PROGRAM: TAIPING HEARTWEEK 2014
VENUE: TAIPING PACIFIC MALL
DATE: 31 OCT 2014 - 2 NOVEMBER 2014
VENUE: TAIPING PACIFIC MALL
DATE: 31 OCT 2014 - 2 NOVEMBER 2014
Friday, 31 October 2014
Tuesday, 28 October 2014
2014 - SMK AIR PUTIH, KUANTAN, PAHANG
PROGRAM : SCHOOL 2014 (PAHANG)
VENUE : SEK.MEN. AIR PUTIH, KUANTAN , PAHANG
DATE : 28 OCTOBER 2014
VENUE : SEK.MEN. AIR PUTIH, KUANTAN , PAHANG
DATE : 28 OCTOBER 2014
SMK Air Putih
Jalan Air Putih
25300 Kuantan
Pahang,
Tel: 09-566 1092
Sunday, 26 October 2014
KISAH DI NERAKA
( Luangkan masa utk membaca kawan2 sahabat2 sekalian…sekejap jer..mOga mendapat ikhtibar dan manfaatnya..) >_
Saya berjumpa fenomena menakutkan hari itu. Takkan saya lupakan selama-lamanya. Ia amat menakutkan dan membuatkan saya trauma beberapa ketika. Terngiang-ngiang ungkapan hamba yang menyesali ...dosa, “Alangkah, lebih baik sekiranya aku menjadi tanah.”
Seorang lelaki berwajah buruk berkulit hitam merangkak-rangkak dengan penuh seksa di lembah kotor itu. Bau hanyir menusuk ke hidung, dengan segera saya menutup hidung. Namun bau itu makin kuat. Lelaki buruk berwajah hitam legam, hingus meleleh di hidung meskipun sudah disapu berkali-kali, dan yang malangnya, ia telanjang bulat tanpa sebarang pakaian.
Ah, ia amat menjelekkan. Bukan hanya dia bertelanjang, bahkan lelaki yang lain, perempuan, mak nyah, pondan dan tomboi, semua bertelanjang dan sangat menjelekkan. Yang perempuan, air nanah meleleh keluar daripada kemaluan mereka. Yang lelaki, air kencing mereka berdarah dan berketul-ketul. Mereka membuang air kecil dengan penuh seksa dan meraung kepedihan.
Lelaki yang merangkak-rangkak itu dihidangkan makanan. Saya mengintai dari kejauhan. Aduh, hidangannya adalah najis lembu yang masih cair dan dihurungi lalat. Najis hitam itu bercampur dengan air kencing lembu yang kuning-kekuningan. Saya muntah dibuatnya. Lelaki itu mengambil najis lalu disuap ke mulutnya dengan lahap. Ia muntah, namun dimakan terus tanpa henti.
Seksanya, hanyirnya. Tiba-tiba suasana menjadi pegun. Terdengar suara yang penuh garau dan menakutkan,
✿ “Wahai manusia terkutuk, tahukah kamu neraka Hawiyah? Itulah neraka yang apinya menjulang-julang.”
Saya terpandang sepasang lelaki dengan perempuan. Si perempuan itu mengumpulkan nanah yang keluar daripada kemaluannya lalu diberikan kepada lelaki. Ia minum dengan rakus, kemudian muntah keluar. Yek, jelek sekali. Kemudian si lelaki bangun berdiri dan kencing sedangkan perempuan itu menadah mulutnya. Wek, saya muntah di situ juga.
✿ “Wahai penzina yang berbangga dengan kemaluannya di dunia, rasakan kamu air nanah dan najis pasangan kamu. Apa yang kamu banggakan di dunia adalah kehinaan di akhirat.”
Sekumpulan manusia bertelanjang berhidung babi dihidangkan dua jenis makanan. Makakan yang baik dan makanan yang jelek. Namun mereka seolah-olah tidak nampak makanan yang baik itu. Mereka menerkam ke arah makanan jelek, yang dihurungi cacing dan lalat. Baunya seperti bau najis ayam. Ia busuk sekali. Mereka makan dengan lahap kemudian bergaduh sesama mereka.
✿ “Wahai pemakan riba, kamu mengetahui bahawa ribamerupakan kemurkaan di sisi Allah. Allah telah menyediakan ruang mencari rezeki yang baikuntuk kamu namun kamu memilih riba.”
Saya ketakutan. Ya Allah, di alam manakah aku ini sebenarnya. Seketika, saya melihat kejauhan. Seorang yang kelihatan soleh. Wajahnya tampak kuat beribadat. Ia diperintahkan ke sebuah taman yang indah. Namun, baru sahaja ia melangkah, kakinya dipegang erat oleh seseorang.
✿ “Ya Allah, janganlah Kamu masukkan ia ke dalam taman keindahan itu. Ia seorang berilmu, namun ia tidak menyampaikannya kepada kami. Ia seorang naqib, namun ia tidak pernah berusrah dengan kami. Ia seorang pemimpin, namun ia tidak pernah membimbing kami. Ia seorang kuat ibadah, namun tidak pernah menunjuki kami. Masukkan ia ke neraka Ya Allah.”
Saya terus menangis. Seorang naqib? Ya, saya seorang naqib. Apakah seorang naqib seperti saya, yang tidak melakukan usrah akan dicampakkan ke dalam lembah orang telanjang itu? Saya menggeletar ketakutan.
Saya melihat sekumpulan wanita. Mereka sedang mengerumuni satu hidangan. Saya mengintai jauh-jauh. Alangkah, mereka sedang meratah daging mayat manusia. Mereka melapah daging manusia itu hidup-hidup. Siapakah mereka itu Wahai Tuhan?
Saya tambah menggigil apabila melihat salah seorang daripada mereka. Itu adalah saudara saya. Ia seorang yang berbai’ah dengan perjuangan Islam dan mencintai perjuangan. Mengapa ia turut berada dalam kelompok terkutuk itu.
✿ “Itulah kumpulan wanita yang suka mengumpat dan menyebarkan fitnah.Mereka memperjuangkan Islam. Namun dalam masa yang sama,mereka suka sekali menaburkan fitnah dan mengumpat.”
Satu suara menjelaskan kepada saya.
Ya Allah, saya mengerti. Ini kisah benar. Saya mendengar dari rakan saya sendiri. Apabila seorang muslimah berkenan dengan seorang muslimin, dan muslimah itu meminta bantuan daripada rakannya menjadi orang tengah. Malangnya, orang tengah itu bukannya menjalin ikatan bahkan menaburkan fitnah.
Ya Allah, saya berharap cerita ini bukannya mengumpat dan menaburkan fitnah, bukan juga menyebarkan keburukan orang lain.
Seorang ahli pejuang Islam, keluar berdua-duaan dengan muslimah yang turut pejuang Islam. Berpegangan tangan. Menunggang motosikal bersama-sama. Nah, kepada mereka kita ingatkan, Peluklah pasangan kamu itu di atas motor seerat-eratnya, namun harus kamu ingat, yang kamu peluk itulah yang akan menghirup nanah yang keluar dari kemaluan kamu.
✿Na’uzubillah, Ajirna minannar.
✿Saya keanehan. Mengapa seorang lelaki boleh mempercayai seorang perempuan yang sanggup menyerahkan tangan untuk dipegang, kulit untuk dibelai menjadi isterinya? Bolehkah perempuan itu dipercayai untuk menjadi ibu kepada anaknya?
✿ “Darah haid,” saya berpaling ke belakang. Seorang tua bertongkat merapati saya. " Darah haid, apa maksud atuk"
Orang tua itu menunjukkan saya ke satu arah. Terbeliak mata saya melihatnya. Sekumpulan lelaki dihidangkan air berupa darah haid yang baru sahaja keluar daripada seorang perempuan.
“Darah haid itu adalah untuk orang yang memuja perempuan sehinggaLALAI DARIPADA MENGINGATI ALLAH,”
p/s : m0ga mendapat iktibar dari kisah ini..pesanan buat sahabat-sahabat, juga buat diri sendiri..Nauzubillah..kami berlindung hanya padaMU ya ALLAH..
Sumber : Facebook
26.10.2014
Sunday, 19 October 2014
Thursday, 16 October 2014
TAZKIRAH : USAH BERSEDIH
1. Andaikata kamu dikhianati atau dilukai oleh mereka yg mempunyai talian kekeluargaan dgn kamu, usah bersedih. Ingatlah peristiwa Yusuf as, yg dikhianati oleh saudara2nya...
2. Andaikata ibubapa kamu, atau mereka yg kamu kasihi, menentang kamu ketika kamu berjalan di atas jalan kebenaran, usah bersedih. Ingatlah peristiwa Ibrahim as, yg dihumban ke dalam api oleh ayahandanya...
3. Andaikata kamu buntu di dalam permasalahan dan tidak nampak jalan keluar, usah bersedih. Ingatilah kisah Yunus as, yg terperangkap di dlm perut ikan.
4. Andaikata kamu didatangi penyakit, dan seluruh anggota badan kamu di landa kesakitan, usah bersedih. Ingatilah kisah Ayub as, yg ditimpa kesakitan dan pelbagai penyakit, disamping kehilangan ahli keluarganya.
5. Andaikata kamu melihat akan adanya kekurangan atau kelemahan pada diri kamu, usah bersedih. Ingatlah kisah Musa as, yg tidak dapat bertutur dgn sempurna.
6. Andaikata kamu difitnah dan dicaci oleh manusia di sekelilingmu, usah bersedih. Ingatilah kisah Aisyah ra, yg sabar setelah difitnah sehingga satu kota memperkatakannya...
7. Andaikata kamu rasa kesunyian dan keseorangan serta tiada yg membantu, usah bersedih. Ingatilah kisah Adam as, yg diturunkan ke muka bumi bersendirian sebelum bertemu kembali Hawa.
8. Andaikata kamu rasakan tidak ada kewajaran akan apa yg perlu kamu lakukan, serta detikan hati tertanya mengapa ianya terjadi, usah bersedih. Ingatilah kisah Nuh as, yg tanpa keluh dan tanpa tahu sebabnya, terus membina bahtera yg besar tanpa soal...
9. Andaikata kamu diherdik dan dicerca oleh saudara mara kamu sendiri lantaran kamu memilih agama dan kehidupan akhirat berbanding kehidupan dunia, usah bersedih. Ingatilah kisah Muhammad saw, yg dipulaukan dan diperangi oleh keluarganya yg terdekat...
Subhanallah... Masyaallah.. Allahuakbar...
Allah swt mewujudkan personaliti yg hebat2 ini sebelum kita, dan mendatangi mereka dgn pelbagai ujian dan cabaran, dgn tujuan agar satu hari nanti, manusia spt saya dan kamu, bila mana berhadapan
dgn sebarang musibah dan tribulasi, tidak perlu berkata "KENAPA AKU?"...
ALHAMDULILLAH UTK SEGALA2NYA YA RAHMAN.
Jika sudi dikongsikan dgn sesiapa sahaja, silakan jika tidak keberatan....
Sumber: Facebook
16.10.2014
Sunday, 12 October 2014
Menjadi orang asing di dunia
Bismillahir rahmaanir rahiim..
Dari Ibnu Umar radhiallahu ‘anhuma beliau berkata: “Rasululloh shalallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam pernah memegang kedua pundakku seraya bersabda, “Jadilah engkau di dunia seperti orang asing atau musafir”. Ibnu Umar berkata: “Jika engkau berada di sore hari jangan menunggu datangnya pagi dan jika engkau berada pada waktu pagi hari jangan menunggu datangnya sore. Pergunakanlah masa sehatmu sebelum sakit dan masa hidupmu sebelum mati” (HR. Bukhari)
Penjelasan
Hadits ini adalah hadits yang diriwayatkan oleh Ibnu Umar berisi nasihat nabi shalallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam kepada beliau. Hadits ini dapat menghidupkan hati karena di dalamnya terdapat peringatan untuk menjauhkan diri dari tipuan dunia, masa muda, masa sehat, umur dan sebagainya.
Ibnu Umar berkata: “Rasululloh shalallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam pernah memegang kedua pundakku”, hal ini menunjukkan perhatian yang besar pada beliau, dan saat itu umur beliau masih 12 tahun. Ibnu Umar berkata: “beliau pernah memegang kedua pundakku”. Rasululloh shalallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam bersabda, “Jadilah engkau di dunia seperti orang asing atau penyeberang jalan”. Jika manusia mau memahami hadits ini maka di dalamnya terkandung wasiat penting yang sesuai dengan realita. Sesungguhnya manusia (Adam As.) memulai kehidupannya di surga kemudian diturunkan ke bumi ini sebagai cobaan, maka manusia adalah seperti orang asing atau musafir dalam kehidupannya. Kedatangan manusia di dunia (sebagai manusia) adalah seperti datangnya orang asing. Padahal sebenarnya tempat tinggal Adam dan orang yang mengikutinya dalam masalah keimanan, ketakwaan, tauhid dan keikhlasan pada Alloh adalah surga. Sesungguhnya Adam diusir dari surga adalah sebagai cobaan dan balasan atas perbuatan maksiat yang dilakukannya. Jika engkau mau merenungkan hal ini, maka engkau akan berkesimpulan bahwa seorang muslim yang hakiki akan senantiasa mengingatkan nafsunya dan mendidiknya dengan prinsip bahwa sesungguhnya tempat tinggalnya adalah di surga, bukan di dunia ini.
Dia berada pada tempat yang penuh cobaan di dunia ini, dia hanya seorang asing atau musafir sebagaimana yang disabdakan oleh Al Musthofa shalallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam.
Betapa indah perkataan Ibnu Qoyyim rahimahullah ketika menyebutkan bahwa kerinduan, kecintaan dan harapan seorang muslim kepada surga adalah karena surga merupakan tempat tinggalnya semula. Seorang muslim sekarang adalah tawanan musuh-musuhnya dan diusir dari negeri asalnya karena iblis telah menawan bapak kita, Adam ‘alaihissalam dan dia melihat, apakah dia akan dikembalikan ke tempat asalnya atau tidak. Oleh karena itu, alangkah bagusnya perkataan seorang penyair:
Palingkan hatimu pada apa saja yang kau cintai
Tidaklah kecintaan itu kecuali pada cinta pertamamu
Yaitu Allah jalla wa ‘ala
Berapa banyak tempat tinggal di bumi yang ditempati seseorang
Dan selamanya kerinduannya hanya pada tempat tinggalnya yang semula
Yaitu surga
Demikianlah, hal ini menjadikan hati senantiasa bertaubat dan tawadhu kepada Allah jalla wa ‘ala. Yaitu orang yang hati mereka senantiasa bergantung pada Allah, baik dalam kecintaan, harapan, rasa cemas, dan ketaatan. Hati mereka pun selalu terkait dengan negeri yang penuh dengan kemuliaan yaitu surga. Mereka mengetahui surga tersebut seakan-akan berada di depan mata mereka. Mereka berada di dunia seperti orang asing atau musafir. Orang yang berada pada kondisi seakan-akan mereka adalah orang asing atau musafir tidak akan merasa senang dengan kondisinya sekarang. Karena orang asing tidak akan merasa senang kecuali setelah berada di tengah-tengah keluarganya. Sedangkan musafir akan senantiasa mempercepat perjalanan agar urusannya segera selesai.
Demikianlah hakikat dunia. Nabi Adam telah menjalani masa hidupnya. Kemudian disusul oleh Nabi Nuh yang hidup selama 1000 tahun dan berdakwah pada kaumnya selama 950 tahun,
“Maka ia tinggal di antara mereka seribu tahun kurang lima puluh tahun” (QS Al Ankabut: 14)
Kemudian zaman beliau AlaihisSalam selesai dan telah berlalu. Kemudian ada lagi sebuah kaum yang hidup selama beberapa ratus tahun kemudian zaman mereka berlalu. Kemudian setelah mereka, ada lagi kaum yang hidup selama 100 tahun, 80 tahun, 40 tahun 50 tahun dan seterusnya.
Hakikat mereka adalah seperti orang asing atau musafir. Mereka datang ke dunia kemudian mereka pergi meninggalkannya. Kematian akan menimpa setiap orang. Oleh karena itu setiap orang wajib untuk memberikan perhatian pada dirinya. Musibah terbesar yang menimpa seseorang adalah kelalaian tentang hakikat ini, kelalaian tentang hakikat dunia yang sebenarnya. Jika Allah memberi nikmat padamu sehingga engkau bisa memahami hakikat dunia ini, bahwa dunia adalah negeri yang asing, negeri yang penuh ujian, negeri tempat berusaha, negeri yang sementara dan tidak kekal, niscaya hatimu akan menjadi sehat. Adapun jika engkau lalai tentang hakikat ini maka kematian dapat menimpa hatimu. Semoga Allah menyadarkan kita semua dari segala bentuk kelalaian.
Kemudian Ibnu Umar radhiallahu ‘anhuma melanjutkan dengan berwasiat,
“Jika engkau berada di sore hari jangan menunggu datangnya pagi dan jika engkau berada pada pagi hari jangan menunggu datangnya sore.”
Yaitu hendaklah Anda senantiasa waspada dengan kematian yang datang secara tiba-tiba. Hendaklah Anda senantiasa siap dengan datangnya kematian.
Disebutkan dari para ulama salaf dan ulama hadits bahwa jika seseorang diberi tahu bahwa kematian akan datang kepadanya malam ini, maka belum tentu dia dapat menambah amal kebaikannya.
Jika seseorang diberi tahu bahwa kematian akan datang kepadanya malam ini, maka belum tentu dia dapat menambah amal kebaikannya. Hal ini dapat terjadi dengan senantiasa mengingat hak Allah.
Jika dia beribadah, maka dia telah menunaikan hak Allah dan ikhlas dalam beribadah hanya untuk Rabbnya.
Jika dia memberi nafkah pada keluarganya, maka dia melakukannya dengan ikhlas dan sesuai dengan syariat.
Jika dia berjual beli, maka dia akan melakukan dengan ikhlas dan senantiasa berharap untuk mendapatkan rezeki yang halal.
Demikianlah, setiap kegiatan yang dia lakukan, senantiasa dilandasi oleh ilmu. Ini adalah keutamaan orang yang memiliki ilmu, jika mereka bertindak dan berbuat sesuatu maka dia akan senantiasa melandasinya dengan hukum syariat. Jika mereka berbuat dosa dan kesalahan, maka dengan segera mereka akan memohon ampunan. Maka dia akan seperti orang yang tidak berdosa setelah beristigfar. Ini adalah kedudukan mereka. Oleh karena itu Ibnu Umar radhiallahu ‘anhuma mengatakan atas sabda Rasulullah Shallallahu 'Alaihi Wasallam:
“Pergunakanlah masa sehatmu sebelum sakit dan masa hidupmu sebelum mati”
(HR. Bukhori)
Penulis: Syaikh Shalih bin ‘Abdul Aziz Alu Syaikh hafizhohulloh
Diterjemahkan dari Penjelasan Hadits Arba’in No. 40. Oleh: Abu Fatah Amrulloh
Murojaah: Ustadz Abu Ukasyah Aris Munandar
[Sumber: http://muslim.or.id]
Semoga Bermanfa'at.
Sumber: Facebook
12.10.2014
Wednesday, 8 October 2014
HOW THE MUSLIMS KILLED DRACULA
Born in the Ottoman Principality of Wallachia, Romania in 1435 AD, he was known as Radu al III-lea cel Frumos to his Romanian countrymen,Yakışıklı Radu Bey to the Turks, Radu al-Wasim to the Arabs, and Radu the Handsome in English. This ally and childhood friend of Sultan Mehmet II was instrumental in the conquest of Constantinople for Islam. Radu’s participation in that conquest ensured that Mehmet II would go down in history as “Fatih,” or “Conqueror.” Radu was the Ottomans’ secret weapon against the Safavids to the East and the Serbs, Romanians and Hungarians to the West. The Muslim world owes much to this hero of Islam, yet they recorded little other than cursory references to him, perhaps for fear of taking away from Fatih Sultan Mehmet’s limelight. The Byzantines recorded Radu as a reviled despot due to their hatred for his conversion to Islam and instrumental role in ending the Byzantine Empire.
Yet, this Ottoman general had a greater war, a war against darkness. He hunted the very progenitor of the vampire legend who impaled his enemies and drank their blood – Vlad al III-lea Ţepeş, also known as Vlad Drăculea, who would go down in infamy as, simply, Dracula. The character of Professor Abraham Van Helsing was no more than a figment of Bram Stoker’s terrifying imagination, but Sultan Mehmet II and Radu cel Frumos were perhaps the first and only true vampire hunters in history.
The Blood Brothers
Looking back, Radu’s devotion to Islam and to Sultan Mehmet II could be traced to the political alliance of their respective fathers before them. Vlad II from the House of Drăculeşti (“House of the Dragon”) was an ally and vassal of Sultan Mehmet’s father, Sultan Murad II. Vlad II had 4 sons: Mircea II, Vlad IV Călugărul (“The Monk”), Vlad III who would come to be known as Dracula, and Radu III cel Frumos (“The Handsome”). As a gesture of unity with the Sultan, Vlad II offered his sons, Dracula and Radu, to serve the Ottoman Sultan. Under the Janissaries they studied the Qur’an, Arabic, Turkish, Persian, Islamic Theology and Jurisprudence, and, coveted above all, Turkish military strategy and tactics of war.
The Ottoman special forces who held a higher status both militarily as well as socially than the rank and file were the Janissaries and the Sipahis. The Janissaries were the elite infantry of the Ottoman military as well as the personal bodyguards of the Sultan and his family. The Sipahis were the elite cavalry who surrounded the Sultan in battle and would be sent to deal with the most stubborn of adversaries. They were the commandos and special forces of their day. Though the Sipahis were almost exclusively Turkic in origin as demanded by Sultan Mehmet II himself in his treatise of law entitledKanun Nameh-e-Sipahi (“Law Book of the Sipahis”), the Janissaries, within whose ranks Dracula and Radu found themselves, were conversely converts to Islam.
The young Dracula continually abused and rebelled against his hosts earning himself imprisonment and castigation. Due to the heavy handedness of the Turks in response to his insolence, he developed a compounded and complex series of grudges. He hated his father for allying with the Turks, which he saw as a betrayal of the Order of the Dragon to which his father had sworn an oath. The Order of the Dragon was a Christian fraternity whose sole aim was to wipe out Islam from the Balkans forever. Dracula hated Radu for his successes and the favor the Turks bestowed upon him. He was filled with jealousy for the then young Mehmet II who, like him, was a prince, but, very unlike him, lived in splendor. He was also jealous of his brothers Mircea and Vlad the Monk due to what he perceived as his father’s preference for them. His sentiments for Mircea however, would teeter between jealousy and awe. It is from him that the young Dracula learned the terror tactic of impaling thousands to create forests of the dead.
Radu remained faithful to Islam and the Sultan and spent his entire life in battle on the frontiers of the Ottoman Empire, vanquishing the most difficult adversaries of the Empire. His natural knack for battle was unparalleled even amongst the Janissaries and elite Sipahis of the Ottoman military, and he would be called upon frequently to subdue any foe that seemed insurmountable. It is reported that he turned the very course of Near Eastern history when he stopped the mighty Ak Koyunlu from overrunning the Ottomans, an event that, if not stopped, would have definitely changed the faces of both the Middle East and Europe today. For this very reason, he was called upon to face the threat from his homeland of Wallachia that neither the elite Janissaries nor the Sipahis could route.
The Conquest of Constantinople
“On the third day after the fall of our city, the Sultan celebrated his victory with a great, joyful triumph. He issued a proclamation: the citizens of all ages who had managed to escape detection were to leave their hiding places throughout the city and come out into the open, as they were to remain free and no question would be asked. He further declared the restoration of houses and property to those who had abandoned our city before the siege, if they returned home, they would be treated according to their rank and religion, as if nothing had changed.” (George Sphrantzes, 1401-1478, Byzantine Christian chronicler and witness of the fall of Constantinople)
It was a time of relief and rejoicing. It was a relief for the inhabitants of Constantinople who expected a prompt culling following the fall of their city. It was a time of celebration for the entire Muslim world for this historical conquest of a city that has remained, to this very day, the capital of the Turks. Yet as Sultan Mehmet II rode into the city victorious, a glance over to his childhood friend and chief of the Janissaries, Radu cel Frumos, son of Vlad II Duke of Wallachia, may have served as a sobering reminder that to the North, beyond the spoils of Byzantium, their fiercest enemies lay in wait. Among those enemies was the most feared of them all, Dracula, who just so happened to be Radu’s own brother.
The Rise of Dracula
Opportunistic betrayal was the way of Wallachia’s rulers and in one such brief betrayal, Vlad II silently allowed his older sons, Mircea and Vlad IV, to launch an insurrection after which Mircea impaled all his prisoners upon stakes. The young Dracula loved the sight of this and later joined Mircea in further insurrections against the Ottomans as well as the rival Dăneşti clan supported by the Hungarian warlord, John Hunyadi. Ultimately, Hunyadi overran Dracula’s father, slew him in the marshes of Bălteni and blinded and buried Mircea alive at Târgovişte. Hunyadi installed a Dăneşti prince, Vladislav II, over Wallachia. In his ambition and lust for power, Dracula put aside any vengeful sentiments for his slaughtered father and brother and allied with Hunyadi and served him as an adviser. As John Hunyadi went to face the Turks at Belgrade in modern day Serbia, Dracula attacked and slew Vladislav and took the throne for himself. As fortune would have it, a plague broke out amongst Hunyadi’s camp, infecting him which lead to his death. Sultan Mehmet was severely wounded in the battle. These events left Dracula to rule Wallachia uninterrupted for 6 years. It was the only time he ruled his home for so long.
The Impaler
“I have killed men and women, old and young… We killed 23,884 Turks and Bulgarians without counting those whom we burned in their homes or whose heads were not cut by our soldiers.” (Dracula, in a letter to Matthias Corvinus bragging of his tyranny)
As Sultan Mehmet approached what appeared to be a fetid balding forest of rotting trees in the distance he soon realized the horror of what he approached. They were so close to their destination – the Wallachian capital of Târgoviște -that he was in no mood for this puzzling sight. But the figures became more clear as the steeds in the cavalry grew unruly and the infantry felt ill. Before him stood 20,000 impaled bodies of innocent men, women and children, all victims of Dracula in that winter of 1462.
Dracula’s Muslim upbringing, albeit abandoned in deference to opportunity, and fluency in Turkish enabled him to move about the Ottomans’ most secured camps freely as a Turk without being noticed. This had deadly consequences for the Muslims. Dracula had entered Serbia with his men all dressed as Turkish Sipahis and slaughtered all the Muslim villagers, and those non-Muslims friendly to them that they could find. The intent was to leave a horrifying memento for Sultan Mehmet whom they knew to be soon taking their capital city. They erected this unholy monument in a bid to alarm the Sultan and terrorize his troops in hopes that they might turn around and retreat home.
What is remarkable is that there are no records of mass desertion of Ottoman troops after witnessing this. They pressed on unflinchingly. However, some historians have suggested that Sultan Mehmet II lost his taste for hunting down the ‘vampire’ following this invasion of Wallachia and left the task up to the only one who was capable of hunting down Dracula and killing him. After taking the Wallachian capital of Târgoviște, Mehmet returned home, leaving the hunt to Radu. After all, it would take someone who knew the mind of Dracula to defeat him, and none fit this bill better than his own brother.
This event earned Dracula the name of Vlad Ţepeş, the Romanian word “Ţepeş” meaning “Impaler”. Legend has it that if you look closely at the word you can see Dracula’s fangs dangling beneath as a hidden warning to the vampire’s terrible lust for blood.
Radu vs. Dracula: Brothers in Blood
As Târgoviște was taken, Dracula fled towards Transylvania in hopes of finding refuge with John Hunyadi’s son Matthias Corvinus. As was typical of Dracula’s opportunism and lack of reverence for religion, he offered to become Catholic in order to win Corvinus’ favor. He scorched the earth and slaughtered all the living in his path leaving a wake of desolation and writhing impaled bodies. He would not give up his homeland to the Muslims that easily. He began a beleaguering campaign of guerilla warfare that the elite Ottoman Sipahis could not endure. It is said he slaughtered 15,000 of the Ottoman soldiers in one single night. Still, as the mightiest of the Ottomans fled, Radu was undeterred seemingly driven by what can only be interpreted as an austere piety, to end the bloody reign of his haplessly misguided brother. None remained to fight Dracula save Radu and his fellow Romanian Muslim Janissaries.
The brothers fought lingering battles for the throne of Wallachia and Radu’s control of the region increased staggeringly with Dracula receiving less and less support from Matthias Corvinus in Hungary. In a strange twist of fate, Corvinus, the one to whom Dracula retreated, had him imprisoned for 12 years on charges of high treason. The people of Wallachia and their Christian nobles had enough of Dracula’s terror and put their support behind Radu who was pronounced Voivod, Prince and Ruler of Wallachia in 1462. Radu ruled the land prosperously for 11 years until his death while Dracula wasted away in a Budapest prison patiently waiting to rise again from the darkness.
Dracula’s Release and Final Battle
After Radu’s death in 1473, Dracula was released from prison. He immediately assembled an army and invaded Bosnia, slaughtering its Muslim population and impaling 8,000 on stakes in a forest of human bodies. Once again, Dracula had arisen from the darkness with the objective of eliminating Islam from the Balkans forever. He finally acquired the throne of Wallachia after his departed brother, but only for a month. Sultan Mehmet invaded Wallachia to remove this profanity from the throne his dear friend Radu had vacated in death. In 1476 the forces of Sultan Mehmet faced the forces of Dracula in Bucharest, Romania. Dracula’s army was overrun in a blitz and all were killed, including Dracula himself. The vampire had been slain. News of this did not suffice. His head was cut off and preserved in a jar of honey and sent to Constantinople. There, in a fitting end, Dracula’s head was impaled upon a stake in the center of Constantinople for all to see. There was to be no doubt or mystery.
The Muslims had finally, at last, killed Dracula.
References
- Dracula: Essays on the Life and Times of Vlad Ţepeş, Kurt W. Treptow
- Vlad III Dracula: The Life and Times of the Historical Dracula, Kurt W. Treptow
- The Complete Dracula, Radu Florescu, Raymond T. McNally
- Vlad Ţepeş, Prince of Walachia, Nicolae Stoicescu
- Tarikh al-Dawlah al-`Uthmaniyyah fi-l `Usur al-Wusta (Arabic), Dr. Mahmud al-Huwayri
- Al-`Uthmaniyin fi-l Tarikh wal-Hadharah (Arabic), Dr. Muhammad Harb
- Tarikh al-Dawlah al-`Uthmaniyyah (Arabic), Dr. Ali Hassoun
- Al-Sultan Muhammad al-Fatih (Arabic), Dr. Sayyid Ridwan `Ali
Resource:http://www.suhaibwebb.com/islam-studies/history/how-the-muslims-killed-dracula/
8.10.2014
ISLAM, A RELIGION OF PEACE
There appears to be no end to the war between several western powers—leaders in the global capitalist world order—and Muslim militants. Both sides are spiralling into some form of mutually assured destruction. Fragile “modern” nation-states, formed under the influence of European colonial forces in the early twentieth century, are crumbling and revealing their inability to deliver the promised fruits of secular modernity. Millions of Muslims are being killed, thousands are fleeing for their lives, and centuries old sites of Islamic civilisations are being decimated, while war-stressed western economies are declining into the shadows of China’s great industrial leap forward.
In the face of the current phase of this violent confrontation ushered in by the emergence and establishment of a militant-led Islamic State (IS) in Syria and Iraq, many officials of western governments and Muslim leaders are making public statements that include the positive representation of Islam as a “religion of peace.” Linguistic anthropologists or any other social scientists seeking to provide a serious scholarly analysis of such discourse would examine the context and what the speakers are trying to do. Here, some of the social meanings of these statements may include efforts to reinforce the peace-loving posture of the majority of Muslims and to calm the fears of non-Muslims, many of whom have already begun to resort to acts of violence against fellow citizens perceived to be Muslims. However, this scholarly tack is not the approach Clive Kessler chose.
Clive Kessler, a Columbia University trained Emeritus Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of New South Wales, chose to interrogate the truth value of discourse expressing the positive representation of Islam “as a religion of peace.” In the article, “The Islamic State and ‘Religion of Peace,’” published online in theQuadrant on September 26, 2014, Kessler tells us that he finds this description of Islam to be “bland, disingenuous, intellectually lazy, delusional, politically evasive, and altogether simplistic.” He wants us to have a clear idea of what we’re confronted with in order to devise an “effective response.”
A concern I’m sure many of us share, myself included. Kessler argues that “Islam”—taken at different times to mean an essence or essentialised, monolithic whole, conventional versions or mainstream historical Islam or core religious texts—is not a religion of peace, unless the “peace” you are referring to is “a religion and an attendant worldly order of hegemonic quietude and obedience” (p. 5).*
Most scholars of Islam, and of religion in general, would make a distinction between core religious texts and the multiple and diverse ways believers interpret and practice religion. They would also generally contend that religions are not actors and that it is the believers and practitioners who are peaceful or violent. However, this “cosmopolitan” point of view is not what he offers.
Kessler bases his argument about the nature of “Islam” upon an inaccurate and warped caricature of early Islamic history. He asserts that Islam, in contrast to the Judeo-Christian tradition, is from its very founding “political” and “majoritarian”—assuming “a world where Muslims ‘have the upper hand’ because they are the majority, one that is capable of having and imposing its way” (p. 4).* Kessler interprets the complex concept of Islam as religion, way of life, and polity (din wa daulah) as meaning that “Islam” possesses an inherent drive to dominate others—through generally violent means—and subjecting them to the status of “protected minorities” (dhimmi).
To the contrary, the history of the origins of Islam in Mecca was definitely not “majoritarian,” since Prophet Muhammad and a small group of followers—the first “converts” to Islamic monotheism—was a minority in the midst of the dominant polytheistic Quraish elite. It was also not “political” in the “governmentalist” sense Kessler proposes; in fact, some of the main politics revolved around trying to maintain protection from the increasingly hostile Quraish majority.
Eventually, the small band of Muslims fled to Medina to escape persecution, and that is where Islam was established not only as a religion and way of life but now also as a political order. Indeed, the new polity was an Islamic and Muslim-led state, which extended civil and membership rights to non-Muslims. But rather than applaud this polity as an early form of pluralism and multiculturalism, not to speak of religious tolerance and peaceful co-existence, Kessler spins it in the most negative fashion:
When one sets aside its divine dimension, Islam is in mundane terms a religion not of peace but domination and submission: the submission of all Muslims to Allah, and of other Muslims to those Muslims who claim to exercise the authority of Allah; and of non-Muslims to Muslims, under arrangements that are said to embody the sovereignty of Allah. That is the basis upon which Islam claims to offer social peace and, in the words of its political apologists, to be ‘a religion of peace’. (p. 4)*
If he were interested in comparing historical Islamic polities to “modern” nation-states, there is a growing literature on Islamic constitutionalism and pluralism (see, for instance, the works of Mohammad Fadel and Anver M. Emon). Yet again, Kessler’s interest takes us in another, more devious and Islamophobic, direction. He proceeds to argue that since violent Muslim militants draw upon and produce interpretations of Islamic texts and that their versions of Islam can be “derived directly” from these primary religious sources, therefore Islam is not a “religion of peace.”
Furthermore, he claims that all Muslims are responsible for the violent actions of any Muslims that draw upon Islamic texts and traditions and that we must “publicly recognise and directly repudiate those parts of the Islamic tradition that are anything but peaceful” (p. 7).* We should note that real Muslim actors reappear at this point in his article at the very point in which he delegates the marching orders to 1.5 billion peace-loving Muslims the world over.
I would be remiss to not clarify what I mean by considering Kessler’s logic as a form of Islamophobic attack on Islam. If he is being fair and balanced, then the logic he is applying to Islam should apply to other religions. Contrary to his attempt to create a false caricature of Islam as an exceptionally and inherently violent religion, human history is full of believers of various religions drawing upon religious sources in their commission of acts of violence against others.
Would he or other anti-Muslim activists, holding Islam up to this form of ridicule, attack and interrogation, apply the same logic to other religions? Would he deny and attempt to refute, other believer’s in these faiths positive representations of their religions? Would he order them to excise those parts of their religious traditions that violent co-religionists drew upon as they engaged in acts of violence?
For instance, Indian Hindus have committed such acts of violence against Indian Muslims, Christians, and Sikhs. Sri Lankan Buddhists have committed such acts against Tamil Hindus. Burmese Buddhists have committed such acts of violence against Rohingya Muslims. Israeli Jews have committed such acts of violence against Palestinian Muslims.
Moreover, European Christians have committed such acts of violence against peoples across the world as they expanded empires of domination, colonialism, and slavery. Meanwhile, Christian religious leaders in Europe and abroad found multiple ways to justify these acts of unspeakable barbarity, savagery, and inhumanity. In addition, Christians in Europe, North America, and Australia, drawing upon religious sources, have created racial epistemologies and hierarchical structures of white supremacy that continue to plague our contemporary global society.
Would Clive Kessler and others leading the current wave of attacks on Islam and Muslims, claim that Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, and Christianity promote acts of violence? Would all adherents of these faiths be held responsible for their co-religionists’ violent behaviour? Would he deny and verbally assault believers and practitioners of these religions, when they or others express positive representations of these faiths? Would he tell Hindus that their religion is not a “religion of salvation” or Buddhists that their religion is not a “religion of enlightenment” or Jews that their religion is not one of “atonement” or Christians that their gospel is not a “gospel of love”? Would we? No. Why not? We would not because we know better. We know that the interpretations and acts of particular adherents of a religion do not define the character of said religion.
Likewise, adherents of Islam should not be assaulted with these anti-Muslim attacks, when we utter the positive representation of our religion as a “religion of peace.” After all, this phrase does not only roll off the lips of “Muslim apologists.” It is found in popular religious songs, films, and compact discs, and other genres within Muslim cultural spheres. It is also expressed in sermons in religious institutions and embedded in the everyday practices of Muslims as we perform acts of worship and extend greetings of peace to fellow human beings and all of the universes created by Allah. It is embedded in our core religious beliefs as we strive to attain higher levels of peace through remembrance of Allah and submission to Allah’s Commandments. Islam is a religion of peace.
Finally, Clive Kessler asks a serious question about where does the violence of people who claim to be adherents of a particular religion come from.
To provide a serious answer to this question, we must consider the context, both broadly and minutely, to understand the actions of individuals and groups interpreting religious sources and devising courses of action. Frantz Fanon, Anthony Wallace, and many other social scientists have underscored the importance of political, social, and environmental conditions that shape the ways people reformulate and create new religious interpretations and frameworks. Frantz Fanon pointed out in his classic workThe Wretched of the Earth that acts of anti-colonial violence—often connected to reformulations of religious sources—were products of European colonialism. Therefore, if we are serious about formulating an “effective response” to the apparently unending war between several western powers and Muslim militants, we must look to change the conditions that have shaped both sides becoming more deeply entrenched along the course of mutually assured destruction.
Timothy P. Daniels is Associate Professor of Anthropology at Hofstra University. He conducts ethnographic studies of religion, politics, and society in Southeast Asia.
NB – * refers to the page number the selected quotation comes when the online article is in printed form.
Resource:
8.10.2014
R. FIDELMA O’Leary
R. FIDELMA O’Leary mendapatkan penghargaan Woman of Spirit tahun 2012. Ia adalah seorang Professor Biologi di Universitas St. Edward di Austin, Texas, AS.
Wanita asli Texas yang berprofesi sebagai Professor Neurosains di Universitas Texas ini, telah menemukan kedamaian dalam islam. Dr Fidelma, yang juga sebagai seorang Dokter Neurologi di sebuat rumah sakit di AS, terpukau ketika melakukan kajian terhadap syaraf-syaraf di otak manusia. Satu hal yang membuat dia terpukau adalah ketika mengetahui bahwa terdapat beberapa urat syaraf manusia yang tidak dimasuki darah. Padahal setiap inci otak manusia memerlukan suplai darah agar bisa berfungsi secara normal.
Setelah mengadakan penelitian dengan seksama dan memakan waktu yang lama, Dr Fidelma akhirnya mendapati kenyataan bahwa urat-urat syaraf di otak itu tidak dimasuki darah kecuali bila seseorang sedang shalat, yakni ketika posisi sujud! Ternyata urat syaraf itu memerlukan darah hanya beberapa saat saja, yakni ketika seseorang shalat.
Setelah penelitian itu, Dr Fidelma mencari tahu tentang Islam, lewat buku-buku keislaman dan diskusi dengan rekan-rekannya yang Muslim. Dan akhirnya, dengan kesadaran penuh, Dr Fidelma mengikrarkan keislamannya dengan mengucapkan dua kalimat syahadat.
SubhanAllah..
Allah SWT berkenan memberinya hidayah atau petunjuk pada iman. Keyakinannya pada agama Islam yang baru dianutnya itu demikian besar. Sekarang Dr Fidelma membuka klinik,”Pengobatan dengan Al-Qur’an”. Dia terus mengkaji pengobatan Islami dan memberikan pengobatan dengan ayat-ayat Al-Qur’an dan apa saja yang dianjurkan Al-Qur’an dan Hadits Nabi Saw, misalnya dengan berpuasa, madu, habbatussauda (jinten hitam), minyak zaitun, dan sebagainya.
Allah SWT berfirman: “Dan apabila kamu menyeru untuk mengerjakan shalat, mereka menjadikannya (shalat itu) sebagai ejek-ejekan dan permainan. Yang demikian itu ialah karena mereka suatu kaum yang tidak berakal.” (Q.S Al Maidah: 58).
[Sumber: dtislam.blogspot.com]
Semoga Bermanfa'at.