya.

Seperti yg saya lakukan dengan Ali5196 Tentang Bentuk dan Isi.
Saya ngga faham dengan apa yg dia maksud dengan Bentuk dan Isi, karena definisi penting dalam diskusi. Makanya saya konfimasikan ke dia yg saya/checev maksud dng "Bentuk dan Isi" seperti yg itu....sama ato ngga. Nanti malah jadi kaya iklan susu bendera.
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Postby checev » Sat Nov 12, 2005 4:24 pm

If THESE are the truth, I will not come to Islam:
When we evaluate examples set by Muhammad., we see a man who raided caravans and villages, massacred unnamed people, looted them, enslaved their wives and children, raped them and committed all sorts of atrocities worthy of the worst gangsters. None of that affects the faith of these believers. Nothing can shake them and wake them up.

Those (Muhammad the charlatan, the rapist etc) were what they told me.

AND
This is what I read and analysis with MY OWN mind.

1. Old-Arab Confederation VS New Order (Muhammad PBUH).
2. The feudal Old Arab Confederation VS New Leadership System which try to leverage "the caste"
3. Old Arab Confederation's Sanction VS Caravan Raiding of Muhammad S.A.W.
4. Random caravan raiding VS WAR tactics/Eye for Eye.
NO REPORT about (Neutral/Ally) NON-MUSLIM's caravan is raided by Muhammad PBUH.
5. Personal Attack VS System Attack


Adadeh, thanks for your Interpretations about (charlattan/rappist/etc), I got my own source and resource to interpreted them.
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Re: Penjelasan tentang zinah

Postby From_hell1 » Sat Nov 12, 2005 6:09 pm

hamba_allah wrote:Bismillah..

Saudara-saudaraku..
Pengertian zinah tidak hanya masuknya antara 2 alat kelamin yang berlawanan. Tetapi persentuhan antara kulit 2 orang yang bukan muhrim (ikatan darah/saudara) termasuk zina juga.

Semoga bisa dimengerti. Terimakasih




Yah bagus lah hamba allah," persentuhan 2 kulit dah zinah" brarti emang dong kalo muslim itu tukang zinah semua. Emangnya seumur hidup orang itu gak pernah sentuhan sama orang lawan jenis yg bukan muhrimnya?, yah contoh yang paling gampang kalo manggil orang kan kadang2 coel2 kalo orang yg dipanggil gak denger.
ckckc hebat ya Pantes lah pelecehan TKI di arab itu paling banyak dan gak ada yg berhasil menjebloskan di penjara, gak percaya??? nonton tuh berita. gimana mau menjebloskan, orang hakim di arab aja suka ngelecehin pembantunya kok :lol:
From_hell1
Acuh Tak Acuh
Acuh Tak Acuh
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:52 pm

Postby Adadeh » Sun Nov 13, 2005 12:23 am

Checev,
Maaf kalau kamu sampai merasa saya salah mengerti maksudmu. Tidak ada niat untuk mengacaukan pernyataanmu.

Adadeh, I never said tsunami is a PUNISHMENT.

Anda bilang bahwa God kills people, contohnya tsunami di Aceh. Kita sedang bicara tentang Hukum rajam, pembunuhan atas nama Tuhan, sebagai HUKUMAN orang berzinah. Jadi Tuhan menghukum dengan membunuh. Jika Tuhan membunuh orang Aceh dengan tsunami tanpa maksud menghukum, lalu menurutmu apa maksud Tuhan melakukan hal itu?

Seperti yang saya telah katakan di posting terdahulu, saya tidak percaya bahwa bencana alam adalah hukuman dari Tuhan. Buat saya bencana alam adalah fenomena alam biasa saja dengan segala konsekuensinya. Apalagi memang telah diramalkan oleh para meterologis dan geofisis dari Indonesia bahwa lempeng2 di dasar laut di daerah Aceh bertumbukan sekali setiap 150 tahun (kalau tidak salah). Makanya sampai saat inipun gempa masih saja terus berlangsung di daerah itu.

Dan ini dari postingmu sebelumnya:
Is God a rational being???

Jawaban saya: IYA. Pendapat saya ini berdasarkan kenyataan bahwa ciptaanNya sendiri, yakni manusia, mampu sekali untuk berpikir secara logis dengan otaknya. Jika Tuhan bukan makhluk rasional, maka ini berarti Dia tidak bisa berpikir logis, tidak bisa menggunakan logikanya. Ini jelas bertentangan dengan sifat Tuhan yang Omnipotent (=mahakuasa). Manusia ciptaanNya saja bisa, apalagi Tuhan sebagai Sang Pencipta. Yang Maha Kuasa tentunya mampu berpikir logis dan rasional.

This is what I read and analysis with MY OWN mind.

Dulu juga saya percaya begitu. Would you like to double check and cross check? Artinya, coba lihat dari sudut pandang orang lain:
http://indonesian.knowislam.info/forum/ ... .php?t=308
http://indonesian.knowislam.info/forum/ ... c.php?t=31

1. Old-Arab Confederation VS New Order (Muhammad PBUH).
Sebelum Muhammad hijrah ke Medinah, apakah ada ayat2 yang menunjukkan rencana pembunuhan orang Mekah terhadap Muhammad?Apakah ada ayat yang menunjukkan orang2 Mekah itu mengusir Muhammad and the gang ke luar dari Mekah dengan paksa?

Old Arab Confederation's Sanction VS Caravan Raiding of Muhammad S.A.W.

Sanksi apa ya yang dikeluarkan Arab confederation? Dan kapan (tahun berapa) sanksi itu dikeluarkan?

Random caravan raiding VS WAR tactics/Eye for Eye.

Tapi tidak ada bukti orang2 Mekah itu merampok apapun dari orang Islam. Apakah ada ayat2 yang menunjukkan mereka merampas harta orang Islam waktu Muhammad masih tinggal di Mekah (sebelum hijrah)?
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

Postby checev » Sun Nov 13, 2005 2:52 pm

:
Sebelum Muhammad hijrah ke Medinah, apakah ada ayat2 yang menunjukkan rencana pembunuhan orang Mekah terhadap Muhammad?Apakah ada ayat yang menunjukkan orang2 Mekah itu mengusir Muhammad and the gang ke luar dari Mekah dengan paksa?

1. OAC sepakat untuk mengirim dari tiap2 kabilah seorang pemuda. Dan pemuda2 inilah yg akan membunuh Nabi pada suatu malam.
Mereka sengaja mengirimkan dari masing2 Clan seorang pemuda, supaya gampang kemudian hari. Paman Nabi saat itu hadir juga disana.
2. Malam itu juga Nabi bersama Abu Bakar hijrah ke Madinah dan menyuruh Sayyidina Ali tidur ditempat tidur Nabi.
3. Para pembunuh ketiduran, ketika bangun dan masuk ke rumah Nabi, mereka hanya mendapati Sayyidina Ali.
4. Mereka mengejar Nabi yg hanya bersama Abu Bakar.
5. Dimulailah stage Hijrah mulai dari bersembunyi di Gua hingga Aqabah.

Sanksi apa ya yang dikeluarkan Arab confederation? Dan kapan (tahun berapa) sanksi itu dikeluarkan?

Tapi tidak ada bukti orang2 Mekah itu merampok apapun dari orang Islam. Apakah ada ayat2 yang menunjukkan mereka merampas harta orang Islam waktu Muhammad masih tinggal di Mekah (sebelum hijrah)?



1. Muhajirin yg hijrah ke Maddinah dilarang membawa apapun juga. Semua tanah, bangunan, harta(emas) dikuasai oleh the Meccan.
2. Mengisolir Madinah, orang madinah dari jalur perdagangan Yaman <--> Syiria.
3. Bahkan sebelumnya Clan nya Nabi tidak boleh "berdagang" sama sekali hingga kelaparan.
4. Bilal Bin Rabah yg disiksa gara-gara dipaksa me-renounce syahadat dia (Ahad...ahad..ahad...ahad.)
5. Ingat Abu Dzar Al Ghifarri yg di siksa hampir Meninggal. Hanya karena bilang, La ilahi haillallah.
6. Bahkan, Nabi menganjurkan orang Mukmim yg lemah (karena orang yg lemah akan dipaksa/siksa untuk kembali ke ajaran Ba'al, La ta,Uza and other funny names) tuk berhijrah ke Najasyi (Ethiopia).

------------------------------------------------------------
Fact:
Zero bloodsheed during Fathul Mekah/ penaklukan kota Mekkah.
It show me: System is attacked.

In fact, the war during Nabi is really againts the System.
------------------------------------------------------------

About Ali Jinah, I read his article about "the Narcism of the Prophet".
1. It's full of twisted fact.
2. Full of self-claim (Ali Jinah's claim).
3. Assumptions, but he put it in such a way it's fact.
4. His writing style is really a personality mis-representation. Is he an ex-lawyer?

From then on, I always laugh at him for bullying himself. Assuming, he is a scholar, then he really lying to himself.

Lets discuss his (Ali's) writing later.
I just back from my weekend.
------------------------------------------------------------
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Postby Adadeh » Mon Nov 14, 2005 12:02 am

Mang Checev,
1. OAC sepakat untuk mengirim dari tiap2 kabilah seorang pemuda. Dan pemuda2 inilah yg akan membunuh Nabi pada suatu malam. 1. Muhajirin yg hijrah ke Maddinah dilarang membawa apapun juga. Semua tanah, bangunan, harta(emas) dikuasai oleh the Meccan.

Ayat2nya dikasih dong, ambeh abdi oge ngertos, kitu.

Assuming, he is a scholar, then he really lying to himself.

Well, his observation about the Prophet being narsistic is indeed his own observation. But his argument about the quarrels between the Prophet and the Mecan, the Jews and the caravan robberies are backed with credible datas from Qur'an and Hadith. You can prove him wrong if you wish.
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

Postby checev » Sat Nov 19, 2005 11:15 am

Ayat2nya dikasih dong, ambeh abdi oge ngertos, kitu.???


Ayat???wake up bro!

Itu hadits yg mutawatir.
Mahfumnya aja udah cukup kalo buat diskusi.
Kalo mau bikin fatwa, baru perlu sanad/chain of naration.

Kalo hadits yg mutawatir aja ngga "eng-ngeh", gimana mau interpretasi/nafsir-in hadits2 yg ngga mutawatir.

Well, his observation about the Prophet being narsistic is indeed his own observation. But his argument about the quarrels between the Prophet and the Mecan, the Jews and the caravan robberies are backed with credible datas from Qur'an and Hadith. You can prove him wrong if you wish.


Fact:
Nabi di tawari jadi "Raja Dirajanya" orang2 Meccan, dng syarat berhenti menyiarkan Agama Tauhid.
Dijawab Nabi (mahfumnya): Seandainya, bulan ditaruh ditangan kiriku dan matahari di taruh tangan kananku, niscaya tidak akan ku hentikan dakwah ini karena ini perintah Tuhanku.
(please jng minta sanadnya, itu akan membuat saya seperti menjelaskan 4+4=8, disaat diskusiin differential problem).

Sesuai Hukum logika sederhana:
(Nabi == Narcistic Person) ==> (Nabi == terima tawaran)
but
(Nabi =/= terima tawaran ) ==> (Nabi =/= Narcistic Person)

So my observation is that: Ali Jinah hide the truth

1. In fact, Ali Jinah is the true blue of narcistic person by putting all the indicator on him.(by assuming that he is doing all these not for money)

2. He is doing all "these things" for charity?? Doubt so.

So my conclusion is:
Ali Jinnah is a professional "Personality Killer" (just like other “think tank” in this “Opinion War Era”).
or
He is a "True Blue Narcistic Person". (He wishes to "smack down" the leader of 1.3 billion followers).
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Postby Adadeh » Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:16 am

Itu hadits yg mutawatir.
Mahfumnya aja udah cukup kalo buat diskusi.

Tolong cantumkan Hadisnya yang mana. Juga kalau kau pikir ulasan Ali Sina tentang kegiatan Muhammad di Mekah, Medina, dan kegiatan perampokan atas kafilah2 Mekah, pembantaian Bani Quraisa itu salah, mohon tunjukkan di mana salahnya.

Anda bilang:
Zero bloodsheed during Fathul Mekah/ penaklukan kota Mekkah.
Ini tidak betul. Muhammad datang dengan 10.000 tentara. Orang2 Quraish tahu mereka tidak ada harapan menang melawan tentara sebanyak itu. Muhammad memang tidak membantai seluruh penduduk kota, tapi dia benci dan dendam sama beberapa orang Mekkah. Muhammad memerintahkan pembunuhan 10 orang ketika dia masuk Mekkah.

Tabaqat, Vol 2, halaman168.
"Rasul Allah masuk melalui Adhakhir, [ke dalam kota Mecca], dan melarang pertempuran. Dia memerintah 6 pria dan 4 wanita dibunuh. Mereka adalah: (1) Ikrimah Ibn Abi Jahl, (2) Habbar Ibn al-Aswad, (3) Abd Allah Ibn Sa'd Ibn Abi Sarh, (4) Miqyas Ibn Sababah al-Laythi, (5) al-Huwayrith Ibn Nuqaydh, (6) Abd Abbah Ibn Hilal Ibn Khatal al-Adrami, (7) Hind Bint Utbah, (8) Sarah, the mawlat (enfranchised girl) of Amr Ibn Hashim, (9) Fartana and (10) Qaribah.

QUOTING FROM THE SIRAT, PAGE 550.
"Sang Raul memerintahkan para panglima perangnya ketika mereka memasuki Mekkah untuk hanya memerangi mereka yang melawan, kecuali sejumlah kecil orang yang harus dibunuh meskipun mereka bersembunyi di bawah tirai Kaaba. Diantara orang2 ini adalah Abdullah Sa'd, saudara laki B. Amir Luayy. Alasan Rasul untuk membunuh dia adalah karena Sa'd dulunya seorang Muslim dan biasa menuliskan wahyu, tapi lalu dia murtad dan kembali ke suku Quraysh (Mekkah) dan bergabung dengan saudara angkatnya Uthman Affan. Uthman menyembunyikan Sa'd sampai keadaan Mekkah aman, dan lalu Uthman membawa Sa'd ke hadapan Rasul untuk minta diampuni. Muhammad diam untuk waktu yang lama sebelum akhirnya berkata ya (mengampuni).

Ketika Uthma pergi, Muhammad berkata pada pengikut2nya yang duduk di sekelilingnya,"Aku diam saja supaya ada satu dari antaramu yang berdiri dan memotong lehernya!" Satu dari orang2 Ansar (Medinah) itu bertanya,"Kalau begitu mengapa kau tidak memberi tanda, Rasul Allah?" Muhammad berkata seorang nabi tidak suka membunuh sambil menunjuk.


Ibn Sa'd corroborates Ibn Ishaq and says on page 174:
"A person of al-Ansar had taken a vow to kill Ibn Abi Sarh [the already mentioned Abdullah] if he saw him. Uthman whose foster brother he (Ibn Abi Sarh) was, came and interceded for him with the prophet. The Ansari was waiting for the signal of the prophet to kill him. Uthman interceded and he [Muhammad] let him go. The apostle of Allah said to the Ansari, "Why did you not fulfil your vow?" He said, "O apostle of Allah! I had my hand on the hilt of the sword waiting for your signal to kill him. The prophet said signalling would have been a breach of faith. It does not behave the prophet to make signal.""

Juga, Anda belum menerangkan mengapa orang berjinah harus dirajam sampai mati, tapi perkosaan massal diperbolehkan?
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

Postby checev » Sun Nov 27, 2005 11:06 pm

"Rasul Allah masuk melalui Adhakhir, [ke dalam kota Mecca], dan melarang pertempuran. Dia memerintah 6 pria dan 4 wanita dibunuh. Mereka adalah: (1) Ikrimah Ibn Abi Jahl, (2) Habbar Ibn al-Aswad, (3) Abd Allah Ibn Sa'd Ibn Abi Sarh, (4) Miqyas Ibn Sababah al-Laythi, (5) al-Huwayrith Ibn Nuqaydh, (6) Abd Abbah Ibn Hilal Ibn Khatal al-Adrami, (7) Hind Bint Utbah, ( Sarah, the mawlat (enfranchised girl) of Amr Ibn Hashim, (9) Fartana and (10) Qaribah.


1. Ikrimah Bin Abu Jahal, meninggal as muslim waktu perang melawan Byzantine. Dia seorang sahabat. Beliau diampuni Nabi, kemudian masuk Islam.

2. Hind Bint Utbah,R Anha. Hindun terkenal dengan kata2nya, "saya tidak masuk Islam tapi Islam telah masuk ke saya", ketika dia ditanya oleh orang-orang mekkah mengapa dia masuk Islam. Hind(orang Indo nyebutnya Hindun) yg menganiaya jasad Hamzah R.A. Tapi is diampuni Nabi S.A.W
Note:
Hind bint Utbah, the wife of Abu Sufyan and the mother of Mu'awiyah.

The Prophet, peace be upon him, entered Makkah and gave a general pardon and amnesty to all Quraysh who entered the sacred mosque, or who stayed in their houses or who went to the house of Abu Sufyan, the paramount Quraysh leader. However he refused to grant amnesty to a few individuals whom he named. He gave orders that they should be killed even if they were found under the covering of the Ka'bah. At the top of this list was Ikrimah ibn abi Jahl. When Ikrimah learnt of this, he slipped out of Makkah in disguise and headed for the Yemen.

Umm Hakim, Ikrimah's wife, then went to the camp of the Prophet. With her was Hind bint Utbah, the wife of Abu Sufyan and the mother of Mu'awiyah, and about ten other women who wanted to pledge allegiance to the Prophet. At the camp, were two of his wives, his daughter Fatimah and some women of the Abdulmuttalib clan. Hind was the one who spoke. She was veiled and ashamed of what she had done to Hamzah, the Prophet's uncle, at the battle of Uhud.

"O Messenger of God," she said, "Praise be to God Who has made manifes1 the religion He has chosen for Himself. I beseech you out of the bonds of kinship to treat me well. I am now a believing woman who affirms the Truth of your mission." She then unveiled herself and said:

"I am Hind, the daughter of Utbah, O Messenger of God. "

"Welcome to you," replied the Prophet, peace be on him.

"By God, O Prophet" continued Hind, "there was not a house on earth that I wanted to destroy more than your house. Now, there is no house on earth that I so dearly wish to honour and raise in glory than yours."

Umm Hakim then got up and professed her faith in Islam and said:

"O Messenger of God, Ikrimah has fled from you to the Yemen out of fear that you would kill him. Grant him security and God will grant you security."

"He is secure," promised the Prophet.

Umm Hakim set out immediately in search of Ikrimah. Accompanying her was a Greek slave. When they had gone quite far on the way, he tried to seduce her but she managed to put him off until she came to a settlement of Arabs. She sought their help against him. They tied him up and kept him. Umm Hakim continued on her way until she finally found Ikrimah on the coast of the Red Sea in the region of Tihamah. He was negotiating transport with a Muslim seaman who was saying to him:

"Be pure and sincere and I will transport you."

"How can I be pure?" asked Ikrimah.

"Say, I testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah."

"I have fled from this very thing," said Ikrimah.

At this point, Umm Hakim came up to Ikrimah and said:

"O cousin, I have come to you from the most generous of men, the most righteous of men, the best of men . . . from Muhammad ibn Abdullah. I have asked him for an amnesty for you. This he has granted. So do not destroy yourself."

"Have you spoken to him?"

"Yes, I have spoken to him and he has granted you amnesty," she assured him and he returned with her. She told him about the attempt of their Greek slave to dishonour her and Ikrimah went directly to the Arab settlement where he lay bound and killed him.

At one of their resting places on their way back, Ikrimah wanted to sleep with his wife but she vehemently refused and said:

"I am a Muslimah and you are a lifushrik."

Ikrimah was totally taken aback and said, "Living without you and without your sleeping with me is an impossible situation."

As Ikrimah approached Makkah, the Prophet, peace be upon him, told his companions:

"Ikrimah ibn abi Jahl shall come to you as a believer and a muhajEr (a refugee). Do not insult his father. Insulting the dead causes grief to the living and does not reach the dead."

Ikrimah and his wife came up to where the Prophet was sitting. The Prophet got up and greeted him enthusiastically.

"Muhammad," said Ikrimah, "Umm Hakim has told me that you have granted me an amnesty."

"That's right," said the Prophet, "You are safe."

"To what do you invite?" asked Ikrimah.

"I invite you to testify that there is no god but Allah and that I am the servant of Allah and His messenger, to establish Prayer and pay the Zakat and carry out all the other obligations of Islam."

"By God," responded Ikrimah, "You have only called to what is true and you have only commanded that which is good. You lived among us before the start of your mission and then you were the most trustworthy of us in speech and the most righteous of us." Stretching forth his hands he said, "I testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is His servant and His messenger." The Prophet then instructed him to say, "I call on God and those present here to witness that I am a Muslim who is a Mujahid and a Muhajir". This Ikrimah repeated and then said:

"I ask you to ask God for forgiveness for me for all the hostility I directed against you and for whatever insults I expressed in your presence or absence." The Prophet replied with the prayer:

"O Lord, forgive him for all the hostility he directed against me and for all the expeditions he mounted wishing to put out Your light. Forgive him for whatever he has said or done in my presence or absence to dishonour me." Ikrimah's face beamed with happiness.

"By God, O messenger of Allah, I promise that whatever I have spent obstructing the way of God, I shall spend twice as much in His path and whatever battles I have fought against God's way I shall fight twice as much in His way."

From that day on, Ikrimah was committed to the mission of Islam as a brave horseman in the field of battle and as a steadfast worshipper who would spend much time in mosques reading the book of God. Often he would place the mushaf on his face and say, "The Book of my Lord, the words of my Lord" and he would cry from the fear of God.

Ikrimah remained true to his pledge to the Prophet. Whatever battles the Muslims engaged in thereafter, he participated in them and he was always in the vanguard of the army. At the battle of Yarmuk he plunged into the attack as a thirsty person after cold water on a blistering hot day. In one encounter in which the Muslims were under heavy attack, Ikrimah penetrated deep into the ranks of the Byzantines. Khalid ibn al-Walid rushed up to him and said, "Don't, Ikrimah. Your death will be a severe blow to the Muslims."

"Let us carry on, Khalid," said Ikrimah, now at the peak of motivation. "You had the privilege of being with the Messenger of God before this. As for myself and my father, we were among his bitterest enemies. Leave me now to atone for what I have done in the past. I fought the Prophet on many occasions. Shall I now flee from the Byzantines? This shall never be." Then calling out to the Muslims, he shouted, "Who shall pledge to fight until death?"

Four hundred Muslims including al-Harith ibn Hisham and Ayyash ibn Abi Rabiah responded to his call. They plunged into the battle and fought heroically without the leadership of Khalid ibn al-Walid. Their daring attack paved the way for a decisive Muslim victory.

When the battle was over, the bodies of three wounded mujahideen lay sprawled on the battleground, among them Al-Harith ibn Hisham, Ayyash ibn Abi Rabi'ah and Ikrimah ibn abi Jahl. Al-Harith called for water to drink. As it was brought to him, Ayyash looked at him and Harith said:

"Give it to Ayyash." By the time they got to Ayyash, he had just breathed his last. When they returned to al-Harith and Ikrimah, they found that they too had passed away.

The companions prayed that God may be pleased with them all and grant them refreshment from the spring of Kawthar in Paradise, a refreshment after which there is thirst no more.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scanned from: "Companions of The Prophet", Vol.1, By: Abdul Wahid Hamid.

source: http://web.umr.edu/~msaumr/reference/co ... rimah.html

My point is:
1. Zero bloodsheed yg saya maksud adalah: "Darah ditumpahkan untuk mencapai tujuan(penaklukan kota mekkah)".

2. Perintah 10 orang untuk di "HUKUM" bukan dalam rangka Fatul Makkah, tapi dalam rangka penegakan hukum.


Perkosaan massal,definisinya apa?
give clear definision?
Lets start from your definition.
checev
Pandangan Pertama
Pandangan Pertama
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 pm

Postby fren » Mon Nov 28, 2005 5:48 am

Sekarang kita harus tunduk sama agama dan budaya mereka? Di mana kejayaan kita yang dulu? Apakah sumbangan agama Islam (dari budaya Arab) ini bagi bangsa Indonesia?


Inilah point kritis-nya. Syariah itu sama aja seperti pemaksaan hegemoni Islam atau legalisasi penjajahan/penindasan akal-budi manusia. Udah kayak aturan main diktator-mafia.

Ya masih jauh lebih baik azas demokrasi yang didirikan rakyat Yunani purba lah yau!
User avatar
fren
Jatuh Hati
Jatuh Hati
 
Posts: 784
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 6:27 am

Postby Adadeh » Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:21 am

Checev:
Perkosaan massal,definisinya apa? give clear definision? Lets start from your definition

Okay, boss. Tentang Muhammad masuk Mekah saya bahas nanti saja.

Setelah mengumpulkan dari banyak definisi pemerkosaan dari kamus, ensiklopedia, dan hukum negara Indonesia dan Barat, saya menyusun definisi pemerkosaan sebagai berikut:
Pemerkosaan (hubungan kelamin/sexual) dinyatakan terjadi jika:
1. korban pemerkosaan tidak mampu atau tidak punya hak untuk menolak
2. tanpa kemauan atau persetujuan salah satu pihak yang dipaksa melakukan hubungan seksual dengan kekerasan, ancaman atau rasa takut disakiti secara fisik oleh pihak lain
3. korban pemerkosaan tidak sanggup melawan karena sedang dalam keadaan tak sadar (di bawah pengaruh obat bius, narkoba atau obat pemati rasa) yang diberikan oleh si pemerkosa
4. korban pemerkosaan tidak sadar karena alasan alami (pingsan, koma) dan si pemerkosa tahu akan keadaan ini.
5. pelaku pemerkosaan mengancam untuk membalas korban jika menolak dan ada kemungkinan besar pelaku akan melaksanakan ancamannya: ancaman menculik, menyiksa, menyakiti tubuh, atau kematian.

Kita bicara soal ini karena pemerkosaan massal yang dilakukan oleh prajurit2 Muslim terhadap tawanan perang wanita diperbolehkan oleh Muhammad. Seperti biasanya, Muhammad dan tentaranya yang menjadi pihak penyerang. Mereka melakukan penyerangan untuk merampok harta benda, tanah tempat tinggal, ternak dan para wanita dan anak2 korban. Memang begitulah cara Muhammad mencari nafkah pada waktu itu.

Ini pengakuannya sendiri:
Hadis Sahih Bukhari, Vol. IV, bab 88:
Dikisahkan oleh Ibn ‘Umar bahwa sang Nabi berkata,”Mata pencaharianku ada di bawah bayangan tombakku, (1) dan dia yang tidak menaati perintahku akan dihinakan dengan membayar Jizya.”

Catatan: (1) “Di bawah bayangan tombakku” berarti “dari jarahan perang”.
“The Translation of Sahi Bukhari” oleh Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan. [Ref: The Translation of the Meanings of Sahih Al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, Vol.IV (page 104) by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Islamic University—Al-Medina Al-Munauwara].

Perampokan terjadi lebih dari seratus kali. Biasanya setelah seluruh tentara lawan ditaklukkan, tawanan2 perang wanita dibagi-bagikan kepada para tentara Muslim untuk dijadikan budak dan pemuas seks. Tidak jarang para suami dan kerabat pria wanita2 itu sudah dibunuh oleh para tentara Muslim. Jadi tadinya para wanita itu adalah orang2 bebas dan terhormat, tapi gara2 penyerangan Muhammad, mereka dijadikan budak dan pelayan seks untuk memuaskan nafsu berahi para tentara Muslim.

Beberapa contohnya dapat dilihat di sini:
Perampokan oleh Muhammad atas orang2 Yahudi di Khaibar
Dinarasikan oleh 'Abdul 'Aziz:
"Kata Anas, ketika nabi menyerbu Khaibar orang2 di kota berseru “Muhamad dan pasukannya datang”. Kami mengalahkan mereka semua, menjadikan mereka tawanan dan harta rampokan dikumpulkan. Nabi membunuh para pria yang melawan, membantai anak-anak keturunan merekan dan mengumpulkan para wanita menjadi tawanan (Sahih Bukhari V.5 B.59 N.512).


Ishaq:511 “Ketika Dihyah (seorang tentara Muslim) protes, ingin tetap mendapatkan Safiyah bagi dirinya sendiri, sang Nabi menukar Safiyah dengan memberi Dihyah dua saudara sepupu Safiyah. Para wanita Khaybar dibagi-bagikan diantara orang2 Muslim.”

Perampokan oleh Muhammad di Hunain
Sunan Abu Dawud, Book V, Chapter 711, Number 2150
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said:
Rasul Allah mengirim pasukan tentara ke Awtas dalam perang Hunain. Mereka bertemu pasukan musuh dan berperang. Mereka mengalahkan musuh dan menawan pihak musuh. Beberapa prajurit Rasul Allah ragu2 untuk melakukan hubungan seks dengan tawanan wanita di hadapan para suami mereka yang non-Muslim. Jadi Allah yang Maha Kuasa mengirim ayat Qur’an ini: dan (diharamkan juga kamu untuk meniduri) wanita yang bersuami, kecuali yang dimiliki tangan kananmu (yakni budak2 wanita, baik yang sudah atau belum bersuami) (Allah telah menetapkan hukum itu) sebagai ketetapan-Nya atas kamu. ."[Surah 4:24]


Sebenarnya masih banyak lagi, tapi cukup sekian dulu contohnya.
Para budak wanita ini tidak punya hak untuk menolak keinginan majikan Muslimnya. Keinginan tentara Muslim untuk meniduri para wanita ini bukan saja dibiarkan tapi diijinkan oleh Muhammad. Karena tidak adanya hak untuk menolak dan takut akan konsekuensi atau ancaman kalau menolak, maka yang dilakukan para tentara Muslim terhadap para tawanan/budak wanita ini jelas adalah pemerkosaan. Karena jumlah tawanan wanita adalah ratusan, maka ini termasuk pemerkosaan masal.

Untuk menambah semangat para prajuritnya, Muhammad tidak segan2 menjanjikan ini:
"Kau lihat, Tuhan segera akan membuatmu mewarisi tanah mereka, harta mereka dan kamu akan tidur dengan para wanita mereka” (harafiahnya: memberikan tempat tidur para wanitanya bagimu)”Ibn Hisham on page 182 Vol. II, di bukunya yang terkenal "Al Rod Al Anf".

Jadi berdasarkan Hadis2 dan ayat2 di atas, jelas bahwa Muhammad memperbolehkan pemerkosaan masal.
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

Postby monasjazz » Mon Nov 28, 2005 8:48 am

:P

hehehe

itu kan pemahamanmu
bukan pemahamanku

hihihi ..

:wink:
monasjazz
Mulai Suka
Mulai Suka
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:27 pm

Postby Adadeh » Tue Nov 29, 2005 1:26 am

itu kan pemahamanmu
bukan pemahamanku

Pemahamanmu tiada artinya tanpa penjelasan yang logis dan informasi yang reliable. Tunjukkan jika kau mampu berpikir jelas dan intelektual.
User avatar
Adadeh
Translator
 
Posts: 8460
Images: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 1:59 am

PreviousNext

Return to Hak WANITA dlm Islam



 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users