Idea Transcript
THE ISLAMIC CHRONICLERS
Heroes
Air Mata Saad Bin Abi Waqqash dalam Perang Qadisiyyah (via Islampos) JULY 31, 2014JULY 23, 2014 / RIAN FARISA / LEAVE A COMMENT Penolakan Kaisar Persia untuk menerima Islam membuat air mata Saad bin Abi Waqqash bercucuran. Berat baginya melakukan peperangan yang harus mengorbankan banyak nyawa kaum Muslim dan bukan Muslim. Kepahlawanan Saad bin Abi Waqqash tertulis dengan tinta emas saat memimpin pasukan Islam melawan tentara Parsi di Qadisiyyah, yang mana merupakan salah satu peperangan terbesar umat Islam. Bersama 3,000 pasukannya, ia berangkat menuju Qadasiyyah. Di antara mereka terdapat sembilan veteran perang Badar, lebih dari 300 mereka yang ikut serta dalam ikrar Riffwan di Hudaibiyyah, dan 300 di antaranya mereka yang ikut serta dalam memerdekakan Makkah bersama Rasulullah. Selain itu ada juga 700 orang putra para sahabat dan ribuan wanita yang ikut serta sebagai perawat dan tenaga bantuan. Pasukan ini berkemah di Qadisiyyah yang berhampiran dengan Hira. Pasukan musuh yang datang untuk menentang pasukan tentera Muslimin berjumlah 120,000 ribu orang dibawah panglima perang kebanggaan mereka, Rustum. Sebelum memulai peperangan, Umar bin Khattab yang menjadi khalifah saat itu, mengarahkan Saad untuk menulis surat kepada Kaisar Persia, Yazdegerd serta jendralnya Rustum. Isi surat itu intinya mengajak mereka untuk masuk Islam. Delegasi Muslim yang pertama berangkat menemui Yazdegerd adalah Nu’man bin Muqarrin yang kemudian mendapat penghinaan dan menjadi bahan ejekan sang raja. Untuk mengirim surat kepada Rustum, Saad mengirimkan delegasi yang dipimpin Rubiy bin Aamir. Rustum menawarkan segala kemewahan duniawi kepada Rubiy bin Aamir sebagai pembalasan dan penghinaan. Namun ia tidak berpaling dari Islam dan menyatakan bahawa Allah SWT menjanjikan kemewahan lebih baik yaitu surga. Para delegasi Muslim kembali setelah kedua pemimpin itu menolak tawaran masuk Islam. Melihat hal tersebut, air mata Saad bercucuran kerana ia terpaksa harus berperang. Setelah itu, untuk beberapa hari dia terbaring sakit kerana tidak kuat menanggung kepedihan jika perang harus terjadi. Saad tahu bahwa peperangan ini akan menjadi peperangan yang sangat keras yang akan menumpahkan darah dan mengorbankan banyak nyawa. Ketika tengah berpikir, Saad akhirnya mendapati bahawa dia tetap harus berjuang. Karena itu, meskipun terbaring sakit, Saad segera bangkit dan menghadapi pasukannya. Di depan pasukan Muslim, Saad membaca QS Al-Anbiya: 105 tentang bumi yang akan dipusakai oleh orang-orang soleh seperti yang tertulis dalam kitab Zabur. Setelah itu, Saad menukar pakaian kemudian menunaikan Shalat Zhuhur bersama pasukannya. Setelah itu dengan membaca takbir, Saad bersama pasukan Muslim memulai peperangan. Selama empat hari, peperangan berlangsung tanpa henti dan menimbulkan korban dua ribu Muslim dan sepuluh ribu orang Persia. Peperangan Qadisiyyah merupakan salah satu peperangan terbesar dalam sejarah dunia dan pasukan Muslim memenangkan pertempuran itu. —– Edited by: @pokamamil Source: http://www.islampos.com/air-mata-saad-bin-abi-waqqash-dalam-perang-qadisiyyah-123109/ (http://www.islampos.com/air-mata-saad-bin-abi-waqqash-dalam-perang-qadisiyyah-123109/)
Report this ad
Report this ad
The Last Words of Omar Mukhtar – Lion of The Desert JULY 23, 2014JULY 20, 2014 / RIAN FARISA / LEAVE A COMMENT Omar Mukhtar rahimahullah, the elderly hero famed for his bravery leading the rebellion against the European imperialists in Libya on the turn of 20th century, was finally captured and about to be executed by the Italians. These are his famous words before his execution. Defiant until the very end, what Omar Mukhtar actually said was the thing that made the Italians tremble in fear.
(https://islamichroniclers.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/omar-mukhtar.jpg)
The Status of Dhimmi (Non-Muslim Minorities) in Ottoman Empire (via Ottoman History Picture Archives) JULY 3, 2014JUNE 29, 2014 / RIAN FARISA / LEAVE A COMMENT The Ottoman Empire recognized three groups of non-Muslim minorities: ahl al-kitab (People of the Book), ahl al-dhimma (protected minorities), and non-Muslims. They are not forced to follow Islamic law, have considerable freedom of choice, and have their own religious organizations. This system has been considered the Ottoman Empire’s greatest strength and weakness. Historical background Dhimmi designates an indefinitely renewed contract through which non-Muslims have a specific status (but are not full citizens), have their property protected, and are ensured safe conduct in return for acknowledging Islam’s domination and paying the jizya (poll tax). In early Islam, they were Christians, Jews, Magians, Samaritans, and Sabians. The Prophet and the early caliphs showed religious tolerance and caution toward religious minorities. The Ottoman sultans made slight changes, but basically followed the same attitude in a more structured fashion. Dhimmis in the Ottoman State Some assert that Ottoman society was divided into ruling (Muslim) and (non-Muslim) raaya classes. But it was more complicated than that, for Muslims and non-Muslims were referred to as raaya (followers, the ruled, or non-participants in government). As the Ottoman State was semi-theocratic, raaya should be understood in the biblical sense as the shepherd and the flock. Government personnel worked in three areas: religion and law, war and statecraft, and the bureaucracy. The first branch was restricted to Muslim-born subjects. The ulema devoted long years to theological, scholastic, and legal studies in order to become judges and professors. The latter two branches were reserved mainly for non-Muslims. Neither group was inferior to the Muslims. The Ottoman system was so complex that we cannot determine whether there was religious or racial discrimination. After reforms during the nineteenth century, many intellectuals and ecclesiastics argued that applying a unified law would deprive them of their privileges. The Ottoman system of government was holistic, considered all branches interwoven and interconnected, and was fairly well integrated, in socioeconomic matters but not in religious matters, at least in Turkishmajority areas. The Millet System Three days after Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror entered Constantinople (1453), he told everyone to go home and continue his or her occupation and religion. He supervised the election of a new Greek Patriarch, a monk named Genadius, who was elected by Synod and consecrated. He proclaimed the patriarch-elect in the most honorific terms, gave him the pastoral staff with his own hands, and said: Be patriarch, live with us in peace, and enjoy all the privileges of your predecessors. Though other communities later were recognized in the same terms, the Greek Orthodox Church always had more privileges and stronger ties with the central government. Gradually, dealing with minorities engendered the millet system. Controlling the minority communities through their local bishops and rabbis stopped, and the whole Orthodox Church was organized as Rum Milleti (Roman people). The patriarch collected and allocated the poll tax and served as his community’s temporal leader. He was assigned a ceremonial rank with three tugs (horsetails), allowed his own court and prison in Istanbul’s Fener district, and had unlimited civil jurisdiction over and responsibility for his community. The State assigned him other duties and enforced the laws that he laid down for his community. Since Islamic law is corporate (not territorial) and Ottoman society was corporate in nature, the Ottoman State dealt with dhimmis as members of a community and not as individuals. A community member was directly responsible for and accountable to the community. Thus the government protected the communities from internal and external aggression, while the community’s leaders managed its affairs. The Porte had to ratify the chosen leader, but this was a mere formality. Each millet’s leader represented his people, and these matters were dealt with through the Foreign Ministry. The Greek Orthodox Patriarch had the rank of vizier and was provided with a guard of Janissaries (soldiers). The Christian Millet Most Orthodox Christian Balkan territories had been included in the Patriarchate of Constantinople’s jurisdiction. But by the time of Ottoman conquest, the Slavonic branch in the Sultan’s dominion had split into three patriarchates: Ochrida, Trnovo, and Ipek. These divisions were racial, dynastic, and nationalistic, and not doctrinal. Thus the Conqueror placed all Orthodox Christians under the authority of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople and let him decide how to apportion the tax among them. The sixteenth-century conquests in the Islamic lands and the capture of Cyprus and Crete brought many Orthodox Christians and the ancient patriarchates of Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria under Muslim control. As the patriarch was influential with the sultan, the Porte made arrangements through which the Greek elements became dominant. The Jewish Millet The Conqueror allowed the Jews, recognized as another millet, to settle in Istanbul. He appointed a haham basi (Chief Rabbi) with powers similar to those enjoyed by the patriarch. The haham basi was given precedence over the patriarch next to the head of ulema, and after the conquest, the Jews’ position improved. Although outcasts under the Byzantines, they now started holding various public offices. Jews fleeing persecution in Spain and elsewhere were welcomed into Ottoman lands. Each minority community was treated according to how it had been incorporated into the Ottoman State. Under Bayezid II and Mehmed the Conqueror, Muslims seem to have favored Jews over Christians, since Christians were suspected of being too sympathetic to Christian Europe. The Jews had no central authority to follow and be instigated by, save that of the office of haham basi, which the Porte could check easily. Almost all Jews were immigrants and brought their distinctive rituals, habits, and customs with them. Therefore, different regions inhabited by homogeneous groups were represented by different synagogues. The Armenian Millet In 1462, the Armenians became the last community recognized as a separate millet until the period of decline. Whereas the Patriarch was the most prominent ecclesiastical figure in the Orthodox Church and the Jews had no spiritual universal director, the head of Armenian Church did not reside within the Empire. The Orthodox Church considered the Armenian church (Gregorian) heretical. Earlier, it had been as powerful as Orthodoxy. When the Armenians became a separate millet, neither little Armenia nor the Armenian provinces of the East, two important seats, were ruled by the Ottomans. Therefore, Mehmed II chose Horaghim, Gregorian bishop of Bursa, as the Armenian patriarch of Istanbul and gave him powers similar to those of the Orthodox patriarch and the haham basi. Also belonging to this millet were all unclassified subjects, such as the Bogomils and the Paulicans, two heretical sects that originated from the Armenian church. Most Balkan Armenians accepted Islam after the area was overrun by the Ottoman armies. Remaining subjects have retained their particular faith until today. Other members included various Catholic and other Christian groups that the Orthodox Church considered heretical. The devshirme and ghulam systems This devshirme system was based on traditional views of dealing with prisoners of war. In the classical Islamic period, jurists advised immediate execution, allowing some or all to be ransomed or freed, exchanges for Muslim prisoners, or enslavement. Islam allowed slaves to be emancipated; the Ottomans did not. One-fifth of all captives entered the ghulam system (the sultan’s slave family), and were trained and allowed to rise within the system. Such slaves were recruited from Christians aged 10 to 20 years. The preferred ages were probably between 14 and 18, and boys younger than 12 or older than 20 were considered only in exceptional cases. Recruits were obtained through capture, purchase, gift, or tribute. Slaves not bought for the sultan or given to him were usually either captives or levied with the tribute boys. There was hardly any other way, since slaves passed too rapidly into the Muslim fold to have their children available for the system. The sons of the recruits (though already themselves Muslim) were eligible, but not their grandsons, because by then the grandchildren would most likely be Muslims. Reliable statistical data is rare, but based on contemporary accounts, in the sixteenth century probably 3,000 children were recruited annually. Those within the system might have reached as high as 80,000, and the total number recruited throughout the centuries might have been close to 2 million. This exclusion of all other Muslims’ children and grandchildren lasted until Suleyman the Magnificent broke them. He allowed the Janissaries’ children to join their ranks or other parts of the system. This proved to be a fatal move, for it became the only hereditary institution after the sultanate. At first, parents were anxious to keep their children out of the system. But later on, even Muslim families tried to get their children into it because of the prestige it conferred. Originally restricted to the sons of villagers and poor families, it eventually spread to the townsmen’s children. The earlier practice resulted in great social upward mobility; the later practice opened up a new way of accumulating wealth and prestige, and thus undermined the State. This tribute system brought children from Austria, the Caucasus, the Crimea, and the Balkans. Those captured by raiders and corsairs were presented to the sultan as gifts. Otherwise, recruiting officers visited some villages every 4 years to fill their quota. The officer summoned the priest and got a list of children, visited the houses, and took the most suitable children. If he received more than required, the surplus was sold elsewhere. Contemporary accounts say that it produced the ablest and most talented children. These children became known as ghilman. The sultan had the absolute sovereignty over them. However, they felt honored by this title and tried to show their loyalty to him. The Ottoman system raised slaves to ministers of state, courtiers, husbands of princesses, rulers of the Islamic state, soldiers and generals, bureaucrats and prime ministers. Race was irrelevant, for only potential talent was considered. They were taught Turkish, Arabic, Persian, physical training, war affairs, administration, the Ottoman governing institutions, and so on. The successful and meritorious could expect to serve in some of the Empire’s highest positions. Its graduates became fully Muslim, as did those who served in the Ottoman armed forces. However, many non-Muslims served in respectable positions during the reigns of Murad II, Mehmed the Conqueror, and Salim I. Muslims and nonMuslims held provincial administration positions and were members of court slave families (e.g., the grand vizier, governors, princes, military officers, and so on). Taxation Dhimmis paid two special taxes: jizya (a tribute or a poll tax) and kharaj (land tax). Ottoman ulema ruled that this rule still was in use, but since all agricultural land belonged to the State, it applied to private holdings. Another tax was taken from all peasants. Many other dues levied on peasants and traders were heavier for dhimmis than for Muslims. Though the land tax was discontinued during the early days of Islam, the Ottomans continued to levy the poll tax in lieu of military service. Interestingly enough, it was confused with land tax and the dhimmis were confused with the masses. The masses’ payment of the land tax thus was actually the dhimmis’ payment of the poll tax. Originally it was levied only on free men who could earn and afford to pay it. But later on, ministers, rabbinical representatives, the chief rabbi, teachers, slaughterers, and a few Jewish families in Istanbul were excluded. Many Christian families obtained a decree from the sultan that made them exempt. Gibb and Bowen estimate that probably only one-third of all eligible dhimmis paid this tax during the State’s later period. During the nineteenth century, the land tax was abolished (in principle) and yet retained as a compensation for military duty. Shortly thereafter, Istanbul’s people were exempted from it in toto, although it was still collected in the provinces. Until the republican era, all non-Muslims (except for Istanbul residents) paid only a military and a road tax. Conclusion The Ottoman State acted according to Islam and its own interests. It recognized each community’s rights and frequently protected them at the expense of its own citizens. It opened up state offices to non-Muslims as an incentive to become Muslim. Such a policy was unknown to the Europe of that time. However, the Ottomans did not spread the Islamic educational system among the non-Muslims to encourage their conversion, which constituted the state’s very raison d’etre. —– Written by: Dr. Bekir Aksoy
Ketika India Takluk di Tangan Kesatria Yang Belum Genap Usia 20 Tahun (via HTI) JULY 2, 2014JUNE 29, 2014 / RIAN FARISA / LEAVE A COMMENT India – sebelum dipecah menjadi India, Pakistan, Kashmir dan Bangladesh merupakan satu wilayah besar. Perhatian tehadap negeri ini sudah diberikan oleh para Khulafa’ Rasyidin. Hanya saja, misi pembebasan yang benar-benar berhasil dimulai dari Sindh, daerah yang terletak di sebelah barat daya Semenanjung India di sebelah tenggara Persia. Penaklukan wilayah ini dilakukan serentak dengan penaklukan wilayah Wara’ Nahr (Asia Tengah). Penaklukan ini dimulai tahun 89 H/708 M, atau dua tahun setelah Qutaibah bin Muslim membebaskan Asia Tengah, yang terjadi di era Khalifah ‘Abdul Malik bin Marwan. Pembebasan Sindh adalah atas inisiatif Panglima al-Hajjaj bin Yusuf atTsaqafi dan dialah yang mengutus Muhammad bin Qasim,yang tak lain adalah saudara sepupunya sendiri, untuk memimpin pasukan pembebasan tersebut. Yang menarik, saat itu usia Muhammad bin Qasim belum genap 20 tahun. Muhammad bin Qasim ditugaskan untuk membebaskan wilayah ini, setelah wilayah ini menjadi berbatasan dengan batas timur negara Islam. Setelah wilayah ini berhasil dibebaskan, Muhammad bin Qasim, yang belia itu, diangkat menjadi amir untuk wilayah tersebut. Setelah wilayah ini berhasil dibebaskan, Muhammad bin Qasim melanjutkan misinya ke Mukran. Mukran ini berbatasan dengan Kirman di sebelah barat, dan India di sebelah timur, Sajtan di sebelah utara, sedangkan sebelah selatannya berbatasan dengan laut. Dari sana, Muhammad bin Qasim bergerak ke Daibul, menyusuri pantai Laut India, dan membebaskan wilayah tersebut. Sesampainya di sana, Muhammad bin Qasim mengepung wilayah tersebut selama tiga hari, dan berhasil menguasainya setelah penguasa wilayah tersebut, Dahir, melarikan diri. Di sini, Muhammad bin Qasim merancang kota dan menempatkan 4.000 tentara Muslim. Wilayah ini kemudian disulap menjadi pangkalan laut bagi Khilafah Islam. Pembebasan wilayah ini mempunyai dampak yang besar terhadap situasi domestik, baik kota maupun kampung yang berdekatan. Akhirnya, penduduk-penduduk di sekitarnya berbondong-bondong menyatakan perjanjian damai dengan kaum Muslim. Setelah misi ini berhasil, Muhammad bin Qasim mengarahkan pasukannya ke Birun, yang terletak di tepi barat sungai Sind, yang terkenal dengan nama Mahran. Penduduknya pun segera menyatakan damai, yang diikuti dengan penduduk Sarbidus, Sahban dan Sadusan. Kota-kota ini terletak di tepi timur sungai Sind. Di kota Mahran ini, Muhammad bin Qasim bertemu lagi dengan Dahir. Panglima belia ini pun berhasil mengalahkannya dan membunuhnya. Setelah itu praktis kaum Muslim berhasil menguasai seluruh daerah Sindh. Tentara dikerahkan ke timur laut hingga sampai ke kota Brahmanabad. Tentara Dahir yang dipimpin oleh anaknya Jaisink, melarikan diri ke sana. Di kota ini, mereka diperangi oleh pasukan Muhammad bin Qasim hingga kalah. Setelah itu, Muhammad bin Qasim dengan pasukannya pun berhasil membebaskan kota tersebut. Jaisink akhirnya melarikan diri ke utara dan membuat benteng di Rur, ibukota Sindh. Muhammad bin Qasim dan pasukannya mengepung kota ini selama empat bulan sebelum akhirnya kota ini takluk. Setelah wilayah ini dikuasai oleh kaum Muslim, maka Muhammad bin Qasim, yang usianya telah memasuki 20 tahun lebih sedikit, mengatur urusan wilayah-wilayah yang ditaklukkan tersebut. Dia adalah wali di wilayah-wilayah tersebut. Setelah pengaturan dan sistemnya berhasil diterapkan dengan baik, dia pun siap melanjutkannya misinya yang lain. —– Source: www.hizbut-tahrir.or.id/2014/06/24/ketika-india-takluk-di-tangan-kesatria-yang-belum-genap-usia-20-tahun/ (www.hizbut-tahrir.or.id/2014/06/24/ketika-india-takluk-di-tangan-kesatria-yang-belum-genap-usia-20-tahun/)
Perang Peradaban (via Anti Liberal News) JUNE 30, 2014JUNE 29, 2014 / RIAN FARISA / LEAVE A COMMENT Dahulu kala, ketika Nabi menerima laporan bahwa ajakannya kepada Kaisar Romawi Heraclius untuk berpegang pada keyakinan yang sama (kalimatin sawaa’) ditolak dengan halus, Nabi hanya berkomentar pendek “Sa ukhjim al-rum min uqri baitii” (Akan saya perangi Romawi dari dalam rumahku). Ucapan Nabi ini bukan genderang perang atau teror, ia hanya berdiplomasi. Tidak ada ancaman fisik dan juga tidak menyakitkan pihak lawan. Ucapan itu justru menunjukkan keagungan risalah yang dibawanya, bahwa dari suatu komunitas kecil di jazirah Arab yang tandus, Nabi yakin Islam akan berkembang menjadi peradaban yang kelak akan mengalahkan Romawi. Pada tahun 632, ketika Nabi Muhammad SAW wafat, beliau telah melaksanakan berbagai tugas besar yaitu yang pertamatama adalah menyampaikan risalah (al-Qur’an), kemudian membentuk komunitas Muslim dan menyatukan suku-suku Arabia menjadi sebuah bangsa yang homogen dan kuat sehingga berdiri institusi negara Madinah dan akhirnya mendirikan institusi pendidikan yang kemudian menjadi cikal bakal tradisi intelektual Islam. Di masa Khulafa’ al-Rasyidin, Islam mulai menyebar keluar dari jazirah Arabia. Diawali pada masa Abu Bakar dan mencapai titik tertingginya pada masa Umar Ibn Khattab dan boleh dikatakan terhenti pada zaman Ali ibn Abi Thalib. Pada masa Khulafa’ al-Rasyidin umat Islam telah menguasai kawasan-kawasan di sekitar jazirah Arabia seperti Persia, Mesir, Syria dan sebagainya. Dari sejak itu umat Islam sudah tidak terbendung lagi untuk keluar dari jazirah Arabia. Pada abad ke 7 kekhalifahan Umayyah berdiri dan beribukota di Damaskus (661-750), kemudian kekhalifahan Abbasiyah berdiri pada abad ke 8 dan beribukota di Baghdad (750-1258). Selain itu pada abad ke 10 di Kairo berdiri kekhalifahan Fatimiyyah (909-1171), sedangkan di Kordoba (Qurtubah) Spanyol pada abad yang sama berdiri kekhalifahan Umayyah (929-1031). Dengan berakhirnya kekhalifahan Umayyah, Abbasiyah dan Fatimiyyah ternyata pada abad ke 16 masih berdiri kekhalifahan yang lebih besar lagi yang bukan dari bangsa Arab, yaitu kekhalifahan Turki Utsmani di Konstantinopel yang berlangsung sejak 1517 hingga 1924. Dengan berdirinya kekhalifahan Umayyah (tahun 661 M), Damaskus telah berubah menjadi pusat pemerintahan Islam membawahi wilayah terpenting kerajaan Byzantium lainnya seperti Palestina, Suriah, Persia, (635-640 M), Mesir (641 M), Siprus (649 M), Iskandariyah (652 M), Transoxiana, kawasan Asia Barat dan Afrika Utara, dua kawasan yang dulunya jatuh ke tangan Alexander the Great. Pada tahun 700an, tidak lebih dari setengah abad sesudah wafatnya Nabi Muhammad (632 M), umat Islam telah tersebar ke kawasan Asia Barat dan Afrika Utara, dua kawasan yang dulunya jatuh ke tangan Alexander the Great. Selanjutnya Muslim memasuki kawasan yang telah lama dikuasai oleh Kristen tanpa perlawanan yang berarti. Menurut William R. Cook pada tahun 711 – 713 M kerajaan Kristen di kawasan Laut Tengah jatuh ke tangan Muslim dengan tanpa pertempuran, meskipun pada abad ke-7 kawasan itu cukup makmur. Bahkan selama kurang lebih 300 tahun hampir keseluruhan kawasan itu dapat menjadi Muslim. Baru pada abad ke 11 kerajaan Kristen di kawasan itu mulai melawan Muslim. Demitri Gutas dengan jelas mengakui bahwa pada tahun 732 M kekuasaan dan peradaban baru didirikan dan disusun sesuai dengan agama yang diwahyukan kepada Muhammad, Islam, yang berkembang seluas Asia Tengah dan anak benua India hingga Spanyol dan Pyrennes. Gutas bahkan menyatakan bahwa dengan munculnya peradaban Islam, Mesir untuk pertama kalinya sejak penaklukan Alexander the Great, dapat dipersatukan secara politis, administratif dan ekonomis dengan Persia dan India dalam jangka waktu yang cukup lama. Perbedaan ekonomi dan kultural yang memisahkan dua dunia yang berperadaban, Timur dan Barat, sebelum Islam datang yang dibatasi oleh dua sungai besar dengan mudahnya lenyap begitu saja. Mungkin orang mencari-cari kaitan antara metaforika Nabi “menyerang Romawi dari dalam rumahku” dengan kenyataan sejarah. Memang proses kejatuhan Romawi tidak disebabkan oleh faktor tunggal. Edward Gibbon dalam The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire menyatakan bahwa periode kedua dari merosot dan jatuhnya Kekaisaran Romawi disebabkan oleh lima faktor: Pertama, di era kekuasaan Justinian banyak memberi wewenang kepada Imperium Romawi di Timur. Kedua, adanya invasi Italia oleh kaum Lombards. Ketiga, penaklukan beberapa provinsi Asia dan Afrika oleh orang Arab yang beragama Islam. Keempat, pemberontakan rakyat Romawi sendiri terhadap raja-raja Konstantinopel yang lemah. Yang terakhir adalah munculnya Charlemagne yang pada tahun 800 M mendirikan Kekaisaran Jerman di Barat. Jadi, penyebab kejatuhan Romawi merupakan kombinasi dari berbagai faktor, seperti problem agama Kristen, dekadensi moral, krisis kepemimpinan, keuangan dan militer. Dan diantara faktor terpenting penyebab kejatuhan Romawi adalah datangnya Islam. Inilah sebenarnya kaitan pernyataan Nabi yang metaforis itu. Nabi tidak pernah pergi menyerang Romawi Barat maupun Timur, tapi datangnya gelombang peradaban Islam telah benar-benar menjadi faktor penyebab kejatuhan Romawi. Namun ini tidak bisa ditafsiri bahwa Islam itu datang membawa kehancuran peradaban lain. Islam justru harus ditafsiri sebagai penyelamatnya, sebab Islam adalah diin yang menghasilkan tamaddun yang diterima oleh bangsa-bangsa selain bangsa Arab sebagai pembebas dari ketidakadilan dan penindasan. Islam membawa sistem kehidupan yang teratur dan bermartabat, sehingga mampu membawa kemakmuran dan kesejahteraan masyarakat, sehingga Islam diterima oleh bangsa-bangsa non Arab karena universalitas ajarannya yang tidak lain adalah kekuatan pancaran pandangan hidupnya. —– Written by: Dr. Hamid Fahmy Zarkasyi , M.A. Ed, M. Phil Source: http://antiliberalnews.com/2014/06/23/perang-peradaban/ (http://antiliberalnews.com/2014/06/23/perangperadaban/) Older posts BLOG AT WORDPRESS.COM.