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.

Punishment of Blasphemy in Quraan

We are pleased to present different points of view,  publication does not mean endorsement - Mike Ghouse,  Muslims together.

# # #

Quraan does not contain any verse for the Punishment of Blasphemy

By Irshad Mahmood

Forget about blasphemy against Allah, his Prophets (Peace-Be-Upon-Them) and Sahaba (Raḍiyul-Laahu-Anhu), even if someone says anything about Religious Scholars (Faqui, Peer, Molvi or Mufti etc.), we are just so ready to KILL, KILL and KILL again and destroy our own economy with our own hand and put Billions of Dollars of loss in just few hours, which might have taken ages to established. This could be Shaitaan’s another Trap to destroy Muslims economy.

Blasphemy and these types of slogan are not new and many times, Prophet Muhammad (Peace-Be-Upon-Him) was subjected to verbal and physical humiliation. He (Peace-Be-Upon-Him) was narrowly escaped assassination by migrating to Medina along with Hazrat Abu Bakar (Raḍiyul-Laahu-Anhu). He was accused of FORGERY (Ref: Al_Quraan_021.005), and MAD/CRAZY/POSSESSED (Ref: Al_Quraan_068.002). His personal reaction, as also the reaction of all his devoted Companions (Raḍiyul-Laahu-Anhu), while both in and out of power, was impeccable adherence to the Quraanic teachings.

Punishment for Physical Abuse/Crime in the Quraan:

The Quraan sets strict limits on punishment for any and every physical abuse/crime, i.e. tit for tat, e.g., eye for eye, teeth for teeth and wounds for similar wounds as its maximum punishment, while recommends to forgive to set a role model for others (Ref: Al_Quraan_002.178, 004.092-093, 005.032, 005.045, 062.040, 028.054). The honorable ministers and lawyers must have clear knowledge of the Quraanic directives on crime and its punishment.

And if you punished, let your punishment be proportionate to the wrong that has been done to you; but if you show patience, that is indeed the best course. (Al_Quraan_016.126)

There is no punishment mentioned in the Quraan regarding verbal abuse, however Allah has given limited authority to Islaamic Government to established peace for non-Physical Abuse in a balanced way (Ref: Al_Quraan_018.028, 004.059). 

True peaceful rally in front of Parliament/Secretariat Buildings, Courts and Palaces etc. is necessary during the weekends, which do not hurt Peoples economy. True Islaamic Government must fines those doing these types of verbal abuses/crimes, in addition to put them into jail for limited time and teach them all the Quraanic (True Book of Guidance) Messages in their language during this jail time regardless of diplomats or high officials (Ref: Al_Quraan_009.006). Anyone entering into Muslims Country must be taught a Brief Quraanic Messages before issuing them visas including Diplomats and High Officials.

Be patient with what they say, celebrate (constantly) the praises of thy Lord and leave them with noble (dignity). (Ref: Al_Quran_020.130, 050:039, 073.010)

And withhold yourself with those who call on their Lord morning and evening desiring His goodwill, and let not your eyes pass from them (always yes sir, till they follow the Quraan and Really Authentic Sunnah), desiring the beauties of this world's life; and do not follow him whose heart We have made unmindful to Our remembrance, and he follows his low desires and his case is one in which due bounds are exceeded. (Al_Quraan_018.028)

If Quraan cannot convince you nothing will:

None argue concerning the revelations (Ayaat) of Allah BUT those who Disbelieve... (Al_Quraan_040.004)

The command is for none but Allah. (Al_Quraan_018:026)

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

Islamic scholar attacks Pakistan's blasphemy laws

Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, reformist scholar and popular television preacher. Photograph: Declan walsh

A prominent Islamic scholar has launched a blistering attack on Pakistan's blasphemy laws, warning that failure to repeal them will only strengthen religious extremists and their violent followers.

"The blasphemy laws have no justification in Islam. These ulema [council of clerics] are just telling lies to the people," said Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, a reformist scholar and popular television preacher.

"But they have become stronger, because they have street power behind them, and the liberal forces are weak and divided. If it continues like this it could result in the destruction of Pakistan."

Ghamidi, 59, is the only religious scholar to publicly oppose the blasphemy laws since the assassination of the Punjab governor, Salmaan Taseer, on 4 January. He speaks out at considerable personal risk.

Ghamidi spoke to the Guardian from Malaysia, where he fled with his wife and daughters last year after police foiled a plot to bomb their Lahore home. "It became impossible to live there," he said.

Their fears were well founded: within months Taliban gunmen assassinated Dr Farooq Khan, a Ghamidi ally also famous for speaking out, at his clinic in the north-western city of Mardan.

The scholar's troubles highlight the shrinking space for debate in Pakistan, where Taseer's death has emboldened the religious right, prompting mass street rallies in favour of his killer, Mumtaz Qadri.

Liberal voices have been marginalised; many fear to speak out. Mainstream political parties have crumbled, led by the ruling Pakistan People's party, which declared it will never amend the blasphemy law.

Sherry Rehman, a PPP parliamentarian who proposed changes to the legislation, was herself charged with blasphemy this week. Since Taseer's death she has been confined to her Karachi home after numerous death threats, some issued publicly by clerics.
Although other Islamic scholars share Ghamidi's views on blasphemy, none dared air them so forcefully. "Ghamidi is a voice of reason in a babble of noises seemingly dedicated to irrationality," said Ayaz Amir, an opposition politician and opinion columnist.

Ghamidi's voice stands out because he attacks the blasphemy law on religious grounds. While secular critics say it is abused to persecute minorities and settle scores, Ghamidi says it has no foundation in either the Qur'an or the Hadith – the sayings of the prophet Muhammad. "Nothing in Islam supports this law," he said.
Ghamidi deserted the country's largest religious political party, Jamaat-e-Islami, to set up his own school of religious teaching. He came to public attention through a series of television shows on major channels. They were cancelled due to opposition from the mullahs, he said. "They told the channels there would be demonstrations if I wasn't taken off air."

Three years ago gunmen fired a pistol into the mouth of the editor of Ghamidi's magazine; last year the police foiled a plot to bomb his home and school. Now the school is closed.

The core problem, Ghamidi said, was the alliance between Pakistan's "establishment" – code for the military – and Islamist extremists it uses to fight in Kashmir and Afghanistan. "They are closely allied," he said.

The blasphemy debate has exposed painful rifts in Pakistani society. One Ghamidi follower said his father, a British-educated engineer, called him an infidel for attacking the controversial law. "Our society is tearing itself apart," he said.

Tariq Dhamial, a lawyer representing Mumtaz Qadri, said more than 800 lawyers had offered to represent the self-confessed killer. "Everyone is behind Qadri. Doctors, teachers, labourers, even police – they believe he did the right thing," Dhamial said.Dhamial said the police intended to hold Qadri's trial in jail but the lawyers wanted it heard in open court. The latest hearing is due next Tuesday.

Even when out of Pakistan, Ghamidi features on television shows by phone, often outwitting extremist clerics with his deep knowledge of the Qur'an. But he eschews terms such as "liberal".

"I am neither Islamist nor secular. I am a Muslim and a democrat," he said. But even allies question whether religious argument alone can win the sulphurous blasphemy debate.

"When you talk about religion, you only provoke the forces of reaction who become more intolerant. Then governments become frightened and retreat,"
said Amir. "Ghamidi's is a voice for the converted. But that won't solve our problem."

• This article was amended on 21 January 2011. The original referred to Jamaat-e-Islami as Pakistan's largest religious political party. This has been corrected.
# #

Proposed Amendments to Blasphemy Laws in Pakistan

The existing Blasphemy Laws of Pakistan are reproduced below together with the changes proposed by a private member's bill in Parliament (Sherry Rehman's bill).  Scroll down quickly to have an overview of our existing laws and the proposed changes. Proposed deletions are shown as strikethrough and proposed additions in (brackets).  This will give you a broad feel of what we are talking about.  I am sure most people have not seen the existing laws or the proposed changes in context of the existing laws.  (I have used Sherry Rehman's bill only as an example of changes that could be considered because it is the only one I know that is in the public domain.)

Then read the rest of my email which you will find after you have scrolled down.

EXISTING LAWS AND
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE BLASPHEMY LAWS

National Assembly of Pakistan

Amendments in Offences Related to Religion

Amendments in the Pakistan Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code

Proposed by Sherry Rehman, MNA

Proposed deletions are shown as strikethrough and proposed additions in (brackets).

PAKISTAN PENAL CODE

(ACT XLV OF1860)

Chapter 15

Offences Relating to Religion

295. Injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to insult the religion of any class: Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction damage or defilement as an insult to their religion shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

295-A. Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs: Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of the citizens of Pakistan, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations insults the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten (two) years, or with fine, or with both.

295-B. Defiling, etc., of Holy Quran: Whoever wilfully defiles, damages or desecrates a copy of the Holy Quran or of an extract therefrom or uses it in any derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be punishable with imprisonment for life (shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine or with both).

295-C. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet: Whoever (maliciously, deliberately and intentionally) by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death (shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine or with both).

296. Disturbing religious assembly: Whoever voluntarily causes disturbance to any assembly lawfully engaged in the performance of religious worship, or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

297. Trespassing on burial places, etc.: Whoever, with the intention of wounding the feelings of any person, or of insulting the religion of any person, or with the knowledge that the feelings of any person are likely to be wounded, or that the religion of any person is likely to be insulted thereby, commits any trespass in any place of worship or on any place of sculpture, or any place set apart for the performance of funeral rites or as a, depository for the remains of the dead, or offers any indignity to any human corpse or causes disturbance to any persons assembled for the performance of funeral ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

298. Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings: Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year or with fine, or with both.

298-A. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of holy personages: Whoever (maliciously, deliberately and intentionally) by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of any wife (Ummul Mumineen), or members of the family (Ahle-bait), of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), or any of the righteous Caliphs (Khulafa-e-Rashideen) or companions (Sahaaba) of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

298-B. Misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles, etc., reserved for certain holy personages or places: (1) Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves “Ahmadis” or by any other name) who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation (maliciously, deliberately and intentionally) –

(a) refers to or addresses, any person, other than a Caliph or companion of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as “Ameer-ul-Mumineen”, “Khalifatul-Mumineen”, Khalifa-tul-Muslimeen”, “Sahaabi” or “Razi Allah Anho”;

(b) refers to, or addresses, any person, other than a wife of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as “Ummul-Mumineen”;

(c) refers to, or addresses, any person, other than a member of the family (Ahle-bait) of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as “Ahle-bait”; or

(d) refers to, or names, or calls, his place of worship a “Masjid”; shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

(2) Any person of the Qaudiani group or Lahori group (who call themselves “Ahmadis” or by any other name) who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation refers to the mode or form of call to prayers followed by his faith as “Azan”, or recites Azan as used by the Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

298-C. Person of Quadiani group, etc., calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith: Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves “Ahmadis” or by any other name), who directly or indirectly, poses himself as a Muslim, or calls, or refers to, his faith as Islam, or preaches or propagates his faith, or invites others to accept his faith, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, or in any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

(298-E. Any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination or violence shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine or with both.)

203. Giving false information respecting an offence committed: Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, gives any information respecting that offence which he knows or believes to be false shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

(203-A. Anyone making a false or frivolous accusation under any of the sections 295A, 295B and 295C, of the Pakistan Penal Code shall be punished in accordance with similar punishments prescribed in the section under which the false or frivolous accusation was made.)

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1898.

As amended by Act II of 1997

30. Offences not punishable with death. In the Punjab, the North-West Frontier, in Sind and in those parts of the Provinces in which there are Deputy Commissioners or Assistant Commissioners the Provincial Government may, notwithstanding anything contained in [sections 28 and 29. invest any Judicial] District Magistrate or any Magistrate of the first class with power to try as a Magistrate all offences not punishable with death (as well as offences falling under sections 295A, 295B and 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code).

190. Cognizance of offences by Magistrates. (1) Except as hereinafter provided, [any District Magistrate or a Sub-Divisional Magistrate or any other Magistrate specially empowered in this behalf] by the Provincial Government on the recommendation of High Court may take cognizance of any offence:

(a) upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such offence;

(b) upon a report in writing of such facts made by any police-officer;

(c) upon information received from any person other than a police-officer, or upon his own knowledge or suspicion that such offence has been committed.

[(2) The Provincial Government may empower any Magistrate to take cognizance under sub-section (1), clause (a) or clause (b), of offences for which he may try or send to the Court of Session for trial; provided that in case of Judicial Magistrate, the Provincial Government shall exercise this power on the recommendations of the High Court.]

[(3) A Magistrate taking cognizance under sub-section (1) of an offence triable exclusively by a Court of Session shall, without recording any evidence, send the case to Court of Session for trial.]

((3) All offences falling within sections 295A, 295B and 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code shall exclusively be taken cognizance of by the Court of Sessions and tried by the High Court).

193. Cognizance of offences by Courts of Sessions. (1) Except as otherwise expressly provided by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court of Session shall take cognizance of any offence as a Court of original jurisdiction [unless the case has been sent to it under section 190 sub-section (3) (and as expressly provided for under section 190 of the Code).

(2) Additional Sessions Judges and Assistant Sessions Judges shall try such cases only as the Provincial Government by general or special order may direct them to try, or as the Sessions Judge of the division, by general or special order, may make over to them for trial.

201. Procedure by Magistrate not competent to take cognizance of the case. (1) If the complaint has been made in writing to a Magistrate who is not competent to take cognizance of the case, he shall return the complaint for presentation to the proper Court with an endorsement to that effect.

(2) If the complaint has not been made in writing such Magistrate shall direct the complainant to the proper Court (provided that if a complaint is made in writing to a Magistrate under sections 295A, 295B or 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code, he shall not take cognizance of it and forward it to the proper Sessions Court with an endorsement to that effect and in case the complaint has not made in writing, such Magistrate shall direct the complaint to the proper Sessions Court).

[202. Postponement of issue of process. (1) Any Court, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which it is authorized to take cognizance, or which has been sent to it under Section 190, sub-section (3), or transferred to it under Section 191 or Section 192, may, if it thinks fit, for reasons to be recorded postpone the issue of process for compelling the attendance of the person complained against, and either inquire into the case itself or direct an inquiry or investigation to be made by [any Justice of the Peace or by] a police-officer or by such other person as it thinks fit, for the purpose of ascertaining the truth or falsehood of the complaint. Provided that, save where the complaint has been made by a Court, no such direction shall be made unless the complainant has been examined on oath under the provisions of Section 200.

(2) A Court of Session may, instead of directing an investigation under the provisions of sub-section (1), direct the investigation to be made by any Magistrate subordinate to it for the purpose of ascertaining the truth or falsehood of the complaint.

(3) If any inquiry or investigation under this section is made by a person not being a Magistrate [or Justice of the Peace] or a police-officer, such person shall exercise all the powers conferred by this Code on an officer-in-charge of a police-station, except that he shall not have power to arrest without warrant.

(4) Any Court inquiring into a case under this section may, if it thinks fit, take evidence of witnesses on oath.]

((5) Notwithstanding anything contained in the preceding subsections any complaint made under sections 295A, 295B and 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code shall be filed at and taken cognizance of by a Court of Sessions and tried by the High Court, whereas the procedure laid down in the preceding subsections shall be followed).

203. Dismissal of complaint. [The Court] before whom a complaint is made or to whom it has been transferred or [sent] may dismiss the complaint, if, after considering the statement on oath (if any) of the complainant and the result of the investigation or inquiry if any under section 202 there is in his judgment no sufficient ground for proceeding. In such case he shall briefly record his reasons for so doing.

STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND REASONS

Member in Charge

Sherry Rehman, MNA

Amendments to the Blasphemy Laws are long overdue. These must include a rationalization of punishments under the offences relating to religion. Vague terminology in these laws has led to their wide mis-use for the persecution of others. The sentences must be reduced so that the incentive to use these laws to settle scores is taken away. Sentences that promote justice rather than open the doors to religious persecution will be respected and applied properly, and it is these that must be rationalized in pursuit of Constitutional guarantees for protection of all citizens under the law. The ascertainment of malicious intent must also be made when charges are brought against an accused person. The absence of demonstrating premeditation in all such charges has led to a widespread abuse of such laws, where innocent people have suffered trials and tribulations at the hands of their accusers who use these laws to pressure the accused for personal or material gain. The absence of such a clause does not take into account the concept of mens rea, which is central to procedures in all criminal offences.

It is equally important that those making false or frivolous allegations under section 295A, 295B and 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code must also be punished, as misuse of religion to harm others and put them through agony is a serious offence. The Pakistan Penal Code must also be amended to include a new section for making any advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination or violence an offence.

The Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 are the major statutes relating to criminal law in Pakistan. While the PPC deals in defining all the offences and mentions their punishments, the Criminal Procedure Code acts as a procedural law, providing machinery for the punishment of offenders against the substantive criminal law. The two codes are read together, and amendments to the CrPC are essential to ensure the effectiveness of amendments to the PPC. Any bill seeking to make amendments that work for justice delivery on the ground must amend these two statutory codes together.

Amendments must be made in the Criminal Procedure Code to ensure protection of Pakistan’s minorities and vulnerable citizens, who routinely face judgments and verdicts at the lower courts where mob pressure is often mobilized to obtain a conviction. It must be ensured that a court of Sessions take cognizance of an offence made under sections 295A, 295B and 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code on complaints filed before it, so that the complainant takes full responsibility of the consequences in case the accusations are false or frivolous. All complaints under sections 295 A, 295 B and 295 C should be made before a Court of Sessions and subsequently tried by the High Court, because trials by High Courts are likely to strengthen the possibility for justice. Given that the intent of this Bill is to avoid miscarriages of justice in the name of Blasphemy, it should be the aim of a just society, as enshrined in our Constitution and Islam, to try all such cases at the High Courts which are always under a higher degree of public scrutiny.

Given that one of the principle tenets of Islam is to ensure justice to all, it is incumbent to therefore amend these man-made laws introduced in Pakistan by a dictator’s Ordinance, without parliamentary consultation or public debate.

What is Mens rea?

Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind".  In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty unless the mind be also guilty".

Many serious crimes require the proof of mens rea before a person can be convicted.  In other words, the prosecution must prove not only that the accused committed the offence (actus reus) but that he did it knowing that it was prohibited; that his act was done with an intent to commit the crime.

Resuming my e-mail:

As you will have noticed, blasphemy is covered in the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) in 4 sections, Sections 295 to 298. Section 295 pertains to injuring or defiling place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class. Punishment: 2 years or fine or both.

Section 295-A was added in 1927 to cover deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class. Punishment: 10 years or fine or both.

Section 295-B was added in 1982 to cover defiling, damaging, or desecration of the Holy Quran. Punishment: life imprisonment.

Section 295-C was added in 1986 to cover use of derogatory remarks in respect of Holy Prophet. Punishment: death or life imprisonment and also fine.  In 1992 life imprisonment was removed and death became the only punishment.

It is interesting to note that Sections 295, 295-A and 295-B require that an offence must be a consequence of the accused's intent, but in Section 295-C (derogatory remarks against the Holy Prophet) there is no condition of intent.

Now, how much of the above is Allah's law and how much is man-made law?

I believe everyone agrees that blasphemy is condemned by Allah and hence prohibition of blasphemy is Allah's law. But does everyone agree that Allah has decreed specific punishments for the various categories of blasphemy?

For instance, does everyone agree that punishment of 2 years or fine or both for defiling a place of worship is Allah's law?

Does everyone agree that punishment of 10 years or fine or both for outraging religious feelings is Allah's law?  Does everyone agree that punishment of life imprisonment for defiling, damaging or desecration of the Holy Quran is Allah's law?

And finally, does everyone agree that death penalty is the only punishment for derogatory remarks against the Holy Prophet?  Is there consensus among all ulema, fuqaha, and scholars not only in Pakistan but throughout the Islamic world?  It is worth remembering that life imprisonment was an alternate punishment during General Zia's time.

Has Allah decreed that intent to cause offence is a requirement for all categories of blasphemy except for derogatory remarks against the Holy Prophet?

I am surprised to find that blaspheming God is not covered specifically in Pakistan's blasphemy laws.  It seems to me this offence would come under Section 295-A with punishment of 10 years or fine or both.

Would it be contrary to Allah's law if intent is added to Section 295-C just as they are in Sections 295, 295-A and 295-B?  Would it be contrary to Allah's law if punishment for advocacy of religious hatred is added to the PPC?  Would it be contrary to Allah's law if punishment for false or frivolous accusation of blasphemy is added to the PPC?

Lets now turn to Pakistan's blasphemy laws covered under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).  Currently blasphemy under Sections 295, 295-B and 295-C is considered a cognizable offence in Pakistan which means the Police can directly register a FIR (First Information Report), initiate the investigation and arrest the accused without warrant or getting permission from the magistrate or judge.

It is proposed that all blasphemy offences be considered non-cognizable, i.e. the Police cannot register a FIR or start investigation or arrest the accused without the court's permission. If after a preliminary enquiry the court deems the complaint fit for further processing the Police is permitted by the magistrate to investigate and/or arrest the accused. This will ensure that the complainant takes full responsibility of the consequences in case the accusation are false or frivolous.

I don't believe any of the above CrPC details are part of Allah's law, they are clearly man-made laws. It is relevant to point out that blasphemy under Sections 295-A and 298 of the PPC are non-cognizable offences under our current laws and the Police cannot register a case or arrest the accused without the court's permission.

Lastly, blasphemy cases currently are heard by the Sessions Court where mob pressure is often brought to bear on the judge to obtain a conviction.  It is proposed that all blasphemy complaints should made before a Sessions Court but tried by the High Court because trials by the High Courts will strengthen the possibility for justice because cases at the High Court are always under a higher degree of scrutiny.

Again I don't believe treating a blasphemy complaint as a cognizable or non-cognizable offence is part of Allah's law and nor is hearing the case by the Sessions Court or the High Court anything to do with Allah's law. 

Conclusion:  I am at a loss why so many people claim the entire body of Pakistan's Blasphemy Laws are God-given laws and not a word can be changed.  I believe we need to have the facts of Pakistan's blasphemy laws before us so that a calm and reasoned discourse can begin among sincere people who want to do everything possible to ensure Adl and Insaaf.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

Best regards,

Yousuf

Whom do you fear, public opinion, fatwa or Allah?

Continuation of exchange on Blasphemy at WorldMuslimcongress@yahoogroups.com it is a public forum, all are welcome to join by sending an email to: WorldMuslimCongress-subscribe@yahoogroups.com  The group is about nurturing the pluralistic ideals embedded in Islam

Whom do you fear, public opinion, fatwa or Allah?

Good fatwa against Qadri

http://blasphemylaws.blogspot.com/2011/01/whom-do-you-fear-public-opinion-fatwa.html

 

Dear Javed,

I am copying a few paragraphs from the material published in Arab News yesterday.

Islam forbids killing anyone, unless it is in self-defense and it is indeed a morbid sin to commit suicide. This statement breeds an enormous confusion among a few Muslims and non-Muslims, they want to know what to believe, what the radicals are doing in the name of Islam or the ones who say they are misrepresenting it. http://arabnews.com/world/article232984.ece

If we take Brother Shamim’s position and your partial agreement with him, you are making Islam look like a religion of dominance, punishment and revenge. Let me submit to you, Islam is a religion of leadership, leading people out of chaos into peace through free will, it is a religion of peace and the majority of the Muslims believe that.  Prophet Muhammad is indeed the mercy to mankind; Salaam us per ke jis nay bekasoon pay dastagiri ki.  He brought the idea of equality and showed how to work it through the rituals embedded in Islam, he raised the level of consciousness towards the oppressed, forgave the wrong doers, he took over Mecca peacefully and did not order killing of the very people who were determined to kill him.

It calls for a serious discussion, in the name of the man of the peace, you guys are creating chaos, you are making the prophet of peace look like a man of revenge, you have to stop this and stop denigrating the prophet that we admire, adore and hold him as the ultimate peace maker, the Rahmatul Aalameen.

A few, very few in every majority community, be it Christian, Hindu, Muslim or Jewish claim themselves to be the guardians of the community and act out bullying with the power bestowed in them as a majority and make the lives of the minorities difficult.  Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) showed the examples of how to subdue the arrogance within oneself and not exercise the power of the beast for the sake of peace. He initiated the Madina Treaty as a man in charge of the political, military and religious power to protect the minorities from the onslaught of the majoritarianism. The Prophet taught us to stand up for the oppressed.

Javed, ruefully, brother Shamim and his ilk is discarding the examples of kindness prophet set; towards a lady who threw trash on him, praying for the ones who pelted stones on him and more and more at …http://www.petitiononline.com/Asiabibi/petition.html 

Javed, let’s wake ourselves up from our arrogance and do the inner Jihad, Islam is about peace and not dominance. For the conversion-bent among us, this an opportunity missed out.

The silent majority needs to speak out at crucial times like this where the murderer Qadri is being hailed as a hero in defending the very Prophet who was a mercy to mankind. This entire sordid affair started when Bibi, a Christian woman was denied the water by a few senseless individuals, they are the ones that need to be questioned (not punished). Does not Quraan and Hadith say, don’t denigrate the faith of others, lest they do that to you?

Javed, please speak up your mind, you don’t need to appease any one, you are one of the leaders and you need to lead and not worry what others say and compromise.  Standing up will bring fatwas on your door, the question is whom do you fear, Allah or Fatwa?

Mike Ghouse

www.MikeGhouse

From: doctorforu
To: TSidd, WorldMuslimCongress@yahoogroups.com, MikeGhouse@aol.com, hasniessa, Sent: 1/12/2011 7:30:46 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Re: MuslimAgenda :: RE: Good fatwa against Qadri...

Mohatram Shamim Sb

ASAK

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the punishment for what is called in Fiqh as “Shatim-e Rasool” is nothing but death. A person who has blasphemed against a personality or book, which is dearer to a community more than their own nafoos certainly deserves to be sentenced to death because his action is an insult to the beliefs of huge numbers of people and also because it can cause widespread trouble leading to a great number of deaths. Death to him is therefore a preventive measure against greater number of deaths. But my point is that we have to understand the finer differences when deciding on the issues:

1. There is difference between committing blasphemy and supporting for condonement of a person accused of blasphemy. Both are not crimes of equal severity. The person who supports condonement of a person for crime of blasphemy does not necessarily have disrespect for Prophet himself. Many people whose Iman cannot be doubted did not support the fatwa by Khomeini against Rushdie. Does that mean that they committed blasphemy themselves and deserve to be given the same punishment as Rushdie? I have no first hand knowledge but my feeling is that Taseer did not support the views of Asia Bibi and only spoke against the punishment of death for her. I do not think that Taseer had ever expressed any views that make him a shatim-e rasool. Does he deserve death for merely advocating mercy for a person who committed a serious offence? I have my doubts. If Taseer had been tried in a shariah court, would a Mufti declare his crime worthy of punishment by death?

2. If a person does not deserve death for an offence committed by him, howsoever serious or condemnable his offence is, can his killing be justified?

3. Even if his killing is justified under Sharaiah, would anyone be allowed to kill him without any fatwa issues for it or without proceeding in a court in a country where the current laws punish blasphemy by death?

Emotions and sentiments must not dither us from making judgements in accordance with Quran. Allah forgive me if I am wrong!

Javed Jamil

---

From: "TSidd @ >
To: doctorforu123@yahoo.com; WorldMuslimCongress@yahoogroups.com; MikeGhouse@aol.com; hasniessa; .. and the list

Sent: Tue, January 11, 2011 7:21:57 PM
Subject: Re: MuslimAgenda :: RE: Good fatwa against Qadri...

Mohtram Javed Bhai,  ASA

Perhaps you are otherwise busy and had no time to go through the write-up by the  undersigned and that of HK Saheb. You are missing the very genesis  of the issue.

I. Act of blasphemy is crime against humanity when one insults the personality of our beloved Prophet (S), he injures the finest feelings of the Muslim Ummah as a whole. His punishment is death as prescribed in law.

2. If government is hesitant and shows sympathy with the person who has been committing this horrible crime, the  Muslims who love him (S) will have to take the law in their hands as it is the matter of "crime" against an individual person, specially when the person is arrogant and feel proud of doing it as Taseer was behaving.

3, The law of blasphemy is the target of the government  to change under the outside pressure from the secular West, the entire Christendom and the prejudiced Vatican.

4. General Muslim masses have natural sympathy with the assailant who did a noble job to revenge the insult of their Mahboob Prophet Muhammad (S). He act was not a crime but the need of time,

5. The issue is the inefficiency and weakness of Pakistani Government and the lopsided propaganda of the secular vested press that is siding  with the late  secular Governor. and the wilful interference of foreign powers.    

6. If the government  declares that the  Act of Blasphemy  will stay as it is, the Movement  will subside immediately and the fate of the assailant will then be sealed by the legal process. 

7. It will be left to public pressure wether to set him free or hanged to death. Let love for Prophet (S) decide  the  issue on the streets of Pakistan - the most authentic court of democracy that west loves most.         

Justice  demands it.

Shamim Siddiqi

In a message dated 1/11/2011 7:46:28 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, doctorforu @yahoo.com writes:

I have been closely following the discussion emanating from the murder of Punjab Governor and support for the one who killed him because he defended a person who insulted Prophet Muhammad SAW. Two opinions are emerging and I have a middle position. If anyone says that there should be no punishment for blasphemy, he is only befoolng himself. In a world where denial of holocaust is a punishable act, where burning of flags and insult to the constitutions are punishable crimes, to think that insult to religious figures should be made illegal is nothing but an open attempt to defeat religion as a system and institution. The Law aims to keep society away from drifting to chaos, disorder and such conditions where life and honour of the people is at stake. Blasphemous actions are an insult not only of the figures related to a religion but an insult to the conviction and commitment of a vast section of society or almost the whole society in a country dominated by single religion. Such acts of blasphemy are bound to creat chaos at a large scale and cannot be condoned. In such cases the law must act swiftly s that the hurt feelings of the people do not convert into open violence.

If the Law does not act rightly or swiftly, there is every chance that Qadris will emerge.  If the acts of blasphemy are committed or are supported in one way or the other by the custodians of law themelves, people will surely lose confiedence in Legal institutions. But to openly admire an act of reprisal without a legal aurtority in a country where legal recourse was available is not justified. Such an action could have been justified in a country where the culprit cannot be boked under law (for example, Salman Rushdi). In that case, the one who acts like that must be reay to face the law for his act. But in Pakistan, there is a blasphemy law in force. Instead of taking recourse to that, if someone kills a person taking law in his own hands, he should definitely be put to trial for murder. It is another matter that the judge should take all the circumstances into consideration before declaring his punishment. If he hasd one something that has pleased Allah, He will have his reward in Hereafter; but in the world he should face the law.  The sympathies of the people towards him are understandable but the Law must not act on sympathies.

Javed Jamil

---

From: Faiz <tahir
To: MikeGhouse@aol.com; hasniessa  ; and the list
Sent: Mon, January 10, 2011 5:05:55 PM
Subject: MuslimAgenda :: RE: Good fatwa against Qadri...
 From another forum:

Brother Munir alHaq,

 I am not blaming the whole nation.  All I am saying is that a large section of Pakistani society is sympathetic towards Qadri. So much so that many ‘educated people” (some on this forum as well) have lost their minds in this frenzy—and that I find VERY disturbing. There are more facebook pages on Qadri side than on Taseer side.

I am still a citizen of Pakistan and I love my country from the core of my heart. I have spent 32 years of my life living in it in good old days.

 When I see a large segment of society (which means most of the villagers who are unlettered, but also many of the educated class), it tears apart my heart.  I say, how come we don’t think, how come we don’t reflect, how come we don’t listen to the voice of reason? 

I have yet to find a person in the US who opened his mouth to praise Jared Loughton!  And that’s the point I am making.

On the other hand, Qadri—as of today—is being treated with some respect, flower petals and garlands—even the lawyers are willing to fight his case out when the government had a real hard time to lead the funeral prayers for the slain governor!

This is rape of common sense—a ‘toofaan-e-badtameezi’ that I simply fail to understand.

People are scared to death to speak about how they feel about the whole orgy. I am waiting for the day when some enlightened people will pick up the courage and appear in rallies and TV shows to let people know that the concept we call “tahaffuz-e-namoos-e-risalat” can best be achieved by following the Qur’an—the book that Prophet Muhammad (sws) himself followed and commanded all of us to follow.  That Book has clear guideline about all kinds of blasphemies.

And that book never ever allowed its followers to take law in their own hands and commit murderous activities—for any reason whatsoever.  The legislative bodies have the responsibility to make and enact laws, and the Law enforcement agencies will be enforcing them.  There are no ifs and buts in this governing protocol.  If we are not happy with a law, let’s make it known our concerns and let’s adopt legally allowed ways to change it by mutual discussion and deliberation in the legislative domain.

All people of conscience and enlightenment in Pakistan should stand up as one man and push forward to modify this law in a way that the mischief-mongers will find it real hard to misuse and manipulate.  I am hoping this  but I realized it’s not going to happen any time soon because of the presence of ‘scare crows’ everywhere.  The government is weak and corrupt—so is a significant segment of the opposition contingent. The scare tactics of the religious clergy is dancing naked and there’s chaos that can only promote further irrational behavior.

As for as I am concerned, I believe that these blasphemy laws MUST be repealed immediately before anyone else gets hurt.  I call these laws barbaric and draconian---not because they would seem so to anyone sane around---but because these laws violate the basic tenets of the Holy Qur’an.  They do not protect the noble name of the blessed protect at all; in fact, believe me or not, they have the opposite effect.  These laws go way to the ‘tauheen’ o the Prophet because the reasons behind making these laws—the cruel, fabricated historical stories—go a long way to vilify the blessed prophet.  Let anyone go over those stories and you will appreciate what I am saying.   We are not realizing it because many of our enlightened minds are ‘disoriented’ and benumbed at the moment—thanks to the military dictator Zia-ul-Haq; he gave us a murder and vilification gift that, sadly, we love to keep close to our hearts. 

Best,

Irfan

From: Moderate s@yahoogroups.com  
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 5:12 PM
To: fff
Subject: Re: [ModerateMuslims] RE: Asia Bibi Petition for Signature

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I understand the anger we all have against Qadri and that is justified. But the point was that these murderers do not represent the entire society. 

All societies are different from different aspects, some greatly better than others but from specific angles, of course, and vice versa. No religions, races or societies are monoliths that we just paint these with a broad brush as essentially good or evil.

The fanatic zealots supporting Qadri exist as well but my point is one should also realize that there are rallies and protests that were also held against Qadri's horrific actions as well in different parts of the country.

Just wanted to toss out that it seems we should keep the target of our anger to specific groups responsible and not entire religions or entire nations because that tends to undermine our criticism.

Thanks again,

Munir

From: MikeGhouse@aol.com [mailto:MikeGhouse@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:04 PM
To: hasniessa

Check it out at:

www.Blasphemylaws.com

Mike

In a message dated 1/10/2011 2:53:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, hasniessa.com writes:

• Pope Asks Pakistan To Reverse Blasphemy Law

ASSOCIATED PRESS

VATICAN CITY— Pope Benedict XVI urged Pakistan to reverse its blasphemy laws, saying Monday they were a pretext for violence against non-Muslims, and demanded that all governments do more so Christians can practice their faith without fear