What's new

Taseer should have been more balanced, careful: Sharif

Rest assured i can present a lot more examples but my question has not been answered by any of you.

If someone is provoked, is he to blame entirely for an ugly verbal encounter...since after all no murder has been committed, the crime is word of mouth only and that too in anger and people who stand witness are bound to be biased since mostly it is some existing feud or enmity which is being pursued under the guise of religion.

May Allah help us reach the true conclusion and may we have enough wits to value human life and think about such things with patience.

brother,


you are most welcome to give as many examples as you like but i would like those examples to be in proper context and complete version.

Your question has already been answered, let me answer it once more:

The foundation of Pakistan~ Islam
The name~ Islamic Republic of Pakistan
The Constitution~ Sovereignty of Allah is recognised and there's full protection of Islamic laws.

The real question is, where is Islam in the Islamic republic of Pakistan?
i'm hearing few vocal voices on one extra Judicial murder, why no concern for running Pakistan in total contravention to it's ideology and Islamic constitution?

The questions you are raising in the red above are totally related to investigative & Judicial process. i don't know about others but i personally have zero faith in british sarkar court kechri system. You can't blame the ills of a man made secular system on an Islamic Law. Nobody stops the gov to change the corrupt system but why would they as this corrupt man made system serves them.

Let me tell you very honestly, had there been Islamic System in our country, this mess wasn't difficult to handle. Firstly, for mocking an Islamic Law and provoking the feelings of the vast majority, governor or any other ruling authority would been behind the bars.

Secondly
, in case of extra judicial murder, the killer would have been behind the bars and faced one of the three possible things:
a) death penalty.
b) blood money for release.
c) forgiveness.

The difference is, you are seeing this incident in isolation whereas we see this in the context of blunders done to the ideology of Pakistan and total disrespect of Islamic constitution and trying to impose secular version of governing system on the majority.

What we want is the rule of law i.e Islamic laws, unless this happens, we aren't bothered or we don't care who gets killed. Run the country according to it's constitution and you will get our support for any extra constitutional or extra judicial act.
 
He never said anything that sould have resulted in his death by the hands of that coward guard.


did you even bother yourself with actually finding out what the slain governer said? he requested the presidential pardon for the ppor woman who was accused of blasphemy without valid proofs and personal grudges. Based on that and other incidents in the past he expressed his desire to have the law ameneded in a way that it cant be abused to settle personal scores. at no point he expressed his desire to change the very essence of the law. this law goes hand in hand with the Hadood ordinance which is a women specific law and even more draconian the details of which are so shameful and horrific that I dare not write anymore. Again the extreme right wing Jamaat Islami is up in arms against any amendment in it.

I say it with utter disgust and sorrow that Mumtaz Qadri abused his trust and kileld an unarmed person without giving him a chance to say anything.. with such hate that he found it necessary to empty 2 clips of his sub machine gun. All in the name of a Holy Prophet PBUH who not only forgave people who insulted him, hurt him but killed his dear uncle and other followers.

why does a certain section of the Muslim society thinks that in order to assert their Muslim belief they "HAVE" to spill the Human blood? why on one hand these people dont spare a chance to not only mock all other religions but also dont spare other sects within Islam and if there is even a slight indication of a response, all hell is let loose.

tell me with all this attitude, with praising of a cold murderer, how are we showing ourselves to nonMuslims? are they not our prospect candidates for preaching Islam? with this kind of attitude do you think they will come close to us or run away in fear?

Gid forbid if this kind of blood thirsty mentality exisited in early days of Islam then many famous Sahabah and their children would have had no chance to become Muslim. this extremist mindset reminds me of 151th to 17th century medieval Europe when political opponents, revolutionists, physicians, scientists and philosphers were lynched in the name of the Witch craft act. Joan of Arc who led the French freedom struggle was also captured and burnt alive on the charges of being a witch.

it seems that the similar attittude is going through the mindset of a certain section of Muslims who only see spilling of blood as a means to establish their faith.

my question to the fans of that coward cold killer who broke his oath is that have they ever given it a thought that shouting blasphemy without due thought is itself worng? isnt it blasmpehemous of the the Sunni council to say that expressing grief for the slain Governer is blasphemous? how dare they say that? they are using a word of such grave nature with such ease. at this rate it appears they will say whoever doesnt openly support Qadri is committing blasphemy.

whenever someone swears in the name of God and is actually lying. Allah says did you not find someone else and you had to drag my name in? I can imagine how Allah Subhan Ta'alah would see that His name and the name of His beloved Prophet Muhammad PBUH is beign dragged in for the sake of relgious hate politics. Muslims of the future would curl and cringe when they will read our history and will express sorrow that how a section of our society found it so essential to spill the blood of people just because it couldnt win the argument or prove that it was right with logic, knowlege and common sense.

My sincere advice is that you take all the things you mentioned relating to Prophet Muhammad Saw' & Sahabas to a qualified Scholar and get his opinion on this in relation to blasphemy law. This trend of giving expert opinion on Islamic historical events, hadiths, Ayaats to justify ones viewpoint is totally unacceptable. People get into Islamic education, give 15-20 years of their lives to become qualified Scholars and here everyone is ready to give his expertise on the subject. it's just like me giving opinion on medical profession when i can't even spell correctly different medical subject.

Just get the opinion of a qualified Scholar.

Yes, i have followed A-Z what Mr. Taseer had to say on the subject and i have no doubts that he was following the secular's agenda. Now no matter how much u-turn is made, his speeches are available which clearly shows that he mocked Islamic law.

is this a new system in Pakistan where any secular, governor in this case, decides who's innocent and who's not. Do share with us, which magical lamp the governor possessed which told him that the woman is innocent.

Why the vocal voices now for the rule of law when the governor himself violated the law, he had no business to get the so called presidential pardon (which is itself unIslamic) for the accused. She still has the right to higher courts, the most he could have was done was to give all legal support. Instead, he went for "pind da choudhry" type way. i'm not bothered and don't feel any sympathy for him.

Did i hear the word "break Oath", yes i did, i don't know if the word "oath" exists in the dictionary of our corrupt ruling elite. This so called oath is broken infact it's taken on "jotay ki nook par" by our ruling class. Please raise your voice for breaking the oath by totally going against the ideology of Pakistan and governing Pakistan on secular laws which is totally in contravention to our constitution.
 
1st thing for your kind information why you people forgets killing of muslims and destruction of mosques by others.
how many innocent muslims have been killed in so called war on terror isnot it hypocracy?
proplem is whom media shows hero, we consider hero and whom it says villain we consider vilain. at this moment media is under controle of liberals and west lovers who represent anyone or anything againsit them as villain and extremist.
biggest hypocrate is you yourself who is blaming yourself without knowing complete truth..

Have you forgotten that in the same places you want to mention, many times more muslims have been killed by muslim fellows and many muslim holly places have been bombed by muslims. Have you forgotten how mahmoud ghaznavi broke idoles in the name of religion? the taliban destroyed statue of buda. And trust me i am not influenced by media, my comments are mostly driven from my personal experiences.
 
Our media is anything but liberal.By the way i won't be surprised if some jokers say Salman Taseer was acting on US behalf.I mean after all US is the best scrape.Just blame it on US.Anyway; Pakistan is doomed.No two way about it.It's headed towards utter destruction by right wing bigots.
 
He never said anything that sould have resulted in his death by the hands of that coward guard.


did you even bother yourself with actually finding out what the slain governer said? he requested the presidential pardon for the ppor woman who was accused of blasphemy without valid proofs and personal grudges. Based on that and other incidents in the past he expressed his desire to have the law ameneded in a way that it cant be abused to settle personal scores. at no point he expressed his desire to change the very essence of the law. this law goes hand in hand with the Hadood ordinance which is a women specific law and even more draconian the details of which are so shameful and horrific that I dare not write anymore. Again the extreme right wing Jamaat Islami is up in arms against any amendment in it.

I say it with utter disgust and sorrow that Mumtaz Qadri abused his trust and kileld an unarmed person without giving him a chance to say anything.. with such hate that he found it necessary to empty 2 clips of his sub machine gun. All in the name of a Holy Prophet PBUH who not only forgave people who insulted him, hurt him but killed his dear uncle and other followers.

why does a certain section of the Muslim society thinks that in order to assert their Muslim belief they "HAVE" to spill the Human blood? why on one hand these people dont spare a chance to not only mock all other religions but also dont spare other sects within Islam and if there is even a slight indication of a response, all hell is let loose.

tell me with all this attitude, with praising of a cold murderer, how are we showing ourselves to nonMuslims? are they not our prospect candidates for preaching Islam? with this kind of attitude do you think they will come close to us or run away in fear?

Gid forbid if this kind of blood thirsty mentality exisited in early days of Islam then many famous Sahabah and their children would have had no chance to become Muslim. this extremist mindset reminds me of 151th to 17th century medieval Europe when political opponents, revolutionists, physicians, scientists and philosphers were lynched in the name of the Witch craft act. Joan of Arc who led the French freedom struggle was also captured and burnt alive on the charges of being a witch.

it seems that the similar attittude is going through the mindset of a certain section of Muslims who only see spilling of blood as a means to establish their faith.

my question to the fans of that coward cold killer who broke his oath is that have they ever given it a thought that shouting blasphemy without due thought is itself worng? isnt it blasmpehemous of the the Sunni council to say that expressing grief for the slain Governer is blasphemous? how dare they say that? they are using a word of such grave nature with such ease. at this rate it appears they will say whoever doesnt openly support Qadri is committing blasphemy.

whenever someone swears in the name of God and is actually lying. Allah says did you not find someone else and you had to drag my name in? I can imagine how Allah Subhan Ta'alah would see that His name and the name of His beloved Prophet Muhammad PBUH is beign dragged in for the sake of relgious hate politics. Muslims of the future would curl and cringe when they will read our history and will express sorrow that how a section of our society found it so essential to spill the blood of people just because it couldnt win the argument or prove that it was right with logic, knowlege and common sense.

I am very happy to see such reactions from sober well informed Pakistanis and hope that they can transfer this message to the misguided zealots and self-appointed defenders of Islam.

India was very close to disintegration on the basis of religion. There are problems in Naxal areas, Kashmir and North East still. But by opening the economy, allowing foreign companies, reducing red-tapism Indian government has allowed people to compete economically. Hosting of CWG - another step to harness the people's latent energy in a constructive manner. Pray Pakistan's rulers take a cue from India and do the same.
 
As'salam o' Alaiqum,

i will request to please give full details of any incident you quoting. incomplete version will only mislead the people, like ibn Ubai's funeral, u'r version gave the impression that Prophet Muhammad Saw' always used to Pray for munafiqs. Following is the complete version:

Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 23, Number 359:


Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

When 'Abdullah bin Ubai (the chief of hypocrites) died, his son came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Please give me your shirt to shroud him in it, offer his funeral prayer and ask for Allah's forgiveness for him." So Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) gave his shirt to him and said, "Inform me (When the funeral is ready) so that I may offer the funeral prayer." So, he informed him and when the Prophet intended to offer the funeral prayer, 'Umar took hold of his hand and said, "Has Allah not forbidden you to offer the funeral prayer for the hypocrites? The Prophet said, "I have been given the choice for Allah says: '(It does not avail) Whether you (O Muhammad) ask forgiveness for them (hypocrites), or do not ask for forgiveness for them. Even though you ask for their forgiveness seventy times, Allah will not forgive them. (9.80)" So the Prophet offered the funeral prayer and on that the revelation came: "And never (O Muhammad) pray (funeral prayer) for any of them (i.e. hypocrites) that dies." (9. 84)
......................................

You should have also told us as to why Prophet Muhammad Saw' didn't allowed his killing. Also, ibn Ubai was a munafiq (hypocrite), there's no punishment prescribed in Islamic Laws for a hypocrite. Your giving his example is totally irrelevant in this case.

btw, following is the detail, those who wanna understand will understand and those who don't, they will not.

Volume 006, Book 060, Hadith Number 428.


Narated By Jabir bin 'Abdullah : We were in a Ghazwa (Sufyan once said, in an army) and a man from the emigrants kicked an Ansari man (on the buttocks with his foot). The Ansari man said, "O the Ansar! (Help!)" and the emigrant said. "O the emigrants! (Help!) Allah's Apostle heard that and said, "What is this call for, which is characteristic of the period of ignorance?" They said, "O Allah's Apostle! A man from the emigrants kicked one of the Ansar (on the buttocks with his foot)." Allah's Apostle said, "Leave it (that call) as is a detestable thing." 'Abdullah bin Ubai heard that and said, 'Have the (the emigrants) done so? By Allah, if we return Medina, surely, the more honourable will expel there-from the meaner." When this statement reached the Prophet. 'Umar got up an, said, "O Allah's Apostle! Let me chop off the head of this hypocrite ('Abdullah bin Ubai)!" The Prophet said "Leave him, lest the people say that Muhammad kills his companions." The Ansar were then more in number than the emigrants when the latter came to Medina, but later on the emigrant increased.

Wassalam

I believe that the basis of Blasphemy Law are the verses of Surah-Al Maidah.

The punishments of those who wage war against Allāh and His Prophet and strive to spread disorder in the land are to execute them in an exemplary way or to crucify them or to amputate their hands and feet from alternate sides or to banish them from the land. Such is their disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter theirs shall be an awful doom, save those who repent before you overpower them for [in this case] you should know that Allāh is Oft-Forgiving, Ever-Merciful. (5:33-34)

First of all Abdullah bin Ubai was guilty of blasphemy in every conceivable way since he continuously and consciously spread false allegations in all of Medina regarding the Prophet PBUH, his message and even his family.
To say that he was a hypocrite does not change the fact that he was indeed guilty of Blasphemy, reason is that he had converted to Islam at the hands of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH himself who was alive in front of him and had all the signs of Prophet-hood.

The fact that Quran specifically mentioned him and his group makes him someone who had already incurred the wrath of Allah.
Despite all this the Prophet PBUH did indeed all he could for the forgiveness of the man including the funeral prayers till he was forbidden to do so for hypocrites who had been revealed to him by Allah.

This is exactly what i am trying to say here, in his personal capacity the Prophet PBUH attempted to forgive/save anyone and everyone unless the Lord Almighty in His infinite wisdom decreed to the contrary for specific cases and reasons.

By same spirit we should ensure that we are 100% sure before condemning someone, however this is not the case and even the article 295 C is so deliberately vague that it is extremely easy to trap someone even though they were not guilty of the crime mentioned in light of Surah Al Maidah.
The flaw is with our law but it has become such a holy law that asking for its overhaul is now equivalent to blasphemy, i am sorry but this law is a human interpretation and defined by Humans and if it is being used to settle personal scores and enmity due to its ambiguity, there needs to be an amendment to ensure justice.

The killing of a poet who used to slander against the Prophet PBUH etc. are indeed examples but not a general rule which sanctions people like Mumtaz Qadri to kill someone who is perceived to have committed Blasphemy.
There is no way that an individual should kill anyone who is under trial for Blasphemy or accused of Blasphemy (without trial) and become a hero, he has actually sinned and committed a crime by taking law into his own hands.

The issue is with the Law and not just with the implementation.
The law states:-

295-C
Use of derogatory remarks, etc; in respect of the Holy Prophet. Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.


Now is this law precise or vague?
Now if i gather four people and they testify that you indirectly implied something which was derogatory to the Prophet PBUH, it means you are liable to die even if you try to explain that you meant something else or did not say it at all.
What shall you provide as proof of your innocence?
What evidence can you provide?
This is what is not fair in the Law, it has a huge margin to be abused and misused which it has been.

This is not a law given by the Quran and is a human interpretation of Verses of Quran.
Sadly one should not forget that the background over here is the political pressure which Mard-e-Momin Zia had to keep over his opponents and so such laws were very handy since it was extremely easy to entrap anyone and make Zia popular as a great Muslim who was doing his utmost to safeguard Islam, i am sorry but on most accounts Zia was consolidating his political power by using the name of Islam.

The Quranic Verses are very specific in mentioning those who wage War on Allah and his Prophet PBUH and instigate disorder in the land, both things imply an open, direct and persistent crime against the Muslim state and its people and not some one time off the cuff remark when two people are abusing each other and even abuse their religion in craziness of anger.

Also the Quran mentions various punishments but the article 295-C only mentioned 2 whereas in 1990, the Federal Shariat Court ruled that 295-C was repugnant to Islam by permitting life imprisonment as an alternative to a death sentence.
This was upheld since the President did not get the law modified.
Now clearly in Surah Al-Maidah, exile is also a punishment but the current law does not have any provisioning for this.

There is a huge difference between deliberate and non deliberate comment in this particular case since there is no evidence required except a few people testifying, and by virtue of 295-C even someone joking about something could be taken as an indirect hint to insult the Prophet PBUH.
This is not a murder where someone has died and the death/dead-body itself is a quantifiable proof of crime which merits investigation and punishment.
So unless the comments are owned by the perpetrator or made public via books, public addresses or other media, it does not fall under the category of creating mischief in the land or waging war.

However the law has no such provisioning at all whether regarding evidence or regarding the context or provocation, it simply pronounces death sentence regardless of any context and whether it is direct, indirect, suggestion, hint etc.
If there was prior religious provocation and an honest Judge realizes this and sets the accused free on the basis of provocation, he is not complying with 295-C since it does not give any margin in this regards at all.

To say that the implementation is poor is an understatement, the Law is extremely flawed and can be used to settle personal scores which it has been.

Had the law been restricted to direct and open blasphemy via derogatory remarks in written form or openly public and repeated comments propagated by the accused, then it would have been in accordance with Quran, in the case of 295-C it is very vague which causes even petty disputes and personal grudges to be settled via this law.

My point is that the Holy Prophet PBUH made his best effort to save and forgive even the greatest Hypocrite till he was commanded not to for the likes of Abdullah bin Ubai, on the other hand we are doing our best effort to accuse and charge people despite next to no evidence and the law itself facilitates this.
The mere mention of amendment in this law sets our Mullah brigade into a state of frenzy as if this was part of the Quran.

To me this is against the spirit of Islam and the example set by the Prophet PBUH and will continue to be used for revenge rather than to safeguard the state and its people as per Surah Al-Maidah.
 
My sincere advice is that you take all the things you mentioned relating to Prophet Muhammad Saw' & Sahabas to a qualified Scholar and get his opinion on this in relation to blasphemy law. This trend of giving expert opinion on Islamic historical events, hadiths, Ayaats to justify ones viewpoint is totally unacceptable.

With due respect I must correct you, I dont need to be a Mufti to conclude that that the murder of Solomon Taseer was a crime.
And I am very sorry to disagree with you that I don’t have a right to quote Holy Quran & Hadith along with Islamic historic events to make my point. I got this very right when I was born and when I recited the kalmia Tayabah.. and every time I call my Allah and every time I recite the Darood o Salam to my holy Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

You see, this is the difference in Islam from other religions where the priests, shamans and monks monopolise their religion and decide the fate of the people. In Islam its an open invitation by Allah and His Holy Prophet PBUH to learn and investigate.

I don’t think the call of the Holy Quran “Tohifu Fi’ Deen” is only restricted to Mullah Asraf Thanwi and the elite clergy of Tehrik Ahl Sunnat.

I am afraid that you will have to accept this trend of quoting Holy Quran and Hadith from us commoners because the mind sent of people who are glorifying the killer are already dismissing the law of the land.

Going by the definition of Blasphemy set by the zealots of Mumtaz Qadri, you are committing blasphemy by saying that use of Holy Quran and Hadith is unacceptable.

By the way did you realise that by doing this you have actually confirmed and agreed with what Solomon Taseer was saying? He was pointing out at the misuse of the law and he paid the price with his life for that.

No wonder the so called Muslim scholars of this time have lost the respect because they have different set of rules for themselves from others.
 
What we want is the rule of law i.e Islamic laws, unless this happens, we aren't bothered or we don't care who gets killed. Run the country according to it's constitution and you will get our support for any extra constitutional or extra judicial act.

Abu Basit,

Brother, who is we in your comments?

Islamic system or not, when you say that you are not bothered and don't care whoever gets killed, is that not contrary to Islam?
This is not the way to bring a positive change and changes cannot be overnight.

If one is open to discussion, they can absorb a lot more ideas and have much better perspective on how to keep a balance which is especially necessary when trying to change the system for better or to run the country.
I am all for a true Islamic system, but when i see the Islamic movements/parties currently in my country and how they behave...i would rather not see them come to power and ruin the name of Islam.
They are never open to discussion over trivial matters even leave alone sensitive matters.
Their knee jerk reactions and open damage to public property when protesting over all matters is always an ugly sight to see, especially since they claim to be Islamic.

Barring a few Ulema, most of the clergy and religious parties are happy to make huge issues out of little things and keep the people in a state of frenzy, this ofcourse gives them power over the Mob and that is their endgame sadly.

Wassalam
AG
 
The problem is in our culture...we south asians always see the fualt in others...the day we start accepting our short-comings and stop elevating our achievements...we'd rise up to be become a progressive lot...
 
What we want is the rule of law i.e Islamic laws, unless this happens, we aren't bothered or we don't care who gets killed. Run the country according to it's constitution and you will get our support for any extra constitutional or extra judicial act.
Khuda ka khauf karo yaar, Islam ko kitna kaatilana mazhab banane pe tulay huay ho.

And say, "The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve."
-- Quran.

Islam to me starts and ends with justice and logic. Why don't you get it? You can't bring honor to the Prophet's name by being an irrational murderous human being. Is that the legacy of the Holy Prophet you want to keep alive?

Simply put, khuda ka khauf karo yaar.
 
Khuda ka khauf karo yaar, Islam ko kitna kaatilana mazhab banane pe tulay huay ho.

And say, "The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve."
-- Quran.

Islam to me starts and ends with justice and logic. Why don't you get it? You can't bring honor to the Prophet's name by being an irrational murderous human being. Is that the legacy of the Holy Prophet you want to keep alive?

Simply put, khuda ka khauf karo yaar.
Like you said another day that 99.99% of the world is wajib-ul-qatal for insulting the Prophet

I was thinking there is a verse in the Holy Qur'an that says
"31:19 And be moderate in your pace and lower your voice; indeed, the most disagreeable of sounds is the voice of donkeys."

and we often see our Scholars shouting in the public.. so does that not mean they have committed Blasphemy as they are not following the verse of the Holy Qur'an? :rofl:

If you commit blasphemy by just asking a question about Islam, these scholars aren't even following the teachings of the Holy Qur'an.

Just wondering :rolleyes:
 
Wassalam

I believe that the basis of Blasphemy Law are the verses of Surah-Al Maidah.

The punishments of those who wage war against Allāh and His Prophet and strive to spread disorder in the land are to execute them in an exemplary way or to crucify them or to amputate their hands and feet from alternate sides or to banish them from the land. Such is their disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter theirs shall be an awful doom, save those who repent before you overpower them for [in this case] you should know that Allāh is Oft-Forgiving, Ever-Merciful. (5:33-34)

First of all Abdullah bin Ubai was guilty of blasphemy in every conceivable way since he continuously and consciously spread false allegations in all of Medina regarding the Prophet PBUH, his message and even his family.
To say that he was a hypocrite does not change the fact that he was indeed guilty of Blasphemy, reason is that he had converted to Islam at the hands of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH himself who was alive in front of him and had all the signs of Prophet-hood.

The fact that Quran specifically mentioned him and his group makes him someone who had already incurred the wrath of Allah.
Despite all this the Prophet PBUH did indeed all he could for the forgiveness of the man including the funeral prayers till he was forbidden to do so for hypocrites who had been revealed to him by Allah.

This is exactly what i am trying to say here, in his personal capacity the Prophet PBUH attempted to forgive/save anyone and everyone unless the Lord Almighty in His infinite wisdom decreed to the contrary for specific cases and reasons.

By same spirit we should ensure that we are 100% sure before condemning someone, however this is not the case and even the article 295 C is so deliberately vague that it is extremely easy to trap someone even though they were not guilty of the crime mentioned in light of Surah Al Maidah.
The flaw is with our law but it has become such a holy law that asking for its overhaul is now equivalent to blasphemy, i am sorry but this law is a human interpretation and defined by Humans and if it is being used to settle personal scores and enmity due to its ambiguity, there needs to be an amendment to ensure justice.

The killing of a poet who used to slander against the Prophet PBUH etc. are indeed examples but not a general rule which sanctions people like Mumtaz Qadri to kill someone who is perceived to have committed Blasphemy.
There is no way that an individual should kill anyone who is under trial for Blasphemy or accused of Blasphemy (without trial) and become a hero, he has actually sinned and committed a crime by taking law into his own hands.

The issue is with the Law and not just with the implementation.
The law states:-

295-C
Use of derogatory remarks, etc; in respect of the Holy Prophet. Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.


Now is this law precise or vague?
Now if i gather four people and they testify that you indirectly implied something which was derogatory to the Prophet PBUH, it means you are liable to die even if you try to explain that you meant something else or did not say it at all.
What shall you provide as proof of your innocence?
What evidence can you provide?
This is what is not fair in the Law, it has a huge margin to be abused and misused which it has been.

This is not a law given by the Quran and is a human interpretation of Verses of Quran.
Sadly one should not forget that the background over here is the political pressure which Mard-e-Momin Zia had to keep over his opponents and so such laws were very handy since it was extremely easy to entrap anyone and make Zia popular as a great Muslim who was doing his utmost to safeguard Islam, i am sorry but on most accounts Zia was consolidating his political power by using the name of Islam.

The Quranic Verses are very specific in mentioning those who wage War on Allah and his Prophet PBUH and instigate disorder in the land, both things imply an open, direct and persistent crime against the Muslim state and its people and not some one time off the cuff remark when two people are abusing each other and even abuse their religion in craziness of anger.

Also the Quran mentions various punishments but the article 295-C only mentioned 2 whereas in 1990, the Federal Shariat Court ruled that 295-C was repugnant to Islam by permitting life imprisonment as an alternative to a death sentence.
This was upheld since the President did not get the law modified.
Now clearly in Surah Al-Maidah, exile is also a punishment but the current law does not have any provisioning for this.

There is a huge difference between deliberate and non deliberate comment in this particular case since there is no evidence required except a few people testifying, and by virtue of 295-C even someone joking about something could be taken as an indirect hint to insult the Prophet PBUH.
This is not a murder where someone has died and the death/dead-body itself is a quantifiable proof of crime which merits investigation and punishment.
So unless the comments are owned by the perpetrator or made public via books, public addresses or other media, it does not fall under the category of creating mischief in the land or waging war.

However the law has no such provisioning at all whether regarding evidence or regarding the context or provocation, it simply pronounces death sentence regardless of any context and whether it is direct, indirect, suggestion, hint etc.
If there was prior religious provocation and an honest Judge realizes this and sets the accused free on the basis of provocation, he is not complying with 295-C since it does not give any margin in this regards at all.

To say that the implementation is poor is an understatement, the Law is extremely flawed and can be used to settle personal scores which it has been.

Had the law been restricted to direct and open blasphemy via derogatory remarks in written form or openly public and repeated comments propagated by the accused, then it would have been in accordance with Quran, in the case of 295-C it is very vague which causes even petty disputes and personal grudges to be settled via this law.

My point is that the Holy Prophet PBUH made his best effort to save and forgive even the greatest Hypocrite till he was commanded not to for the likes of Abdullah bin Ubai, on the other hand we are doing our best effort to accuse and charge people despite next to no evidence and the law itself facilitates this.
The mere mention of amendment in this law sets our Mullah brigade into a state of frenzy as if this was part of the Quran.

To me this is against the spirit of Islam and the example set by the Prophet PBUH and will continue to be used for revenge rather than to safeguard the state and its people as per Surah Al-Maidah.

As'salam o Alaiqum,

i'm sorry to say brother but the reality is that your argument of forgiveness by quoting the example of ibn Ubai was also before the Sahabas & pious Imams. They didn't take into consideration this example and are unanimous on death penalty. Importantly, the Hadith i quoted clearly tells us the reason for his non execution.

I'm just trying to understand, whose interpretation of Quran do you agree with. Do you recognize the fact that Islamic Laws aren't only derived from Quran, other sources like Hadith, Ijma, Qiyas also plays a role in deriving Islamic laws which are binding on us. If you aren't ready to accept the consensus of Sahabas and pious Imams (were these people also extremist mullahs?) , i don't think any other can convince you on this issue.

Surah Ahzab- 57:
'As for those who abuse Allah and His Messenger,Allah’s curse is on them in the dunya and the akhira. He has prepared a humiliating punishment for them."

This A'yat is also the basis and i can only follow the interpretation of qualified Scholars.

What more clear evidence one need, either accept or just reject this Hadith:

l-Hussain ibn ‘Ali related from his father that the Messenger of Allah said , ‘Whoever curses a Prophet, kill him. Whoever curses my Companions, beat him.’ Tabarani, Daraqutni.

“In the hadith of Abu Barza as-Aslami it says, ‘One day I was sitting with Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and he became angry at one of the Muslim men.’ The man had cursed Abu Bakr. An-Nasa'i went to him and said, ‘Khalif of Allah, let me strike off his head!’ He said, ‘Sit down. That is not for anyone except the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.’”


i don't see anything wrong with 295-C (btw, nobody should be joking around with anything relating to Prophet Muhammad Saw'), you are giving if's & but's on wrong testimonies/witnesses etc., Let me add one if's & but's~ Say, a man murders someone and to settle personal scores, he put the blame on someone else and produces 100 witnesses in this regard, what to do now??

i see these types of arguments as lame excuses to justify the abolishment of blasphemy law. The procedure regarding testimonies/witnesses etc., is available in the form of 'Qanoon'e Shahadat, you are always welcome to improve it, nobody is stopping the government in this regard.

When the ruling elite, mr taseer in this case, don't believe in the rule of law, why accept the same from an ordinary person.
 
If you commit blasphemy by just asking a question about Islam, these scholars aren't even following the teachings of the Holy Qur'an.

Just wondering :rolleyes:

i have asked 100's of questions about Islam, to date, nobody has accused me of blasphemy. :rolleyes:
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom