Faznita's territory...: OLD TOWN WHITE COFFEE TAK HALAL

Faznita's territory...: OLD TOWN WHITE COFFEE TAK HALAL

Menabur Janji dan Menipu Pihak Crew

Harapan saya pun agar PROFIMA pun tidak begitu...saya dah 9 tahun dalam bidang entertainment . . .tapi masalah crew technical dan produksi masih ada belum terbela.

Kenapa mereka yang bernaung di bawah PPFM (sekarang PROFIMA) yang tiada kerja tidak mendapat bayaran dari penerbit dan masih bekerja lebih dari 12 jam tidak terbela?

Kenapa masih ramai tenaga profesional dalam industri hiburan ini tidak mendaftar menjadi ahli PROFIMA? Adakah lawatan PROFIMA ke lokasi penggambaran untuk memantau hanya sekadar melepas batuk di tangga sahaja ?

Selidik dan mengkaji cara mengatasi masalah crew filem kita sekarang. Cadangan saya agar sebelum penggambaran filem atau drama, kontrak yang di tandatangan antara crew dan penerbit perlulah disahkan oleh pihak PROFIMA dan FINAS. Setelah disahkan dan mendapat kelulusan pihak bertanggungjawab ni, barulah kontrak diserahkan pada crew yang bekerja.

Kenapa perlu begini? Kerana ketulusan pihak penerbit masih diragui dan banyak penerbit di Malaysia ini masih menganiyai tenaga kerja filem kita dengan janji manis mereka.

PROFIMA DAN FINAS perlu tahu isi kandungan kontrak antara penerbit dan tenaga kerja, barulah terbela nasib ahli PROFIMA kita sekiranya masalah timbul.

Banyak penerbit -penerbit drama dan filem masih menabur janji dan menipu pihak crew kita, mengapa pihak PROFIMA tidak memandang isu ini serius dan barah dalam industri hiburan kita?

Harapan saya pihak presiden dan AJK tertinggi PROFIMA lebih profesional dalam mengatasi masalah ahli serta mengemudi PROFIMA untuk menjadi contoh pada persatuan yang lain.

Ada produksi tiada SPP dan insuran kelompok pada crew dan artis serta bekerja dari 8.00 pagi hingga 5.00 pagi ( 21 jam ), adakah pihak PROFIMA tahu? Tolong campur tangan dalam hal kontrak crew dan penerbit.

Sudirjan Ahmad Kunjoo

Angel Friends Blogger Award

I'd like to extend my deepest appreciation to TK for this lovely award. You are an angel yourself for always being so thoughtful towards your blogger friends. I am passing this sweet award to the following bloggers and hope with this award we will continue to support each other.

7) Celupar
A recorder of inspirational Islamic stories.A noble effort indeed.

As such I am indeed very grateful to my dear blogger friend, Umihoney, who initiated an effort to listed me under the above award category.

However, this is my reply to her.

Salam Umi,
Thanks indeed for your appreciation on my recorded posting. Earlier it was supposed to be an articles on artists gossip and happening behind the scene of the local entertainment industries. Until friends start sending me these Islamic stories and requested me to share with my readers, then I realized that is something more meaningful to all of us. But anyway I'll still be posting news behind the scene as time required.
Terima kasih Umi, will see you around.

@sliza
You're very welcome. I look forward to read more great articles from you.Take care and ya I'll be seeing you too :)

Thank you very much Umihoney for the amazing award to me. This will motivate me to put up more good and interesting posting.

Tak sangka pula mulut celupar macam Mak Mah, dapat juga award. Tapi kita mulut celupar...hati baik, kan Mak Mah...!!

Wonders of Allah in the Ants

Ants live in colonies and a perfect division of labor exists amongst them. When we take a closer look at their systems, we shall also see that they have a pretty interesting social structure. It will also come to our attention that they are capable of sacrifice at a much higher level than humans are. One of the most interesting points is that - compared to humans - they do not know the concepts such as the rich-poor discrimination and the fight for power that are observed in our societies.

Many scientists, who for years have been doing extensive research on ants, have not been able to clarify the subject of their advanced social behavior. Caryle P. Haskins, Ph.D., the president of the Carnegie Institute at Washington has this to say:

After 60 years of observation and study, I still marvel at how sophisticated the ants' social behavior is. ...The ants thus make a beautiful model for our use in studying the roots of animal behavior. (National Geographic, vol.165, no.6, p. 775)

Some colonies of ants are so extensive with respect to population and living area, that it is impossible to explain how they can form a perfect order over such a vast area. Therefore, it is not easy not to concur with Dr. Haskins.

As an example of these large colonies we can give the species of ant, called Formica Yessensis that lives on the Ishikari coast of Hokkaido. This ant colony lives in 45,000 interconnected nests over an area of 2.7 square kilometers. The colony, which is composed of approximately 1,080,000 queens and 306,000,000 workers, has been named the "Super colony" by the researchers. (Bert Holldobler-Edward O.Wilson, The Ants, Harvard University Press, 1990, p. 1.) It has been discovered that all production tools and food are exchanged in an orderly fashion within the colony.

It is very hard to explain how the ants have maintained this order without any problems, considering the vast area they are living in. We must not forget that various security forces are needed for enforcing law and maintaining social order, even in a civilized country with a low population density. And there is an administrative staff leading and managing these units. Sometimes, it does not become possible to maintain the required order without problems despite all these intense efforts.

Yet in ant colonies there is no need felt for police, gendarmerie or guards. If we consider that actually the duty of the queens, whom we think of as the leaders of the colonies, is just to maintain the species, they do not have a leader or a governor. There is thus no hierarchy based on a chain of command amongst them. Then who is it that lays down this order and maintains its continuity?

The fact that ants can establish such a great and perfect order is proof that they are acting on the inspiration of a certain "supervisor". The verse below fully confirms that God is the master and supervisor of everything and that every living creature acts on His inspiration:

In truth, I have put my trust in Allah, (who is) my Lord and your Lord. There is no crawling creature that He does not take by the forelock. Indeed, my Lord is on a Straight Path. (Surah Hud: 56)

[ Kerana sesungguhnya aku telah berserah diri kepada Allah, Tuhanku dan Tuhan kamu! Tiadalah sesuatupun dari makhluk-makhluk yang bergerak di muka bumi melainkan Allah jualah yang menguasainya. Sesungguhnya Tuhanku tetap di atas jalan yang lurus.]

Dear friends,

Examining the movement of the ant is thought provoking. It moves its infinitesimal legs in a sequential and extremely organised manner knowing perfectly which leg should take the first step and which the next. It moves very rapidly without faltering.

The Ant lifts crumbs much bigger than its body. It carries them to its nest with heart and soul. It travels distances that are very long in comparison to its tiny body. On featureless land, with no guide at its service, it can easily find its nest. Despite the entrance of the nest being too small even for us to find, it is not confused and finds it no matter where it is.

When one sees in the garden some ants, lined up one after the other, ardently toiling to carry food to their nest, one cannot stop wondering what kind of purpose these tiny living beings might have in working so hard. Then one realises that not only does the ant carry food for itself, but also for other members of its colony, for the queen ant and baby ants. How such a tiny ant, which does not even have a developed brain, knows diligence, discipline and self-sacrifice is a point on which one needs to reflect. After pondering these facts, one reaches the following conclusion: ants, like all other living beings, act by the inspiration of Allah and obey His commands alone.

Allah is in command of every single creations in this world, i.e., to those who live in the sea, to those who live under the sea, to those up in the sky, beyond the sky, on the land, and to those who live under the land.

House Break-In Signage

The USJ 11/3 community in their annually get together activities.

To the fellow residents in USJ Subang Jaya and area surrounding please be aware of new technique being use by the burglars in their attempt before any break-in mission.

This information was email by a resident to the SJ Alert community group to be circulated to the residents to take precaution for any signage that may appear at their homes.

Dear fellow SJ residents,

According to the attached article, burglars uses symbols to plan break-ins....

Please check the external wall of your house for symbols similar to these:
Subject: Fw: Be aware of "sign" - Break In house
To: Dear all,

Attached article is FYI and is extracted from 11th May's Oriental Daily
News (Chinese Press), showing signs used by potential burglars to plan for
house break-ins.

Perhaps you should check if the external wall of your house has similar
signs?

+ - : somebody in during day time & nobody @ nite
- + : nobody during day time & somebody in @ nite
¤ : stay alone or tenant
ŸŸŸ : 3 family members
√ : visited (broken in b4)
☆ : target
ó : non-target, safety first

Please be extra cautious upon seeing this signs and please do take an effort to alert the resident's.

Kepalsuan Kisah Hindun Memamah Hati Hamzah

Dipetik dengan sedikit ubahsuai dari buku ‘IBNU ISHAK – Peranannya Dalam Penyebaran Fahaman Syi’ah Di Kalangan Ummah’ karangan Maulana Muhammad Asri Yusoff.

Sebuah kisah yang boleh dikatakan tiada sebuah buku sirah pun yang ditulis kemudian tidak menyebutkannya ialah kisah Hindun memamah, mengunyah atau memakan hati Sayyidina Hamzah semasa atau selepas peperangan Uhud.

Kisah ini adalah ciptaan dan rekaan Ibnu Ishaq. Dialah orang yang mula-mula sekali di dalam dunia ini yang mengemukakan kisah tersebut. Kemudian at-Thabari menyebarkannya tetapi melalui jalan riwayat Ibnu Ishaq. Ringkasnya Ibnu Ishaqlah merupakan satu-satunya paksi dalam meriwayatkan kisah ini.

Ibnu Ishaq berkata, “Mengikut cerita yang sampai kepada saya menerusi Saleh bin Kaisan, Hindun Binti Utbah dan perempuan-perempuan lain bersamanya melakukan ‘mutslah’ terhadap sahabat-sahabat Rasulullah s.a.w. yang terbunuh.

Mereka memotong telinga-telinga dan hidung-hidung (sahabat-sahabat yang terbunuh itu) sehingga Hindun menyucuk telinga-telinga dan hidung-hidung orang-orang yang terbunuh itu untuk dijadikan sebagai gelang kaki dan kalung-kalung. Dia memberikan gelang kaki, kalung dan subangnya (anting-anting) kepada Wahsyi, hamba Jubair Bin Muth’im. Dia membelah perut Hamzah dan mengambil hatinya lalu dikunyahnya tetapi tidak dapat ditelannya kerana itu dia memuntahkannya keluar.” (Lihat Sirah Ibnu Ishak m.s. 385, Sirah Ibn Hisyam jilid 3 m.s. 36)

Ibnu Jarir at-Thabari pula meriwayatkan dari Muhammad Bin Humaid, dia mengambil cerita ini dari Salamah Al Abrasy. Salamah pula mengambil dari Ibnu Ishaq. Ibnu Ishaq mengatakan, “Saleh Bin Kaisan menceritakan kepadanya…” (Lihat Tarikh al-Umam Wa al-Muluk-at-Thabari jilid 2 m.s. 204)

Salah seorang yang tersebut dalam isnad ini ialah Muhammad Bin Humaid ar-Razi. Beliau ialah penduduk Ray. Dia selalu menukilkan riwayat dari Ya’kub al-Qummi (seorang penulis kitab-kitab Syiah dan selainnya).

Ya’kub bin Syaibah berkata, “Dia selalu mengemukakan riwayat-riwayat yang sangat mungkar.” Imam Bukhari berkata, “Kedudukannya dipertikaikan.” Abu Zura’ah ar-Razi seorang alim senegeri dengannya berkata, “Dia seorang pendusta besar.” Fadlak ar-Razi juga seorang alim senegeri dengannya berkata, “Saya mempunyai 50,000 riwayat Muhammad bin Hummaid ar-Razi tetapi satupun darinya tidak saya kemukakan kepada orang ramai.”

Pernah Ibnu Kharasy mengemukakan riwayat Muhammad bin Humaid lantas dia berkata, “Demi Allah! Dia berbohong.” Ulama’ hadis yang lain berkata bahawa dia selalu mengambil hadis-hadis orang-orang tertentu kemudian menisbahkannya kepada orang lain. Imam Nasa’i berkata, “Dia seorang yang lemah.” Saleh Jazarah berkata, “Tidak pernah saya lihat dalam hidup saya seorang yang lebih mahir berbohong dari dua orang iaitu pertama, Muhammad bin Humaid (ahli sejarah) dan kedua, Sulaiman as-Syazkumi.”

Imam Fadhlak ar-Razi pernah menceritakan bahawa, “Saya pernah pergi kepada Muhammad bin Humaid. Ketika itu dia sedang mereka sanad-sanad cerita-cerita palsu.” Imam Zahabi berkata, “Muridnya Muarrikh (sejarawan) at-Thabari telah menulis dengan penuh yakin bahawa Muhammad bin Humaid tidak ingat al-Quran.” Di akhir hayatnya hanya dua orang yang menerima riwayat-riwayat darinya iaitu:

1) Abul Qasim Baghawi

2) Muhammad bin Jarir at-Thabari

Ibnu Humaid meninggal dunia pada tahun 248 H – (Lihat Mizanu al-I’tidal jilid 3 halaman 530, Tahzibu al-Kamal jilid 6 m.s. 286-287).

Seorang lagi yang ada dalam isnad Ibnu Ishak ini ialah Salamah al-Abrasy yang nama penuhnya Salamah bin Fadhl. Dia terkenal dengan gelaran al-Abrasy. Pernah menjadi qadhi di Ray kerana itulah dia dinisbahkan dengan ar-Razi. Kuniahnya ialah Abu Abdillah. Dia terkenal sebagai sejarawan di zamannya selain dianggap sebagai salah seorang perawi penting Maghazi Ibnu Ishaq. Pandangan ulama’ hadis dan rijal terhadapnya dapat dilihat melalui nukilan Imam Zahabi. Beliau menulis, “………Ishaq bin Rahawaih berkata, “Dia seorang dhaif.” Bukhari berkata, “Sesetengah hadisnya mungkar.” Imam Nasa’i berkata, “Dia seorang dhaif.” Ali Ibnu Madini menceritakan, “Setelah kami pulang dari Ray, riwayat-riwayat yang pernah kami dengar dari Salamah kami buangkan dengan anggapan ia adalah karut dan dusta.”

Yahya bin Ma’in berkata, “Salamah al-Abrasy ar-Razi adalah seorang Syiah.” Abu Hatim ar-Razi berkata, “Dia tidak boleh dijadikan hujjah.” Abu Zur’ah ar-Razi berkata, “Penduduk Ray sama sekali tidak suka kepadanya, lantaran fahamannya yang salah. Sebagai seorang qadhi, beliau selalu berlaku zalim terhadap orang ramai meskipun dia bersembahyang dengan khusyuk’. Sebelum menjadi qadhi beliau mengajar kanak-kanak dan beliau meningggal dunia pada tahun 191 H.” (Mizanu al-I’tidal jilid 2 m.s. 12, Tahzibu al-Kamal jilid 3 m.s. 252-253)

Ibnu Ishaq mendakwa riwayat ini diambilnya dari Saleh Bin Kaisan. Siapakah Saleh Bin Kaisan itu? Beliau ialah seorang tabi’i kecil dan tsiqah (perawi yang boleh dipercayai) tetapi beliau lahir selepas 70H dan meninggal dunia pada tahun 140H. Dia lebih tua sedikit dari Muhammad Bin Ishaq sedangkan peristiwa peperangan Uhud telah berlaku 70 tahun sebelum kelahirannya. Siapakah pula yang menceritakannya kepada Saleh? Tentu sekali beliau bukan merupakan penyaksi peristiwa itu dengan mata kepala sendiri. Sudah tentu sekurang-kurangnya seorang yang ‘ghaib’ dalam isnad ini menjadikannya riwayat munqati’. Sepertimana dimaklumi riwayat munqati’ tidak boleh diterima (sebagai hujah).

Sebenarnya Saleh Bin Kaisan tidak pun meriwayatkan kisah ini. Ibnu Ishaq sahaja yang mengaitkannya dengan Saleh. Selain dari Ibnu Ishaq, tidak ada sesiapapun mengambil cerita ini baik dari Saleh Bin Kaisan atau orang lain sepanjang pengetahuan sejarah. Di antara sekian ramai anak murid Ibnu Ishaq pula, tidak ada yang meriwayatkan cerita ini darinya selain Salamah al-Abrasy. Kemudian tidak ada seorang pun yang meriwayatkan dari Salamah al-Abrasy selain Muhammad Bin Humaid ar-Razi. Seterusnya tidak ada seorang pun yang meriwayatkan dari Muhammad bin Humaid ar-Razi selain dari Ibnu Jarir at-Thabari.

Thabari meninggal dunia pada tahun 310H. Ini bermakna dari tahun 70H hingga tahun 310H, di setiap peringkat hanya ada seorang sahaja yang meriwayatkan kisah ini, seolah-olah ia suatu perkara yang sulit dan perlu dirahsiakan. Ia hanya boleh diterima dari setiap generasi, seorang sahaja!

Sekiranya peristiwa ini benar-benar berlaku dan ia mempunyai saksi yang melihatnya dengan mata kepala, tentu sekali ia tersebar lebih awal dari itu dan sepatutnya perawi-perawi cerita ini semakin ramai dari satu generasi ke generasi selepas itu. Terbuktilah bahawa kisah ini tidak popular kecuali setelah masyarakat Islam menerima apa sahaja riwayat yang dikemukakan oleh Ibnu Ishaq dan at-Thabari dengan membuta tuli. Kisah ini sebetulnya tidak diketahui oleh sesiapa pun sebelum tahun 70H.

PENILAIAN LOGIK

Dari segi Logiknya, bagaimana Ibnu Ishak hanya nampak Hindun sahaja melakukan perbuatan keji ini dan menuding jari kepadanya sedangkan ramai lagi perempuan-perempuan lain yang turut serta dalam peperangan Uhud selain Hindun seperti Ummu Hakim binti al-Harits Bin Hisyam, Barzah (isteri kepada Safwan bin Umayyah), Barrah binti Mas’ud bin Amar bin Umair as-Saqafiyyah (ibu kepada Abdullah Bin Safwan), Buraithah binti Munabbih bin al-Hajjaj (isteri kepada Amar bin al-’As dan ibu kepada Abdullah bin Amar bin al-As). Sulafah binti Saad, Khunas binti Malik dan Amrah binti Alqamah dan lain-lain lagi. Dalam kesibukan perang dan hingar bingar kedua-dua pasukan yang berperang itu, bagaimana kelihatan kepada Ibnu Ishaq Hindun sedang memakan hati Hamzah dan menjadikan telinga, hidung dan lain-lain anggota Hamzah sebagai gelang kakinya di samping menghadiahkan pula kalung dan subangnya kepada Wahsyi yang telah mensyahidkan Hamzah.

Untuk mengetahui semua tindakan Hindun dengan sah dan tepat, seolah-olahnya Ibnu Ishaq telah mengutus wartawan-wartawan dan juru-juru kamera yang tidak terbabit langsung dalam peperangan, tugas mereka hanyalah menyaksikan dan merakamkan apa yang berlaku dalam peperangan itu lalu melaporkannya kepada Ibnu Ishaq dan menyerahkan pula gambar-gambar sebagai bukti sokongan kepada apa-apa yang disampaikan oleh mereka itu. Untuk mendapat kepastian sedemikian rupa semestinya Ibnu Ishaq dibantu oleh orang-orang tadi. Ini kerana tidak pula orang-orang yang ikut serta secara langsung sama ada dari kalangan orang-orang Islam atau mereka yang ada di pihak orang-orang kafir tetapi kemudiannya memeluk Islam menceritakan sepertimana yang diceritakan oleh Ibnu Ishaq.

Perempuan-perempuan yang dikatakan oleh Ibnu Ishaq telah bersama-sama dengan Hindun melakukan mutslah (memotong-motong anggota orang yang telah mati dengan maksud melepaskan geram dan dendam) juga tidak menceritakan seperti mana yang diceritakan oleh Ibnu Ishaq itu. Maka bagaimana kita akan menerima riwayat yang melaporkan kisah tersebut menerusi Saleh Bin Kaisan yang lahir setelah lebih 70 tahun berlakunya peristiwa ini dan mengenepikan pula saksi-saksi mata kepala yang turut serta dalam peperangan ini sama ada dari kalangan orang-orang Islam atau dari kalangan orang-orang kafir.

Wahsyi yang diketahui dan diterima oleh semua sebagai pembunuh Sayyidina Hamzah kemudiannya telah memeluk agama Islam. Jubair bin Muth’im tuan kepada Wahsyi kemudiannya juga memeluk agama Islam. Hindun binti Utbah, isteri Abu Suffian, ibu kepada Sayyidina Muawiyah yang dikatakan oleh Ibnu Ishaq telah memakan hati Hamzah, kemudiannya juga telah memeluk agama Islam. Semua mereka ini tidak ada pun menceritakan apa yang diceritakan oleh Ibnu Ishaq pada hal merekalah orang-orang yang terlibat secara langsung dalam peristiwa ini dan paling patut dirujuk dan diselidiki penjelasan mereka.

SIKAP IMAM BUKHARI

Imam Bukhari jauh berbeza dari Ibnu Ishaq kerana meriwayatkan kisah pembunuhan Sayyidina Hamzah melalui pembunuhnya sendiri bukan melalui orang yang lahir 70 tahun selepas peristiwa itu berlaku. Menurut metod ilmu riwayat, riwayat yang dikemukakan oleh Imam Bukhari lebih wajar diterima kerana beliau mengambil dari orang yang terlibat secara langsung dalam peristiwa itu. Mari kita perhatikan riwayat Imam Bukhari dalam Sahihnya berhubung peristiwa itu.

RIWAYAT IMAM BUKHARI

Imam Bukhari menukilkan dari Ja’far bin Amar bin Umaiyyah ad-Dhamri dia berkata, “Saya telah berangkat untuk satu perjalanan dengan Ubaidullah bin Adiy bin al-Khiyar. Bila kami sampai di Hims, Ubaidullah bin Adi bertanya kepada saya, “Mahukah engkau berjumpa dengan Wahsyi? Boleh kita tanya kepadanya tentang pembunuhan Sayyidina Hamzah.” Saya berkata, “Tentu sekali.”

Pada hari-hari itu Wahsyi menetap di Hims. Kami bertanya seseorang, “Di mana rumah Wahsyi?” Orang itu menceritakan, “Itu dia Wahsyi sedang duduk di bawah naungan (bayang) rumahnya. Bila kami ternampak dia dalam rupanya yang gemuk dan tidak berambut itu tak ubah seperti sebuah gereba. Kami berdiri sejenak setelah sampai di hadapannya lalu kami memberi salam kepadanya. Beliau menjawab salam kami. Perawi berkata, “Ketika itu Ubaidullah bin Adi bin al-Khiyar menutup muka dan kepalanya dengan serban. Wahsyi tidak nampak apa-apa darinya melainkan dua mata dan kakinya sahaja.”

Ubaidullah pun bertanya Wahsyi, “Kamu kenalkah siapa saya?” Wahsyi mengangkat pandangannya ke arah Ubaiullah, kemudian dia berkata, “Demi Allah! Tidak! Ya, Cuma saya tahu bahawa Adi bin al-Khiyar telah berkahwin dengan seorang perempuan dipanggil Ummul Qital binti Abi al-‘Is. Dengannya Adi bin al-Khiyar telah mendapat seorang anak lelaki. Sayalah yang telah mencari seorang pengasuh untuk anaknya itu dan saya dengan ibunya membawakan anak itu untuk diserahkan kepada pengasuh tersebut. Sekarang saya sedang memerhatikan kaki awak. Saya rasa engkaulah anak itu.” Ubaidullah pun mengalihkan kain dari mukanya. Dia bertanya Wahsyi, “Bolehkah kamu ceritakan kepada kami tentang pembunuhan Hamzah?” Wahsyi menjawab, “Ya, tentu boleh. Ceritanya begini: Hamzah telah membunuh Thu’aimah bin Adi bin al-Khiyar dalam peperangan Badar. Tuan saya Jubair bin Mut’im berkata kepada saya, “Kalau engkau dapat membunuh Hamzah, engkau merdeka.”

Bila saya keluar untuk berperang pada tahun ‘Ainain’ (Ainain ialah salah satu bukit di Uhud, di hadapannya terletak Wadi Uhud), saya juga keluar bersama orang lain untuk berperang. Bila masing-masing pasukan telah membetulkan saf, maka Siba’ bin Abdul Uzza pun tampil kehadapan seraya berkata, “Adakah sesiapa yang akan berlawan?” Wahsyi menceritakan, “Dari kalangan pihak lawan, Hamzah bin Abdul Muthalib tampil ke hadapan seraya berkata, “Oh Siba’! Oh anak Ummu Anmar! Mudim anak-anak perempuan, adakah engkau memerangi Allah dan Rasulnya?” Kemudian dengan pantas Hamzah menyerang lalu dia (Siba’) menjadi seperti kelmarin yang telah berlalu (terus mati). Wahsyi berkata, “Saya ketika itu bersembunyi di sebalik satu batu besar sambil mengintai-intai Hamzah. Bila dia lalu dekat saya, terus saya membaling lembing saya ke arahnya. Lembing itu mengenai bahagian pusatnya lalu menembusi belakangnya. Itulah pertemuan saya yang terakhir dengannya. Bila semua orang pulang dari medan perang, saya juga pulang bersama mereka dan terus menetap di Mekah (selepas merdeka) sehingga Islam tersebar di sana, kemudian saya pun keluar ke Ta’if.”

Bila orang Ta’if menghantarkan utusan-utusan kepada Rasulullah s.a.w. maka ada orang berkata kepada saya, “Nabi tidak mengganggu utusan,” kerana itu saya pun menyertai golongan utusan itu untuk mengadap Nabi s.a.w. Bila Nabi s.a.w. melihat saya, Baginda pun bertanya, “Adakah engkau Wahsyi?” Saya menjawab, “Ya.” Baginda s.a.w. bertanya lagi, “Engkaukah yang telah membunuh Hamzah?” Saya menjawab, “Berita yang sampai kepada tuan itu adalah benar.” Nabi s.a.w. pun bersabda, “Bolehkah engkau sembunyikan mukamu dari pandanganku?” Wahsyi berkata, “Aku pun pergi dari situ.”

Selepas kewafatan Rasulullah s.a.w., Musailamah al-Kazzab memberontak. Saya berfikir dalam hati saya bahawa seharusnya saya keluar untuk menentang Musailamah. Boleh jadi saya akan dapat membunuhnya dengan itu terbalaslah (terbayarlah) pembunuhan Hamzah oleh saya. Setelah terfikir begitu saya pun keluar bersama orang ramai untuk berperang. Tiba-tiba (dalam peperangan) saya ternampak seorang sedang berdiri di celah tembok. Dia kelihatan seperti unta yang kehitaman warnanya. Rambutnya berselerak. Saya lepaskan lembing saya ke arahnya dan tepat mengenai dadanya sehingga menembusi belakangnya. Selepas itu tampil seorang Ansar Madinah lalu menetak kepalanya. Abdullah Bin al-Fadhl menceritakan bahawa Sulaiman bin Yasr menceritakan kepada saya bahawa beliau mendengar Ibnu Umar berkata, “Seorang perempuan yang ketika itu berdiri di atas bumbung rumah lantas berteriak mengatakan, “Demi Amirul Mukminin (Musailamah al-Kazzab)! Dia telah dibunuh oleh budak Habsyi.” (Lihat Sahih Bukhari jilid 2 m.s. 583)

Demikianlah kedudukan sebenar kisah ini mengikut cerita dari mulut pembunuh Sayyidina Hamzah sendiri. Dari riwayat ini dapat disimpulkan beberapa perkara seperti berikut;

1. Wahsyi adalah hamba kepada Jubair bin Muth’im. Jubair bin Muth’imlah yang mendorongnya membunuh Hamzah dengan janji akan memerdekakannya jika dia berjaya membunuh Hamzah. Di dalam riwayat ini tidak ada isyarat pun tentang campurtangan Hindun dalam pembunuhan Hamzah. Bukan Hindun yang mendorong Wahsyi supaya membunuh Hamzah, bukan juga Hindun yang dapat memerdekakan Wahsyi kerana Wahsyi bukan hambanya, malah dalam riwayat Ibnu Ishaq sendiri pun Wahsyi adalah hamba Jubair bin Muth’im.

2. Di dalam riwayat ini juga tidak tersebut Hindun memberikan gelang kaki, kalung dan subangnya kepada Wahsyi kerana kejayaannya membunuh Hamzah. Bahkan Wahsyi tidak mendapat apa-apa hadiah dari sesiapa pun selain dari hadiah kemerdekaan yang dijanjikan tuannya Jubair bin Muth’im. Sekiranya ada, maka tidak ada sebab kenapa Wahsyi menyembunyikannya.

3. Wahsyi ikut serta dalam peperangan Uhud dari awal hingga akhir di pihak orang-orang kafir Quraisy dan akhir sekali beliau pulang ke rumah bersama orang-orang lain. Di dalam riwayat Bukhari ini beliau tidak menyebutkan cerita perempuan-perempuan membuat kalung dari anggota orang-orang Islam yang syahid yang telah dipotong oleh mereka. Tidak ada juga beliau menyebutkan kisah sesiapa memakan hati sesiapa. Jika diandaikan beliau tidak melihat apa yang dilakukan oleh perempuan-perempuan Quraisy terhadap orang-orang Islam yang mati syahid dalam peperangan Uhud itu terutamanya Hindun sekalipun tetap berkemungkinan juga beliau mendengar cerita itu di Mekah setelah pulang tetapi tiadanya cerita Wahsyi ini daripada perbuatan-perbuatan perempuan tersebut menunjukkan bahawa semua itu tidak benar.

4. Kerana Wahsyi telah membunuh Hamzah yang begitu disayangi oleh Rasulullah s.a.w., Nabi s.a.w. meminta beliau supaya tidak bersemuka dengannya. Tetapi Jubair bin Muth’im, pada ketika pembukaan Mekah tidak pula diminta oleh Rasulullah s.a.w. supaya tidak bersemuka dengannya seperti Wahsyi. Apa yang dilakukan oleh Hindun, jika benar seperti yang didakwa oleh Ibnu Ishaq, bahawa Hindun telah membelah perut Hamzah dan mengunyah hatinya – maka kelakuan itu lebih dahsyat daripada apa yang dilakukan oleh Wahsyi terhadap Hamzah, kerana sudah lumrah dalam peperangan seseorang membunuh pihak lawannya. Tetapi adalah sesuatu yang luar biasa seseorang membelah perut orang yang telah mati dalam peperangan lalu memotong hatinya untuk dikunyah atau dimakan. Sepatutnya Rasulullah s.a.w. juga tidak sanggup bersemuka dengan Hindun sama seperti Wahsyi tetapi sebaliknya apabila Nabi s.a.w. menakluk Mekah, di samping Baginda s.a.w. mengisytiharkan damai, Baginda s.a.w. juga telah mengisytiharkan nama-nama orang yang perlu dihukum bunuh.

Pada ketika itu Hindun tidak tersenarai dalam orang-orang yang perlu dihukum bunuh. Tidak juga Nabi s.a.w. menyatakan kebencian dan dendamnya kepada Hindun malah sebaliknya mengisytiharkan kepada umum bahawa sesiapa yang masuk ke dalam rumah Abi Sufyan (juga merupakan rumah Hindun) untuk menyelamatkan dirinya, dia terselamat dan mendapat keamanan. Pengisytiharan seperti ini membuktikan dengan sejelas-jelasnya bahawa Hindun atau Abu Sufyan tidak terlibat sama sekali dalam pembunuhan Sayidina Hamzah apa lagi untuk dikatakan beliau telah membelah perut Hamzah lalu memakan hatinya. Hindun seperti juga ramai orang-orang Quraisy yang lain telah memeluk agama Islam, selepas berbai’ah dengan Nabi s.a.w. dalam keadaan bersemuka dengan Nabi s.a.w., beliau secara terbuka menyatakan perasaannya setelah memeluk Islam terhadap Nabi s.a.w. Kata beliau, “Wahai Rasulullah! Dulu tidak ada manusia yang berkhemah di atas muka bumi ini lebih dipandang hina olehku darimu tetapi hari ini tidak ada orang yang berkhemah di muka bumi ini lebih ku kasihi darimu.”

Lihatlah bagaimana beliau menyatakan isihatinya terhadap Nabi s.a.w. dengan bersemuka dan lihatlah pula apa jawapan Nabi s.a.w. dan bagaimana Nabi s.a.w. menyambut kata-katanya itu. Dari kata-kata Nabi s.a.w. itu kiranya sirnalah segala tuduhan yang dilemparkan oleh musuh-musuh Islam terhadap Hindun, ibu mertua Nabi s.a.w., ibu kepada Ummu Habibah dan juga ibu kepada Sayyidina Mu’awiyah. Baginda s.a.w. lantas bersabda, “Ya, demikian juga aku. Demi Tuhan yang nyawaku berada ditanganNya.” (Lihat Sahih Bukhari jilid 1 m.s. 539)

Ini bermakna Nabi s.a.w. juga kasih kepada Hindun seperti mana Hindun mengasihinya. Malah untuk menyatakan kasihnya yang sungguh-sungguh itu, Baginda s.a.w. bersumpah dengan Tuhan yang nyawanya berada ditanganNya.

5. Daripada dua riwayat berlainan kandungannya yang dikemukakan oleh dua orang tokoh, Ibnu Ishaq dan Imam Bukhari, tergambar dengan jelas aliran pemikiran dan aqidah masing-masing. Yang pertama berfahaman Syi’ah yang sememangnya membenci para sahabat dan memusuhi mereka sementara yang kedua pula mengasihi sahabat seperti Rasulullah s.a.w. sendiri mengasihi mereka.

6. Ibnu Ishaq mendakwa mendapat cerita yang dikemukakannya dari Saleh bin Kaisan yang lahir 70 tahun selepas peristiwa peperangan Uhud itu berlaku. Imam Bukhari pula menerima riwayat yang dikemukakannya dengan sanad yang bersambung-sambung dan tidak terputus. Perawi-perawinya terdiri dari orang-orang yang kuat dengan isnad yang kuat dan tidak terputus-putus. Imam Bukhari mengambil riwayat tentang pembunuhan Hamzah dari pembunuhnya sendiri iaitu Wahsyi. Siapakah yang lebih boleh dipercayai? Seorang yang mengambil riwayat dari orang yang lahir 70 tahun selepas kejadian atau orang yang meriwayatkan sesuatu peristiwa dari orang yang menyaksikan sendiri peristiwa itu malah terlibat secara langsung dalam peristiwa itu?

7. Ibnu Ishaq dan kuncu-kuncunya sebenarnya mahu menanam rasa benci di dalam hati ummah terhadap Sayyidina Muawiyyah yang telah memusnahkan pergerakan musuh Islam selama pemerintahannya 20 tahun sebagai Gabenor dan 20 tahun sebagai Khalifah. Dia seolah-olahnya menghujah para pembaca riwayatnya dengan cerita yang dikemukakan itu, iaitu Sayyidina Muawiyah adalah seseorang yang jahat, kejam dan tidak berperikemanusiaan. Kejahatan dan kekejaman itu bukanlah suatu yang baru bahkan ia adalah suatu yang turun temurun diwarisinya dari ibunya yang telah sanggup membelah perut Hamzah dan mengunyah hatinya, juga diwarisi dari ayahnya yang merupakan kepala kafir Quraisy dalam peperangan Uhud itu. Inilah sebenarnya motif yang telah melahirkan cerita ini ke alam nyata.

8. Ibnu Ishaq sebetulnya mahu mencabar fikiran ummah dengan suatu alasan di sebalik cerita yang dipersembahkan itu. Bahawa jika Wahsyi yang telah melakukan suatu perkara yang lumrah berlaku dalam sesuatu peperangan pun diminta oleh Nabi s.a.w. supaya tidak menunjukkan mukanya kepada Baginda s.a.w., bagaimanakah pula dengan orang yang telah membelah perut Sayyidina Hamzah lalu mengunyah hatinya? Adakah mungkin Rasulullah s.a.w. dapat menerima orang seperti itu? Kalau pun orang itu kemudiannya memeluk agama Islam dan berbai’ah dengan Nabi s.a.w., tetap juga ada kemungkinan bahawa Nabi s.a.w. menerima keislamannya secara taqiyyah!

Imam Bukhari mengemukakan hadis, “Hindun menyatakan isihatinya kepada Rasulullah s.a.w. secara terbuka dan bersemuka dengan Rasulullah s.a.w. seperti disebutkan tadi di bawah bab ‘Kelebihan Hindun Binti Utbah’. Apa yang Imam Bukhari mahu abadikan melalui bab ini ialah Hindun bukan sahaja telah diterima keislamannya, bahkan beliau mempunyai kelebihan dan keistimewaannya tersendiri. Apa yang dapat difahami secara mudah ialah sekurang-kurangnya beliau merupakan mertua kepada Nabi s.a.w. dan ibu kepada Amirul Mukminin Sayyidina Mu’awiyah bin Abu Sufyan. Itu sahaja pun bagi umat Islam bukan alang kepalang keistimewaannya.

Knight of Islam

Makkah a city without vegetation livestock or rivers. Desert after desert separated the town from the rest of the world. During the day the heat of the sun is unbearable and the nights are still and lonely. There was no religion to guide people except one which promoted the worship of stone idols. There was no knowledge except a love for elegant poetry. This was Makkah and those were the Arabs.

In this town was a young man who had not yet seen twenty summers. He is short and well-built and has a very heavy crop of hair. People compare him to a young lion. He comes from a rich and noble family. He is very attached to his parents and is particularly fond of his mother. He spends much of his time making and repairing bows and arrows and practicing archery as if preparing himself for some great encounter. People recognized him as a serious and intelligent young man. He finds no satisfaction in the religion and way of life of his people, their corrupt beliefs and disagreeable practices. His name is Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas.

One morning Abu Bakr came up to him and spoke softly to him. He explained that Muhammad Ibn Abdullah (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) had been given Revelation and has been sent with the religion of guidance and truth. Abu Bakr then took him to Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) in one of the valleys of Makkah.

It was late afternoon by this time and the Prophet had just completed his prayers. Sa'ad was excited and overwhelmed and responded readily to the invitation to truth and the religion of One God. The fact that he was one of the first persons to accept Islam was something that pleased him greatly. The Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) was also greatly pleased when Sa'ad became a Muslim. He saw in him signs of excellence. The fact that he was still in his youth promised great things to come. Perhaps other young people of Makkah would follow his example, including some of his relations. For Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas was in fact a maternal uncle of the Prophet since he belonged to the Bani Zuhrah, the clan of Aminah bint Wahb, the mother of the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam).

For this reason he is sometimes referred to as 'Sa'ad of Zuhrah,' to distinguish him from several others whose first name was Sa'ad. The Prophet is reported to have been pleased with his family relationship to Sa'ad. Once as he was sitting with his companions, he saw Sa'ad approaching and he said to them: "This is my maternal uncle. Let a man see his maternal uncle!"

While the Prophet was delighted with Sa'ad's acceptance of Islam, others including and especially his mother were not. Sa'ad relates: "When my mother heard the news of my Islam, she flew into a rage. She came up to me and said: "O Sa'ad! What is this religion that you have embraced which has taken you away from the religion of your mother and father...? By God, either you forsake your new religion or I would not eat or drink until I die. Your heart would be broken with grief for me and remorse would consume you on account of the deed, you have done and people would censure you forever more.' 'Don't do (such a thing), my mother,' I said, 'for I would not give up my religion for anything.' However, she went on with her threat... For days she neither ate nor drank. She became emaciated and weak."

"Hour after hour, I went to her asking whether I should bring her some food or something to drink but she persistently refused, insisting that she would neither eat nor drink until she died or I abandoned my religion. I said to her, 'Yaa Ummaah! In spite of my strong love for you, my love for Allah and His Messenger is indeed stronger. By Allah, if you had a thousand souls and each one depart one after another, I would not abandon this religion for anything,'

When she saw that I was determined she relented unwillingly and ate and drank. It was concerning Sa'ad's relationship with his mother and her attempt to force him to recant his faith that the words of the Qur'aan were revealed: "And we enjoined on man to be good to his parents. In pain upon pain did his mother bear him and his weaning took two years. So show gratitude to Me and to your parents. To Me is the final destiny. But if they strive to make you join in worship with Me things of which you have no knowledge, obey them not. But behave with them in the world kindly, and follow the path of him who turns to Me in repentance and obedience. Then to Me will be your return, and I shall tell you what you used to do." [Soorah Luqman (31): 14-15]

In these early days of Islam, the Muslims were careful not to arouse the sensibilities of the Quraysh. They would often go out together in groups to the valley outside Makkah where they could pray together without being seen.

One day a number of idolaters came upon them while they were praying and rudely interrupted them with ridicule. The Muslims felt they could not suffer these indignities passively and they came to blows with the idolaters. Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas struck one of the disbelievers with the jawbone of a camel and wounded him. This was the first blood shed in the conflict between Islam and kufr - a conflict that was later to escalate and test the patience and courage of the Muslims.

After the incident, however, the Prophet enjoined his companions to be patient and forbearing for this was the command of Allah: "And bear with patience what they say and avoid them with noble dignity. And leave Me alone to deal with those who give the lie to the Truth, those who enjoy the blessings of life (without any thought of Allah) and bear with them for a little while. " [Soorah al-Muzzammil (71): 10]

More than a decade later when permission was given for the Muslims to fight. Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas was to play a distinguished role in many of the engagements that took place both during the time of the Prophet and after. He fought at Badr together with his young brother Umayr who had cried to be allowed to accompany the Muslim army for he was only in his early teens.

Sa'ad returned to al-Medina alone for Umayr was one of the fourteen Muslim martyrs who fell in the battle. At the Battle of Uhud, Sa'ad was specially chosen as one of the best archers together with Zayd, Saib the son of Uthman ibn Mazun and others. Sa'ad was one of those who fought vigorously in defense of the Prophet after some Muslims had deserted their positions. To urge him on, the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) said:

"Shoot, Sa'ad ...may my mother and father be your ransom." Of this occasion, Ali ibn Abi Talib said that he had not yet heard the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa-sallam) promising such a ransom to anyone except Sa'ad. Sa'ad is also known as the first companion to have shot an arrow in defense of Islam.

And the Prophet once prayed for him: "O Lord, direct his shooting and respond to his prayer." Sa'ad was one of the companions of the Prophet who were blessed with great wealth. Just as he was known for his bravery, so he was known for his generosity.

During the farewell pilgrimage with the Prophet, he fell ill. The Prophet came to visit him and Sa'ad said: "O Messenger of Allah. I have wealth and I only have one daughter to inherit from me. Shall I give two thirds of my wealth as Sadaqah?" "No," replied the Prophet. "Then, (shall I give) a half?." asked Sa'ad and the Prophet again said 'no.' "Then, (shall I give) a third?' asked Sa'ad. "Yes," said the Prophet. "The third is much. Indeed to leave your heirs well-off is better than that you should leave them dependent on and to beg from people. If you spend anything seeking to gain thereby the pleasure of Allah, you will be rewarded for it even if it is a morsel which you place in your wife's mouth."

Sa'ad did not remain the father of just one child but was blessed thereafter with many children. Sa'ad is mainly renowned as the commander-in-chief of the strong Muslim army which Umar dispatched to confront the Persians at Qadisisyah. Umar wanted nothing less than an end to Sasanian power which for centuries had dominated the region.

To confront the numerous and well-equipped Persians was a most daunting task. The most powerful force had to be mustered. Umar sent dispatches to Muslim governors throughout the state to mobilize all able-bodied persons who had weapons or mounts, or who had talents of oratory and other skills to place at the service of the battle.

Bands of Mujahidin then converged on al-Medina from every part of the Muslim domain. When they had all gathered. Umar consulted the leading Muslims about the appointment of a commander-in-chief over the mighty army. Umar himself thought of leading the army but Ali suggested that the Muslims were in great need of him and he should not endanger his life. Sa'ad was then chosen as commander and Abdur-Rahman Ibn Awf, one of the veterans among the Sahabah said: "You have chosen well! Who is there like Sa'ad?"

Umar stood before the great army and bade farewell to them. To the commander-in-chief, he said: "O Sa'ad! Let not any statement that you are the uncle of the Messenger of Allah or that you are the companion of the Messenger of Allah distract you from Allah. Allah Almighty does not obliterate evil with evil but he wipes out evil with good."

"O Sa'ad! There is no connection between Allah and anyone except obedience to Him. In the sight of Allah all people whether nobleman or commoner are the same. Allah is their Lord and they are His servants seeking elevation through taqwa and seeking to obtain what is with Allah through obedience. Consider how the Messenger of Allah used to act with the Muslims and act accordingly..."

Umar thus made it clear that the army was not to seek conquest for the sake of it and that the expedition was not for seeking personal glory and fame. The three thousand strong army set off. Among them were ninety nine veterans of Badr, more than three hundred of those who took the Pledge of Ridwan at Hudaybiyyah and three hundred of those who had participated in the liberation of Makkah with the noble Prophet.

There were seven hundred sons of the companions. Thousands of women also went on the battle as auxiliaries and nurses and to urge the men on to battle. The army camped at Qadisiyyh near Hira. Against them the Persians had mobilized a force of 120,000 men under the leadership of their most brilliant commander, Rustum.

Umar had instructed Sa'ad to send him regular dispatches about the condition and movements of the Muslim forces, and of the deployment of the enemy's forces. Sa'ad wrote to Umar about the unprecedented force that the Persians were mobilizing and Umar wrote to him: "Do not be troubled by what you hear about them nor about the (forces, equipment and methods) they would deploy against you. Seek help with Allah and put your trust in Him and send men of insight, knowledge and toughness to him (the Chosroes) to invite him to Allah... And write to me daily."

Sa'ad understood well the gravity of the impending battle and kept in close contact with the military high command in al-Medinah.

Sa'ad did as Umar instructed and sent delegations of Muslims first to Yazdagird and then to Rustum, inviting them to accept Islam or to pay the jizyah to guarantee their protection and peaceful existence or to choose war if they so desired.

The first Muslim delegation which included Numan ibn Muqarrin was ridiculed by the Persian Emperor, Yazdagird. Sa'ad sent a delegation to Rustum, the commander of the Persian forces. This was led by Rubiy ibn Aamir who, with a spear in hand, went directly to Rustam's encampment. Rustam said to him: "Rubiy! What do you want from us'? If you want wealth we would give you. We would provide you with provisions until you are satisfied. We would clothe you. We would make you rich and happy. Look, Rubiy! What do you see in this assembly of mine? No doubt you see signs of richness and luxury, these carpets, fine curtains, gold embroidered walls, carpets of silk...Do you have any desire that we should bestow some of these riches which we have on you?"

Rustum thus wanted to impress and allure him from his purpose by this show of opulence and grandeur. Rubiy looked and listened unmoved and then said: "Listen, O commander! Certainly Allah has chosen us that through us those of His creation whom He so desires could be drawn away from the worship of idols to Tawheed (the affirmation of the unity of Allah), from the narrow confines of preoccupation with this world to its boundless expanse and from the tyranny of rulers to justice of Islam. Whoever accepts that from us we are prepared to welcome him. And whoever tights us, we would light him until the promise of Allah comes to pass."

"And what is the promise of Allah to you?" asked Rustum.

"Paradise for our martyrs and victory for those who live."

Rustum, of course, was not inclined to listen to such talk from a seemingly wretched person the likes of whom the Persians regarded as barbaric and uncivilized and whom they had conquered and subjugated for centuries.

The Muslim delegation returned to their commander in-chief. It was clear that war was now inevitable. Sa'ad's eyes filled with tears. He wished that the battle could be delayed a little or indeed that it might have been somewhat earlier. For on this particular day he was seriously ill and could hardly move. He was suffering from sciatica and he could not even sit upright from the pain. Sa'ad knew that this was going to be a bitter, harsh and bloody battle. And for a brief moment he thought, if only... but no!

The Messenger of Allah had taught the Muslims that none of them should say, "If.. ." To say "If..." implied a tack of wilt and determination, and wishing that a situation might have been different was not the characteristic of a firm believer. So, despite his illness, Sa'ad got up and stood before his army and addressed them. He began his speech "And indeed after having exhorted (man), We have laid it down in all the Divine wisdom that our righteous servants shall inherit the land." [Soorah al-Ambiya (21): 105]

After he completed his address, Sa'ad performed the Zuhr Salaat with the army. Facing them once again, he shouted, 'Allahu Akbar' four times and directed the fighters to attack with the word, "Hayya ala barakatillah" Charge with the blessings of Allah."

Standing in front of his tent, Sa'ad directed his soldiers and spurred them on with shouts of Allahu Akbar (Allah is Most Great) and La hawla wa la quvvata illa billah (there is no power or might save with Allah). For four days the battle raged. The Muslims displayed valor and skill. But a Persian elephant corps wrought havoc in the ranks of the Muslims.

The ferocious battle was only resolved when several renowned Muslim warriors made a rush in the direction of the Persian commander. A storm arose and the canopy of Rustam was blown into the river. As he tried to flee he was detected and slain. Complete confusion reigned among the Persians and they fled in disarray.

Just how ferocious the battle was can be imagined when it is known that in one day alone, some two thousand Muslims and about ten thousand Persians lost their lives.

The Battle of Qadisiyyab is one of the major decisive battles of world history. It sealed the fate of the Sasanian Empire just as the Battle of Yarmuk had seated the fate of the Byzantine Empire in the east.

Two years after Qadisiyyah, Sa'ad went on to take the Sasanian capital. By then he had recovered his health. He lived until he was almost eighty years old. He was blessed with much wealth but as the time of death approached in the year 54 AH, he asked his son to open a box in which he had kept a course woolen jubbah and said: "Shroud me in this, for in this (jubbah) I met the Mushrikin on the day of Badr and in it I desire to meet Allah Almighty."

Sa'ad Ibn Abi Waqqas (radhi allahu anhu)
The Story of a man who accepted Islam in its early days
Taken from al-Hudaa (Guidance) [vol. 1, no.12 (1414H)]
www.ahya.org