Alleged blasphemy: Mob burns 100 Christian homes in Lahore

[Zarvan]

Hi,

If this act was done by muslims during a "CALIPHS' regime---the caliph would have executed all the muslims involved in the act---confiscated teir properties and expelled their children and familes to 'badlands'.




Sir,

That is an absolute lie----the prophet never killed anyone for blasphemy----there is no such thing a justified killing for blasphemy under any circumstance----.

No Sir in Madinah many people were killed for Blasphemy on orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW
Firstly, I would like to say that I was shocked to hear about death of Mr Taseer. May Allah forgive him and us all.

Secondly, I am hearing much from the liberals about the blasphemy law and that it is a man made law which has no basis in Islam. This is disappointing and clearly demonstrates a poor understanding of something which they claim to know much about.

I have therefore, for the purposes of education only, listed below some evidences below on this sensitive issue. This is not exhaustive but shows that the blasphemy law is not as clear as the liberals make it out to be.

IN NO WAY AM I SAYING THAT WHAT MALIK QADRI DID IS RIGHT. THIS IS ULTIMATELY FOR THE LEGAL SYSTEM TO DEAL WITH. IT SHOULD BE THE COURT WHICH HANDS DOWN THE PUNISHMENT AND NOT THE CITIZEN'S OF THE STATE.

THE POSITION ON BLASPHEMY

The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16

This ruling is indicated by the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

In the Qur’aan it says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The hypocrites fear lest a Soorah (chapter of the Qur’aan) should be revealed about them, showing them what is in their hearts. Say: ‘(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allaah will bring to light all that you fear.’

If you ask them (about this), they declare: ‘We were only talking idly and joking.’ Say: ‘Was it at Allaah, and His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?’

Make no excuse; you disbelieved after you had believed”

[al-Tawbah 9:64-66]

This verse clearly states that mocking Allaah, His verses and His Messenger constitutes kufr, so that applies even more so to insulting. The verse also indicates that whoever belittles the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also a kaafir, whether he was serious or joking.

With regard to the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (4362) narrated from ‘Ali that a Jewish woman used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him, so a man strangled her until she died, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ruled that no blood money was due in this case.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in al-Saarim al-Maslool (1/162): This hadeeth is jayyid, and there is a corroborating report in the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Abbaas which we will quote below.

This hadeeth clearly indicates that it was permissible to kill that woman because she used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Abu Dawood (4361) narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that a blind man had a freed concubine (umm walad) who used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him. He told her not to do that but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she did not heed him. One night, when she started to say bad things about the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and insult him, he took a short sword or dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it and killed her. The following morning that was mentioned to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He called the people together and said, “I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right over him that he should stand up.” The blind man stood up and said, “O Messenger of Allaah, I am the one who did it; she used to insult you and say bad things about you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not give up her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was kind to me. Last night she began to insult you and say bad things about you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.” Thereupon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Bear witness, there is no blood money due for her.”

(Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 3655)

It seems that this woman was a kaafir, not a Muslim, for a Muslim could never do such an evil action. If she was a Muslim she would have become an apostate by this action, in which case it would not have been permissible for her master to keep her; in that case it would not have been good enough if he were to keep her and simply rebuke her.

Al-Nasaa’i narrated (4071) that Abu Barzah al-Aslami said: A man spoke harshly to Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq and I said, ‘Shall I kill him?’ He rebuked me and said, ‘That is not for anyone after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) .’” (Saheeh al-Nasaa’i, 3795)

It may be noted from this that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had the right to kill whoever insulted him and spoke harshly to him, and that included both Muslims and kaafirs.

The second issue is: if a person who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, should his repentance be accepted or not?

The scholars are agreed that if such a person repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him.

But they differed as to whether his repentance should be accepted in this world and whether that means he is no longer subject to the sentence of execution.

Maalik and Ahmad were of the view that it should not be accepted, and that he should be killed even if he has repented.

They quoted as evidence the Sunnah and proper understanding of the ahaadeeth:

In the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (2683) narrated that Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqaas said: “On the Day of the Conquest of Makkah, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) granted safety to the people except for four men and two women, and he named them, and Ibn Abi Sarh… As for Ibn Abi Sarh, he hid with ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan, and when the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) called the people to give their allegiance to him, he brought him to stand before the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He said, “O Prophet of Allaah, accept the allegiance of ‘Abd-Allaah.” He raised his head and looked at him three times, refusing him, then he accepted his allegiance after the third time. Then he turned to his companions and said: “Was there not among you any smart man who could have got up and killed this person when he saw me refusing to give him my hand and accept his allegiance?” They said, “We do not know what is in your heart, O Messenger of Allaah. Why did you not gesture to us with your eyes?” He said, “It is not befitting for a Prophet to betray a person with a gesture of his eyes.”

(Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 2334)

This clearly indicates that in a case such as this apostate who had insulted the Prophet (S), it is not obligatory to accept his repentance, rather it is permissible to kill him even if he comes repentant.

‘Abd-Allaah ibn Sa’d was one of those who used to write down the Revelation, then he apostatized and claimed that he used to add whatever he wanted to the Revelation. This was a lie and a fabrication against the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and it was a kind of insult. Then he became Muslim again and was a good Muslim, may Allaah be pleased with him. Al-Saarim 115.

With regard to proper understanding of the ahaadeeth:

They said that insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) has to do with two rights, the right of Allaah and the right of a human being. With regard to the right of Allaah, this is obvious, because it is casting aspersions upon His Message, His Book and His Religion. As for the right of a human being, this is also obvious, because it is like trying to slander the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by this insult. In a case which involves both the rights of Allaah and the rights of a human being, the rights of the human beings are not dropped when the person repents, as in the case of the punishment for banditry, because if the bandit has killed someone, that means that he must be executed and crucified. But if he repents before he is caught, then the right of Allaah over him, that he should be executed and crucified, no longer applies, but the rights of other humans with regard to qisaas (retaliatory punishment) still stand. The same applies in this case. If the one who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, then the rights of Allaah no longer apply, but there remains the right of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which still stand despite his repentance.

If it is said, “Can we not forgive him, because during his lifetime the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forgave many of those who had insulted him and he did not execute them?” The answer is:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sometimes chose to forgive those who had insulted him, and sometimes he ordered that they should be executed, if that served a greater purpose. But now his forgiveness is impossible because he is dead, so the execution of the one who insults him remains the right of Allaah, His Messenger and the believers, and the one who deserves to be executed cannot be let off, so the punishment must be carried out.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/438

Insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is one of the worst of forbidden actions, and it constitutes kufr and apostasy from Islam, according to scholarly consensus, whether done seriously or in jest. The one who does that is to be executed even if he repents and whether he is a Muslim or a kaafir. If he repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) wrote a valuable book on this matter, entitled al-Saarim al-Maslool ‘ala Shaatim al-Rasool which every believer should read, especially in these times when a lot of hypocrites and heretics dare to insult the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) because they see that the Muslims are careless and feel little protective jealousy towards their religion and their Prophet, and they do not implement the shar’i punishment which would deter these people and their ilk from committing this act of blatant kufr.

And Allaah knows best. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and all his family and companions

 

[K-Xeroid]

O.k
These religous extremists whether they are TTP , JI or any other organization are part of this green colour, so are you and me. White colour represents christians. No matter how much you and me dislike these extremists, they cant be placed in white..infact if you challenge them then they can prove to you that you are less greener than them, they might even push you to white side like salman taseer.
The fcking two nation theory means that only a muslim is pakistani, the country was not aimed for minorities to begin with. So why hypocricy , dikawa? Why a white colour in flag when whole concept of the nation is based on green?

Gud , Huh ! Thats where you lack , Do u like If I generalize negativity of few Pukhtoon elements with this whole ethnic community ? Is it Justice ? Well even with all of that negativity you never exclude your family member even If he is dark green or White . You do try to re-habitalize them but never try to Eliminate them . That Two Nation theory had given birth to this nation , It were failure of afterward policies that we had obtained to counter our matters .
Such destructive protests happened in all countries even hundreds got killed and few event becomes the cause of starting a civil war . Here , The positive aspects are that no one is killed and we as a nation are standing with our minorities .

 

[Developereo]

If this act was done by muslims during a "CALIPHS' regime---the caliph would have executed all the muslims involved in the act---confiscated teir properties and expelled their children and familes to 'badlands'.

A tad harsh. No logic in punishing their families.

However, I accept the underlying point that challenge to authority and thumbing one's nose at the law was not tolerated.

 

[MastanKhan]

No Sir in Madinah many people were killed for Blasphemy on orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW
Firstly, I would like to say that I was shocked to hear about death of Mr Taseer. May Allah forgive him and us all.

Secondly, I am hearing much from the liberals about the blasphemy law and that it is a man made law which has no basis in Islam. This is disappointing and clearly demonstrates a poor understanding of something which they claim to know much about.

I have therefore, for the purposes of education only, listed below some evidences below on this sensitive issue. This is not exhaustive but shows that the blasphemy law is not as clear as the liberals make it out to be.

IN NO WAY AM I SAYING THAT WHAT MALIK QADRI DID IS RIGHT. THIS IS ULTIMATELY FOR THE LEGAL SYSTEM TO DEAL WITH. IT SHOULD BE THE COURT WHICH HANDS DOWN THE PUNISHMENT AND NOT THE CITIZEN'S OF THE STATE.

THE POSITION ON BLASPHEMY

The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16

This ruling is indicated by the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

In the Qur’aan it says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The hypocrites fear lest a Soorah (chapter of the Qur’aan) should be revealed about them, showing them what is in their hearts. Say: ‘(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allaah will bring to light all that you fear.’

If you ask them (about this), they declare: ‘We were only talking idly and joking.’ Say: ‘Was it at Allaah, and His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?’

Make no excuse; you disbelieved after you had believed”

[al-Tawbah 9:64-66]

This verse clearly states that mocking Allaah, His verses and His Messenger constitutes kufr, so that applies even more so to insulting. The verse also indicates that whoever belittles the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also a kaafir, whether he was serious or joking.

With regard to the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (4362) narrated from ‘Ali that a Jewish woman used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him, so a man strangled her until she died, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ruled that no blood money was due in this case.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in al-Saarim al-Maslool (1/162): This hadeeth is jayyid, and there is a corroborating report in the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Abbaas which we will quote below.

This hadeeth clearly indicates that it was permissible to kill that woman because she used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Abu Dawood (4361) narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that a blind man had a freed concubine (umm walad) who used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him. He told her not to do that but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she did not heed him. One night, when she started to say bad things about the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and insult him, he took a short sword or dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it and killed her. The following morning that was mentioned to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He called the people together and said, “I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right over him that he should stand up.” The blind man stood up and said, “O Messenger of Allaah, I am the one who did it; she used to insult you and say bad things about you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not give up her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was kind to me. Last night she began to insult you and say bad things about you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.” Thereupon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Bear witness, there is no blood money due for her.”

(Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 3655)

It seems that this woman was a kaafir, not a Muslim, for a Muslim could never do such an evil action. If she was a Muslim she would have become an apostate by this action, in which case it would not have been permissible for her master to keep her; in that case it would not have been good enough if he were to keep her and simply rebuke her.

Al-Nasaa’i narrated (4071) that Abu Barzah al-Aslami said: A man spoke harshly to Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq and I said, ‘Shall I kill him?’ He rebuked me and said, ‘That is not for anyone after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) .’” (Saheeh al-Nasaa’i, 3795)

It may be noted from this that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had the right to kill whoever insulted him and spoke harshly to him, and that included both Muslims and kaafirs.

The second issue is: if a person who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, should his repentance be accepted or not?

The scholars are agreed that if such a person repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him.

But they differed as to whether his repentance should be accepted in this world and whether that means he is no longer subject to the sentence of execution.

Maalik and Ahmad were of the view that it should not be accepted, and that he should be killed even if he has repented.

They quoted as evidence the Sunnah and proper understanding of the ahaadeeth:

In the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (2683) narrated that Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqaas said: “On the Day of the Conquest of Makkah, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) granted safety to the people except for four men and two women, and he named them, and Ibn Abi Sarh… As for Ibn Abi Sarh, he hid with ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan, and when the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) called the people to give their allegiance to him, he brought him to stand before the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He said, “O Prophet of Allaah, accept the allegiance of ‘Abd-Allaah.” He raised his head and looked at him three times, refusing him, then he accepted his allegiance after the third time. Then he turned to his companions and said: “Was there not among you any smart man who could have got up and killed this person when he saw me refusing to give him my hand and accept his allegiance?” They said, “We do not know what is in your heart, O Messenger of Allaah. Why did you not gesture to us with your eyes?” He said, “It is not befitting for a Prophet to betray a person with a gesture of his eyes.”

(Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 2334)

This clearly indicates that in a case such as this apostate who had insulted the Prophet (S), it is not obligatory to accept his repentance, rather it is permissible to kill him even if he comes repentant.

‘Abd-Allaah ibn Sa’d was one of those who used to write down the Revelation, then he apostatized and claimed that he used to add whatever he wanted to the Revelation. This was a lie and a fabrication against the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and it was a kind of insult. Then he became Muslim again and was a good Muslim, may Allaah be pleased with him. Al-Saarim 115.

With regard to proper understanding of the ahaadeeth:

They said that insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) has to do with two rights, the right of Allaah and the right of a human being. With regard to the right of Allaah, this is obvious, because it is casting aspersions upon His Message, His Book and His Religion. As for the right of a human being, this is also obvious, because it is like trying to slander the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by this insult. In a case which involves both the rights of Allaah and the rights of a human being, the rights of the human beings are not dropped when the person repents, as in the case of the punishment for banditry, because if the bandit has killed someone, that means that he must be executed and crucified. But if he repents before he is caught, then the right of Allaah over him, that he should be executed and crucified, no longer applies, but the rights of other humans with regard to qisaas (retaliatory punishment) still stand. The same applies in this case. If the one who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, then the rights of Allaah no longer apply, but there remains the right of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which still stand despite his repentance.

If it is said, “Can we not forgive him, because during his lifetime the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forgave many of those who had insulted him and he did not execute them?” The answer is:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sometimes chose to forgive those who had insulted him, and sometimes he ordered that they should be executed, if that served a greater purpose. But now his forgiveness is impossible because he is dead, so the execution of the one who insults him remains the right of Allaah, His Messenger and the believers, and the one who deserves to be executed cannot be let off, so the punishment must be carried out.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/438

Insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is one of the worst of forbidden actions, and it constitutes kufr and apostasy from Islam, according to scholarly consensus, whether done seriously or in jest. The one who does that is to be executed even if he repents and whether he is a Muslim or a kaafir. If he repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) wrote a valuable book on this matter, entitled al-Saarim al-Maslool ‘ala Shaatim al-Rasool which every believer should read, especially in these times when a lot of hypocrites and heretics dare to insult the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) because they see that the Muslims are careless and feel little protective jealousy towards their religion and their Prophet, and they do not implement the shar’i punishment which would deter these people and their ilk from committing this act of blatant kufr.

And Allaah knows best. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and all his family and companions

Sir,

All those scholars are worthless---their accusations and judgements not worth the paper that they are written on. They are pathetic---they are disgusting----.

The TRUE prophet of ALLAH does not need a horrendous blasphemy law to protect HIS name. Neither does Allah the Almighty needs a Blasphemy law imposed by humans to protect HIS Dearest prophets name----.

That would be an OXYMORON in itself----when the LORD of heavens and earth does not have the power to protect the name of HIS dearest and beloved----then does one really need to believe in that prophet and that God---.

When that Allah and that Prophet are dependant on the most criminally oriented and perverted muslim society ( pakistan ) to protect the greatness of the name of the prophet---then is that religion truly worth following.

Many a times I have stated----the prophet of pakistanis is not the Prophet Mohammad that the rest of the world knows of and neither is the God of prophet Mohammad the god of pakistanis.

 

[anonymus]

No Sir in Madinah many people were killed for Blasphemy on orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW

You don't seem to be the brightest bulb among the propagandists.

 

[Zarvan]

Sir,

All those scholars are worthless---their accusations and judgements not worth the paper that they are written on. They are pathetic---they are disgusting----.

The TRUE prophet of ALLAH does not need a horrendous blasphemy law to protect HIS name. Neither does Allah the Almighty needs a Blasphemy law imposed by humans to protect HIS Dearest prophets name----.

That would be an OXYMORON in itself----when the LORD of heavens and earth does not have the power to protect the name of HIS dearest and beloved----then does one really need to believe in that prophet and that God---.

When that Allah and that Prophet are dependant on the most criminally oriented and perverted muslim society ( pakistan ) to protect the greatness of the name of the prophet---then is that religion truly worth following.

Many a times I have stated----the prophet of pakistanis is not the Prophet Mohammad that the rest of the world knows of and neither is the God of prophet Mohammad the god of pakistanis.

Sir Islam is clear you accept it or not your problem but Islam is clear who ever commits blasphemy they will be killed and in Life of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW himself ordered execution of many Sir and the scholars are the authority Sir and those who are true things you don't want to accept the truth your choice but that is truth Sir

Sir,

All those scholars are worthless---their accusations and judgements not worth the paper that they are written on. They are pathetic---they are disgusting----.

The TRUE prophet of ALLAH does not need a horrendous blasphemy law to protect HIS name. Neither does Allah the Almighty needs a Blasphemy law imposed by humans to protect HIS Dearest prophets name----.

That would be an OXYMORON in itself----when the LORD of heavens and earth does not have the power to protect the name of HIS dearest and beloved----then does one really need to believe in that prophet and that God---.

When that Allah and that Prophet are dependant on the most criminally oriented and perverted muslim society ( pakistan ) to protect the greatness of the name of the prophet---then is that religion truly worth following.

Many a times I have stated----the prophet of pakistanis is not the Prophet Mohammad that the rest of the world knows of and neither is the God of prophet Mohammad the god of pakistanis.

Punishment for Blasphemy in the Light of Religious Scriptures



Pakistan is the land of hot issues it would not be a false statement at all. Whether it is the religious, political, economic or social issues; Pakistan is the place you will find on top of all. Lately, the issue of blasphemy has arisen when a session court (lower court) sentence Asiya Bibi (who was Christian by faith) to death after finding her guilty her of sacrilegious comments.

The debate of repealing this law has come out of blue this time after 2-3 decades of legislation regarding. There are several opinions regarding this blasphemy act 295 (c) of the constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. There are oodles of angles to this law, whether it be religious, democratic, political or human right.

We have gathered some evidences from the Quran, Hadith, Sunnah and history (compiled by historians) for the exact punishment for blasphemy. This will also answer the most asked question “What Muhammad (S.A.W) would have done?” “How he would have responded?” and many supplementary questions like “What Quran says?”, “Is there any evidence in Hadith?” and “What other religions say about blasphemy?”

Let’s start from a Quranic verse:

The above verse of Surah e Ahzab (Chapter 33:6) shows the right of a Allah’s Apostle Muhammad (S.A.W) on Muslims. It is clear from the word of GOD that Muhammad (S.A.W) has more right over our lives and closest of relations.

The following Reference of Holy Quran Chapter 4 V 65 was revealed when a man was beheaded by the Hazrat Umar (R.A) due to non compliance of judgment given by Holy prophet Mohammad (S.A.W).

Context of Revelation (Chapter 4, V 65):

Al-Hafiz Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin `Abdur-Rahman bin Ibrahim bin Duhaym recorded that Damrah narrated that two men took their dispute to the Prophet , and he gave a judgment to the benefit of whoever among them had the right. The person who lost the dispute said, “I do not agree.” The other person asked him, “What do you want then” He said, “Let us go to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq.” They went to Abu Bakr and the person who won the dispute said, “We went to the Prophet with our dispute and he issued a decision in my favor.” Abu Bakr said, “Then the decision is that which theMessenger of Allah issued.” The person who lost the dispute still rejected the decision and said, “Let us go to `Umar bin Al-Khattab.” When they went to `Umar, the person who won the dispute said, “We took our dispute to the Prophet and he decided in my favor, but this man refused to submit to the decision.” `Umar bin Al-Khattab asked the second man and he concurred. `Umar went to his house and emerged from it holding aloft his sword. He struck the head of the man who rejected the Prophet’s decision with the sword and killed him.

Consequently, Allah revealed, the aforementioned verse.[Context taken from Tafseer Ibn-e-Kathir]

Let’s get to another verse where Allah (SWT) announces the punishment for enemies (of ALLAH and His Apostle) and who so ever attributes disgrace to Allah and His Apostle Mohammad (S.A.W).

May we present another verse from the Quran where Allah immediately answers to the sacrilegious comment made by the blood relative (uncle) of Allah’s Apostle Mohammad (S.A.W).

Context of Revelation

Abu Lahab (Father of Flame) was the nickname of ‘Abd Al-’Uzza, the Holy Prophet’s uncle and his inveterate enemy and persecutor. He was so called either because his complexion and hair were ruddy or also because he had a fiery temper. The Surah recalls an incident during the early preaching of the Holy Prophet (S.A.W). On being commanded by Allah (S.W.T) to call together his relatives and to deliver to them the Divine Message, the Holy Prophet, one day, stood on mount Safa and called the different Meccan (Makkah’s) tribes by name, the tribes of Luwayy, Murrah, Kilab and Qusayy and his near relatives, and told them that he is God’s Messenger, and that if they did not accept his Message and did not give up their evil ways, Divine punishment would overtake them. The Holy Prophet had hardly his speech, when Abu Lahab stood up and said, ‘Ruin seize thee, is it for this that thou hast called us together’ (Bukhari).

Another precedent from the Holy Quran where Allah (SWT) directly replied to Waleed bin Mughaira, who called Mohammad (S.A.W) Majnoon (Insane) by uncovering the hidden truth regarding his illegitimate birth upon him.

Now let’s move to the evidences from Hadiths.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 372:

Narrated Al-Bara:
Allah’s Apostle sent ‘Abdullah bin ‘Atik and ‘Abdullah bin ‘Utba with a group of men to Abu Rafi (to kill him). They proceeded till they approached his castle, whereupon Abdullah bin Atik said to them, “Wait (here), and in the meantime I will go and see.” ‘Abdullah said later on, “I played a trick in order to enter the castle. By chance, they lost a donkey of theirs and came out carrying a flaming light to search for it. I was afraid that they would recognize me, so I covered my head and legs and pretended to answer the call to nature. The gatekeeper called, ‘Whoever wants to come in, should come in before I close the gate.’ So I went in and hid myself in a stall of a donkey near the gate of the castle. They took their supper with Abu Rafi and had a chat till late at night. Then they went back to their homes. When the voices vanished and I no longer detected any movement, I came out. I had seen where the gate-keeper had kept the key of the castle in a hole in the wall. I took it and unlocked the gate of the castle, saying to myself, ‘If these people should notice me, I will run away easily.’ Then I locked all the doors of their houses from outside while they were inside, and ascended to Abu Rafi by a staircase. I saw the house in complete darkness with its light off, and I could not know where the man was. So I called, ‘O Abu Rafi!’ He replied, ‘Who is it?’ I proceeded towards the voice and hit him. He cried loudly but my blow was futile. Then I came to him, pretending to help him, saying with a different tone of my voice, ‘ What is wrong with you, O Abu Rafi?’ He said, ‘Are you not surprised? Woe on your mother! A man has come to me and hit me with a sword!’ So again I aimed at him and hit him, but the blow proved futile again, and on that Abu Rafi cried loudly and his wife got up. I came again and changed my voice as if I were a helper, and found Abu Rafi lying straight on his back, so I drove the sword into his belly and bent on it till I heard the sound of a bone break. Then I came out, filled with astonishment and went to the staircase to descend, but I fell down from it and got my leg dislocated. I bandaged it and went to my companions limping. I said (to them), ‘Go and tell Allah’s Apostle of this good news, but I will not leave (this place) till I hear the news of his (i.e. Abu Rafi’s) death.’ When dawn broke, an announcer of death got over the wall and announced, ‘I convey to you the news of Abu Rafi’s death.’ I got up and proceeded without feeling any pain till I caught up with my companions before they reached the Prophet to whom I conveyed the good news.”

At the conquest of Makkah:

Holy prophet Mohammad (S.A.W) announced general amnesty to all except those who were guilty of blasphemous acts and sacrilegious statements, Ibn e Khatal was one of the convict (Tareekh-e-Tabari Page 104 / History written by Al Tabari) This is evident from the following Hadith.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 582:

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

On the day of the Conquest, the Prophet entered Mecca, wearing a helmet on his head. When he took it off, a man came and said, “Ibn e Khatal is clinging to the curtain of the Ka’ba.” The Prophet said, “Kill him.”

Sahih Bukahri Volume 5, Book 59, Number 369:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:

Allah’s Apostle said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). “The Prophet said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.” On that, Kab said, “By Allah, you will get tired of him!” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food.”

(Some difference between narrators about a camel load or two.) Kab said, “Yes, (I will lend you), but you should mortgage something to me.” Muhammad bin Mas-lama and his companion said, “What do you want?” Ka’b replied, “Mortgage your women to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the ‘Arabs?” Ka’b said, “Then mortgage your sons to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people’s saying that so-and-so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you. “Muhammad bin Maslama and his companion promised Kab that Muhammad would return to him. He came to Kab at night along with Kab’s foster brother, Abu Na’ila. Kab invited them to come into his fort, and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, “Where are you going at this time?” Kab replied, “None but Muhammad bin Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na’ila have come.”

His wife said, “I hear a voice as if dropping blood is from him, Ka’b said. “They are none but my brother Muhammad bin Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed.” Muhammad bin Maslama went with two men. (Some narrators mention the men as ‘Abu bin Jabr. Al Harith bin Aus and Abbad bin Bishr). So Muhammad bin Maslama went in together with two men, and sail to them, “When Ka’b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. I will let you smell his head.” Kab bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Muhammad bin Maslama said. “have never smelt a better scent than this. Ka’b replied. “I have got the best Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume.” Muhammad bin Maslama requested Ka’b “Will you allow me to smell your head?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” Muhammad smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka’b again, “Will you let me (smell your head)?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions), “Get at him!” So they killed him and went to the Prophet and informed him. (Abu Rafi) was killed after Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf.”

Punishment in Bible for blasphemy:

The punishment for blasphemy in most of the major religions is death. It is stated in the Old Testament of the Bible, which is the authority for both the Jews and the Christians:

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: [Book of Leviticus 24:16]

A reference from Hindu Scripture:

“If a man born of a lower class intentionally bothers a priest, the king should punish him physically with various forms of corporal and capital punishment that make men shudder.” [Manusmriti 9:248]

Conclusion:

It is evident from the above references that the punishment for the act of blasphemy in any religion or any form is very severe. Hence, people who are waging a campaign against the article 295 (c) of the constitution to repeal the said law, is not aligned with Islamic, Christianity and Hinduism religious law.

The current law is compliant with the ethical and moral values of society Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

In a nutshell, this law should stay in place to prevent blasphemous acts. But by no means,anyone should be allowed to use this law for personal vendetta or misuse it. Procedural changes should be made with the consent of Ulema to prevent the misuse of the underlying law.

 

[Spring Onion]

Secondly, I am hearing much from the liberals about the blasphemy law and that it is a man made law which has no basis in Islam. This is disappointing and clearly demonstrates a poor understanding of something which they claim to know much about.

IIn the Qur’aan it says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The hypocrites fear lest a Soorah (chapter of the Qur’aan) should be revealed about them, showing them what is in their hearts. Say: ‘(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allaah will bring to light all that you fear.’

If you ask them (about this), they declare: ‘We were only talking idly and joking.’ Say: ‘Was it at Allaah, and His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?’

Make no excuse; you disbelieved after you had believed”

[al-Tawbah 9:64-66]

This verse clearly states that mocking Allaah, His verses and His Messenger constitutes kufr, so that applies even more so to insulting. The verse also indicates that whoever belittles the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also a kaafir, whether he was serious or joking.

And nowhere the verse call for killing those who does so.

its time we must stand for stopping misuse of the law.

simple and clear.

the case above in discussion is of extreme misuse of the law and its interpretation.

the Blasphemy law should also include a clause that anyone put false blame should be put to death as well,

 

[anonymus]

@Contrarian watch your mouth...Nowhere does religion need to be dragged here.....One who does bad doesnt do it for the religion even if he or she does it in the NAME of the religion...RIP to all the dead but Dont drag religion!!

Well talon,

Even though you may not like his comment but his comment regarding "Bigotry taught to kids" is correct.

If you fail to teach bigotry to a child,the child would never become natural in it.He/She may learn it later on but it would be learned bigotry which is similar to non-religious people using grammar of religion for political ends.

 

[Zarvan]

And nowhere the verse call for killing those who does so.

its time we must stand for stopping misuse of the law.

simple and clear.

the case above in discussion is of extreme misuse of the law and its interpretation.

the Blasphemy law should also include a clause that anyone put false blame should be put to death as well,

I agree with your last point Sir and first understand Arabic Sir even Quran doesn't say that Alcohal is Haram but it is Haram Sir you need to understand How Arabic is and secondly read the Hadees too Sir

 

[Spring Onion]

I agree with your last point Sir and first understand Arabic Sir even Quran doesn't say that Alcohal is Haram but it is Haram Sir you need to understand How Arabic is and secondly read the Hadees too Sir

1. Good that you agreed to the fact that Quran doesnt advocate killings in such cases But ONLY in the battlefield with kafirs which the reality in every battlefield even if its among Muslims or non Muslims.

2. Since many Muslims do not understand Arabic thats why mullas misquote and misinterepret verses and twist these to suit own agenda.

3. I studied Qauran with translation and hence i did NOT find any such order for killing anyone in such cases.

 

[Zarvan]

1. Good that you agreed to the fact that Quran doesnt advocate killings in such cases But ONLY in the battlefield with kafirs which the reality in every battlefield even if its among Muslims or non Muslims.

2. Since many Muslims do not understand Arabic thats why mullas misquote and misinterepret verses and twist these to suit own agenda.

3. I studied Qauran with translation and hence i did NOT find any such order for killing anyone in such cases.

No Sir I didn't agreed with that I agreed with the point of if some one blames a person of Blasphemy falsely he should be punished to death Sir No sir for blasphemy too punishment is death and sir their is huge difference in translation and knowing Arabic

 

[JonAsad]

Apart from Pakistan and Israel,religion has been instrumental in formation of political entities throughout the history

a short list would be

1.Israel
2.Pakistan
3.South Sudan
4. Eritrea
5.Papal states in 17-18th century
6.Holy roman Empire
7.North Ireland
8.Kingdom of Navarre
9.Principality of Antioch
10. Edessa


And that to without taking into cognizance political nature of religion as shown in

1.Global Jihad since birth of Islam,An all encompassing topic.
2.5 crusades
3.Inquisition of Jews in Spain by Torquemada
4.Bloody Mary's suppression of Catholics
5.Inquisition done by Vatican on regular basis
6.30 year war
7. Carribean piracy.

Forget Historical context i can name 180+ countries that were formed on the ideologies other than religion-
Since the context is number of death the recent world wars fought on ideologies other than religion has resulted in more death and destructions-

 

[anonymus]

Forget Historical context i can name 180+ countries that were formed on the ideologies other than religion-
Since the context is number of death the recent world wars fought on ideologies other than religion has resulted in more death and destructions-

Why should one not use historical context?


True nature of a religion could be judged when it has absolute power.

Church did not have that since 19th century.Hindus did not had that since 14th century and zorastarians did not had that since 8th.

Whenever religion had a chance,it has proved itself to be the most violent ideology.The death-o-meter of most of religions exceed that of any other ideology.

 

[indusporus]

Good post, you have nicely summed up in a nutshell why organized religion is detrimental to society, and why this problem of violent outbursts will continue, unless changes occur that fundamentally alter the way how people think. Through a reformation that encompasses and implores educational, political, and psychological transformations. Just saying 'Islam is a religion of peace' is a mockery these days.



Your question has substance. But only if the other side is willing to employ logical reasoning. Looking at the pictures with those enraged and violent rioters, do you honestly think that they will listen to reason? No, they are completely brainwashed, devoid of any rational thinking, who can be charged up, with emotional ranting and demagogue, to attack anyone who 'insults' Islam.
The mere presence of non-Muslims in their midst is blasphemous to them. How can you reason with such people, who will slit your throat without the slightest provocation?

Coming back to your question. What you say is correct. It is impossible to protect the religious sentiments of the Muslim on one side and the Christian one on the other side, while still insisting that people may not criticize either beliefs.
For example, the very distinctive position that Muhammad takes in Islam is itself a direct contravention of the religious beliefs of billions of others, just like Jesus being the Son of God in Christianity is an affront to millions of Muslims. There is thus no way of protecting religion from blasphemy without actually banning the very expression of religious beliefs themselves.

Exactly. Like I said in other post:


Islam and Judaism are blasphemous according to Chrisianity as according they don't accept Christ to be the God.
Christianity is blasphemous according to Islam as it claims that a human is a God
Hinduism, Buddhism, other pagans are blasphemous according to all Abrahamic religions as they break all the first 3 commandments.
Ahmadis are blaspehmous according to Islam as they don't accept Mohammed to be the last prophet.
Atheists and Agnostics are blasphemers according to every religion.
So, if blasphemy laws are really implemented, then every single human being living and ever lived are blasphemers according to one or other religion.
Good luck with implementing Anti-blasphemy laws.

 

[Black Widow]

No Sir in Madinah many people were killed for Blasphemy on orders of HAZRAT MUHAMMAD SAW
Firstly, I would like to say that I was shocked to hear about death of Mr Taseer. May Allah forgive him and us all.

I lost my arguments aftr reading the bold part...