tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734046.post767631663383626647..comments2023-11-02T06:55:33.598-07:00Comments on Kassim Ahmad: Kassim Ahmadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08059909735396467315noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734046.post-74445139731276039622008-07-24T10:44:00.000-07:002008-07-24T10:44:00.000-07:00Di bawah saya turunkan petikan dari satu artikel b...Di bawah saya turunkan petikan dari satu artikel bertajuk, "Why Shariah: An Article Refuting Those Who Doubt The Shariah" oleh Noah Feldman dan disiarkan dalam The New York Times. Mat salleh ini bukanlah pengikut Mazhab Shafie tetapi dia lebih faham mengenai sejarah Islam terutama peranan sunnah Nabi dlm perudangan Islam drpd sdra Kassim Ahmad:<BR/><BR/>"To understand Shariah’s deep appeal, we need to ask a crucial question that is rarely addressed in the West: What, in fact, is the system of Islamic law? In his lifetime, the Prophet Muhammad was both the religious and the political leader of the community of Muslim believers. His revelation, the Koran, contained some laws, pertaining especially to ritual matters and inheritance; but it was not primarily a legal book and did not include a lengthy legal code of the kind that can be found in parts of the Hebrew Bible. When the first generation of believers needed guidance on a subject that was not addressed by revelation, they went directly to Muhammad. He either answered of his own accord or, if he was unsure, awaited divine guidance in the form of a new revelation.<BR/><BR/>With the death of Muhammad, divine revelation to the Muslim community stopped. The role of the political-religious leader passed to a series of caliphs (Arabic for “substitute”) who stood in the prophet’s stead. That left the caliph in a tricky position when it came to resolving difficult legal matters. The caliph possessed Muhammad’s authority but not his access to revelation. It also left the community in something of a bind. If the Koran did not speak clearly to a particular question, how was the law to be determined?<BR/><BR/>The answer that developed over the first couple of centuries of Islam was that the Koran could be supplemented by reference to the prophet’s life — his sunna, his path. (The word “sunna” is the source of the designation Sunni — one who follows the prophet’s path.) His actions and words were captured in an oral tradition, beginning presumably with a person who witnessed the action or statement firsthand. Accurate reports had to be distinguished from false ones. But of course even a trustworthy report on a particular situation could not directly resolve most new legal problems that arose later. To address such problems, it was necessary to reason by analogy from one situation to another. There was also the possibility that a communal consensus existed on what to do under particular circumstances, and that, too, was thought to have substantial weight.<BR/><BR/>This fourfold combination — the Koran, the path of the prophet as captured in the collections of reports, analogical reasoning and consensus — amounted to a basis for a legal system. But who would be able to say how these four factors fit together? Indeed, who had the authority to say that these factors and not others formed the sources of the law? The first four caliphs, who knew the prophet personally, might have been able to make this claim for themselves. But after them, the caliphs were faced with a growing group of specialists who asserted that they, collectively, could ascertain the law from the available sources. This self-appointed group came to be known as the scholars — and over the course of a few generations, they got the caliphs to acknowledge them as the guardians of the law. By interpreting a law that originated with God, they gained control over the legal system as it actually existed. That made them, and not the caliphs, into “the heirs of the prophets.”moloyuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10954761721357387133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734046.post-42083854696961720232008-07-21T10:57:00.000-07:002008-07-21T10:57:00.000-07:00Sdra kata 'kebanyakan hadis adalah omong kosong". ...Sdra kata 'kebanyakan hadis adalah omong kosong". Saya faham sdra telah berhijrah drpd seorang yang berfahaman sosialis kepada yang berfahaman "ahli Quran" yang menolak hadis. Saya tak dapat gambarkan bagaimana sdra hidup sebagai seorang Islam tanpa berpandukan kitab-kitab atau mazhab yang berlandaskan Quran dan Hadis. Kalaulah boleh sdra menceritakan serba ringkas amalan-amalan sdra sebagai seorang Islam yang hanya berlandaskan Quran. sekian.moloyuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10954761721357387133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734046.post-16359166284576524652008-07-11T12:20:00.000-07:002008-07-11T12:20:00.000-07:00Orang-orang yang ikhlas membaca dan mengkaji, dan ...Orang-orang yang ikhlas membaca dan mengkaji, dan memahami kandungan Al-Quran, akan turut terseret untuk membaca buku-buku lain. Kerana, itulah caranya untuk mendapat hidayah Tuhan, dan menjadi seorang pemikir, sebagaimana yang diajarkan Al-Quran sendiri.<BR/><BR/>Mereka berdiri di atas rel Al-Quran semata-mata, samada dari sudut pemikiran, kepercayaan, tutur kata mahupun perbuatan, biarpun seribu buah buku telah mereka baca. Kenapa?.. Kerana setiap lembaran buku yang mengandung kebenaran, dibela oleh Al-Quran sendiri. <BR/><BR/>Terima kasih.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13734046.post-50072417964439161622008-07-09T06:31:00.000-07:002008-07-09T06:31:00.000-07:00salam, adakah pak kassim menulis berlandaskan qura...salam, adakah pak kassim menulis berlandaskan quran semata2 untuk membenarkan/menegakkan hujah pak kassim, saya dah baca buku terbaru pak kassim, banyak yang pak kassim ceritakan pengalam pak kassim mendapatkan imlu melalui siri pembacaan yang tak ada sempadan dan akhirnya kembali kepada alquran sebagai sumber .. kenapa tidak pak kassim hanya membaca quran semata ..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com