Punishment for Blasphemy: a Pre-Islamic Practice

Punishment  for Blasphemy: a Pre-Islamic Practice

Those who believe that anyone who ridicules the Prophet Muhammad should be hanged,  can  produce no clear commandment from the Quran or Hadith  to  support  this  belief. They merely give  a distorted  version  of some incident  which  took  place  during the Prophet’s time and say that such and such a person  involved  in this incident was put  to  death  because he was a blasphemer. The case of Kab ibn Ashraf is generally cited  in support their ill-conceived argument.

Kab ibn Ashaf (d. 624 A.D.) a  native of    Medina, was  a poet as well as an orator. His mother belonged  to the  Banu Nadhir, a Jewish tribe.  In the early days of Islam in Medina, he started defaming the Prophet and his followers, satirizing them  in  his  poems and speeches.

It is clearly mentioned in Al-Bidayah wa’l Nihaya by Ibn Kathir (pp. 326-336, Vol. 5) that when Kab ibn Ashaf started defaming the Prophet, the only  action taken by   the  latter  was to ask Hassan ibn Thabit, one of the Companions who  was a poet, to counter his false allegations. On the Prophet’s advice, Hassan ibn Thabit, then  composed verses in which he refuted the false propaganda  directed against the Prophet  by Kab ibn Ashraf. 

The Prophet entered into an agreement with several tribes of Medina, including  the Banu Nadhir tribe of which Kab ibn Asharaf was a member, that they would not support any other tribe against the Muslims. But Kab ibn Ashaf broke this agreement by visiting Mecca and inciting the Quraysh against the Muslims. He told the Quraysh leaders to attack the Muslims from outside Medina and his tribe will attack the Muslims at the same time from inside the city. He became the ring leader of a group  whose  sole  aim was to incite people against the Prophet and his followers. This was a clear violation of the agreement between the Prophet and the Banu Nadhir tribe. He not only turned his own tribe against the  Muslims but also played a major role in inciting other tribes such as the  Aws.

This was a clear act of violation of the agreement between the Prophet and the Banu Nidhir tribe and it amounted to treason against and betrayal  of the state of Medina.

He was put to death on account  of this act of treason and his conspiring against the state, and not because  of his satire and ridicule of the Prophet.

The contention of a modern scholar, Sheikh Mohammed Riza, that Kab ibn Ashraf was hanged for blasphemy is meaningless, as  it  is  unsupported  by any clear reference from the Quran, the Hadith or from the writings of the early scholars of Islam.

Anyone  who  cares   to go through the attached pages of Al-Badaya Wan Nihya by Ibu Kathir, will  find   that the case of Kab ibn Ashaf was clearly  one of treason against the state and not of blasphemy.

Before Islam, during the pagan age, or jahiliya, many people were prosecuted on  account of their faith. The Quran refers to this in the following verse:

They ill-treated them for no other reason than that they believed in God, the Almighty, the Praiseworthy. (Al-Buruj, 85:8).

With  the  advent of  Islam, the age-old pagan practice of prosecuting people on account of their faith was   abolished. But the Muslims in the Abbasi period revived the former pre-Islamic custom of prosecuting people on  a charge of blasphemy against the Prophet. This was highly irregular and totally against the principles of Islam, as the Quran only sanctions capital punishment for those who have committed  a crime such as murder. There is not a single injunction in the Quran and the Hadith to  the  effect that anyone who says anything against the Prophet should  be put to death. Rather the Quran asks the Prophet and the believers to be as patient as  the other great prophets who endured such  conduct with patience (Al-Ahqaf, 46:35).

The world is a  testing ground. Here, everyone is free to do whatever he likes. Without freedom, it   is not possible  to  put  human beings to  the   test.. People’s freedom of speech cannot  then be snatched away when it has  been given to them by none other than God Almighty Himself.    Punishment  for blasphemy  cannot  therefore  be  countenanced.

Secondly, the killing of  a   person accused of blasphemy by an individual (as  was done recently in Pakistan) is definitely haram. In Islamic law, it is quite clear that if a person is accused of committing a crime, his case will go to the authorities  who will file a case against him. His case will then be examined by a state authorized court in  which the  testimony  of  four witnesses will be heard,  after  which the court, having gone through a proper legal process, will give its verdict. If the accused is found guilty, then the law enforcement agencies will carry out the punishment. But if any  member of the public picks up a gun and,  taking  the law  into  his own  hands, shoots down a person whom he considers a blasphemer, he    will be considered  to  have  acted totally against the spirit of Islam.

In the same way, the case of Abdullah ibn Khatal was not one of blasphemy. It is true that he too, like Kab ibn Ashraf, used to ridicule the prophet in his poetry. But his punishment was not because of blasphemy of the Prophet, but on  account  of a murder  he  committed. He killed his servant  and, as a punishment for that, he was put to death.  Reference is  made  to  this in Ibn Taimiya’s book, Al-Sarim al Maslul ala Shatim al-Rasul, page 265, Vol. 2. (Arabic text attached).

The most important thing which the proponents of the blasphemy law have  chosen  to  ignore is that it is a very important principle of fiqh (Islamic law) that, before making such a law, there has to be a clear reference  to  it in the nass, or text of the Quran and the Hadith.

The Quran makes   the  very  clear statement  that if anyone killed a person, his  action would be seen as killing the entire mankind (al-Maida, 5:32) Supposing   the Almighty  had seen  fit  to  award  such  a punishment as  the execution  of  anyone who ridiculed  the Prophet Muhammad, how  is  it    that, on  this  particular  issue,   the Quran  makes no  statement   whatsoever?

Saniyasnain Khan

www.goodwordbooks.com

Islam believes in freedom

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/126588/Cover%20Story/islam+believes+in+freedom.html

Blasphemy is in the news. According to general perception, Islam prescribes capital punishment to a person who indulges in blasphemy, that is using profane language against the Prophet of Islam. But this concept of blasphemy is completely alien to the original teachings of Islam. Before the advent of Islam, difference of belief was also a punishable act.

They used to punish on matters of belief just as on matters of social crime. This old practice is called religious persecution in history. Islam abolished this practice. The Prophet of Islam declared that personal belief is a subject of discussion and persuasion rather than of legal punishment.

Wahiduddib Khan, Islamic spiritual scholar and founder of Centre for Peace and Spirituality International

However, if non-believers use profane language against the Prophet, Muslims are directed not to react. They have only two options, either to simply ignore it or to respond on equal basis, that is, issuing a statement in return for a statement. The Quran says: "The recompense of an ill-deed is an ill the like thereof (42:40)." According to this injunction, reaction must be on an equal basis, that is, word in return for word, statement in return for statement, book in return for book.


If you go through the Quran and the hadith (sayings and actions of the Prophet of Islam), the only two authentic sources of Islam, you will find that there is not a single Quranic verse or hadith that gives this kind of injunction which says: "Man shatama nabiyakum faqtuluhu. (Kill the person who commits blasphemy against the Prophet)."

Such an injunction was added in the Islamic law only during the Abbasid caliphate, about 150 years after the death (632 AD) of the Prophet. Although the majority of the Fuqaha (Muslim jurists) of this period accepted the law, it was clearly an innovation which is not acceptable in Islam.

Devotees at Delhi's Jama Masjid

According to a well-known hadith, there are three authentic periods of the Islamic history: the period of the Prophet, the period of Sahaba (companions of the Prophet), and the period of Tabein (companions of the companions). It is a fact that all the Fuqaha belonged to the Abbasid period which came after these authentic periods. According to a hadith, the Prophet of Islam has said: "I have left behind for you thaqalain, two authentic sources of Islam: the book of God, and the Sunnah of the Prophet.


You will not astray till you adhere to these authentic sources." (Mu'atta Malik, Hadith no.1661). And those additions made by the Muslim jurists of the later history are certainly not a part of the authentic sources. According to this Islamic injunction, if there is a person who commits blasphemy, then the responsibility of Muslims is to meet him and persuade him and to remove his misunderstanding by peaceful means and if supposing he fails to understand then Muslims are left only with one option, that is to pray for him.

There is ample evidence that tells us what to do in such cases. For example, once when Prophet was in Mecca, one idol-worshipper came to him and told him face-to-face, "Muzammaman abaina (O Muhammad you are a condemned person)." The Prophet simply smiled. This smile was a kind of moral response and was bound to hit his conscience. He fell into introspection. And after some time he accepted him as the Prophet and became one of his followers.

Islam greatly believes in freedom of expression. I would like to say that the secular law of India in this context is more "Islamic" than the so-called Islamic law of Pakistan.

Silence has become the mother of all blasphemies

I am rather pleased to read the following, its central thrust is Silence, and I wrote the article just a day before this article appears in Guardian. http://blasphemylaws.blogspot.com/2011/03/pakistan-blaming-blasphemy-laws.html # # #

Pakistan: Silence has become the mother of all blasphemies http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/03/pakistan-silence-blasphemy-mohammed-hanif

Two months ago, after Governor Salmaan Taseer's murder and the jubilant support for the policeman who killed him, religious scholars in Pakistan told us that since common people don't know enough about religion they should leave it to those who do – basically anyone with a beard.

Everyone thought it made a cruel kind of sense. So everyone decided to shut up: the Pakistan Peoples party (PPP) government because it wanted to cling to power, liberals in the media because they didn't want to be the next Taseer. The move to amend the blasphemy law was shelved.

It was an unprecedented victory for Pakistan's mullah minority. They had told a very noisy and diverse people to shut up and they heard back nothing but silence. After Pakistan's only Christian federal minister, Shahbaz Bhatti – the bravest man in Islamabad – was murdered on Tuesday, they were back on TV, this time condemning the killing, claiming it was a conspiracy against them, against Islam and against Pakistan. The same folk who had celebrated one murder and told us how not to get murdered were wallowing in self pity.

In a very short span of time, Pakistan's mullahs and muftis have managed to blur the line between what God says and what they say. The blasphemy law debate was about how to prosecute people who have committed blasphemy against the prophet Muhammad and the Qur'an. Since repeating a blasphemy, even if it is to prove the crime in a court of law, is blasphemous, no Pakistani has a clear idea what constitutes blasphemy. Taseer had called the blasphemy law "a black law" and was declared a blasphemer. The line between maligning the Holy Prophet and questioning a law made by a bunch of mullahs was done away with. What would come next?

During the last two months sar tan se juda (off with their heads) has become as familiar a slogan as all the corporate songs about the Cricket World Cup. Banners appeared all over Karachi and Islamabad last week demanding death for a Pakistani writer. The only problem is that nobody quite knows what she has written. Her last book came out more than eight years ago and, if it wasn't so scary, it would be ironic that it is called Blasphemy. It was a potboiler set mostly in religious and spiritual leaders' bedrooms. The banners condemning her say that not only she has insulted the prophet, she has insulted religious scholars.

So now disagreeing with anyone who has a beard and armed bodyguards can get you killed. The PPP government has tried to appease this lot by silencing the one-and-a-half liberal voices it had. What it didn't realise is that you can't really appease people who insist their word is God's word, their honour as sacred as the Holy Prophet's. In Pakistan, silence is the mother of all blasphemies. Most Pakistanis are committing that blasphemy and being punished for it.

Mohammed Hanif is a journalist and author of the novel A Case of Exploding Mangoes

Pakistan; Blaming the Blasphemy Laws

The purpose of this site is to bring together differing views on Blasphemy, and develop an understanding from Islamic point of view for the good of all humanity. Current Blasphemy laws and practices do not go with the values of Islam; free will and respect for life. 

Although Quran does not permit killing oneself or the other person (unless in self defense),  the actual deaths from the enforcement of Blasphemy laws average 3/ year in the entire Muslim world of 1.6  Billion people, where as just in Texas and Florida we execute that many in one year. Neither should be acceptable, shamefully our laws in Texas and laws in Iran are primitive, and Neanderthalic. Both nations need to get rid of these archaic laws.

While agreeing with the need to abolish blasphemy laws, we must acknowledge that it is not going to be easy and it cannot be done overnight.  

The issue is the books that have been referred to for generations, even though they are concocted, they are a backbone to the right wing conservatives, they go by the book, who the hell are you and I to tell them otherwise, they have the books to support their position.

Two alternate ways of dealing with it.

Need a Mustafa Kemal Pasha to burn all those books, and it is not going to happen, because the Pakistani Politicians do not have guts to be bold, the one who had (Musharraf) turned out to do more harm to the nation than the good. The others before him kissed assess of the religious radicals to remain in power like ZH and ZA. Some of the blame comes on us Americans for feeding and supporting the criminals.

The second viable choice is education. Give them the right books, get the Ulema to write as a text or a part of the Sharia Law. Most of them are right, you can listen to almost all of them, they have the right answers, but don't have the books!

The small town Ulema don't have the books or the resources, we cannot blame them for the lack of knowledge, we need to blame ourselves for not facilitating them with the knowledge, the books. You cannot slam dunk the decision on the radicals, it will not be sustainable, get them to sit with you, and review Quraan and Hadith, they will listen to it. Throw them a challenge to prove it from the Quraan, honor them for finding the truth, when they own the research, they will take it upon themselves and the Blasphemy laws will be out of door. 

Write the Books... any one can write one, and then all of us can improvise on it. Whether they are radical or not, Muslims respect Quraan without blinking an eye, give them the Quraan, the right one from the wrong translations. It is possible.

 The ones who are screaming have the back up books to support them... we as Muslims need to come up with books on the topic, endorsed by at least a few Ulema's for them to have something in their hands.  They rather believe in the book they have, however wrong it may be, than you and I. 

Blasphemy laws have no religious grounding, none whatsoever. Instead of murdering in the name of God and the prophet, it is time for reflection. God and the Prophet will not only reject, but condemn human sacrifices in their names.

To kill a human is like killing the whole humanity, Quraan prohibits killing unless it is in self defense, and even then, if the offender backs off, a Muslim is required to withdraw the revengefulness and forgive the opponent. Suicide is condemned in Islam.

Quraan is abundantly clear about no compulsion in matters of faith; you cannot compel one to believe against his or her will. Quraan calls for civility and move on with life; to you is your belief and to me is my belief.

Now a teenage girl is being arrested on blasphemy charges. This needs to stop and only education will take it out in the long haul. More about http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-ghouse/muslims-condemn-blasphemy-charges-against-pakistan-christian-girl_b_1815127.html

The Blasphemy law is a game of the politicians; it was initiated by the rulers in the past to appease the religious fanatics and to keep a lid on their subjects. It was done by the English Kings, and it is done by the Republicans to appease the religious right in America today, and it was done to do the same in Pakistan; to appease the religious right who has morphed into Talibans.

Governor Taseer was a Muslim, and the Minister for Minority Affairs Shahbaz Bhatti was a Christian, both were shot dead for asking to bring about the reforms in the Blasphemy laws.

Think about it, neither the killers of Taseer nor Bhatti are evil; it is the damned silence of Pakistanis that is evil for doing nothing about it.  It takes just a few boys in the class room to stand up to the bully from beating them up and the bullies will flee. The Tunisians, the Egyptians, the Libyans are standing up against the bullies, the Pakistanis can do it too to bring about a change they really want, but have to show the moral courage. If you let extremism prevail, you won't be able to run from it and will sink in the quick sand.

Mike Ghouse is committed to building cohesive societies and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. More about it at; www.blasphemylaws.com/

What Islam do you subscribe to?

Evil exists in a given society because good people do nothing about it.

Obviously everyone is scared of speaking up and as long as you are scared, those few will establish that Islam is their religion and a religion of punishment, oppression and coercion.  Sadly, that is their understanding, one of the many ways to change that perception is to speak up, they need to know that there is a different view and most Muslims do not subscribe to their view.

The least you can do, particularly the Pakistani Americans is to speak up and show the support to those gutsy men and women like Sherry Rahman and Prof. Hoodbhoy who are not scared. As he alludes, Zardari has a choice to leave a legacy of goodness for his country and live in peace or run for his life.

Please visit the site www.BlasphemyLaws.com a variety of articles are being posted to increase our own understanding of it.  

To Save Pakistan, what Miracles need to happen?
http://blasphemylaws.blogspot.com/2011/01/to-save-pakistan-what-miracles-shall-we.html

Pakistan’s defiant leader
http://blasphemylaws.blogspot.com/2011/01/pakistans-defiant-prisoner-of.html

Arab News

Qadri and Muslim Majority.  

http://arabnews.com/world/article232984.ece

Your Signature for Asia Bibi http://www.petitiononline.com/Asiabibi/petition.html

Quraan on Blasphemy

The most consistent theme in Quraan is - no aggression. You shall not mess things and get caught in the whole ball of wax,  but you have a right to defend yourselves. God's wisdom surfaces consistently through a variety of messengers including Jesus and Muhammad - do not aggravate the conflict, i.e., turn the other cheek to sustain the peace. 

Those of you who do not believe in the fire, hell, brimstone etc, take is as the anguish and turmoil within the soul.

Muhammad Irtaza has compiled several verses below and I have added Asad's translation where needed to ensure checks and balances.  

I urge you to do your own versification, finding the truth is your own responsibility. 

The Messenger of God Muhammad delivered the following messages on the Blasphemy Laws:
  
4:140 (Asad) And, indeed, He has enjoined upon you in this divine writ that whenever you hear people deny the truth of God's messages and mock at them, you shall avoid their company until they begin to talk of other things   [ Lit., "you shall not sit with them until they immerse themselves in talk other than this".]  - or else, verily, you will become like them. Behold, together with those who deny the truth God will gather in hell the hypocrites.

5:57 (Asad) O you who have attained to faith! Do not take for your friends such as mock at your, faith and make a jest of it-be they from among those who have been vouchsafed revelation before your time, or [from among] those who deny the truth [of revelation as such] -but remain conscious of God, if you are [truly] believers:

[6:68] If you see those who mock our revelations, you shall avoid them until they delve into another subject. If the devil causes you to forget, then, as soon as you remember, do not sit with such evil people.

[18:106] Their just requital is Hell, in return for their disbelief, and for mocking My revelations and My messengers.

[39:48] The sinful works they had earned will be shown to them, and the very things they used to mock will come back to haunt them.

[45:33] The evils of their works will become evident to them, and the very things they mocked will come back and haunt them.

Why the Muslim masses ignore the Messenger Muhammad?  Who they want to please?

The punishment is delivered by God, not by you or me.

The killing is justified only if  people wage  war against you. You may kill them, in that case:

[5:33] (Asad) It is but a just recompense for those who make war on God and His apostle, ^[43] and endeavour to spread corruption on earth, that they are being slain in great' numbers, or crucified in great numbers, or have, in l' result of their perverseness, their hands and feet cut off in great numbers, ^[44] or are being [entirely] banished from [the face of] the earth: such is their ignominy in this world . ^[45] But in the life to come [yet more] awesome suffering awaits them


43- The term "apostle" is evidently generic in this context. By "making war on God and His apostle" is meant a hostile opposition to, and wilful disregard of, the ethical precepts ordained by God and explained by all His apostles, combined with the conscious endeavour to destroy or undermine other people's belief in God as well

44- In classical Arabic idiom, the "cutting off of one's hands and feet" is often synonymous with "destroying one's power", and it is possibly in this sense that the expression has been used here. Alternatively, it might denote "being mutilated", both physically and metaphorically -similar to the (metonymical) use of the expression "being crucified" in the sense of "being tortured". The phrase min khilaf-usually rendered as "from opposite sides"-is derived from the verb khalafahu, "he disagreed with him", or "opposed him", or "acted contrarily to him": consequently, the primary meaning of min khilaf is "in result of contrariness" or "of perverseness"

The killing is not justified if people evict you. You may only evict them:

[2:191] You may kill those who wage war against you, and you may evict them whence they evicted you. Oppression is worse than murder. Do not fight them at the Sacred Masjid, unless they attack you therein. If they attack you, you may kill them. This is the just retribution for those disbelievers.

The killing is not justified if people insult the Prophet. God will take care of it. 

[18:106] Their just requital is Hell, in return for their disbelief, and for mocking My revelations and My messengers

And, these are some of the Quranic wisdoms:

[42:37] They avoid gross sins and vice, and when angered they forgive

[42:40] Although the just requital for an injustice is an equivalent retribution, those who pardon and maintain righteousness are rewarded by GOD. He does not love the unjust.

Blasphemy laws of Pakistan: Indian clerics are no less extremist and obscurantist – Part 2

]http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011\01\20\story_20-1-2011_pg7_18]

 20 Jan 2011, NewAgeIslam.Com

In the second part of his article Maulana Nadeemul Wajidi expresses his horror at the fact that the assassinated Governor of Pakistani Punjab Salman Taseer “felt sympathy for a Christian woman who committed blasphemy against the Prophet (PBUH) and even went to jail to meet her.” Of course, the Maulana has no use for any evidence against the lady who has simply been accused of some sort of blasphemy – exactly what blasphemy Asia Bibi committed no one knows as no one can ask the accuser, her sister-in-law with whom she had had a family quarrel earlier, to repeat the blasphemous statement.

Maulana’s advice and chilling warning to imaginary blasphemers against whom there may not be a shred of evidence that can stand in a civilised court of law: “People who have made it a habit to commit blasphemy against the Prophet (PBUH) should take a lesson from this incident. I will reiterate my stand that Muslims can tolerate anything but insult to the Prophet (PBUH). If the law does not punish such culprits, Muslims will be compelled to punish them themselves. There have been a number of incidents in the past when the law did not do its job, the Muslims came forward and made the guilty realise that their crime was unpardonable.” I wonder if such threats attract any laws of the land.

But the Maulana is ecstatic that “today, Salman Taseer has come down to zero and is lying underground while his assassin Mumtaz Qadri is ruling the hearts of millions of Muslims. The proceedings of the case have been started in the Islamabad court. Three hundred advocates have offered to fight the case without any fee. The court may adjudicate against Mumtaz Qadri and pronounce death sentence against him but nobody can stop him from attaining martyrdom. Saluting the courage of Ghazi Aleemuddin, Allama Iqbal had said that he wished that he had done it. Today every aalim, rather ever Muslim of Pakistan has the same feeling.”

In a tone of competitive extremism, as the “honour” of killing Salman Taseer has gone to the Barelvi sect, which was supposed to be more inclusive, tolerant and broadminded, the Maulana says: “The ulema of Deoband too declare the blasphemer deserving to be killed. Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi says: ”Committing blasphemy against prophets is infidelity (kufr)” (Imdadul fatawa 393/5). Hadhrat Allama Syed Anwar Shah Kashmiri says: “Muslims have unanimity on the view that he who abuses Allah or the Prophet (PBUH) is a Kafir” (Akfarul mulhideen p 119). Hadhrat Maulana Kifayatullah Dehlvi’s fatwa is:” The person showing disrespect to the Prophet (PBUH) or Hadhrat Aysha (R.A.) is a blasphemer and the one not angry with the blasphemer is a Kafir.”(Kifayatul mufti 31/1).The principal mufti of Pakistan Maulana Mufti Mohammad Shafi Usmani says: “The open pronouncement of the Islamic Sharia is that the punishment for apostasy is death.”

The Maulana goes on to pronounce his considered fatwa of death to the alleged blasphemer who can virtually be any one: “The ulema agree on the fact that those committing blasphemy against the Prophet (PBUH) deserve the most severe punishment. The verses of the Quran, the hadiths and numerous incidents in the Islamic history prove that the blasphemer cannot be left alive. It is not an issue of mere emotions but of beliefs. In his book Al Sarim al mas-ool fi hukm-e-Shatimir Rasool, Imam Ibn Taimiyya has compiled all the logical and theoretical arguments in this regard. Even when Salman Rushdie had written a book committing blasphemy and a fatwa ordering his murder was issued against him the question was issued why Muslims consider blasphemers against the Prophet (PBUH) deserving to be killed. On that occasion a book titled ‘Sanctity of the Prophet (PBUB) and the punishment for blasphemy’ was published in Pakistan. The book consisting of about 800 pages sheds light on all the aspects of the issue. Those who are undecided on this issue should read this book.”

Maulana Wajidi in not alone in proffering these threats of death to anyone who is accused of blasphemy, without the accuser even asked to repeat what he claims has been said. Urdu Press in India, as its counterpart in Pakistan, is coming out daily with new write-ups in a similar vein. It’s time for a reality check for those who nurse the illusion that living in a multicultural society under a secular constitution has impacted our Mullahs and made them somewhat civilised. Far from that. Indeed even our Press keeps providing generous space to these Juhala. Editorial space in Urdu dailies is practically reserved for such fulminations. Conspiracy theorists and other enemies of civilisation rule the roost.

Thankfully, there are still some Muslims who believe Islam is a religion of civilisation. Islam had brought order in unruly Arabia and other parts of the world at one time. It stood for and established the rule of law. Let us hope such people take the threats from Maulanas seriously and get together to think a way of saving Islam from these marauders and even surviving themselves from this onslaught that is coming as much in India as it has come in Pakistan. Let us also hope that these Juhala do not further inspire Hindu right wingers too who have been dreaming for decades of Muslimising Hinduism. For, while Maulanas have only one person , Mohammad (PBUH), – that too not a god, just a messenger of God - the Hindus have 330 million gods and there are myriad ways in which these Maulanas keep expressing contempt for them or at least for their images.

Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, the founder of Jamaat-e-Islami, wanted India to be a Hindu state as he wanted Pakistan to be a Muslim state. He was clear that Hindus in India should be free to treat Muslims the same ignominious way as Muslims of Pakistan treat the Hindus. His vision has come true in Pakistan. Let us hope he does not succeed in India. -- Sultan Shahin, Editor New Age Islam

Pakistan’s Blasphemy Law, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan

A Dissenting Voice onPakistan’s Blasphemy Law, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan 

 Yoginder Sikand

In the wake of the dastardly killing of Salman Taseer, governor of Pakistan’s Punjab province, for having dared to question Pakistan’s draconian anti-blasphemy law, scores of Pakistani ‘Islamic’ outfits celebrated the crime by showering encomiums on the man’s murderer, insisting that his action was perfectly in consonance with (their understanding of) Islam. They feted him as an intrepid Islamic hero, a ghazi or warrior of the faith. Across the border, not a single Indian Muslim religious organization condemned the attack. This might well suggest that they shared the enthusiasm of their Pakistani counterparts, although, for obvious reasons, they were unable to openly express their delight at the deadly event. Probably the only Islamic scholar of note on either side of the border to have condemned the brutal murder in no uncertain terms, and to have insisted that it had no sanction whatsoever in Islam, was the New Delhi-based Maulana Wahiduddin Khan. He immediately responded to the murder in an article published in the Times of India, insisting that the punishment of death for blasphemy, as prescribed in Pakistan’s anti-blasphemy law, had no sanction in Islam at all.
Khan’s views on the appropriate Islamic punishment for blasphemy, particularly for defaming the Prophet Muhammad, are diametrically opposed to those of the mullahs and doctrinaire Islamists, which is one reason why the latter so passionately detest him. He does not condone blasphemy, even in the name of free speech, of course, but nor does he agree with those Muslims who insist that Islam prescribes the death penalty for those guilty of it. He first articulated his position on the subject in a book titled Shatim-e Rasul Ka Masla: Quran wa Hadith aur Fiqh wa Tarikh ki Raushni Mai (‘Defaming the Prophet: In the Light of the Quran, Hadith, Fiqh and History’). The book, consisting of a number of articles penned in the wake of the massive controversy that shook the world over the publication of Salman Rushdie’s infamous Satanic Verses, was published in 1997. It is a powerful critique, using Islamic arguments, of the strident anti-Rushdie agitation and of the argument that the Islamic punishment for blasphemy is death. Although Khan condemned the Satanic Verses as blasphemous, he argued that stirring up Muslim passions and baying for Rushdie’s blood was neither the rational nor the properly Islamic way of countering the book and its author. Death for blasphemy, he contended, using references from the Quran and the corpus of Hadith to back his stance, was not prescribed in Islam, in contrast to what Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini, and, echoing him, millions of Muslims worldwide, ardently believed.
Khan was possibly one of the only Islamic scholars to forcefully condemn the death sentence on Rushdie that Khomeini had announced and that vast numbers of Muslims, Shias and Sunnis, imagined was their religious duty to fulfill. Although his book deals specifically with the issue of blaspheming the Prophet in the context of the anti-Rushdie agitation, it is of immediate relevance to the ongoing debate about the anti-blasphemy laws and the violence it engenders in Pakistan today. What is particularly fascinating about the book is that it uses Islamic arguments to counter the widespread belief among Muslims that death is the punishment laid down in Islam for blasphemy as well as for those who, like the late Salman Taseer, oppose such punishment. Addressing the issue from within an Islamic paradigm, with the help of copious quotes from the Quran and Hadith, Khan’s case against death for blasphemers would, one supposes, appear more convincing to Muslims than secular human rights arguments against Pakistan’s deadly anti-blasphemy law that has unleashed such havoc in that country. 
Like most Muslims, Khan believes that Islam is the only true religion. Muslims, he says, are commanded by God to communicate Islam to the rest of humanity. This work of dawah or ‘invitation’ to the faith is, he says, the hallmark of a true Muslim. Yet, he laments, ‘the Muslims of today are totally bereft of dawah consciousness’. This lack, he contends, is at the very root of the manifold conflicts that Muslims are presently embroiled in with others in large parts of the world. This almost total absence of ‘dawah consciousness’ has made Muslims, so he argues, victims of a peculiar superiority complex (that has no warrant in Islam) that drives them on to engage in endless conflict with others. Muslims, he writes, imagine themselves as ‘the soldiers of God, the censors of the morals of the whole of creation, and the deputies of God on earth’, which, he contends, is ‘absurdly un-Islamic’. He insists that this attitude of presumed superiority and the drive for confronting and dominating others that it instigates have absolutely no sanction in the Quran. He quotes the Quran as referring to the Prophet as simply as a warner and guide, and not as a ruler over the people he addressed, and rues that Muslims behave in a totally contrary manner in their relations with non-Muslims. ‘They want to rule over others’, Khan laments. And that, he adds, is ‘their biggest psychological problem.’
The Quran, Khan says, exhorts Muslims to be bearers of glad tidings to others and to invite them to God’s path. The work of dawah is not a simple verbal calling. Rather, for dawah to be effective, he says, Muslims must themselves be righteous, including in their dealings with people of other faiths. They must see themselves as dais or missionaries inviting others to God’s path, and regard others as madus or addressees of the divine invitation. Dawah, Khan says, ‘must form the basis of the believer’s personality and must shape his relations with others.’ These relations must be fundamentally shaped by the dawah imperative, which means that Muslims must always seek to relate kindly and compassionately with others. A true dai, committed to this principal Islamic duty of dawah, must relate to people of other communities with love and concern for their welfare. They should ‘keep the needs of dawah above all other considerations,’ Khan says. They might face all sorts of loss and damage at the hands of others, but at no cost should they allow the cause of dawah to be hampered. This means, Khan insists, that ‘they must not resort to such activities that are opposed to the demands of dawah or that undermine its prospects.’ Principally, they must desist from conflicts with people of other faiths, even in the face of grave provocation, for this would certainly further reinforce their prejudices against Islam and Muslims and only sabotage prospects for dawah. Even when confronted with extremely hurtful and provocative situations, such as blasphemy, they must not resort to violent agitation and demand the death of the culprit. There are other, rational and more meaningful, ways to react, Khan says, but to react violently and to call for the death of blasphemers would only further magnify anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic sentiments, harden borders between Muslims and others, and, thereby, place additional barriers in the path of dawah.
Khan is convinced that the Muslims of today have abandoned their divine duty of dawah. This is why, he writes, instead of seeking to relate kindly with people of other faiths, as addressees of the ‘invitation’ to God’s path, they consider the latter as their ‘communal enemies’ and are constantly engaged in seeking to confront them. Muslims, he contends, wrongly imagine that they are ‘God’s deputies on earth’, completely forgetting that the Quran speaks about true believers as being His witnesses to humanity. Because the drive for dawah no longer enthuses them, he goes on, their relations with people of other faiths are conflict-ridden and they ‘engage in such acts as have no sanction at all in Islam’. Their hatred for others, which promotes constant conflict with them, he says, ‘is tantamount to murder of dawah.’  Treating others as their ‘political foes’, instead of as ‘potential addressees of God’s message’, they lose no opportunity to drum up opposition and instigate conflicts and agitations directed against them. Such Muslims, Khan minces no words in saying, ‘are murderers of dawah and divine guidance’. They are completely unmindful, he says, that ‘by engaging in such activities that sabotage dawah, they are inviting God’s wrath on themselves.’
Khan then turns to the issue of blasphemy and the violent agitations unleashed across the globe in the wake of Khomeini’s fatwa calling for Rushdie’s death. He insists that the fatwa and the agitation that it stirred are tantamount to ‘murdering dawah’, and bemoans that ‘it reflects a total lack of dawah consciousness.’ Such reactions, he warns, will only further reinforce deeply-rooted negative feelings among non-Muslims about Islam and Muslims, which would make the task of dawah even more difficult than it already is. He goes so far as to claim that those engaged in this agitation, whether as leaders or foot-soldiers, run the very real risk of ‘being treated as criminals in the eyes of God, notwithstanding the fact that they may label their dawah-murdering agitation as an agitation for the glory of Islam.’ Hence, he insists, the fatwa and the violent agitation that it spurred are ‘absurd and un-Islamic’.
Khan blames what he sees as the Muslims’ total lack of dawah consciousness for what he perceives as their wild emotionalism in the face of even the smallest provocation. If anyone dares says anything, no matter how minor, against their way of thinking, he contends, they immediately get provoked and resort to agitation and even violence. The most sensitive issue in this regard, Khan notes, is the image of the Prophet Muhammad. If anyone says or writes anything about the Prophet that does not correspond with how they themselves perceive him, Khan notes, Muslims turn ‘uncontrollably emotional’ and ‘lose all reason.’ Khan believes this is not at all the appropriate Islamic attitude, and traces it to what he perceives as the fact that ‘Muslims have abandoned dawah’. Because of this, he explains, they now ‘see others as their communal enemies’ and consider any such criticism as ‘an attack on their communal pride’, which forces them out on the streets in violent agitation and worse.
Had Muslims maintained their ‘dawah consciousness’, he remarks, they would have responded to the provocation differently: through patience and avoidance of conflict, as he says the Quran advises them to, so that prospects for dawah would not thereby be damaged. But since they have lost the commitment to dawah, he laments, they have fallen victim to what he terms ‘false emotionalism’ that drives them to respond violently to any and every provocation. This stance, he says, is completely un-Quranic, and is bound to reinforce anti-Islamic prejudices that underlie phenomenon such as blasphemy, instead of doing anything at all to resolve them.
In the face of provocations, such as negative statements or writings against Islam, Khan advises Muslims not to give in to the temptation to react with violent agitation. Instead, he advises, they should respond ‘with patience, wisdom, far-sightedness and clear-mindedness’, these being qualities which he identifies with ‘success in this world and in the next’.
[This article, in a very slightly edited form, appeared in the 21st January 2011 issue of the Daily Times, Pakistan, and can be accessed on

From the writers on Blasphemy

Newsweek on Blasphemy Backlash at

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/06/pakistan-more-attacks-may-follow-killing-of-salmaan-taseer.html

A Reluctant Mind

http://tazeen-tazeen.blogspot.com/2011/01/salman-taseer-you-brave-brave-man-may.html

Is Mullah the true Blasphemer

http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=3887

Salman Taseer, a death foretold

http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=3885

Killer Qadri hailed as a hero

http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=3886

More information

I urge you to share the links to videos and article in the comments section below, after review, I will post to the main body. I have recieved several articles and I will post them as I read them. The debates in Pakistan are very hopeful and inspiring, I love that spirt of freedom and if any one of you can subtitle it in English, it would be of immense value. Thank you.
Mike Ghouse

Follow up on Asia Bibi Petition

Appeal for Justice to Pakistani Asia Bibi and Mercy to mankind

The People, Ulema and Government of Pakistan

• Sponsored By: Muslims of the World

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is a mercy to mankind, he is indeed a blessing to the humanity and rightfully known as Rahmutul Aalameen. There are innumerable examples of forbearance, forgiveness and kindness of the prophet (pbuh) towards those who insulted and even tried to harm him.

One of the most famous stories, often repeated is about an old lady who threw trash on the prophet every time he passed in front of her door. One day, the trash was not thrown. Concerned, he asked the neighbors and found that she was sick. He knocked on her door to and offered help. Overwhelmed with kindness and love, she chose to become a Muslim.

Once on way to the city of Taif, the Prophet was pelted with rocks by miscreants, his associates wanted to retaliate, even the arch angel Gabriel offered to help bring relief to the situation. The prophet said no, instead he asked God to forgive them, because he was the last messenger. If they are destroyed to whom would he preach? He hoped that if not them, their progeny at will accept the God-sent message to mankind.

He enjoined us that "if any one eats a full meal when his neighbor is hungry or starving, then he is not from among us". He never said 'Muslim neighbor'. He loved humanity and asked Muslims to be role models of charity, kindness, concern and love to all.

What was the need for the Prophet to have endured such painful experiences? It was to guide humanity towards kindness, and shape long term solutions for peaceful communities and the greater good of the society at large. He was committed to mitigating conflicts and nurturing goodwill, indeed he was the ultimate peace maker, the mercy to mankind.

As Muslims we need to keep his message of kindness alive and bring to fruition what he was all about; Rahmutul- Aalameen. Let the mercy and kindness he taught become a blessing to the universe and continue to shower on humanity.

We appeal to the Ulema, thoughtful people and the Government of Pakistan to give life to the examples of the Prophet in representing to Asia Bibi. What would Rahmutul Aalameen have done?

Asia Bibi is not a Muslim and is relegated to menial work that is considered unclean (Napak) by others, who consider themselves to be good Muslims, denied her water from the common source. Is this not a most egregious insult, and the denial of water, the same as denial to sustain life?

First of all he would not have denied Asia Bibi the water of life, indeed in another famous occurrence a person fed water to a thirsty animal and the Prophet had said God will grace the person for that act of kindness. He would have been kind and magnanimous and would probably have us pray for Asia Bibis well being. God loves the forgivers and those who repent.

As Muslims we need to keep his message of kindness alive and bring to fruition what he was all about; Rahmutul- Aalameen. Let the mercy and kindness he taught become a blessing to the universe and continue to shower on humanity.

We owe an apology to Asia Bibi, her family and the Christian community. We should build goodwill in our and their hearts.

We ask the people of Pakistan to seriously debate about the blasphemy laws. The violent silencing of Governor Salman Taseer calls for an immediate need for a discussion on the topic. Islam is about free will and as Muslims we need stand against any oppression towards any human being following in the footsteps of the prophet. Amen!

1. Mike Mohamed Ghouse, World Muslim Congress, USA
2. Imam Zia ul Haq Sheikh, Islamic Council of Irving, USA
3. Dr. Mirza A. Beg, World Muslim Congress, USA
4. Dr. M. Basheer Ahmed, USA
5. Dr. Nauman Anwar, USA
and
1. Bishop Ijaz Inayat, Pakistan
2. Dr John Dayal, All India Christian Council, India

In humility, we submit this appeal to bring Rahmat (Mercy) and Justice to every human being. 

The original petition with signature is lost - as the website is closed. However, I was able to retrieve from http://www.inarchive.com/page/2011-11-23/http://www.petitiononline.com/petitions/Asiabibi/signatures?page=31

            
The following note is in response to the comments floating on the internet in the last few hours.  Please read some of the comments an amazing mind-set is in the works.

As people of faith, also should be known as peace makers, we cannot cause people in conflict to dig in their heels and take positions, we have to mitigate conflicts and nurture goodwill for the ultimate good of all. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) applied that method in many of his examples.  I hope you understand the avoidance of such language in the petition.   

Three (of the thousands on my list) individuals wrote, “It is too much. You are really becoming a problem for Ummah. Why are you aggravating the situation? Do you know what are you are going to lose - your both the worlds perhaps?” Another one writes, “Islamically, insults and abuses against the Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, count as acts of war and rebellion against a justly created Islamic entity. The Qur'an commands terrible punishment for such acts of war. “Finally, the third one writes, “Salman was a shame on Islam”.

Those were the right wingers among Muslims, a minuscule, statistically insignificant number of people but can become players by shining the media light on them. These guys are fodder for the other right wingers;  among Republicans and the Fox people. The left on the other hand shouts that we have to declare a war on right wingers. Mahatma Gandhi had aptly said an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.

Prophet Muhammad’s wisdom comes as guiding light; follow the middle path. Every one has a God given space, if we can learn to respect that, conflicts fade and solutions emerge. Keeping that in mind, we have crafted the appeal with a clear goal of finding solutions, which is a deep desire in all parties.

As moderates we are an overwhelming majority, we can express our support to the middle path and ask the extremists to study the prophet and spread goodness in his name and not oppression.

Please sign the Appeal for Justice to Asia Bibi and Mercy to mankind in Pakistan that is if you agree with the content:

http://www.petitiononline.com/Asiabibi/petition.html

Mike Ghouse
www.MikeGhouse.net

Appeal for Justice to Asia Bibi and mercy to mankind

To:  The People, Ulema and Government of Pakistan

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is a mercy to mankind, he is indeed a blessing to the humanity and rightfully known as Rahmutul Aalameen. There are innumerable examples of forbearance, forgiveness and kindness of the prophet (pbuh) towards those who insulted and even tried to harm him.

One of the most famous stories, often repeated is about an old lady who threw trash on the prophet every time he passed in front of her door. One day, the trash was not thrown. Concerned, he asked the neighbors and found that she was sick. He knocked on her door to and offered help. Overwhelmed with kindness and love, she chose to become a Muslim.

Once on way to the city of Taif, the Prophet was pelted with rocks by miscreants, his associates wanted to retaliate, even the arch angel Gabriel offered to help bring relief to the situation. The prophet said no, instead he asked God to forgive them, because he was the last messenger. If they are destroyed to whom would he preach? He hoped that if not them, their progeny at will accept the God-sent message to mankind.

He enjoined us that "if any one eats a full meal when his neighbor is hungry or starving, then he is not from among us". He never said 'Muslim neighbor'. He loved humanity and asked Muslims to be role models of charity, kindness, concern and love to all.

What was the need for the Prophet to have endured such painful experiences? It was to guide humanity towards kindness, and shape long term solutions for peaceful communities and the greater good of the society at large. He was committed to mitigating conflicts and nurturing goodwill, indeed he was the ultimate peace maker, the mercy to mankind.

As Muslims we need to keep his message of kindness alive and bring to fruition what he was all about; Rahmutul- Aalameen. Let the mercy and kindness he taught become a blessing to the universe and continue to shower on humanity.

We appeal to the Ulema, thoughtful people and the Government of Pakistan to give life to the examples of the Prophet in representing to Asia Bibi. What would Rahmutul Aalameen have done?

Asia Bibi is not a Muslim and is relegated to menial work that is considered unclean (Napak) by others, who consider themselves to be good Muslims, denied her water from the common source. Is this not a most egregious insult, and the denial of water, the same as denial to sustain life?

First of all he would not have denied Asia Bibi the water of life, indeed in another famous occurrence a person fed water to a thirsty animal and the Prophet had said God will grace the person for that act of kindness. He would have been kind and magnanimous and would probably have us pray for Asia Bibi’s well being. God loves the forgivers and those who repent.

As Muslims we need to keep his message of kindness alive and bring to fruition what he was all about; Rahmutul- Aalameen. Let the mercy and kindness he taught become a blessing to the universe and continue to shower on humanity.

We owe an apology to Asia Bibi, her family and the Christian community. We should build goodwill in our and their hearts.

We ask the people of Pakistan to seriously debate about the blasphemy laws. The violent silencing of Governor Salman Taseer calls for an immediate need for a discussion on the topic. Islam is about free will and as Muslims we need stand against any oppression towards any human being following in the footsteps of the prophet. Amen!

1. Mike Mohamed Ghouse, World Muslim Congress, USA
2. Imam Zia ul Haq Sheikh, Islamic Council of Irving, USA
3. Dr. Mirza A. Beg, World Muslim Congress, USA
4. Dr. M. Basheer Ahmed, USA
5. Dr. Nauman Anwar, USA
and
1. Bishop Ijaz Inayat, Pakistan
2. Dr John Dayal, All India Christian Council, India
In humility, we submit this appeal to bring Rahmat (Mercy) and Justice to every human being.

Sincerely,
The Undersigned

FOLLOW UP

Appeal for Justice to Pakistani Asia Bibi and Mercy to mankind

            The following note is in response to the comments floating on the internet in the last few hours.  Please read some of the comments, an amazing mind-set is in the works.http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2011/01/follow-up-on-asia-bibi-petition.html

As people of faith, also should be known as peace makers, we cannot cause people in conflict to dig in their heels and take positions, we have to mitigate conflicts and nurture goodwill for the ultimate good of all. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) applied that method in many of his examples.  I hope you understand the avoidance of such language in the petition.   

Three (of the thousands on my list) individuals wrote, “It is too much. You are really becoming a problem for Ummah. Why are you aggravating the situation? Do you know what are you are going to lose - your both the worlds perhaps?” Another one writes, “Islamically, insults and abuses against the Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, count as acts of war and rebellion against a justly created Islamic entity. The Qur'an commands terrible punishment for such acts of war. “Finally, the third one writes, “Salman was a shame on Islam”.

Those were the right wingers among Muslims, a minuscule, statistically insignificant number of people but can become players by shining the media light on them. These guys are fodder for the other right wingers;  among Republicans and the Fox people. The left on the other hand shouts that we have to declare a war on right wingers. Mahatma Gandhi had aptly said an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.

Prophet Muhammad’s wisdom comes as guiding light; follow the middle path. Every one has a God given space, if we can learn to respect that, conflicts fade and solutions emerge. Keeping that in mind, we have crafted the appeal with a clear goal of finding solutions, which is a deep desire in all parties.

As moderates we are an overwhelming majority, we can express our support to the middle path and ask the extremists to study the prophet and spread goodness in his name and not oppression.

Please sign the Appeal for Justice to Asia Bibi and Mercy to mankind in Pakistan that is if you agree with the content:

http://www.petitiononline.com/Asiabibi/petition.html