Javed Ghamdi, Salman Taseer, Asma Jhangir :: Khuda ka khof karen plz! - Nice Column by Orya Maqbool

[kmanzar]

:jazak: :jazak: :jazak: :jazak:

May Allah (SWT) bless you for exposing the Ghamdi fitna.

Only the people who has reached the level of enlightened moderate fascists promote Ghamdi Fitna, because he is giving them the reasons to justify their happy-go-lucky type of life style. Ghamdi is a Freemason tool to create confusion about the settled matters of Deen.

Wadaich mere bhai

You used this ‘enlightened moderate fascists’ words a lot in your posts, but I would like to know that whether you actually know the meaning of these words or not :) If not, then please do refer some good dictionary before combining two almost opposite terms in a word

Regarding the ‘enlightened moderate’, let you know, the idea of the county, to which we all belong, was thought and executed by enlightened moderate minded people (Sir Syed, Allam Iqbal, Quaid-e-Azam etc, but most of the fascists minds opposed that country). Dilemma is that the newly born country was hijacked by those who actually opposed it. And another dilemma is the term ‘enlightened moderate’ was misused in very wrong way during Mushi’s regime, believe me that was nothing but another kind of fascism (following things blindly)

Regards

 

[Bret Hawk]

Wadaich mere bhai

You used this ‘enlightened moderate fascists’ words a lot in your posts, but I would like to know that

Before you venture in to the straits of your self inflicted labyrinth laden with the path of confusion and abject mindedness, which is an obvious effect of a follower of charlatans like Ghamdi, I would dare to intercept you here and would like to know today few things from you as contrary to my thought earlier that you're simply wayward in your line of thinking but afterwards I’ve realised the hidden motives and insinuations embedded in your posts of late. I think the nature of your anxiety is related to the proclivity of your biased mind otherwise there’s nothing wrong with this issue of blasphemy law as maintained by me and countless other forum members as well ever since this issue has been, by premeditated design of course, highlighted in some sections of an equally parochial-infested electronic media of Pakistan.

You consider yourself the sole “Almighty Sage of this Forum” to detect this supposedly inherent inconsistencies and flaws for the first time ever in the history of this discipline (Of Islamic Sciences), which is related with one of the major sources of Islamic Shariah, along with its legal framework which was painstakingly designed and developed by its legal doctors of the past and present? What sort of those alleged aberrations you have spotted “Mr Genius” in Islamic Jurisprudence and legal sciences during the course of your misleading observations? May I dare to ask you (again) to present even a single polemical issue from your repertoire of memory, which was / is falsely related to the domain of Islam by its Faqihs of the past under those supposed influences / pressures which they faced during their lifetime?

 

[zeshaan]

In loogoon kay baray main parh kar mehsoos hota hay keh inn logoon ki bunyadoon main (jenyati khamian) koi teerhh hay.

 

[kmanzar]

Before you venture in to the straits of your self inflicted labyrinth laden with the path of confusion and abject mindedness, which is an obvious effect of a follower of charlatans like Ghamdi, I would dare to intercept you here and would like to know today few things from you as contrary to my thought earlier that your simply wayward in your line of thinking but afterwards I’ve realised the hidden motives and insinuations embedded in your posts of late. I think the nature of your anxiety is related to the proclivity of your biased mind otherwise there’s nothing wrong with this issue of blasphemy law as maintained by me and other countless other forum members ever since this issue has been, by premeditated design of course, highlighted in some sections of an equally parochial infested electronic media of Pakistan.

You consider yourself the sole “Almighty Sage of this Forum” to detect this supposedly inherent inconsistencies and flaws for the first time ever in the history of this discipline (Of Islamic Sciences), which is related with one of the major sources of Islamic Shariah, along with its legal framework which was painstakingly designed and developed by its legal doctors of the past and present? What sort of those alleged aberrations you have spotted “Mr Genius” in Islamic Jurisprudence and legal sciences during the course of your misleading observations? May I dare to ask you (again) to present even a single polemical issue from your repertoire of memory, which was / is falsely related to the domain of Islam by its Faqihs of the past under those supposed influences / pressures which they faced during their lifetime?

Although I asked definition of fascist from someone else, but thanks a lot for making me very clear on what the word ‘fascist’ is actually meant :)

And your ability of producing such an astute vocabulary is highly appreciable, but it would be far better (instead of wasting time on finding difficult words) if you kept yourself within topic instead of starting unsubstantiated personal attracts, but I am not surprised by such a reaction as this is a typical from ignorant orthodox minds, never mind anyways.

But for the sake of keeping this topic within boundaries, I expect some reasoning instead of emotional blackmailing.

Before coming to the point, I would like to clarify on several points raised, and correct me where I go wrong.

Your claim that ‘inherent inconsistencies and flaws of this discipline are challenged very first time’ is historically incorrect. Please read history first and then you can find that the discipline was being challenged throughout in past, and the reason is that in Islam nothing is unchallengeable except the Holy Quran (as text) and Prophet ‘SAW’ (as person). Rest of all text is solely human efforts and being analyzed critically throughout the history.

Due to such diversity in understanding among different scholars, you can see lots of different schools of thoughts around, and scholars from such different schools kept challenging each other from the past till present time. There are followers of different schools of thoughts, and I would like to be one, but instead of keep insisting on the school of thought I born into, I like to choose my destiny based upon my knowledge (even if it is limited).

Lots of scholars from far past and present times did doctrine on such sources, for example few names from recent times are: Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Hamiduddin Farahi, Amin Ahsan Islahi, Muhammad Hamidullah, Ali Shariati, Allama Iqbal, Ghulam Ahmed Pervez, Maulana Abul Kalaam Azad and so many more.

In my point of view (correct me where I am wrong), authenticity and authority of the Holy Quran is far superior then any text of the world. And by a rule of logic, you cannot judge an authentic thing via any unauthentic tool, right? So keeping this logic in mind, Quran being a highest text, should be used as tool of measuring any rule, any event and any incident of past. Therefore, if anyone follows this rule, in my personal opinion (based upon my limited knowledge) does the right thing. And if someone does vise-versa, e.g. tries to judge Quren using lower tools can interpret the message wrongly.

And that is the whole point here. So, keeping my full respect to the all true Islamic scholars of their times, in the current time, I like the reasoning and way of analysis of Ghamidi sb, and I always try to learn from his experience and knowledge.

Regarding the original blasphemy law topic, I would like to repeat what I wrote to you. I am fully in support of punishing a blasphemist, because such act can cause ‘Fasad fil Arz’, but I am against of overriding the Quranic message (of tolerance and forgiveness in such matters), by narrating hand picked unauthentic, out of context traditions (out of several pointing the other way from Prophet (SAW)).

Quran should remain superior, and any other thing should be studied and analyzed under it’s light

Regards

 

[concern_paki]

Yesterday, also I give some comments about Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamdi ..... and I feel that My comment is worthed ...... Everyone must aware of his philosophy and the way he is trying to mold ISLAM and want new generation to follow him on a new path which is very far from REAL ISLAM ..... So, now it is the duty of everyone that no one hears what he is saying and do not follow his words ...... Governor of Punjab ... everyone knows very well about him so why I should I waste My precious time and words here to write anything more. Ms. Jehangir is enlightening the women of Pakistan but very unfortunate to say here I cannot see any enlightenment among women here but even a horrible night of dark ....losing values...losing our culture...losing modesty ..... lose everything in-fact

 

[Nice2MU]

Wadaich mere bhai

You used this ‘enlightened moderate fascists’ words a lot in your posts, but I would like to know that whether you actually know the meaning of these words or not :) If not, then please do refer some good dictionary before combining two almost opposite terms in a word

Regarding the ‘enlightened moderate’, let you know, the idea of the county, to which we all belong, was thought and executed by enlightened moderate minded people (Sir Syed, Allama Iqbal, Quaid-e-Azam etc, but most of the fascists minds opposed that country). Dilemma is that the newly born country was hijacked by those who actually opposed it. And another dilemma is the term ‘enlightened moderate’ was misused in very wrong way during Mushi’s regime, believe me that was nothing but another kind of fascism (following things blindly)

Regards

By the way when Sir Sayed had given any idea or thought about Pakistan and how can you very easily declare Allama Iqbal and Quaid-e-Azam as "Enlightened Moderates "? Could you please give some of their statements to show them Enlightened Moderates?

They want Pakistan as Modern Islamic Welfare State but not Enlightened Moderate State like Mustafa Kamal Paasha (of Turkey) or Musharaf.

They wanted that every person should practice their religion in Pakistan without any restriction and this is what Islam says about minorities?

 

[crankthskunk]

People who faced such allegations include: Abu Hanifa, Shah Wali Ulla, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Amin Ahsen Islahi, Farahi, Allam Iqbal, Ghulam Ahmed Pervez, Allama Mashriqui, Maudoodi and so many others.

KManzar

You are doing a gross injustice to compare Imam Abu Hanifa, and to lesser degree Allama Iqbal with heretic like Ghulam Ahmed Pervaz, and to some extent with people likes Amin Ahsen Islahi and Farahi.

Why you think, others are not rational or have not done the needed research on the Holy Quran and other Islamic jurisprudence? You bring something on and I will respond to each and everything you throw at me, Inshallah.

Mughal1,

Are you the KCMughal of lets build Pakistan fame?

An way, let me correct your gross misconception of the Holy Quran, first and foremost, you have levelled very grave allegations on the Wives of Holy Prophet SAW, based on your injure or dare I say, borrowed knowledge of the Holy Quran.

In these verses it is very clear that standard maximum punishment is set at 100 lashes by the quran as normal ie for people of reasonable back ground and reasonable circumstances. Then depending on the background the punishment is set at 50 lashes as maximum for less fortunate and then we are told that punishment for people like wives of the prophet is set at double as maximum ie 200 lashes.

In ignorance you automatically implied that the wives of Prophet SAW were guilty of immoral conduct, nauzobillah minzalik.

Let me remind you what translation you produced from Youssuf Ali;

033.030 YUSUFALI: O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled to her, and that is easy for Allah.

I suggest you should stop using your conjecture for the verses of the Holy Quran, and dont try to imply meanings and tafseer to the Quranic verses, without knowledge and wisdom. May Allah forgive you for your gross mistake you have committed by implying unimaginable things to the wives of our Holy Prophet SAW.

You should read properly, Youssuf Ali didnt say anything about the adultery and fornication in the translation of the verse 33:30, he wrote evident unseemly conduct. How did you conclude it is reflecting for Adultery or fornication and linked it with 200 lashes? Are you in your senses?

Let me ask you a question, if you think you have become a master of the Quranic teachings, in 4:15 translation produced by you, it mentions;

4:15 and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way.

But in the translation of 24:2 you wrote;

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, - flog each of them with a hundred stripes.

As it is evidently clear according to your translations, there are two sentences prescribed in the Holy Quran for the act of adultery and fornication, i) to confine them in their houses ii) 100 stripes.

Which is the correct sentence? Or do you think 24:2 abrogated 4:15?

If you are the Mugal from lets build Pakistan, I suggest you stay focus on your cut and paste jobs, and refrain yourself from commenting on the Holy Quran. No matter how strong is the temptation to malign Islam in your liberal world.

 

[Nice2MU]

Although I asked definition of fascist from someone else, but thanks a lot for making me very clear on what the word ‘fascist’ is actually meant :)

And your ability of producing such an astute vocabulary is highly appreciable, but it would be far better (instead of wasting time on finding difficult words) if you kept yourself within topic instead of starting unsubstantiated personal attracts, but I am not surprised by such a reaction as this is a typical from ignorant orthodox minds, never mind anyways.

But for the sake of keeping this topic within boundaries, I expect some reasoning instead of emotional blackmailing.

Before coming to the point, I would like to clarify on several points raised, and correct me where I go wrong.

Your claim that ‘inherent inconsistencies and flaws of this discipline are challenged very first time’ is historically incorrect. Please read history first and then you can find that the discipline was being challenged throughout in past, and the reason is that in Islam nothing is unchallengeable except the Holy Quran (as text) and Prophet ‘SAW’ (as person). Rest of all text is solely human efforts and being analyzed critically throughout the history.

Due to such diversity in understanding among different scholars, you can see lots of different schools of thoughts around, and scholars from such different schools kept challenging each other from the past till present time. There are followers of different schools of thoughts, and I would like to be one, but instead of keep insisting on the school of thought I born into, I like to choose my destiny based upon my knowledge (even if it is limited).

Lots of scholars from far past and present times did doctrine on such sources, for example few names from recent times are: Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Hamiduddin Farahi, Amin Ahsan Islahi, Muhammad Hamidullah, Ali Shariati, Allama Iqbal, Ghulam Ahmed Pervez, Maulana Abul Kalaam Azad and so many more.

In my point of view (correct me where I am wrong), authenticity and authority of the Holy Quran is far superior then any text of the world. And by a rule of logic, you cannot judge an authentic thing via any unauthentic tool, right? So keeping this logic in mind, Quran being a highest text, should be used as tool of measuring any rule, any event and any incident of past. Therefore, if anyone follows this rule, in my personal opinion (based upon my limited knowledge) does the right thing. And if someone does vise-versa, e.g. tries to judge Quren using lower tools can interpret the message wrongly.

And that is the whole point here. So, keeping my full respect to the all true Islamic scholars of their times, in the current time, I like the reasoning and way of analysis of Ghamidi sb, and I always try to learn from his experience and knowledge.

Regarding the original blasphemy law topic, I would like to repeat what I wrote to you. I am fully in support of punishing a blasphemist, because such act can cause ‘Fasad fil Arz’, but I am against of overriding the Quranic message (of tolerance and forgiveness in such matters), by narrating hand picked unauthentic, out of context traditions (out of several pointing the other way from Prophet (SAW)).

Quran should remain superior, and any other thing should be studied and analyzed under it’s light

Regards

You mean to say that Allah would forgive any person which abuse any prophet and specially Prophet (PBUH) which He loves the most in this world.

If you rely your statement on the" tolerance and forgiveness " of Quran, then why the same Quran also order "Jihad-Bil-Saif and Killings" of Fasaadi on the earth?

Do you know the reasons of Blasphemy Law in Pakistan? It was because Enlightened Moderate and Liberal peoples were openly ridicule the teaching of Quran, Islam and Prophet (PBUH). They used to say and write abusive language about Quran and Prophet (PBUH). It was then realised in 1984 that a law should be made which should ban such acts and writings. This liberal class stopped ridiculing after this law in 1984.Initially the punishment was Life time imprisonment and in 1990 on the order of Sharia Court, the punishment was decided as death.

If you Ghamidi would have some courage then why did he not put voice against this law, when it was under consideration in Parliament? Where was this Ghamidi 1990? Where was he standing?

 

[Truthslapper]

Friends,

There is a set of rules that defines which information is islamic and which is not.

There is two kinds of information about islam a)that comes from the quran as first and more most proper islam that was originally preached and b)islam of mullahs that diverts people from the islam that is in the quran. You may think that I am just saying it and I wish that I was wrong but unfortunately that is true.

Here are some facts for you to verify for yourselves.

!)Stoning to death of people in the name of islam for islamically unlawful sex is mullah's islam that is against the quran.

Here is the proof.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/c.../muslim/quran/

004.015 YUSUFALI: If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way.

004.016 YUSUFALI: If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful.

004.025 YUSUFALI: If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess: And Allah hath full knowledge about your faith. Ye are one from another: Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable: They should be chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours: when they are taken in wedlock, if they fall into shame, their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear sin; but it is better for you that ye practise self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

033.030 YUSUFALI: O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled to her, and that is easy for Allah.

024.002 YUSUFALI: The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.

In these verses it is very clear that standard maximum punishment is set at 100 lashes by the quran as normal ie for people of reasonable back ground and reasonable circumstances. Then depending on the background the punishment is set at 50 lashes as maximum for less fortunate and then we are told that punishment for people like wives of the prophet is set at double as maximum ie 200 lashes. The quran divides people into three categories ie normal call the other people and above normal like the wives of the prophet and then less than normal..

Mullahs tell us that lashes are for unmarried and stoning is for married. This is false in the light of the quran because the wives of the prophet are married women ie they are married to the prophet.

In light of these facts it is not difficult to see where mullahs are taking us if we do not wake up and follow them like slaves. So please do not listen to mullahs against the quran.

This stoning has been carried out by taleban in the name of islam, quran and the prophet. How many lives have been destroyed through this adventure of mullahs I don't know but please think hard and help educate people about proper islam if you must.



2)Here is another point, child brides and forced marriages. Thanks to adventurous mullahs so many innocent lives have been destroyed. Again mullahs teach that which is against the quran.

Proof.

004.006 YUSUFALI: Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them, release their property to them; but consume it not wastefully, nor in haste against their growing up. If the guardian is well-off, Let him claim no remuneration, but if he is poor, let him have for himself what is just and reasonable. When ye release their property to them, take witnesses in their presence: But all-sufficient is Allah in taking account.

004.019 YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may Take away part of the dower ye have given them,-except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and Allah brings about through it a great deal of good.

The quran is very clear indeed that none should be married before the age of marriage and against their will and if one is not mentally mature enough to take care of family and raise the family.

Can anyone see from the quran allowing such terrible things? No. The place of the quran in religion of islam is fundamental ie it is the bedrock of islam. No hadith is authentic if it contradicts what the quran says because it is an accepted law of hadith authenticity criterion.

You see marriage allowd in islam not a binding duty by allah. What it means is that you do not have to get married. It is like law about driving a car. You are not allowed driving below an age but even if you are of the right age it is not a binding duty that you must drive a car. Only if you want to and you have the right circumstances and situation that you may drive.

So this drive in mullah's head is very dangerous for our society if we do not stop it by confronting these mad mullahs. This is why we must not follow just anyone rather look for proper ulema of islam who know what they are talking about.

This is just the start, as I get time I shall keep adding things to try and help educate people about islam in the quran in the quranic context.


regards and all the best.

It is astonishing to read that you have quoted the translation of Yusuf Ali. According to the short biography of Yusuf which can be read on Renaissance.com which itself is supervised by Ghamdi:

A peculiar product of the era of British raj, Yusuf Ali was a pukka sahib par excellence. For him loyalty to the crown was of paramount importance . Religion was a personal matter. It should, therefore, come as no surprise to learn that he married an English woman in a church in England. That the woman should prove unfaithful despite giving birth to four of his children, perhaps best epitomises the relationship between the empire and India.


and further....

His first wife proved unfaithful and left him for another man. Yusuf Ali could not see that infidelity was, and remains an acceptable way of life in the west. His children, too, abandoned and resented him. He was too engrossed in public life currying the favours of the raj to pay much attention to the family. Despite his intense loyalty to the British, they were glad to see his back when he wanted to retire from the ICS.

When he died in London on December 10,1953, he was a pathetic wreck. Disoriented and confused, he was found by the police lying outside the steps of a house. Taken to hospital, he died unsung and unmourned. He was buried in Brookwood Cemetery in Surrey.

Link:- http://www.renaissance.com.pk/jabore96.html

Mind you Brookwood Cemetery is a Christian graveyard in Surrey,UK!

 

[drkjke]

ghamadi is a munafiq
he only speaks against muslims and their religious sentiments but he never opens his dirty mouth against americans killing muslims or raping aafia siddiqui
so called scholars like ghamadi are among those who were recruited by CIA after 2001 in muslim countries to weaken the spirit of jihad among muslims and weaken the love of prophet among muslims
these two things which make muslims invincible,and which kufar awnt to steal from us,so ghamadi like people are stealing these precious treasures from us
may allahs curse be upon his followers

 

[awan4ever]

As usual the debate has digressed into personal attacks instead of talking about the law itself.

Anyway I would like to know somethings for my own knowledge.

1) Is the law perfect in all its aspects?
2) If not then where do you see the problems in it and how can they be rectified?

From seeing the debates going on on TV i have seen the following problem crop up each time.
It seems anyone with the least bit of knowledge can stand up and claim this person has said insulting remarks. The court admits the case and even if pronounced not guilty that person ends up being killed outside court or has to flee the country. So in essence the person who has been taken to court under this law is doomed no matter what.
The point put forward by the Islamic parties and also put forward in this column by OMJ is that people have been accused of murder falsely. However if they are acquitted under such charge they can get back to their lives without fear of reprisal from the community. This is not the case with someone accused under the Blasphemy law. Anyone on the street can be insinuated into killing an acquitted person by saying he paid off the judge but in reality he is guilty.
This is a real challenge w.r.t this law and it has to be addressed. If an innocent person cannot live in peace after being acquitted by court then there is a serious flaw somewhere which has to be redressed.
Im also very much in favor of booking a false accuser under the same law if the defendant is found not guilty.

 

[Mughal1]

Mughal1,

Are you the KCMughal of “let’s build Pakistan” fame?

An way, let me correct your gross misconception of the Holy Quran, first and foremost, you have levelled very grave allegations on the Wives of Holy Prophet SAW, based on your injure or dare I say, borrowed knowledge of the Holy Quran.



In ignorance you automatically implied that the wives of Prophet SAW were guilty of immoral conduct, nauzobillah minzalik.

Let me remind you what translation you produced from Youssuf Ali;



I suggest you should stop using your conjecture for the verses of the Holy Quran, and don’t try to imply meanings and tafseer to the Quranic verses, without knowledge and wisdom. May Allah forgive you for your gross mistake you have committed by implying unimaginable things to the wives of our Holy Prophet SAW.

You should read properly, Youssuf Ali didn’t say anything about the “adultery and fornication” in the translation of the verse 33:30, he wrote “ evident unseemly conduct”. How did you conclude it is reflecting for “Adultery or fornication” and linked it with 200 lashes? Are you in your senses?

Let me ask you a question, if you think you have become a master of the Quranic teachings, in 4:15 translation produced by you, it mentions;



But in the translation of 24:2 you wrote;



As it is evidently clear according to your translations, there are two sentences prescribed in the Holy Quran for the act of adultery and fornication, i) to confine them in their houses ii) 100 stripes.

Which is the correct sentence? Or do you think 24:2 abrogated 4:15?

If you are the Mugal from “lets build Pakistan”, I suggest you stay focus on your cut and paste jobs, and refrain yourself from commenting on the Holy Quran. No matter how strong is the temptation to malign Islam in your “liberal” world.

Dear crankthskunk, did you read my post properly? It is about punishment by stoning to death, clarifying the law, showing that stoning people to death is wrong and against the quran.

The laws are there that is all they do not mean that someone did something wrong. The verse you are talking about is there to show us that allah expects wives of the prophet to have the conduct of highest standard. But at the same time by showing the double reward or punishment, it eliminates the stoning punishment. Because there cannot be half or double of death penalty.

I wonder if you know but a wife of the prophet was falsely accused ie ayesha siddeeqah. So laws are there to protect people.

As for abrogation, what do you mean? Please explain. There is no law in the quran that is abrogated but I shall explain that elsewhere in detail in time. All the laws in the quran are based on circumstances, situations, time and place, reason with exceptions where need be. This is why there is no need for abrogation in the quran.

Abrogation only comes in where laws are such that they are indifinite or infinite to begin with and then need arises to define or limit them to creat exceptions. The quranic laws are already defined by ways I listed.

regards and all the best.

 

[drkjke]

prophet warned us of false scholars who would misguide people near end times
during victory of makkah those people who had done blasphemy against prophet were killed even when some of them grasped kaaba clothe,they were killed then and there,there is no doubt at all among muslims that the only punishment of blasphemy against prophet is death

if pakistanis erase the law of blasphemy i have no doubt allah will erase them
And a great number of towns (their population) We destroyed (for their crimes). Our torment came upon them (suddenly) by night or while they were sleeping for their afternoon rest{4}. No cry did they utter when Our Torment came upon them but this: "Verily, we were Zlimn (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.)"{5} (sura alaraaf ayat number 4 and 5)


and those brothers who are still with islam beware,these are end times and full of fitna times,protect your iman and read the below hadeeth

sunan abudawud
Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar: When we were sitting with the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), he talked about periods of trial (fitnahs), mentioning many of them.that Then there will be the little black trial which will leave none of this community without giving him a slap, and when people say that it is finished, it will be extended. During it a man will be a believer in the morning and an infidel in the evening, so that the people will be in two camps: the camp of faith which will contain no hypocrisy, and the camp of hypocrisy which will contain no faith. When that happens, expect the Antichrist (Dajjal) that day or the next. (Book #35, Hadith #4230)

 

[crankthskunk]

Dear crankthskunk, did you read my post properly? It is about punishment by stoning to death, clarifying the law, showing that stoning people to death is wrong and against the quran.

Off course I read your post properly and got your drift correctly. You first give the verses and then you gave the example of wives of Prophet Muhammad Saw that they will be given double to punishment of 200 strips. Why did you mention 200 strips for them, were you not talking the punishment of adultery? So why you included examples of wives of Prophet SAW in that example by giving precise number of 200, i.e. double of normal punishment of 100?

As for abrogation, what do you mean? Please explain. There is no law in the quran that is abrogated but I shall explain that elsewhere in detail in time. All the laws in the quran are based on circumstances, situations, time and place, reason with exceptions where need be. This is why there is no need for abrogation in the quran.

Abrogation only comes in where laws are such that they are indifinite or infinite to begin with and then need arises to define or limit them to creat exceptions. The quranic laws are already defined by ways I listed.

I was not wrong in judging your intentions either, lets say, I have tons of experience dealing with people like you, I can detect and pick many things which ordinary people can not. I have very clear idea what you are going to write and what examples would you give and from where.

So, you think Quran is for situations and the Hadood mentioned in it are for specific times, not eternal and forever, until the Day of the Judgement?

You didnt explain which the right punishment for the adultery is; leave them in their houses or 100 strips? You should be able to specify, you produced both of the verses in your post. Can you own up to your own statements? Or they were for specific times, not applicable now? what is the applicable punishment now? You or people like Ghamdi are free to introduce whatever punishments they deem fit for different social wrongs? Or no punishments at all, following the examples of Asma Jehangir, Taseer and Sherry. After all what would you do with the Quran when it forbids the Alcohol? Easy way out, those restrictions were for specific times, not applicable now, right?

Now you are jumping to even more serious issues by stating that the Quran Laws are not infinite or indefinite. In a nutshell you are saying the Quranic Laws can be changed with passage of time, i.e. with someones whim and wink.

Changed by the sold out people like Ghamdi? They free to introduce their own Laws on the instigations of their masters?

Do you see the pitfalls of following someone like Ghamdi?

 

[crankthskunk]

Awan4ever,

So what do you suggest, the Law of Blasphemy should be removed, because you think it is not clear or just?

What should replace it? Nothing, according to the thinking of Asma, sherry and Taseer. People should be free to hurl abuse at our Prophet SAW on the pretext of freedom of Speech, exactly like in the west?

Drunkard like Taseer can say what they like, and druggies like Paracha can write what he likes in Dawn? They should be left alone with their evil?

And lets assume that this law is not there, and people are tried under another law without the death penalty, then what people would do? Who are not found guilty would do? And even those who found guilty would do?

Sherry has introduced the bill in the Parliament, she is dying for her fag and the glass of Sherry, she does not want to be bounded by any norm of civilised behaviour in an Islamic society. She wants freedom, but she does not worry about the death of thousands of innocent Pakistani Muslims by means which are illegal under the international laws. Talk about hypocrisy and lunacy.

 

[Night_Hawk]

prophet warned us of false scholars who would misguide people near end times
during victory of makkah those people who had done blasphemy against prophet were killed even when some of them grasped kaaba clothe,they were killed then and there,there is no doubt at all among muslims that the only punishment of blasphemy against prophet is death

if pakistanis erase the law of blasphemy i have no doubt allah will erase them
And a great number of towns (their population) We destroyed (for their crimes). Our torment came upon them (suddenly) by night or while they were sleeping for their afternoon rest{4}. No cry did they utter when Our Torment came upon them but this: "Verily, we were Zlimn (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.)"{5} (sura alaraaf ayat number 4 and 5)


and those brothers who are still with islam beware,these are end times and full of fitna times,protect your iman and read the below hadeeth

sunan abudawud
Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar: When we were sitting with the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), he talked about periods of trial (fitnahs), mentioning many of them.that Then there will be the little black trial which will leave none of this community without giving him a slap, and when people say that it is finished, it will be extended. During it a man will be a believer in the morning and an infidel in the evening, so that the people will be in two camps: the camp of faith which will contain no hypocrisy, and the camp of hypocrisy which will contain no faith. When that happens, expect the Antichrist (Dajjal) that day or the next. (Book #35, Hadith #4230)

Thank for the advice Dr. Sahib

 

[Abdul Allah]

But still I will say that he is a human being, he can make mistakes, but we should point out anyone mistakes in light of reasoning under Quranic teachings, but not good to blame anyone blindly just because he is not following antecessors definitions

Have you search about it? that How wrong he is in his understanding of Things? Do search it there is enough material on that on the basis of Quran and Hadith.

You prefer "rational approach". tell me whose rational approach should we used to draw Laws for our daily life? yours,mind, xyz,abc whose??? or any one who started to be called as Alim and try to fit Islam as per his thoughts?

you said
but his approach considered right to those who want to follow the logical reasoning (within the limits of Islam)

Define "With in the limits of Islam"

you said
But still I will say that he is a human being, he can make mistakes, but we should point out anyone mistakes in light of reasoning under Quranic teachings

It is being Done That is what i am telling you. Do search it.

"But if rationale being used under the light of Quran, it never let you misdirected"

Well how you define "Light of Quran". if a person interpret Quran as he think and write a Tafsir then how can you say that he have not done it under the "light of Quran". He surely have done it under ight of Quran but as per his thinking.

you said

the holy Quran fully supports the rational approach and discourages in full extent following any belief of ancestors blindly

Yes but Ancestors of you and mine
It did not Not include Muhammad SW and his Sahaba.

Following Muhammad SW is basic part of Faith. Insnt it?
and if a thing is in Hadith and that Hadith is Sahi then if it did not fit in someone's brain and his rational thinking can not handle it it is his fault. and if someone says that only Quran is the tool to extract laws then He is totally wrong. and can be proved easily

You said Islam ask for rational thinking
well
Yes agreed totaly agreed
For that there are detail principle out there.

please do search about how wrong his understanding is please.

 

[Abdul Allah]

As usual the debate has digressed into personal attacks instead of talking about the law itself.

Anyway I would like to know somethings for my own knowledge.

1) Is the law perfect in all its aspects?
2) If not then where do you see the problems in it and how can they be rectified?

From seeing the debates going on on TV i have seen the following problem crop up each time.
It seems anyone with the least bit of knowledge can stand up and claim this person has said insulting remarks. The court admits the case and even if pronounced not guilty that person ends up being killed outside court or has to flee the country. So in essence the person who has been taken to court under this law is doomed no matter what.
The point put forward by the Islamic parties and also put forward in this column by OMJ is that people have been accused of murder falsely. However if they are acquitted under such charge they can get back to their lives without fear of reprisal from the community. This is not the case with someone accused under the Blasphemy law. Anyone on the street can be insinuated into killing an acquitted person by saying he paid off the judge but in reality he is guilty.
This is a real challenge w.r.t this law and it has to be addressed. If an innocent person cannot live in peace after being acquitted by court then there is a serious flaw somewhere which has to be redressed.
Im also very much in favor of booking a false accuser under the same law if the defendant is found not guilty.

1) It is being said many times that Amend the law so that Innocent should not suffer
2) it is said many time that if some one accuse a person and that person is found innocent then accuser should pay the price.
3) outside court murder will increase in case of repealing the law.

 

[Mughal1]

Off course I read your post properly and got your drift correctly. You first give the verses and then you gave the example of wives of Prophet Muhammad Saw that they will be given double to punishment of 200 strips. Why did you mention 200 strips for them, were you not talking the punishment of adultery? So why you included examples of wives of Prophet SAW in that example by giving precise number of 200, i.e. double of normal punishment of 100?


I was not wrong in judging your intentions either, lets say, I have tons of experience dealing with people like you, I can detect and pick many things which ordinary people can not. I have very clear idea what you are going to write and what examples would you give and from where.

So, you think Quran is for situations and the “Hadood” mentioned in it are for specific times, not eternal and forever, until the Day of the Judgement?

You didn’t explain which the right punishment for the adultery is; leave them in their houses or 100 strips? You should be able to specify, you produced both of the verses in your post. Can you own up to your own statements? Or they were for specific times, not applicable now? what is the applicable punishment now? You or people like Ghamdi are free to introduce whatever punishments they deem fit for different social wrongs? Or no punishments at all, following the examples of Asma Jehangir, Taseer and Sherry. After all what would you do with the Quran when it forbids the Alcohol? Easy way out, those restrictions were for specific times, not applicable now, right?

Now you are jumping to even more serious issues by stating that the Quran Laws are not infinite or indefinite. In a nutshell you are saying the Quranic Laws can be changed with passage of time, i.e. with someone’s whim and wink.

Changed by the sold out people like Ghamdi? They free to introduce their own Laws on the instigations of their masters?

Do you see the pitfalls of following someone like Ghamdi?

Dear crankthskunk, please get out of whatever you are in because it is blocking your view and not letting you see what is there as you are giving your judgements without addressing the issue.

The question is simply, is stoning to death islamic or not? What is you answer and why do you have that view? Very simple. I am saying that stoning is not islamic punishment as per my understanding of things. Do you agree with talebanic version of islam? I do not.

As for the transalations of the quran, none of them is perfect nor is any tafseer but you are free to let me know which one is your favorite. Ibn kasir is there, jalain is there, ibn abbas is there, tafeemul quran is there and more.

I have brelavi sunni background but I disagree with some of the things, what is yours?

regards and all the best.

 

[bankalalookheti]

The Mullah brigade has come out of its cave to spread further fasaad in this godforsaken country. On the one hand, the Mullah brigade never get tired to tell the kafir world that Islam means peace and how compassionate, benevolent and merciful the prophet was but, on the other hand, they also give examples to justify the killing of Asia the kafir lady, how the prophet killed those who committed blasphemy against him. Can the Mullah brigade first decide whether the prophet was merciful or full of vanegeance?