‘Tears, hugs and two icy handshakes’

      
           Jose
Mourinho’s reign at Chelsea ended emotionally, with warm dressing-room
embraces for 23 of his players - and a cold handshake for Andriy
Shevchenko and skipper John Terry. His departure, though, was a long
time coming. Duncan Castles reports
         

      
      
          Sunday    September 23, 2007
The Observer

         
      

       Tuesday,
10pm, home dressing room, Stamford Bridge. Andriy Shevchenko is taking
Michael Essien to task on his performance in the night’s embarrassing
1-1 draw with Rosenborg. The former European footballer of the year
tells Africa’s finest midfielder that he tried to make too many passes
through the centre of the Norwegians’ formation where ‘70 percent of
their players were’. Essien learns he should have been passing to the
wings ‘where they only had 30 percent of their men’.

Not the most insightful of tactical advice, but then these are not the
thoughts of a Ukraine international, they are those of a Russian
billionaire. Standing beside Shevchenko, tactics board in hand, Roman
Abramovich is the man telling Essien how to play football. Shevchenko
is merely there to translate. In another room, attending to the press,
Mourinho is utterly unaware of his employer’s actions.

Tuesday,
7:11pm, the home dressing room. Chelsea’s squad of 18 are called out
for their pre-match warm up. All the players step out for the carefully
prepared drill - except one. John Terry remains sitting where he is.
One of Jose Mourinho’s assistants urges Terry out. Chelsea’s captain
refuses, swears, and, according to an eye witness, says he is upset and
has ‘things on my mind’. Terry is said to be furious after finding out
that Mourinho had been asking in Chelsea’s treatment room whether there
was a medical reason for his perceived loss of form over recent weeks.
The stand-off continues until a team-mate cajoles his friend out on to
the pitch.

The game starts, Chelsea quickly lose a goal at a free
kick as Miika Koppinen stretches ahead of Terry to turn in a near-post
cross. Chelsea go in at half time 1-0 down and Jose Mourinho takes his
captain to task, blaming the defender for the deficit. Terry says
nothing but all his team-mates can see the anger on his face.

The
pair had once been the closest of footballing allies, but within 24
hours Mourinho is no longer Terry’s manager as Chelsea agree to a
£10.5million pay-off to rid themselves of a man they describe as ‘the
most successful manager the club has known’.

‘The relationship
broke down not because of one detail or because of something that
happened at a certain moment. It broke down over a period of time.’ -
Jose Mourinho, 21 September 2007.

To understand how the winner of
two Premier League titles, two League Cups and one FA Cup, a man who
averaged an unprecedented 2.33 points from his 120 Premiership games in
just over three seasons, steadily became persona non grata at the club
he made great, it is necessary to return to the summer of 2005.

‘In
Jose’s first season everything was fine,’ said a Chelsea employee who
suffered the Abramovich guillotine long before the Portuguese. ‘He came
in, he won the title by miles, almost made the Champions League final,
everyone was happy. But then it all began to go wrong. Peter Kenyon
started thinking it was his genius as a chief executive that was
important. Abramovich’s mates were telling him his money had done it
and any half-decent coach would win the league with those resources.
They forgot that the most important man at any club is the manager.’

That
summer, Chelsea poached Tottenham Hotspur’s sporting director Frank
Arnesen at a cost of £5m. Ostensibly recruited to revolutionise the
club’s sub-standard youth ranks, the Dane was actually brought in on
the recommendation of Piet de Visser, a well-known Dutch talent scout
who had advised Abramovich on football matters from his first months as
Chelsea owner.

Arnesen and De Visser, friends and allies from
their time together at Dutch club PSV Eindhoven, steadily worked to
influence Abramovich’s thinking on the first team, and, most
importantly, player recruitment. Along with the agents Soren Lerby,
Vlado Lemeic and Pini Zahavi they sought to steer Abramovich towards
the purchase of certain footballers. Their objective, according to one
source, was ‘to get to Abramovich’s money. To do that they needed power
at the club, needed a manager who would do what they wanted. Mourinho
was not that manager.’

Thus emerged a power struggle in which
Arnesen and others seemed to undermine Mourinho by questioning him at
every opportunity. When Mourinho went to war with Uefa over the actions
of referees they told Abramovich his coach was embarrassing the club.
When Mourinho’s team dourly won key matches by a goal to nil, they told
the owner a better coach would win by more goals and bring him far more
flamboyant football. When a Mourinho signing failed to perform on the
pitch, they told Abramovich that better players could be found
elsewhere.

Within a year, and despite Mourinho’s success in
claiming a second successive Premiership, the manager had lost control
of transfers. In the 2006 summer window, Mourinho asked the board to
buy Samuel Eto’o; they spent a UK record £30m on Shevchenko. Chelsea
sold William Gallas to Arsenal against Mourinho’s wishes, and forced
the £7m Khalid Boulahrouz upon him, while Arnesen compounded the error
of allowing Chelsea’s most effective defender to leave the club by
pulling the plug on the £5m purchase of Micah Richards. Inside a season
Richards was a full England international, while Boulahrouz was
stinking out the reserves until Chelsea paid Sevilla to take him off
their hands.

At least Mourinho could easily leave the Dutch
defender out of the first team. A personal friend of Abramovich’s,
Shevchenko played regardless of his performances, and those were
usually awful. In his first 26 appearances for Chelsea, the Ukrainian
striker scored five goals. His coaches and team-mates often felt as
though Chelsea were playing with 10 men and Mourinho was faced with a
problem - should he leave out the owner’s pal or lose the faith of the
rest of the team?

As January approached, Mourinho asked to be
allowed to sign a new striker. The board refused. Mourinho asked for a
centre-back to cover for Terry, then sidelined with a serious back
problem. The board offered him a choice between Alex, a Brazilian
bought via De Visser and ‘parked’ at PSV for two seasons, and Tal Ben
Haim, a Zahavi client. Mourinho wanted neither.

Worse still,
Chelsea’s manager was instructed to sack one of his assistants and add
the Israeli Avram Grant to his coaching staff. When he refused, the
club descended into open warfare.

Mourinho dropped Shevchenko
from his first team, leaking the story to a national newspaper in an
open challenge to Abramovich to sack him. On an emotional afternoon at
Stamford Bridge the manager first rallied his team around him, then
sent them out to overrun Wigan 4-0. Long before kick-off the Chelsea
supporters were chanting ‘Stand up for the Special One’ through
standing ovation after standing ovation.

An infuriated Abramovich
ceased attending games and instructed his advisors to find a
replacement coach. Mourinho let it be known that he would leave, but
only on payment of the outstanding value of his contract - about £28m
comprising £5.2m per annum for three-and-a-half years and up to £10m in
bonuses. In the meantime he kept winning matches, pushing his
injury-hit squad to within a few games of a remarkable quadruple.

Ultimately
Chelsea won the League Cup and the FA Cup, forcing Abramovich to
reconcile with his manager. A consciously ‘mellow’ Mourinho promised to
avoid conflict with opposing managers and football authorities,
accepted restrictions on his transfer budget, and reshaped his team in
a more flamboyant 4-4-2 formation. Fatefully, he also acceded to the
appointment of Grant as Chelsea’s director of football.

Though
some in Mourinho’s camp had Grant pinned as a ‘Mossad Spy’ from the
off, the manager attempted to work with him, holding long meetings with
him during the club’s staggeringly positive pre-season US tour and
letting it be known that he welcomed his arrival as a buffer against
Arnesen and route to Abramovich. The early-season optimism, however,
swiftly evaporated.

Grant began calling individual players aside to ask them questions.

‘You
look sad, why?’ ‘How do you feel in this position?’ ‘Is this the best
place for you to play?’ ‘Are we using your abilities well?’ Because
many of them complained about this to Mourinho, the manager decided to
cut back radically on team meetings, the only one this season having
been arranged for the Jewish New Year when Grant had returned to Israel.

While
Grant looked on at training, Shevchenko treated it with disdain. A
morose, lonely figure around the camp, he seemed to show more interest
in improving his golf swing than his shooting. As the first team
prepared for their final pre-season friendly against Danish side
Brondby, Shevchenko declared himself unfit with a back problem. A 2-0
victory ensured the £121,000-a-week striker was not missed, but
Mourinho was bemused to discover that Shevchenko’s bad back had not
prevented him from enjoying a round of golf at Sunningdale that day.

The
board, though, were not interested and the club’s descent continued.
Other players began to realise what was happening, that the summer’s
peace was a false one, that their manager had no support from the top.
‘The mentality became weaker and weaker,’ said one insider. ‘You could
feel the team’s strength sapping away.’

Mourinho knew his time at
Chelsea was coming to an end. At Uefa’s forum for elite coaches in
Geneva a fortnight ago he allowed Premier League rivals an insight into
his thinking. ‘Mourinho said he loved Chelsea and he loved English
football, but thought he would not stay for long,’ said one coach. ‘One
of us asked him why. He wouldn’t answer, but it was obvious something
was seriously wrong.’

His next Champions League match brought the
end. On Wednesday afternoon the board asked Mourinho to resign, citing
his handling of Shevchenko, his attitude to authority and, crucially,
his relationship with Terry as reasons why he should go. Mourinho
refused to walk, and fought only to maximise his pay-off as Chelsea
apparently threatened to call club employees to testify against him at
any employment tribunal.

A £10.5m pay-off was agreed and the
following morning Mourinho made a final trip to the training centre at
Cobham to pick up his possessions and say goodbye to his squad. There
was a message in each farewell. For most there was a Latin embrace and
warm words of thanks. For Didier Drogba and Frank Lampard the emotions
were so strong that both men were reduced to tears, Lampard retreating
to the shower room in an attempt to hide his. For Shevchenko and Terry
there was nothing but a handshake that, in the words of one observer,
could have ‘frozen a mug of tea’. No one was in any doubt about who he
considered the true captains of his team.

Out with the old, in
with the new. Furious at Mourinho’s dismissal, senior players describe
Grant’s appointment as ‘a disgrace’. Some at Cobham call him ‘an idiot’
and describe his coaching techniques as ‘25 years behind the times’.
Abramovich pushes the Israeli around ‘without a hint of respect’.

Former
academy coach Brendan Rogers has been drafted in to help out with the
first team, a promotion that may not be unconnected to the one-on-one
training sessions he gave Abramovich’s son. Only in Steve Clarke is
there the level of football knowledge to deal with a squad full of
international superstars. As the sole survivor of Mourinho’s cadre of
four assistant managers, the Scotsman has an unenviable task.

But
then neither he nor Grant will be picking the team. As Michael Essien
discovered on Tuesday night, the new manager of Chelsea is also the
owner.

Oleh : Ibnu Qayyim Al-Jauziyyah dalam bab pertama terjemahan KITAB IGHATSATUL LAHFAN

… bersambung,

Oleh: DR. MOHD. ASRI ZAINUL ABIDIN

ANTARA keistimewaan
Islam yang agung ini adalah jalan pulang ke pangkuan agama ini amat
luas terbuka dan tidak membebankan. Peluang seorang insan kembali ke
pangkuan keampunan dan keredaan Allah tidak pernah disekat oleh
sebarang jarak waktu, latar diri, keturunan, atau harta.

Sesiapa
yang ingin pulang ke pangkuan Allah tidak pernah dihalang oleh agama
ini disebabkan jenis dosanya atau keturunan, usianya yang lanjut, atau
apa sahaja.

Seseorang yang ingin
kembali kepada Allah diterima oleh kerahmatan-Nya dengan syarat insan
tersebut menyesali kesilapannya, benar-benar memohon keampunan dan
berazam tidak mengulangi kesalahan lalu. Jika kesalahan itu sesama
insan lain, dia memohon maaf dari yang dizalimi. Jika tidak mampu,
bimbang mudarat yang lebih besar jika permohonan maaf dibuat, serahkan
sahaja urusannya itu kepada Allah dan Allah Maha Mengetahui kadar
kemampuan hamba-hamba-Nya.

Firman Allah dalam
surah Ali ‘Imran 135-136: (maksudnya) Dan mereka yang apabila melakukan
perbuatan keji, atau menganiaya diri sendiri, mereka ingat kepada Allah
lalu memohon ampun dosa-dosa mereka - dan sememangnya tidak ada yang
mengampunkan dosa-dosa melainkan Allah - dan mereka juga tidak
meneruskan (perbuatan buruk) yang mereka telah lakukan itu, sedang
mereka mengetahui (akan salahnya dan akibatnya). Orang- orang yang
demikian sifatnya, balasannya adalah keampunan dari Tuhan mereka, dan
syurga-syurga yang mengalir di bawahnya beberapa sungai, mereka kekal
di dalamnya; dan yang demikian itulah sebaik-baik balasan (bagi)
orang-orang yang beramal.

Islam bukan seperti
sesetengah ajaran yang menyuruh seseorang yang berdosa membuat
pengakuan di hadapan orang agama, atau melakukan upacara yang menyeksa
diri demi penghapusan dosa seperti melukakan diri atau berjalan atas
bara api atau membuat bayaran penebusan.

Demikian perbuatan sesetengah pihak mencari rezeki dengan mengambil upah untuk pelupusan dosa solat atau puasa
atau ibadah yang lain, bukan dari ajaran Islam. Islam tidak pernah
mengenal itu semua. Seperti Islam tidak pernah menerima sama sekalipun
perbuatan sesetengah agama lain yang mengeluarkan surat berbayar untuk
penghapusan dosa, demikian Islam tidak dapat menerima perbuatan
penganutnya jika melakukan hal yang sama dengan mengeluarkan borang
pahala yang dijual sempena Ramadan atau selainnya.

Keampunan dan rahmat
Allah bukan dijual di jalanan. Ia sangat berkaitan dengan keluhuran
jiwa yang ikhlas ingin kembali kepada Allah Yang Maha Pengampun. Jika
keampunan hanyalah bayaran yang dibayar kepada pihak tertentu, tentulah
semua orang kaya tempatnya di syurga.

Sementara si miskin
yang tidak mampu membayar kepada golongan agama tiadalah habuan
keampunan untuknya. Maka tidaklah perlu lagi seseorang berpegang dengan
agama, cukuplah dengan membanyakkan ongkos, maka selamatlah dia di sisi
Tuhan. Aduhai, tentu tidak demikian.

Firman Allah
(maksudnya) Hari yang padanya harta benda dan anak-pinak tidak dapat
memberikan manfaat sesuatu apapun. Kecuali orang yang datang menghadap
Allah dengan hati yang sejahtera. Dan (pada hari itu) didekatkan syurga
bagi orang- orang yang bertakwa. Dan diperlihatkan neraka jelas nyata
kepada orang-orang yang sesat. (surah al-Syu’ara 88-91).

Seseorang yang
berdosa pula, tidak disuruh mendedahkan dosanya kepada orang lain
sekalipun di hadapan ulama atau siapapun di kalangan manusia. Bahkan
dia disuruh bertaubat antara dia dengan Allah dan menutup keburukan
dirinya daripada orang lain. Nabi s.a.w. bersabda: Sesiapa yang menutup
(keburukan) seorang Muslim, Allah tutup (keburukannya) di dunia dan
akhirat. (Riwayat Muslim).

Termasuk dalam
perkataan Muslim itu diri insan yang berdosa itu sendiri, dia juga
tentu seorang Muslim. Maka dia wajib menutup keaiban dirinya. Maka
dalam Islam tidak ada ‘pengakuan dosa di hadapan paderi’. Sesiapa
sahaja yang berasa berdosa dan ingin kembali kepada Allah, maka dia
bertaubat di mana sahaja dia berada.

Sabda Nabi:
Sesungguhnya Allah menerima taubat seorang hamba selagi nyawa belum
sampai ke halkumnya. (Riwayat al- Tirmizi, dinilai hasan oleh al-Albani).
Aduhai luasnya rahmat Allah dalam agama ini. Bahkan dalam sebuah hadis
kudsi, Allah berfirman: Wahai anak-anak Adam, selagi mana engkau
memohon dan mengharapkan dari-Ku, Aku ampunkan engkau walau apapun
dosamu, Aku tidak peduli. Wahai anak-anak Adam, jika dosamu sampai ke
puncak langit, lalu engkau pohon keampunan dari-Ku, Aku ampunkan
engkau, aku tidak peduli. Wahai anak-anak Adam, engkau jika datang
kepada-Ku dengan dosa yang hampir memenuhi bumi, namun engkau
menemui-Ku tanpa mensyirikkan Daku dengan sesuatu, nescaya aku datang
kepadamu dengan penuh keampunan. (Riwayat al-Tirmizi, dinilai hasan
oleh al-Albani).

Bahkan kita dilarang
kecewa dengan hidup disebabkan dosa yang lalu. Sebaliknya, disuruh agar
sentiasa memohon keampunan daripada Allah dan jangan kecewa dari
rahmat-Nya. Firman Allah dengan penuh syahdu dalam surah al-Zumar ayat
53: (maksudnya), Katakanlah: Wahai hamba- hamba-Ku yang telah melampaui
batas terhadap diri mereka sendiri (dengan perbuatan maksiat),
janganlah kamu berputus asa dari rahmat Allah, kerana sesungguhnya
Allah mengampunkan segala dosa; sesungguhnya Dialah jua Yang Maha
Pengampun, lagi Maha Mengasihani.

Al-Imam Ibn Kathir
(meninggal 774H) ketika mentafsirkan ayat ini menyebut: “Ayat yang
mulia ini adalah panggilan untuk semua pembuat dosa dari kalangan yang
kufur dan selain mereka agar bertaubat dan kembali kepada Allah. Ayat
ini juga adalah pemberitahuan Allah Yang Maha Berkat Lagi Maha Tinggi
bahawa Dia mengampunkan segala dosa untuk sesiapa yang bertaubat dan
meninggalkannya, walau bagaimana besar dan banyak sekalipun dosa
tersebut. Sekalipun bagaikan buih di lautan”. (Tafsir al-Quran
al-‘Azim, 4/74, Beirut: Mussasah al-Rayyan).

Maka tidak ada kecewa
bagi insan yang berdosa. Sekalipun kadangkala ada dosa yang tidak dapat
dimaafkan oleh perasaan insan lain, namun Allah tidak pernah menutup
pintunya selagi insan yang berdosa itu insaf, benar-benar kembali
kepada-Nya.

Saya bicarakan tajuk
ini, sesuai dengan suasana puasa. Juga agar perbincangan agama,
janganlah menyebabkan manusia ini kecewa dengan diri mereka dalam
mencari jalan pulang ke pangkuan Tuhan.

Agama ini begitu
lunak. Pintu untuk mendekati Tuhan tidak pernah hanya dikhususkan untuk
orang tertentu semata. Bahkan sesiapa sahaja yang menerima Islam ini
dan berusaha mendekatkan diri dengan jalan Rasulullah maka dia akan
sampai ke dalam rahmat Allah.

Tiada perbezaan
antara mufti, ustaz, imam dan orang biasa. Tuhan tidak pernah menilai
insan dengan gelaran-gelaran yang diberikan oleh sesama manusia. Dia
melihat keluhuran jiwa dan kesahihan amalan. Entah berapa ramai orang
biasa lebih mulia di sisi Tuhan dibandingkan mereka yang bersandar
dengan berbagai-bagai gelaran dan pangkat. Jalan pulang ke pangkuan
Tuhan tidak pernah mendiskriminasikan manusia.

Kadangkala amat
menakutkan kita mendengar ucapan sesetengah orang. Saya pernah
mendengar seseorang menyebut “dosa- dosa si polan tidak akan diampunkan
Allah.” Ringan perkataan itu di lidah kita, amat berat kesalahannya di
sisi Allah.

Sejak bilakah pula
kita menjadikan wakil Tuhan dalam memutuskan rahmat atau kelaknatan di
kalangan hamba-hamba-Nya. Kita menolak manusia ingin kembali dataran
keampunan Allah hanya kerana emosi kita, sedangkan Allah sendiri
mengisytiharkan keluasan rahmat-Nya untuk semua.

Marilah kita
berkempen untuk manusia mendapatkan rahmat keampunan Allah ini. Bukan
untuk orang masjid dan surau sahaja, tetapi juga semua muda-mudi di
jalanan, artis di pentas, pemimpin di gelanggang politik dan
seterusnya. Jangan menghukum seseorang itu sebagai tidak berpeluang
menerima rahmat Allah sedangkan roh masih di jasadnya dan hukuman Allah
belum pun kita tahu.

Nabi bersabda: Jika
seseorang berkata: Binasalah manusia, maka dialah yang paling binasa.
(Riwayat Muslim). Hadis ini bermaksud apabila seseorang berkata dengan
tujuan merendahkan orang lain dan membanggakan dirinya seakan orang
lain tidak mendapat kerahmatan, maka dialah akan dibinasakan Allah.
Dakwah agama hendaklah merentasi sempadan-sempadan yang dibikin oleh
kita. Rahmat Allah mestilah disebarkan ke semua daerah hidup yang
pelbagai. Sama ada yang berada di gelanggang sukan, di pentas filem, di
medan politik atau apa sahaja.

Janganlah
perbincangan agama hanya menggambarkan seakan semua manusia akan
memasuki neraka semata, lalu kita lupa Allah ialah Tuhan Yang Maha
Rahmat. Ungkapan-ungkapan agama ini adalah ungkapan memberikan harapan,
bukan menimbulkan kekecewaan.

Sehingga dalam hadis
Nabi bersabda: Seorang telah melakukan satu dosa, lalu dia berkata:
Wahai Tuhanku ampunilah dosaku. Lalu Allah azza wa jalla berfirman:
Hamba-Ku melakukan dosa dan dia mengetahui bahawa baginya Tuhan yang
boleh mengampun dan menghukumnya – dalam riwayat yang lain ditambah:
Aku ampunkan dosanya. Kemudian dia kembali melakukan dosa yang lain,
dia berkata: Wahai Tuhanku aku telah melakukan dosa ampunilah dosaku.
Lalu Allah berfirman: Hamba-Ku melakukan dan dia mengetahui bahawa
baginya Tuhan yang boleh mengampun dan menghukumnya-dalam riwayat yang
lain ditambah: Aku ampunkan dosanya. Lalu dia melakukan dosa sekali
lagi, dia berkata: Wahai Tuhanku aku telah melakukan dosa ampunilah
dosaku. Lalu Allah berfirman: Hamba-Ku melakukan dan dia mengetahui
bahawa baginya tuhan yang boleh mengampun dan menghukumnya, maka aku
ampunkan hamba-Ku in, buatlah apa yang kau mahu Aku ampunkan engkau.
(Riwayat al-Bukhari dan Muslim).

Hadis ini bukanlah
menggalakkan manusia melakukan dosa, tetapi menceritakan hal seorang
hamba yang bertaubat bersungguh-sungguh namun gagal mengawal dirinya
lalu tetap terjatuh ke dalam dosa. Setiap kali berdosa, dia ikhlas
memohon keampunan dan dia tetap diampun oleh Allah s.w.t.

Hadis ini memberikan
semangat kepada mereka yang telah bersalah berulang kali untuk terus
bertaubat bukan berputus asa dan terus mengikut jejak langkah syaitan.
Walaupun barangkali orang lain akan menyebut kepadanya “tidak guna kau
bertaubat, sudah berapa kali kau tetap gagal kekal atas taubatmu”,
namun Allah tidak berkata demikian. Dia Yang Maha Pengampun tetap
membuka pintu selagi hamba-Nya itu jujur dan ikhlas merintih kepada-Nya.

Jika Allah menutup
pintu, maka kekecewaan akan meliputi jiwa hamba yang seperti ini dan
akhirnya dia akan terus tenggelam dalam kejahatan. Namun dengan dibuka
seperti ini, insan akan terus berusaha kembali kepada Allah setiap kali
tergelincir.

Saya amat hairan, ada
agama tertentu yang dikatakan mempengaruhi emosi sesetengah anak-anak
muda kita disebabkan unsur kasih sayang dan rahmat berkenaan yang
ditonjolkan dalam agama. Seakan anak-anak muda kita tidak pernah
mendengar tentang keluasan rahmat dan keampunan Allah dalam Islam ini.
Lalu mereka pun kagum dengan agama lain dan melupai agama sendiri yang
diturunkan Allah ini.

Adakah kerana mereka
tidak mempelajari ajaran Islam yang betul? Ataupun kempen kita kepada
Islam kurang menonjolkan unsur-unsur kerahmatan agama ini?

Hendaklah kita sedar,
dalam dakwah baginda Nabi bukan hanya diceritakan balasan neraka, namun
diceritakan juga kenikmatan syurga. Bukan hanya tentang kemurkaan Allah
kepada yang menderhakai-Nya tetapi juga rahmat-Nya bagi yang kembali
kepada kepada-Nya.

Firman Allah dalam
surah al-Hijr 49-50: (maksudnya) Khabarkanlah kepada hamba-hamba-Ku
(Wahai Muhammad), bahawa Akulah Yang Maha Pengampun lagi Maha
Mengasihani (bagi mereka yang bertaubat dan beramal soleh). Dan bahawa
azab-Ku, adalah azab yang tidak terperi sakitnya, (bagi mereka yang
tetap dalam kederhakaan).

Di suasana Ramadan
ini, semoga taubat mempunyai ruang yang besar dalam hidup kita. Manusia
disuruh takut melakukan dosa. Namun jangan kecewa jika tersilap. Di
samping insan juga hendaklah selalu beringat, bahawa dosa yang
terlampau setelah diberi peringatan, boleh menghilangkan ingatan insan
untuk kembali kepada Tuhan.

Firman Allah dalam
surah al-Baqarah ayat 6-7: (maksudnya) Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang
ingkar itu, sama sahaja kepada mereka: Sama ada engkau beri amaran
kepadanya atau engkau tidak beri amaran, mereka tidak akan beriman.
(Dengan sebab keingkaran mereka), Allah mematerikan atas hati mereka,
pendengaran mereka, dan pada penglihatan mereka ada penutupnya; dan
bagi mereka pula disediakan azab seksa yang amat besar.

- DR. MOHD. ASRI ZAINUL ABIDIN ialah Mufti Kerajaan Negeri Perlis.

E-mel: moasriza@yahoo.com

Layari http://drmaza.com/

September 20, 2007

José Mourinho represents the ultimate triumph of this: The Cult of the
Manager. He has done as much as is humanly possible to render the action on
the pitch irrelevant. With Chelsea, the story was always the manager.
Players, what do they matter? Like Alfred Hitchcock’s actors, they are
cattle.

Mourinho was football’s star. His entire career was a sweet revenge on the
gods that made him unable to play the game. But he was never interested in
football for itself; rather, it was football as a vector for power that
enthralled him. That was his strength and ultimately his downfall.

Because the truth of the matter is that, ultimately, football is a game about
spontaneity; about fragments of individual brilliance allied to a corporate
resolve. If you reduce football to a series of set-plays, you reduce the
capacity for surprise and, therefore, the potential for winning.

But Mourinho hated spontaneity. He sought control. He wanted people who only
ever crossed on the pedestrian crossing, not realising, or rather, not
understanding that a city without jaywalkers is a city without artists.

He didn’t want artists. He didn’t trust them. He liked ordinary talents
developed to extraordinary lengths: Terry, Lampard, Makelele, Drogba. These
were people he could control, these were players who would not get between
the manager and his public.

One club, one star. Le club, c’est moi. Football’s
traditional belief is that the team are an extension of the manager’s
nature. Why, you may ask, were Chelsea not flamboyant, feisty, cocky,
maverick, paradoxical, intermittently brilliant? Because Mourinho is
primarily interested in power. The maverick side of his nature is merely the
way he set about claiming power, for it is power, not perversity, that
defines him.

As a result, the team were in subjection to the manager. This wasn’t a team
who cut loose, ever; this wasn’t a team you watched for the sake of this
player or that player. You wouldn’t catch Mourinho signing Cristiano Ronaldo
or Cesc Fàbregas, talents that need a certain amount of slack in the rope.

Rather, Mourinho put his faith in method and control. Chelsea were effective
enough but never reached beyond the brilliantly ordinary. The truly
exceptional was always beyond their reach, perhaps beyond Mourinho’s
understanding.

How else to explain his failures with Andriy Shevchenko and Michael Ballack?
To fail with one might be regarded as a misfortune; to fail with two looks
like a personality disorder. A manager who takes on two of the finest
players in Europe and gets scarcely anything from either – indeed, seems to
delight in their misfortunes – must ask questions not about the players but
about himself.

These two players were stars and, as such, they didn’t fit into Mourinho’s
plans. They were a threat to him. It was important for him that they failed,
and they did. This is heresy: it should be the belief of every coach that
anyone of sufficient talent can be accommodated.

Mourinho preferred other methods. They work, too. They worked for Mourinho at
FC Porto, where he won the European Cup, and they worked well enough in
England to bring two league titles, even if a second European Cup was always
beyond him with Chelsea.

But these methods have their drawbacks. The first is that if you rule the
exceptional out of your game, you are going to have problems when you
encounter the exceptional among your opponents. You have eliminated the
element of individual inspiration. In fact, the only place in which
individual inspiration was allowed to flourish with Chelsea was with the
goalkeeper. Petr Cech’s head injury was the single reason Chelsea failed to
win the league title last season.

The other drawback is that your team are going to be less fun. Less fun to
watch, less fun to play for. And you can argue all you like that a win is a
win and that it doesn’t matter whether you went the pretty way or the ugly
way, the fact is that Mourinho found himself in trouble at Chelsea because
of a disagreement on the subject of aesthetics. It is true, yet it is not
true, that Roman Abramovich, the Chelsea owner, parted company with Mourinho
because he was unable and unwilling to deliver football like Barcelona. That
was the proximate cause, of course, an ever-growing dissatisfaction with the
fact that Chelsea’s highest ambition was to achieve a sustained and
brilliant mediocrity.

But the ultimate cause was different. If it hadn’t been aesthetics, it would
have been something else. Mourinho established a one-star club, with one man
attracting all the attention, making all the stories, setting the agenda,
one man as the centre of power, one man as the moving spirit, one man
eclipsing all others. It really should have occurred to him that a man who
had spent 500 million quid to establish the club as a publicity vehicle for
himself may get a little bit irritated by that.

Because the truth is that Mourinho’s power was only ever an illusion. He drew
attention to himself, he had the nation’s football press delighting in every
pose, every absurdity, every contradiction, but he was never truly in charge
of Chelsea. Such power as he had was loaned, not achieved or given.

Mourinho reminds me of the critic in Anthony Powell, whose goal “was to
establish finally that the Critic, not the Author, was paramount”. The cult
of the manager is designed to promote the idea that the manager, not the
player, is paramount and Mourinho’s is the ultimate expression of this cult.
And that’s why Mourinho had to go – because the cult is based on a false
premise. In the end, the players are the stars.

Jobs for the boy

Where will José Mourinho turn after leaving Chelsea? Bill Edgar examines some
of the possibilities, with William Hill supplying the odds on his next job.

Portugal Mourinho has often said that he would like to coach his
country’s national team, although he may prefer to seek further glory at
club level after departing from Chelsea ahead of schedule. Odds 1-2

Tottenham Hotspur A club with such a long history of underachievement
would surely welcome Mourinho with open arms, but would he be willing to
join a club where a director of football has a prominent role? Odds
6-1

Barcelona A move to the Nou Camp would be a surprise, even though
Mourinho worked there as Bobby Robson’s translator. The Portuguese is
disliked for his inflammatory comments before and after Chelsea’s Champions
League meetings with the Spanish club, notably in 2005, when he accused
Anders Frisk, the referee, of bias towards Barcelona because of an alleged
half-time discussion with Frank Rijkaard, their coach. Odds 8-1

Real Madrid A job at the Bernabéu also seems unlikely given that Real
recently did exactly what Chelsea have done – parted company with a
successful manager because his style was boring. Fabio Capello’s league
title last season could not save his job. Odds 10-1

England Mourinho has the ego and single-mindedness to take on “the
impossible job” and the post will probably become available this autumn if
England fail to reach the European Championship finals. Odds 10-1

FC Porto Having won every trophy on offer to the club, he would
probably decline the chance to coach there again, even if he would have the
freedom to operate as a dictator. Odds 12-1

Inter Milan Mourinho reportedly spoke to the Italian club this year,
but Roberto Mancini should be secure as coach after Inter’s runaway title
success last season. Odds 20-1

Arsenal Mourinho may be tempted to seek revenge on Chelsea by taking
over one of their main rivals, but the prospects of Arsène Wenger vacating
the manager’s chair seem slim. Odds 20-1

Wenger vacating
the manager’s chair seem slim. Odds 20-1

var show=false;
var articleID = “2500633″;
var sHaveYourSay = ‘Have your say’;
var sCollapseForm = ‘Hide the form’;
var sHideMostComments = ‘Show fewer comments’;
var errorString = ”;
var testFlag = true;
var nTotalCharacters = 1000; // Value for the total number of characters that can be submitted - change to suit requirements //
// Array of required fields for the named form
var aFormEnterViewCommentValidation = new Array(’your_view’,'name’,'email’,'town_fs_city’);
/*
get the cookie string in cookie associated with cookiename
*/
function getCookie(Name) {
var search = Name + “=”
var CookieString = document.cookie
var result = null
if (CookieString.length> 0) {
offset = CookieString.indexOf(search)
if (offset != -1) {
offset += search.length
end = CookieString.indexOf(”;”, offset)
if (end == -1)
end = CookieString.length
result = unescape(CookieString.substring(offset, end))
}
}
return result
}
/*
set the cookie string in cookie
*/
function setCookie (name, value, lifespan) {
var cookietext = name + “=” + escape(value)
if (lifespan != null) {
var today=new Date()
var expiredate = new Date()
expiredate.setTime(today.getTime() + 1000*60*60*24*lifespan)
cookietext += “; expires=” + expiredate.toGMTString()
}
document.cookie = cookietext
return null
}
/*
validating whether required fields are being entered before submitted
*/
function PostingValidate(objForm) {
// if remember me is checked, the information is saved into the cookies
if(objForm.remember_me){
setCookie(’TimesOnlinecomment_name’,objForm.name.value,30);
setCookie(’TimesOnlinecomment_email’,objForm.email.value,30);
setCookie(’TimesOnlinecomment_city’,objForm.city.value,30);
setCookie(’TimesOnlinecomment_countryState’,objForm.countryState.value,30);
}
// seting the title to article headline so that the moderator get to know on which article, comment is made
objForm.title.value = “Unquenched thirst for power brings down one-man show”;
errorString = ”;
testFlag = true;
if(objForm.body.value.length==”0″){
objForm.body.focus();
document.getElementById(”label_your_view”).className = ‘color-bd0000′;
document.getElementById(”label_your_view”).style.fontWeight = ‘bold’;
testFlag = false;
errorString = ‘
* Please enter the comment’;
}
else {
document.getElementById(”label_your_view”).className = ”;
document.getElementById(”label_your_view”).style.fontWeight = ‘normal’;
}
if(objForm.name.value.length==”0″){
objForm.email.focus();
testFlag = false;
document.getElementById(”label_name”).className = ‘color-bd0000′;
document.getElementById(”label_name”).style.fontWeight = ‘bold’;
errorString += ‘
* Please enter the Name’;
}
else {
document.getElementById(”label_name”).className = ”;
document.getElementById(”label_name”).style.fontWeight = ‘normal’;
}
if(objForm.email.value.length==”0″){
objForm.body.focus();
testFlag = false;
document.getElementById(”label_email”).className = ‘color-bd0000′;
document.getElementById(”label_email”).style.fontWeight = ‘bold’;
errorString += ‘
* Please enter the Email’;
}
else {
if(objForm.email.value.indexOf(”@”,1)==-1){
document.getElementById(”label_email”).className = ‘color-bd0000′;
document.getElementById(”label_email”).style.fontWeight = ‘bold’;
testFlag = false;
errorString += ‘
* Please enter a valid Email’;
}
else{
document.getElementById(”label_email”).className = ”;
document.getElementById(”label_email”).style.fontWeight = ‘normal’;
}
}
if(objForm.city.value.length==”0″){
objForm.body.focus();
testFlag = false;
document.getElementById(”label_town_fs_city”).className = ‘color-bd0000′;
document.getElementById(”label_town_fs_city”).style.fontWeight = ‘bold’;
errorString += ‘
* Please enter the city’;
}
else {
document.getElementById(”label_town_fs_city”).className = ”;
document.getElementById(”label_town_fs_city”).style.fontWeight = ‘normal’;
}
if (testFlag == false)
{
document.getElementById(”enter-view-comment-error-container”).className = ‘color-bd0000′;
document.getElementById(”enter-view-comment-error-container”).style.fontWeight = ‘bold’;
document.getElementById(”enter-view-comment-error-container”).innerHTML = “

Error: “+errorString+”

“;
return false;
}
else {
return true;
document.getElementById(”enter-view-comment-error-container”).className = ”;
document.getElementById(”enter-view-comment-error-container”).style.fontWeight = ‘normal’;
}
}
var sReadAllComments = “”;

Great piece of writing

Sly, London,

rather
harsh and distorted version of reality. Ferguson or Wenger are as much
control freaks and actuallly have more power in their respective clubs.
While taking all the attention on himself Mourinho has let the players
bask in relative calm. For this they are actually grateful to him.

Sheva and Ballack are also big egos and no managers want to deal
with that. Witness Ferguson on Beckham after he got married and
involved in pop, fashion etc. Managers want players that will die for
the cause not prima donnas and show offs.

Winners are often difficult, driven characters. Gullit for one,
was also criticised for his outspokeness, but if things are ever to
change someone has to speak up. Mourinho has shaken English football
into life. It is more competative and of a higher standard accross all
clubs than it was before him. He has broken the dominance of Man U. and
opened up the chances of other teams winning, and we should be thankful
for his willingness to call it like it is.

Dan , london, uk

Would love to have him at Man Utd…

Now that Carlos is leaving Man U, he should step in and take them to greater heights

Praveen, Chennai,

// Hide comments-4-to-n because there is no ” access-text” in the classname of comments-form.
fShowHideElement(’comments-4-to-n’);

How about Man utd?

Fergie is on a rolling contract and now would seem an opportune time to hand over the reins.

Bill, town, country

Mourinho proud of Chelsea achievements

Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:27am BST

LONDON (Reuters) - Jose Mourinho has spoken of a "never ending love
story" with Chelsea fans in his first public comments since parting
company with the club in the early hours of Thursday morning.   

In a heartfelt letter on the team’s Web site (www.chelseafc.com),
the Portuguese coach said he was proud of his achievements since taking
over in 2004.

Mourinho’s reign, which brought two Premier League titles, two
League Cups and an FA Cup, ended because, in the club’s words, their
relationship had "broken down".

"I am very proud of my work with Chelsea and I think my decision to
come to England was an excellent one," said Mourinho, who never lost a
home league game at Stamford Bridge.

"It was a beautiful and rich period of my career. I want to thank
all Chelsea supporters for what I believe is a never ending love story.

"I wish great success to the club, a club that will be forever
connected to me for some historic moments. I wish the players happiness
in their football and in their family lives."

In a separate statement, Chelsea said they had reached agreement on
all contractual arrangements for Mourinho’s departure although no
details were disclosed.

Jose Mourinho quits Chelsea

Sep. 20 - Top British football club Chelsea confirms that manager Jose Mourinho has left the club by mutual consent.

The
Portuguese manager, who took over in 2004 and won consecutive Premier
League titles, told senior players that he was leaving. Chelsea have
never lost a Premier League match at Stamford Bridge under Mourinho but
rumours surfaced last season that he had fallen out with billionaire
Russian owner Roman Abramovich.

Penny Tweedie reports.

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.

var nextVideoId=66885;

function replaceVideoId(currentUrl, videoId){
return ReplaceQueryStringParam(currentUrl, “videoId”, videoId);
}

function NextVideo()
{
if(nextVideoId != null){
var newLocation = replaceVideoId(document.location.href, nextVideoId);
document.location.href=newLocation;
}
}

Kesilapan Kerap Muslim di Ramadhan 

( artikel ini telah disiarkan tahun 2006 yang lalu, disiarkan semula bagi manfaat bersama,  

terdapat beberapa perkara yang telah ditambah)  

Oleh  

Zaharuddin  Abd Rahman  

Pada
hemat saya, kita bolehlah mengatakan bahawa objektif atau sasaran yang
perlu dicapai oleh Muslim di bulan Ramadhan ini kepada dua yang
terutama. Iaitu taqwa dan keampunan. Perihal objektif taqwa telah
disebut dengan jelas di dalam ayat 183 dari surah al-Baqarah. Manakala
objektif ‘mendapatkan keampunan’ ternyata dari hadith sohih tentang
Sayyidatina Aisyah r.a yang bertanya kepada nabi doa yang perlu dibaca
tatkala sedar sedang mendapat lailatul qadar. Maka doa ringkas yang
diajar oleh Nabi SAW adalah doa meminta keampunan Allah SWT.  

Bagaimanapun,
kemampuan untuk mendapatkan kesempurnaan pahala ramadhan kerap kali
tergugat akibat kekurangan ilmu dan kekurang perihatinan umat Islam
kini. Antara yang saya maksudkan adalah :-  

1) Makan dan minum dengan bebas setelah batal puasa dengan sengaja
(bukan kerana uzur yang diterima Islam). Perlu diketahui bahawa sesiapa
yang batal puasanya dengan sengaja tanpa uzur seperti mengeluarkan mani
secara sengaja, merokok, makan dan minum. Ia dilarang untuk makan dan
minum lagi atau melakukan apa jua perkara yang membatalkan puasa yang
lain sepanjang hari itu. (Fiqh as-Siyam, Al-Qaradawi, hlm 112).  

Ia
dikira denda yang pertama baginya selain kewajiban menggantikannya
kemudiannya. Keadaan ini disebut di dalam sebuah hadith, Ertinya :
"sesungguhnya sesiapa yang telah makan (batal puasa) hendaklah ia
berpuasa baki waktu harinya itu" (Riwayat al-Bukhari)  

2) Makan sahur di waktu tengah malam kerana malas bangun di akhir malam.
Jelasnya, individu yang melakukan amalan ini terhalang dari mendapat
keberkatan dan kelebihan yang ditawarkan oleh Nabi SAW malah bercanggah
dengan sunnah baginda. "Sahur" itu sendiri dari sudut bahasanya adalah
waktu terakhir di hujung malam. Para Ulama pula menyebut waktunya
adalah 1/6 terakhir malam. (Awnul Ma’bud, 6/469). Imam Ibn Hajar
menegaskan melewatkan sahur adalah lebih mampu mencapai objektif yang
diletakkan oleh Nabi SAW. (Fath al-Bari, 4/138)  

3) Bersahur dengan hanya makan & minum sahaja tanpa ibadah lain.
Ini satu lagi kesilapan umat Islam kini, waktu tersebut pada hakikatnya
adalah antara waktu terbaik untuk beristigfar dan menunaikan solat
malam.  

Firman
Allah ketika memuji orang mukmin ertinya : " dan ketika waktu-waktu
bersahur itu mereka meminta ampun dan beristighfar" (Az-Zariyyat : 18)  

يا رسول الله , أي الدعاء أسمع ؟ : قال : جوف الليل الأخير ودبر الصلوات المكتوبة 

Ertinya
: "Ditanya kepada Nabi (oleh seorang sahabat) : Wahai Rasulullah :"
Waktu bilakah doa paling didengari (oleh Allah s.w.t) ; jawab Nabi :
Pada hujung malam (waktu sahur) dan selepas solat fardhu" ( Riwayat
At-Tirmidzi, no 3494 , Tirmidzi & Al-Qaradhawi : Hadis Hasan ;
Lihat Al-Muntaqa , 1/477) 

4) Menunaikan solat witir sejurus selepas terawih. Menurut dalil-dalil yang sohih, waktu yang terbaik bagi solat witir adalah penutup segala solat sunat
di sesuatu hari itu berdasarkan hadith ertinya "Jadikanlah solat sunat
witir sebagai solat kamu yang terakhir dalam satu malam". (Fath
al-Bari, no 936). Sememangnya tidak salah untuk melakukan witir selepas
terawih, cuma sekiranya seseorang itu yakin akan kemampuannya untuk
bangun bersahur dan boleh melakukan solat sunat selepas itu, maka
adalah lebih elok ia melewatkan witirnya di akhir malam.  

5) Tidak menunaikan solat ketika berpuasa.
Ia adalah satu kesilapan yang maha besar. Memang benar, solat bukanlah
syarat sah puasa. Tetapi ia adalah rukun Islam yang menjadi tonggak
kepada keislaman sesorang. Justeru, ‘ponteng’ solat dengan sengaja akan
menyebabkan pahala puasa seseorang itu menjadi ‘kurus kering’ pastinya.
 

6) Tidak mengutamakan solat Subuh berjemaah sebagaimana Terawih.
Ini jelas suatu kelompongan yang ada dalam masyarakat tatakala
berpuasa. Ramai yang lupa dan tidak mengetahui kelebihan besar semua
solat fardhu berbanding solat sunat, teruatamnya solat subuh berjemaah
yang disebutkan oleh Nabi SAW bagi orang yang mendirikannya secara
berjemaah, maka beroleh pahala menghidupkan seluruh malam.  

7) Menunaikan solat terawih di masjid dengan niat inginkan meriah.
Malanglah mereka kerana setiap amalan di kira dengan niat, jika niat
utama seseorang itu ( samada lelaki atau wanita) hadir ke masjid adalah
untuk meriah dan bukannya atas dasar keimanan dan mengharap ganjaran
redha Allah sebagaimana yang ditetapkan oleh Nabi SAW di dalam hadith
riwayat al-Bukhari. Maka, "Sesungguhnya sesuatu amalan itu dikira
dengan niat". (Riwayat al-Bukhari)  

Bermalasan dan tidak produktif dalam kerja-kerja di siang hari
dengan alasan berpuasa. Sedangkan, kerja yang kita lakukan di pejabat
dengan niat ibadat pastinya menambahkan lagi pahala. Justeru, umat
Islam sewajarnya memperaktifkan produktiviti mereka dan bukan
mengurangkannya di Ramadhan ini.  

9) Memperbanyakkan tidur di siang hari dengan alasan ia adalah ibadat.
Sedangkan Imam As-Sayuti menegaskan bahawa hadith yang menyebut
berkenaan tidur orang berpuasa itu ibadat adalah amat lemah. (al-Jami’
as-Soghir ; Faidhul Qadir, Al-Munawi, 6/291)  

10) Menganggap waktu imsak sebagai ‘lampu merah’ bagi sahur.
Ini adalah kerana waktu imsak sebenarnya tidak lain hanyalah ‘lampu
amaran oren’ yang di cadangkan oleh beberapa ulama demi mengingatkan
bahawa waktu sahur sudah hampir tamat. Ia bukanlah waktu tamat untuk
makan sahur, tetapi waktu amaran sahaja. Lalu, janganlah ada yang
memberi alasan lewat bangun dan sudah masuk imsak lalu tidak dapat
berpuasa pada hari itu. Waktu yang disepakti ulama merupakan waktu
penamat sahur adalah sejurus masuk fajar sadiq (subuh). (As-Siyam, Dr
Md ‘Uqlah, hlm 278)  

11) Wanita berterawih beramai-ramai di masjid tanpa menjaga aurat.
Ini nyata apabila ramai antara wanita walaupun siap bertelekung ke
masjid, malangnya kaki dan aurat mereka kerap terdedah da didedahkan
berjalan dan naik tangga masjid di hadapan jemaah lelaki. Tatkala itu,
fadhilat mereka solat di rumah adalah lebih tinggi dari mendatangkan
fitnah buat lelaki ketika di masjid. 

12) Memasuki Ramadhan dalam keadaan harta masih dipenuhi dengan harta haram,
samada terlibat dengan pinjaman rumah, kad kredit, insuran,
pelaburan dan kereta secara riba. Ini sudah tentu akan memberi kesan
yang amat nyata kepada kualiti ibadah di bulan Ramadhan, kerana status
orang terlibat dengan riba adalah sama dengan berperang dengan Allah
dan RasulNya, tanpa azam dan usaha untuk mengubahnya dengan segera di
bulan ‘tanpa Syaitan’ ini, bakal menyaksikan potensi besar untuk gagal terus untuk kembali ke pangkal jalan di bulan lain.  

Nabi Muhammad menceritakan :- 

ذَكَرَ
الرَّجُلَ يُطِيلُ السَّفَرَ أَشْعَثَ أَغْبَرَ يَمُدُّ يَدَيْهِ إلى
السَّمَاءِ يا رَبِّ يا رَبِّ وَمَطْعَمُهُ حَرَامٌ وَمَشْرَبُهُ حَرَامٌ
وَمَلْبَسُهُ حَرَامٌ وَغُذِيَ بِالْحَرَامِ فَأَنَّى يُسْتَجَابُ لِذَلِكَ 

Ertinya
:  menyebut tentang seorang pemuda yang bermusafir dalam perjalanan
yang jauh, hal rambutnya kusut masai, mukanya berdebu di mana dia
mengangkat tangan ke langit : Wahai Tuhanku…wahai Tuhanku…
sedangkan makanannya haram, minumannya haram dan pakaiannya haram..Dan
dia dibesarkan dengan memakan makanan haram maka bagaimana Kami mahu
mengabulkan doanya. ( Riwayat Muslim, no 1015, 2/703 ; hadis sohih) 

Justeru,
bagaimana Allah mahu memakbulkan doa orang yang berpuasa sedangkan
keretanya haram, rumahnya haram, kad kreditnya haram, insurannya haram,
simpanan banknya haram, pendapatannya haram?. Benar, kita perlu
bersangka baik dengan Allah, tetapi sangka baik tanpa meloloskan diri
dari riba yang haram adalah penipuan kata Imam Hasan Al-Basri. 

13) Tidak memperbanyakkan doa tatkala berpuasa dan berbuka. Ini satu lagi jenis kerugian yang kerap dilakukan oleh umat Islam. Nabi SAW telah menyebut :-  

ثلاثة لا ترد دعوتهم , الإمام العادل , والصائم حتى يفطر ودعوة المظلوم  

Ertinya
: "Tiga golongan yang tidak di tolak doa mereka, pemimpin yang adil,
individu berpuasa sehingga berbuka dan doa orang yang di zalimi" (
Riwayat At-Tirmizi, 3595, Hasan menurut Tirmizi. Ahmad Syakir : Sohih )  

Selain itu, doa menjadi bertambah maqbul tatkala ingin berbuka berdasarkan hadith.  

إن للصائم عند فطره دعوة لا ترد  

Ertinya
: "Sesungguhnya bagi orang berpuasa itu ketika berbuka (atau hampir
berbuka) doa yang tidak akan ditolak" ( Riwayat Ibn Majah, no 1753,
Al-Busairi : Sanadnya sohih)  

Sekian 

Zaharuddin Abd Rahman 

www.zaharuddin.net 

17 Oktober 2006