Blasphemy and Apostasy Laws: Islam or Hislam?

It is one of the simplest but effective pieces in understanding Blasphemy, this virus has penetrated deeply into the psyche of Muslim, even though, it is not Islamic. Recommended reading.

Mike Ghouse
----------


Courtesy: FaithStreet

n January 2011, the governor of Punjab, Salman Taseer, was gunned down by one of his own security guards over a controversial move — opposing the blasphemy law in Pakistan. Although thousands of Pakistanis condemned this by attending his funeral and showing support on social media, religious fanatics hailed his murderer as a hero, recently naming a mosque after him.

As a Muslim, I stand firmly against blasphemy laws. My faith demands that I do so, for it repeatedly asks me to stand for justice and fight oppression.

The Quran shows us that even though God’s prophets were mocked and threatened, they never killed their accusers for hurting their “religious sentiments.” In fact, the Quran opposes any laws that restrain freedom of speech or would have someone killed over differences in belief. Rather, Quran 73:10 says, “Be patient over what they say, and leave them graciously.”

So how did these blasphemy and apostasy laws come to be associated with Islam?

The blasphemy and apostasy laws are found in the Hadeeth, sayings attributed to Prophet Mohammad, which were compiled two-three centuries after his death. Muslims know that no Hadeeth should contradict the Quran if they are to be accepted, given their subjective nature and reliance on the Quran for authenticity.

But early scholars intentionally overlooked this to protect the interests of clergymen and political leaders. These oppressive laws allow them to exercise complete control over people, punishing anyone who threatens their position by declaring them apostates — enemies of Islam. To so many clergymen, religion is nothing but a means to gain power and control people. To keep out competition and force their monopoly, they invent laws in the name of God so “consumers” have no choice but to keep buying their “product.” Or face persecution.

Religious leaders like Tahir-ul-Qadri, a staunch proponent of blasphemy laws, rule people by fear. Add to that the fact that the average Muslim is unaware of the Quran’s teachings, which makes them likely to believe whatever the clergy tells them about Islam. Of these leaders, the Qur’an asks us to be weary: “O You who have believed! A great many religious leaders: rabbis, priests, monks, Mullahs, yogis, and mystics devour the wealth of people in falsehood, and bar them from the path of God” (Quran 9:34).

So what exactly does the Quran say about blasphemy and apostasy?

Quite frankly, blasphemy and apostasy laws are themselves blasphemous to the teachings of the Qur’an. Not in the traditional sense, but because they violate the very instructions the scripture gives regarding freedom of belief.

Regarding apostasy, in Quran 2:256 God says, “There is no compulsion in matters of faith. The right way is now distinct from the wrong way. Anyone who denounces false authorities and becomes at peace with God has grasped the strongest bond; one that never breaks. God is Hearer, Knower.”

In a similar vein, verse 109:6 instructs adherents to end a debate by saying: “To you, your belief system. And to me, mine.”

If all that isn’t convincing enough, Quran 10:99 should seal the deal: “If your Lord willed, all who are on earth, would have believed (by not providing free will). Would you then, compel people to become believers?”

When it comes to blasphemy, I often hear some version of, “Hold on. If someone mocks my religion, it prompts me to act violently. You see, it makes me very emotional.”

But this statement only shows an ignorance of the Quran, which says in verse 6:68, “When you see them engaged in vain discourse about Our verses, turn away from them unless they engage in a different subject. If Satan ever makes you forget (i.e. your mind gets engrossed in their discourse,) then as soon as you recollect, no longer sit in the company of the people who confound the truth with falsehood.”

Here, Muslims are instructed to engage with these people if they change the topic. Certainly that means we’re not to have enmity towards them, let alone kill them!

And, again, Quran 28:55 instructs, “Whenever they (believers) hear vain talk of ridicule, they withdraw from it decently and say, ‘“To us our deeds and to you yours; Peace be upon you, we do not seek to join the ignorant.”

Those verses are practically shouting freedom of expression at the top of their lungs! Islam is a very progressive path to God, one in which differences in opinions and beliefs are accepted, not punished (Quran 39:18). On the other hand, blasphemy and apostasy laws lead to negative misconceptions about Islam being an oppressive faith.

But what are we Muslims to do? By not voicing our disapproval, we stand for these anti-Quranic laws and call them Islam. Is that not like setting your own house on fire? There is not a single verse that encourages Muslims to act violently toward those who leave Islam, or even mock the Quran. After all, shouldn’t truth be able to defend itself on its own merit? What good is a forced belief?

We can even take it a step further by noting how rejecters treated the prophets.

Of Prophet Nooh: “They said, ‘If you do not desist, O Noah, you will surely be of those who are stoned’” (Quran 26:116).

Prophet Ibrahim’s father said, ”Do you dislike my gods, O Abraham? If you cease not, I will certainly cause you to be stoned to death! Now get away from me for good” (Quran 19:46). Similarly, the priesthood said of Ibrahim, “Burn him alive and uphold your gods if you are going to take any action” (Quran 21:68).
Regarding Prophet Musa, “[Pharaoh] said, ‘If you take a god/authority other than me, I will surely place you among those imprisoned’” (Quran 26:29). To Musa’s followers, Pharaoh also said, “I will surely cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will surely crucify you all” (Quran 26:49).”

These verses should reveal to us a different perspective: all prophets were seen as blasphemers and apostates to the prevalent religion of their time. To condone the oppressive laws of religious leaders today is to support ill treatment of the prophets. After all, you would’ve done the same!

And that’s the most ironic part. If a messenger were to come today, these clergymen and their ardent followers would utter the same threats to him. They have fabricated their own laws in the name of God, so when you ask them to reform, they either consider you a blasphemer or an apostate and have a fatwa issued to kill you.  That’s the scary thing about truth: it doesn’t warrant aggression but is always met with it.

This is not a matter of interpretation, as some would call it. The Quran condemns forced belief in numerous verses. Rather, this is a matter of giving preference to the Hadeeth over the Quran to justify bigotry and extremism in the name of Islam. Having said that, it’s up to you whether you want to rethink your stance or keep blindly following what you have been taught — whether you want to follow Islam or Hislam. Because unlike misguided religious fanatics, sincere believers never force their beliefs on others.

What’s the Golden Rule, again? “Any secondary source on Islam that goes against the Quran should be rejected.”

Often said, but seldom followed.

The opinions expressed in this piece belong to the author.
Image courtesy of Cezary Piwowarski.

More on:

About Ro Waseem

Ro Waseem is a progressive Muslim who is bent on separating culture from religion. His articles have been published by The Express Tribune, The Malaysian Insider, and World Religion News. He blogs about Muslim reformation at http://quranalyzeit.wordpress.com.

Blasphemy Law has NO Qur'anic Basis

Some Muslim countries have legislated punishment for blasphemy. This draws on the Classical Sharia (Law) of Islam that evolved in the medieval ages and was inevitably informed by the historical realities and entrenched customs and practices of the era. However, with a sea change in civilizational paradigms,  many of its rulings suffer anachronism, stand in conflict with international human rights charters and conduce to injustice, anarchy and barbarism in today's politically volatile and globalized world. All such rulings need to be examined in light of the universal message of the Qur'an which is by far the highest and incontestable authority in Islam. 

This essay - an exercise in ijtihad (intellectual scrutiny with the limits set by God) investigates the case of blasphemy. It draws on a recently published focused exegetic work, the Essential Message of Islam [Amana Publications, USA- 2009] that is duly approved by al-Azhar al-Sharif and endorsed and authenticated by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, Alfi Distinguished Professor of Law at the UCLA School of Law.

The Qur'anic pronouncement "not to insult those whom others (lit., 'they') invoke besides God" (6:108) is a clear reminder against profaning any deity, idol or symbols held sacred by other people. The Qur'an, however, does not prescribe any punishment for the offenders. It warns humanity that there will always be some people who will hurl seductive remarks at the Prophet (6:113) or be inimical to him (25:31) for fun or cupidity and asks the believers to simply ignore them. In other words, the Qur'an treats blasphemy as a moral vice and does not regard it as a punishable/ criminal offence.

The Meccan enemies of the Prophet called him impostor, a madman (30:58, 44:14, 68:51), and an insane poet (37:36). They ridiculed the Qur'anic revelation (18:56, 26:6, 37:14, 45:9), which they declared to be strange and unbelievable (38:5, 50:2), a jumble of dreams(21:5) and legends of the ancients (6:25, 23:83, 25:5, 27:68, 46:17, 68:15, 83:13). They accused the Prophet of forging lies and witchcraft (34:43, 38:4), forging lies against God, forgery and making up tales (11:13, 32:3, 38:7, 46:8), witchcraft (21:3, 43:30, 74:24), obvious witchcraft that was bewildering (10:2, 37:15, 46:7), and of being bewitched or possessed by a Jinn (17:47, 23:70, 34:8). By definition, all these accusations were blasphemous. Nowhere in its text does the Qur'an prescribe any punishment for those who uttered these blasphemies.

The advocates of blasphemy law may raise the following points:

1. The slanderer and maligner of the Prophet can upset peace and harmony like priests of Cordova (Spain, 851-859) [1].

2. Maligning any religion, religious leader, text etc. purports to demonize and dehumanize it and can fuel hatred, religious bigotry and animosity, and in the present day context, feed Islamophobia and Islamofacism.

The arguments appear convincing but there are more compelling grounds against prescribing any punishment for blasphemy.

The highly porous and subjective character of the 'offense' (blasphemy) can lead to a chaotic situation within the Muslim community and persecution of the minority community as is happening in Pakistan these days.

An uncouth citizen can use it to settle a score with a non-Muslim or even a Muslim neighbour or financially exploit him by a threat of blasphemy charge.

An Islamic State can use it for political repression of dissidents.

By strict application of blasphemy law in a broader sense, a Sunni Sharia Court can charge the entire Shia community of blasphemy for their invectives against the Prophet's close relatives - the first three Caliphs, who were either his father-in-law (Abu Bakr and Umar) or son-in-law (Uthman).

The theologians in the Islamic heartlands can issue an endless stream of fatwas for the heads of the countless Islam bashing scholars and writers, whose speech, writing and symbolism can sometimes be construed as blasphemous.

The very notion of killing a person for blasphemy contradicts the Qur'anic cardinal principle of justice that relates only to offences committed against fellow humans.

Conclusion: The relativism and porosity in the definition of 'blasphemy' can open a floodgate of blasphemy charges against unsuspecting individuals, members of the minority, Muslim sects and Islam.critcal scholars and writers. Since the Qur'an, conceivably cognizant of these caveats, does not  prescribe any punishment for blasphemy, the blasphemy law needs to be repealed. Blasphemy symbolizes and epitomises hatred that inevitably breeds hatred - regardless of any law against it. This can in turn feed radicalisation, foster terrorism, and trigger communal riots. Muslim jurists will do better by insisting on getting a firm Security Council Code of Conduct and may be limited punishment for blasphemy depending upon the gravity and potential impact of the offence and the attitude of the offender, rather than legislating a capital punishment or even, any punishment for blasphemy - which remains a porous act of misconduct and moral turpitude.

Notes

[1]. Between 851 and 859, some priests in Cordova, now southern Spain, used to utter in public places highly insulting and abusive remarks against the Prophet deliberately seeking capital punishment. They were an embarrassment to both the Christian community and the Emir and were executed by application of Sharia law as this was the only way to prevent them from a highly provocative behaviour in public.

Muhammad Yunus, a Chemical Engineering graduate from Indian Institute of Technology, and a retired corporate executive has been engaged in an in-depth study of the Qur'an since early 90's, focusing on its core message. He has co-authored the referred exegetic work, which received the approval of al-Azhar al-Sharif, Cairo in 2002, and following restructuring and refinement was endorsed and authenticated by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl of UCLA, and published by Amana Publications, Maryland, USA, 2009.

August 24, 2012.

Blasphemy laws go against Islam

http://blasphemylaws.blogspot.com/2012/04/blasphemy-laws-go-against-islam.html

Blasphemy laws have no basis in the Quran, God is about justice and mercy, and not cruelty and tyranny. Those who claim to defend the dignity of God, Prophet, Quran, and Islam really do not have faith in the four. They are afraid God, the Prophet, the Quran, and Islam will disappear from the face of the earth without their protection. They are wrong! We are bloody mortal beings here today and gone tomorrow, whereas God, Prophet, Quran, and Islam have been around and will always be there.

There should be no punishment for Blasphemy, it is not in the Quran and it was not practiced by the prophet. God (Quran) says the dearest human to him is one who forgives, and Prophet practiced it by praying for those who cursed him. He could have smashed those miscreants in Taif, but he chose to pray. As followers, we are supposed to pray and not punish. 


Blasphemy Laws are not God's laws, they are the tools of oppression by the tyrants to force obedience from others, it goes against the principle of the Quran - there is no compulsion. 

Insecure men do not have the confidence in themselves to dialogue and resolve the conflicts, nor do they have faith in God and his word.

When people disagree with them, they will beat them up or eliminate them with power, screams, deaths, and threats. 

Secure men believe in God and the Day of Judgment, and he is the only one who knows what is in our hearts. He says in the Quran, I am closer to you than your jugular vein. Meaning, he knows our thoughts, intentions, and actions on time, as we do.

Secure men discuss things, square the difference through dialogue. Indeed, that is the reason God gave us a tongue to dialogue instead of what the animals are programmed to do.

Who are we to punish then? 

It is un-Islamic and cooked up by the tyrants. Unless a few of us start speaking against Blasphemy, the evil vigilantist anti-Islamic practice of insecure men will continue. There is no punishment for Blasphemy.

Except for the first four caliphs, who were chosen to govern,  we have a bad history of oppression.  It is not just us, until 100 years ago with the exception of the United States; the whole world was run by dictators and kings particularly in Muslim majority nations. Most nations are moving towards civil societies run by the consensus of the people and sadly Muslim societies have not been able to free themselves from the shackles put in by the dictator Caliphs and Kings.  At least one thing is right about secondary Muslim literature - they called the first four Caliphs Rashidun - the rightly guided ones. Since then we have good, bad, and ugly Muslim rulers. 

Look at our history, we have been prevented from independent inquiry, we are run over by the damned dictators and kings. 

Unfortunately, Muslims do not have the breathing room to be themselves, they are continuously bonded by one tyrant or the other… We certainly can pray to ask God to help Muslims to be free to govern themselves and not throw them in the mouths of Mullahs from the dictators. One bad Mubarak goes and the brotherhood is out there to force their laws on the unwilling people, and now we have another tyrant Sisi, where will it end? 

We the Muslims have been reduced to Pavlovian Muslims - we are too damned conditioned with the laws created by men like dictator Zia ul Haq, intolerant Ibn-e-Wahhab, sneaky Maududi and Banna. We need to be free and follow the guidance from God.

Prophet Muhammad said I am leaving this book to you - he did not say, well, I have assigned the interpretation of the book to the Imams, Kings and the dictators... you don't need to read the Quran any more, just follow the rules made by the dominant partners of God, you will get a free pass on the Day of Judgement. They will take care of you.

Time to start from Zero and follow the Prophet. Pull down the "Great Work" of big-time Imams and not equate their work with the Quran, they have made us cowards and insecure with Blasphemy and Apostasy laws that go against God's will.  

Here are verses from the Quran;

 [5:57] O you who believe, do not befriend those among the recipients of previous scripture who mock and ridicule your religion, nor shall you befriend the disbelievers. You shall reverence GOD if you are really 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 revelations and My messengers. 

My note: Hell and punishment is God's business and not ours. Ours is to forgive and pray for the goodwill. 

[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. 

[5:33] (Asad) It is but a just recompense for those who make war on God and His apostle, ^[43] and endeavor 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 endeavor 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 possible 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 the 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.

The Muslim masses need to learn a lot from the Quran.  They are shackled by their Ulams and Allamas!

# # #

Mike Ghouse is a Muslim thinker, speaker and writer. Information about him is available in 63 links at www.MikeGhouse.net and his current writings are at www.TheGhousediary.com.

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.

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/