Is blasphemy a pardonable offense?

[Musafir117]

The answer, it is clear, was a categorical yes.

The untold story of Pakistan’s blasphemy law - Blogs - DAWN.COM

Why does no credible source from the mainstream religious leadership then step forward and set the record straight?

It seems to be of greater importance to withhold the facts of the case, as a more open dialogue may also incidentally amount to collusion with the secular position – surely, the worst of crimes.

In the midst of all this chaos and misinformation, there is still hope for the likes of Asia Bibi and Junaid Jamshed.

There is no need to change the letter of the blasphemy law for Junaid Jamshed and Asia Bibi to get their pardon. All that is required is to revisit the judicial interpretation, and rectify the erroneous conclusion of the Federal Sharia Court that was reached on the basis of dubious research.

The blasphemy law, according to the Hanafi position, allows for pardon.

That is all that Imam Ibn Abidin pointed out.

 

[Viking 63]

Scrap this stupid and highly misused Blasphemy law. Pakistan will be better served if there is no such law.

 

[Steve781]

Question: does Pakistan still have a common law legal system or did you abolish all traces of it when you adopted Sharia?

 

[TankMan]

I concur that blasphemy should pardonable in Pakistan, as it certainly is according to Islam.

We also need a strict law as to what qualifies as blasphemy, and people who wrongfully accuse others of blasphemy should be punished, as they are not only trying to abuse the law,harm others and cause injustice, they are also trying to create division among Muslims, which are both major sins in Islam.

“Say (O Muhammad), Produce your proof if you are truthful”
[al-Baqarah 2:111]

“Since they produce not witnesses, they are the liars in the sight of Allaah”
[al-Noor 24:13]

“O you who have spoken the words of faith but faith has not entered your hearts! Do not backbite about the Muslims or seek out their faults, for whoever seeks out their faults, Allaah will seek out his faults even if he is his house.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, no. 4880; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.

Indeed, those who have divided their religion and become sects - you, [O Muhammad], are not [associated] with them in anything. Their affair is only to Allah ; then He will inform them about what they used to do

.
[al-An'aam 6:159]​

Why does no credible source from the mainstream religious leadership then step forward and set the record straight?

That's a good question, one that I ask too - perhaps they're too busy debating over trivial matters like whose beard is more 'Islamic', but I reckon the issue is deeper than that.​

 

[Norwegian]

God alone should punish blasphemy, not HUMANS!

 

[Judge]

Question: does Pakistan still have a common law legal system or did you abolish all traces of it when you adopted Sharia?

Pakistan has till date not adopted the Shariah. They have picked up a few things from Shariah but shied away from implementing Shariah in full.

A highly hypocritical stance I might add. A nation that proclaims itself to be Islamic, whose citizens call it "Qila of Islam" but shies away from implementing the "Laws of God".

 

[TankMan]

Question: does Pakistan still have a common law legal system or did you abolish all traces of it when you adopted Sharia?

A Sharia and Fiqh based system is perfectly compatible with a common legal system. In Pakistan, certain matters are dealt by a Federal Shariat court while others are handled by a normal legal system in Civil, Session and High Courts.
http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/thejudicialsystemofPakistan.pdf

 

[Norwegian]

A highly hypocritical stance I might add. A nation that proclaims itself to be Islamic, whose citizens call it "Qila of Islam" but shies away from implementing the "Laws of God".

There is NO SUCH THING as Laws of Gods. Just human interpretations of ancient dogma.

 

[TankMan]

Pakistan has till date not adopted the Shariah. They have picked up a few things from Shariah but shied away from implementing Shariah in full.

A highly hypocritical stance I might add. A nation that proclaims itself to be Islamic, whose citizens call it "Qila of Islam" but shies away from implementing the "Laws of God".

No, you are incorrect. Adapting Islamic principles to modern times is a part of Sharia - It is not 'shying away' from anything. God has given humans a brain so that they can adapt and think for themselves, Islam is flexible and logical enough to allow for integration of Islamic principles within a more polished and refined justice system, which is what Pakistan has attempted to do (admittedly, it hasn't been done correctly, which is why we are discussing the topic of this thread).

 

[Judge]

No, you are incorrect. Adapting Islamic principles to modern times is a part of Sharia - It is not 'shying away' from anything. God has given humans a brain so that they can adapt and think for themselves, Islam is flexible and logical enough to allow for integration of Islamic principles within a more polished and refined justice system, which is what Pakistan has attempted to do (admittedly, it hasn't been done correctly, which is why we are discussing the topic of this thread).

There are other Islamic countries that have adopted Shariah to a far greater degree than Pakistan has - Saudi Arabia for example.

Let us not kid ourselves - Pakistani laws are in direct contravention of Shariah.
Do the non-Muslims of Pakistan pay Jizya?
Do the Muslims pay zakat?
Is Pakistani financial system not based on riba'a?
Is there amputation for crime like thievery ?

If the answer is No, then No, Pakistan has not implemented Shariah.

 

[Norwegian]

There are other Islamic countries that have adopted Shariah to a far greater degree than Pakistan has - Saudi Arabia for example.

Let us not kid ourselves - Pakistani laws are in direct contravention of Shariah.
Do the non-Muslims of Pakistan pay Jizya?
Is Pakistani financial system based on riba'a?
Is there amputation for crime like thievery ?

If the answer is No, then No, Pakistan has not implemented Shariah.

PAKISTAN WAS NEVER meant to be a SHARIAH based clerical state. Jinnah never suggested it. Iqbal never meant it. And more these SHARIAH based states are rather modern interpretations of an IDEA called Islamic State, which itself was a brainchild of that Islamist terrorist called Maulana Maududi!

 

[Musafir117]

I concur that blasphemy should pardonable in Pakistan, as it certainly is according to Islam.

We also need a strict law as to what qualifies as blasphemy, and people who wrongfully accuse others of blasphemy should be punished, as they are not only trying to abuse the law,harm others and cause injustice, they are also trying to create division among Muslims, which are both major sins in Islam.

That's a good question, one that I ask too - perhaps they're too busy debating over trivial matters like whose beard is more 'Islamic', but I reckon the issue is deeper than that.​

They are afraid to touch or raised/point out this issue, Suleman Taseer's muder is a clear warning from a countable fundamental extreme religious minority.

 

[Judge]

PAKISTAN WAS NEVER meant to be a SHARIAH based clerical state. Jinnah never suggested it. Iqbal never meant it. And more these SHARIAH based states are rather modern interpretations of an IDEA called Islamic State, which itself was a brainchild of that Islamist terrorist called Maulana Maududi!

Sir, while I respect your views and I find a large number of our views match, this seems to be an exception.

No one actually knows what Jinnah wanted because he said different things to different people, basically he said exactly what the people wanted to hear. So I can call Zarvan and many others like him to point out how Jinnah wanted an Islamic State(as opposed to a Muslim majority state).

Again, as far as Maududi is concerned, you can call him a terrorist but a large number of Pakistanis consider him a hero. He is the inspiration and his teachings a driving force for millions of Muslims in Pakistan. Why is your version more credible over theirs?

 

[Selous]

There is NO SUCH THING as Laws of Gods. Just human interpretations of ancient dogma.

Goodness gracious me! what a thread to express such views.

 

[Norwegian]

No one actually knows what Jinnah wanted because he said different things to different people, basically he said exactly what the people wanted to hear. So I can call Zarvan and many others like him to point out how Jinnah wanted an Islamic State(as opposed to a Muslim majority state).

The very IDEA of a clerical Islamic State was terrorist Maududi's and not of great visionaries like Jinnah's or Iqbal's. Jinnah lived with pet dogs, her sister never used niqab while in public. He was a 100 % secular man just like Imran Khan. He endorsed Muslim cultural and religious VALUES i.e. Muslim Nationalism in Pakistan and not enforced imposition of barbaric Islamist cultic LAWS!

Again, as far as Maududi is concerned, you can call him a terrorist but a large number of Pakistanis consider him a hero. He is the inspiration and his teachings a driving force for millions of Muslims in Pakistan. Why is your version more credible over theirs?

Because a hero would never cause riots in Lahore in 1953, thus declaring Martial Law on Qadiani issue in Pakistan for the first time. A hero would never call for arson attacks against another religious community because of his own wild hatred for them. Only terrorists do such things to terrorize their rigid religious thinking on the masses. Clericalism is the world's oldest profession!

Goodness gracious me! what a thread to express such views.

A God made law must be written by God. Show me ONE law that is in fact "written" by GOD himself! All I see is various interpretations that are faulty and full of human errors!