6sman
Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
RESERVATIONS REGARDING BLASPHEMY LAW
Salam,
What follows is a collection of my comments scattered around the forum still awaiting their replies, comments that should not be taken as outright denial of the ‘blasphemy law’, but herein I simply express my doubts concerning it’s veracity, and should rather be taken in good spirit with educational motives.
Let me begin by asking the core question; Where exactly does the Qur’an state the punishment for blasphemy of the Prophet (استہراء رسولﷺ) is death? And let me show you what kind of evidence I seek. For instance, Allaah Ta’aala states concerning theft and fornication;
As for thiefs, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allaah, for their crime: and Allaah is Exalted in power. [Al-Qur'an, 5:38]
The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes... [Al-Qur'an, 24:2]
Notice the clarity and un-ambiguity with which the punishment is prescribed leaving behind no or little room for further explanation (ta’weel). Yet this ayah concerns steeling, whereas murder is a greater crime which certainly deserves to be stated with even further un-ambiguity. Similarly, the Qur’an ordains Qisas or taking of blood-money on murder. Allaah Ta’aala’s laws (hudood) or penal codes are well-defined in the Qur’an and are so explicit that no honest reader could object their prescription. Hence, in light of forgone explanation my contention with regards to the ‘blasphemy law’ is: Where does the Qur'an say something like ‘as for those who blaspheme, slaughter them’? Remember, Allaah’s orders (ahkam) with respect to punishments (hudood) are always clear cut minus any un-certainty, if blasphemy necessitates death then where is this clear cut order (hukm)?
Another thing is that if blasphemy against Allaah Ta’aala can be left un-punished then why can’t blasphemy against His agent, because as I understand: both cases fall under rights of God (huqooqu'Allaah) that are to be left upon the Almighty to deal with, the implied meaning of Allaah’s statement; انا کفینک من المستہزئین. As an example let’s take Christians, who base their faith upon the ‘blasphemy’ of asserting Christ Jesus[p] was the “Begotten-God”, but even under Islamic rule (state): No punishment for this blasphemy is executable. We might also recall that sin is of two types; moral and legal. Legal sin is that upon which punishment becomes obligatory such as fornication, robbery, and murder, even bypassing traffic rules. But some sin purely moralistic such as anger, hate, jealousy. Take arrogance for example, the Prophet said concerning it that no haughty and arrogant person would enter heaven. Imagine the gravity of the sin, yet, it is not a legal sin against which a punishment must be applied. Blasphemy is something similar, it's a moral sin of immense magnitude that is more than enough to expel one from paradise and admit the abyss, but it has no legal aspect that I know of.
Then I ask who has given individuals, lay-men, the right to carry out murders when Allaah Ta'aala so clearly states: Nor take life - which Allah has made sacred - except with justice. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law). [Al-Qur'an, 17:33] Every soul is sacred in the eyes of Allaah Ta’aala and no life can be taken except after due process of justice which includes witnesses against and testimony of the accused person, only after he be given every right to defend himself as citizen is in a society of Islamic social justice; then only can the court alone pass due verdict. And as for the punishment, then ideally instead of a bunch “Aashiqan-e Rasool”, the courts should decide appropriate punishment if one is actually found guilty. And the court does not (at least should not) work on emotions, and ought try her utmost for rectification i.e. look at the root cause as to why a person might take up such line of action. If his ‘blasphemy’ be due to some misconception then the court can (should) take lenient action, but if the cause be sheer hatred towards Islam then she can determine what punishment is suitable, options of which include flogging, jail, ransom, but not capital punishment since the Qur’an, as I read, didn't even mention a minor. So I ask: Is it legal to just accuse anyone of ‘blasphemy’ and go out slaughtering people without actually proving the guy’s ‘guilt’?
Now people at times produce isolated incidents in support for this law, of such I beg the question: Were not all pagan Meccans, in fact whole of Arabia guilty of blasphemy against Allaah’s Messenger? Of course they were, so did Rasoolu’Allaah at the conquest of Makkah prescribe upon all of them the punishment of death? Ne’er, rather he forgave them all except the most notorious among them who were involved in other heinous crimes against humanity. My query is: If this ‘blasphemy law’ was ordained by Allaah Ta’aala then why did not His Messenger implement it when we take into consideration the fact that it is not possible for the Prophet to alter what Allaah Ta’aala had prescribed? Look at what the Prophet says: "By Allaah, if Fatima, the daughter of Muhammadﷺ stole, I would cut off her hand." [Bukhari]
Though I've never been a fan of Salman Taseer, all he did was express his own opinion to which he was more than entitled to. He had doubts regarding the blasphemy law and to be fair, so too I. Perhaps the closest verse to anything like a ‘blasphemy law’ is Surah Maidah, 5:33, but even it gives four options including exile, so why kill the guy? And even that ayah is followed by glad-tidings on repentance. I wanna know what has happened to tolerance in our society that is supposedly based on Islamic morals? Isn't sabr the best form of ishq-e-Rasoolﷺ or "ishq-e-Rasoolﷺ" mere lip-service? When ittiba` is the best form of love of the Prophetﷺ then why is such murder condoned, even encouraged in religious circles?
I wanna know did any of these overzealous mullahs try to change Taseer's view by guiding him to the right opinion. What happened to rectification (islah) propagation (tableegh), the fundamental tools by which Islam spread? Why did not our clergies (molvis), who can't express enough their "love for the Prophetﷺ", play down the issue by using dialogue to solve disputes as the Prophetﷺ use to do? Instead they show complete disregard for Rasool'Allaahﷺ, his religion, his teachings by inciting emotions and passion with vulgar and extravagant slogans amongst their weak-minded followers who have little knowledge of what Islam is, thus are mentally vulnerable to religious indoctrination, and always sensitive to actually carry out exactly what they've been instigated or programmed to do by their religious teachers. Our mullahs, I'm sorry to say, are nothing but cry-babies and a bunch of emotional idiots, and so too those who sheepishly them. People say politicians are bad, well yes they are, but molvis are even worse who mix religion with politics. These guys don't care about Islam or it's global image, all they care for is their over-grown tummies and self-suiting agendas, and to me these are the main cause for extremism and terrorism to flourish, attributes that have no place in Islam.
Salam!
Salam,
What follows is a collection of my comments scattered around the forum still awaiting their replies, comments that should not be taken as outright denial of the ‘blasphemy law’, but herein I simply express my doubts concerning it’s veracity, and should rather be taken in good spirit with educational motives.
Let me begin by asking the core question; Where exactly does the Qur’an state the punishment for blasphemy of the Prophet
As for thiefs, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allaah, for their crime: and Allaah is Exalted in power. [Al-Qur'an, 5:38]
The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes... [Al-Qur'an, 24:2]
Notice the clarity and un-ambiguity with which the punishment is prescribed leaving behind no or little room for further explanation (ta’weel). Yet this ayah concerns steeling, whereas murder is a greater crime which certainly deserves to be stated with even further un-ambiguity. Similarly, the Qur’an ordains Qisas or taking of blood-money on murder. Allaah Ta’aala’s laws (hudood) or penal codes are well-defined in the Qur’an and are so explicit that no honest reader could object their prescription. Hence, in light of forgone explanation my contention with regards to the ‘blasphemy law’ is: Where does the Qur'an say something like ‘as for those who blaspheme, slaughter them’? Remember, Allaah’s orders (ahkam) with respect to punishments (hudood) are always clear cut minus any un-certainty, if blasphemy necessitates death then where is this clear cut order (hukm)?
Another thing is that if blasphemy against Allaah Ta’aala can be left un-punished then why can’t blasphemy against His agent
Then I ask who has given individuals, lay-men, the right to carry out murders when Allaah Ta'aala so clearly states: Nor take life - which Allah has made sacred - except with justice. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, we have given his heir authority (to demand qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the Law). [Al-Qur'an, 17:33] Every soul is sacred in the eyes of Allaah Ta’aala and no life can be taken except after due process of justice which includes witnesses against and testimony of the accused person, only after he be given every right to defend himself as citizen is in a society of Islamic social justice; then only can the court alone pass due verdict. And as for the punishment, then ideally instead of a bunch “Aashiqan-e Rasool
Though I've never been a fan of Salman Taseer, all he did was express his own opinion to which he was more than entitled to. He had doubts regarding the blasphemy law and to be fair, so too I. Perhaps the closest verse to anything like a ‘blasphemy law’ is Surah Maidah, 5:33, but even it gives four options including exile, so why kill the guy? And even that ayah is followed by glad-tidings on repentance. I wanna know what has happened to tolerance in our society that is supposedly based on Islamic morals? Isn't sabr the best form of ishq-e-Rasoolﷺ or "ishq-e-Rasoolﷺ" mere lip-service? When ittiba` is the best form of love of the Prophetﷺ then why is such murder condoned, even encouraged in religious circles?
I wanna know did any of these overzealous mullahs try to change Taseer's view by guiding him to the right opinion. What happened to rectification (islah) propagation (tableegh), the fundamental tools by which Islam spread? Why did not our clergies (molvis), who can't express enough their "love for the Prophetﷺ", play down the issue by using dialogue to solve disputes as the Prophetﷺ use to do? Instead they show complete disregard for Rasool'Allaahﷺ, his religion, his teachings by inciting emotions and passion with vulgar and extravagant slogans amongst their weak-minded followers who have little knowledge of what Islam is, thus are mentally vulnerable to religious indoctrination, and always sensitive to actually carry out exactly what they've been instigated or programmed to do by their religious teachers. Our mullahs, I'm sorry to say, are nothing but cry-babies and a bunch of emotional idiots, and so too those who sheepishly them. People say politicians are bad, well yes they are, but molvis are even worse who mix religion with politics. These guys don't care about Islam or it's global image, all they care for is their over-grown tummies and self-suiting agendas, and to me these are the main cause for extremism and terrorism to flourish, attributes that have no place in Islam.
Salam!
Last edited:
