Is blasphemy a pardonable offense?

[Zarvan]

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.

When issue of Sahabas and Sahabiat is concerned if the person apologizes and promises not to do again he will be forgiven but for RASOOL SAW sorry Sir this can't be forgiven. Honor and respect of RASOOL SAW is more important to Muslim than his own life what if some one attacks you what you do you do you hit back but attack on RASOOL SAW is more severe than this. Now I come to the law and case of Junaid Jamshed what Junaid Jamshed was doing was that he was quoting a Hadees in his own words rather quoting the Hadees word to word that is his only mistake he made those talking against him also know it there only problem is sect is different as for Asia Bibi she her first willingly accepted that she abused Hazrat MUHAMMAD SAW later when Taseer came in he told her to apologize for it and than she did. If Junaid case should have been registered it would be registered under Blasphemy of Sahabas not for RASOOL SAW and that to he didn't do he is being targeted because he belongs to different sect. As for the law it should not be and will never be changed only one addition had to be made and now most Ulemas agree on it that is the one who is accused if found innocent than the one who falsely accused that person needed to hanged in I mean given death sentence. The moment you start doing it these cases will reduce by 90 % because most accused are found innocent so there should be death punishment for the one who falsely accuses some one. @Judge @TankMan

 

[Sine Nomine]

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".

Because sharia laws are ruthless against Adultery,corruption,harassing of women and many others how pious Muslims of Pakistan can leave these things, in country like Pakistan every thing promoted on Large scale in the end becomes a Bank for promoters ranging from Afghan jihad to war on terror you well know sir when it comes to Law and religion you have to follow all or leave all..

enforced imposition of barbaric Islamist cultic LAWS

Now tell us those laws please.

 

[marbella]

did they allow other blasphemy accused to apologize? was their apology accepted?

 

[tarrar]

Blasphemy law in Pakistan is used only for personal interests by some sects & these sects are filled with uneducated mullahs. Bharalvi sect in my opinion is one of the worst & they are mostly extremist.

 

[TankMan]

When issue of Sahabas and Sahabiat is concerned if the person apologizes and promises not to do again he will be forgiven but for RASOOL SAW sorry Sir this can't be forgiven. Honor and respect of RASOOL SAW is more important to Muslim than his own life what if some one attacks you what you do you do you hit back but attack on RASOOL SAW is more severe than this. Now I come to the law and case of Junaid Jamshed what Junaid Jamshed was doing was that he was quoting a Hadees in his own words rather quoting the Hadees word to word that is his only mistake he made those talking against him also know it there only problem is sect is different as for Asia Bibi she her first willingly accepted that she abused Hazrat MUHAMMAD SAW later when Taseer came in he told her to apologize for it and than she did. If Junaid case should have been registered it would be registered under Blasphemy of Sahabas not for RASOOL SAW and that to he didn't do he is being targeted because he belongs to different sect. As for the law it should not be and will never be changed only one addition had to be made and now most Ulemas agree on it that is the one who is accused if found innocent than the one who falsely accused that person needed to hanged in I mean given death sentence. The moment you start doing it these cases will reduce by 90 % because most accused are found innocent so there should be death punishment for the one who falsely accuses some one. @Judge@TankMan

Our issue is that we are way too confused as to what actually classifies as blasphemy and proof of blasphemy. That needs to be discussed, clarified and strictly implemented before any new steps are taken.

I disagree with your notion of 'it can't be forgiven' because it is in direct contradiction of the Quran itself, which says:

''Show forgiveness, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the foolish'' (i.e. don't punish them) [Al A'raf 7:199]

(Context: Allah is commanding the Prophet to convey this message to his people: ''Say, [O Muhammad] .... [7:195]'')

''And when they hear ill speech, they turn away from it and say, "For us are our deeds, and for you are your deeds. Peace will be upon you; we seek not the ignorant." [Al-Qasas 28:55]

(Context: Allah is describing the actions of the messengers, : ''Those to whom We gave the Scripture before it..... [28:52]'')

They swear by Allah that they said nothing (bad), but really they said the word of disbelief, and they disbelieved after accepting Islam, and they resolved that (plot to murder Prophet Muhammad SAW) which they were unable to carry out, and they could not find any cause to do so except that Allah and His Messenger had enriched them of His Bounty. If then they repent, it will be better for them, but if they turn away, Allah will punish them with a painful torment in this worldly life and in the Hereafter. And there is none for them on earth as a Wali (supporter, protector) or a helper.

(Context: Allah is addressing Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) directly: ''O Prophet....'')

Such blasphemy laws contradict the Quran, thus they are invalid. I understand that concepts like that can be vaguely inferred from some Hadith, however those interpretations can not be correct as long as they contradict the Quran because It is the highest authority in Islamic Law.

I do not advocate too much 'freedom of speech' and I condemn blasphemy. But it is illogical (in today's world especially) to enforce a death penalty for minor cases, especially when it lacks basis in religious texts and is very loosely based on interpretations of hadith.

The only circumstances under which killing a blasphemer is allowed is when he is leading or inciting an uprising against the state or Muslims, in which case I support it.

Otherwise, for small cases, a fine or reasonable time in prison would be a better and fairer punishment (obviously, a fair trial should be required first).

the one who falsely accused that person needed to hanged in I mean given death sentence.

This I agree with completely.
People who falsely accuse others are committing three crimes:
1) Abusing the law and religion
2) Trying to harm someone else (without reasonable justification)
3) Purposely creating corruption and injustice

The death penalty is a suitable punishment for those crimes.

 

[Dubious]

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.

To start with it shouldnt be an offense where it cant be pardoned! Heck we are asked to even pardon and ascot to safety our enemies in times of war if they cause no harm!

Well, how will one repeat a mistake if you chop off the head in the 1st round?

The Quran clearly states there are those who believe then disbelieve, then believe again, then disbelieve again. This proves death for apostasy simply did not exist, because if it did, it would be impossible to believe again after unbelief, as they would have been put to death after the first unbelief:

Surely (as for) those who believe then disbelieve, again believe and again disbelieve, then increase in disbelief, God will not forgive them nor guide them in the (right) path. [4:137]

This is further proven by the following verse:

How can God guide a people who have rejected after believing, and they witnessed that the messenger is true, and the clarity had come to them? God does not guide the wicked people. [3:86]

The Quran states, in no uncertain terms, that there is no compulsion in religion:

Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in God has grasped the most sure hand-hold, that never breaks. And God is Hearing, Knowing. [2:256]

The Quran states that God could have made all those on earth believe, thus asks who is man to enforce such a thing if God did not:

And if your Lord had pleased, surely all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them; will you then force men till they become believers? [10:99]

The Quran states there were those who believed part of the time, then disbelieved part of the time in order to confuse and sow discord amongst the believers of the time. If death for apostasy existed, no sane minded person would attempt to do this as they would be killed the very first time they tried it:

A section of the People of the Book say: "Believe in the morning what is revealed to the believers, but reject it at the end of the day; perchance they may (themselves) Turn back. [3:72]

Please also see the clear example set out in 4:88-91, in which the believers are told to offer peace with those who became hypocrites/apostates (i.e. were Muslim in name only but did not follow through with action during hostilities/fighting in this case) if they also offer peace.

To conclude, it is clear that 'death for apostasy' does not exist in The Quran. People are free to believe and live their lives accordingly or not. If a community or system or any structure deprives its members of this basic freedom, it will produce hypocrites and suppressed people who have no strength of belief or goals to work for and will likely result in a weak system or community. Freedom of belief is the air that healthy and just communities breathe.

 

[Sneaker]

Punishing based on religious books is not the civilized, correct way of doing things, IMHO. So, the question itself is loaded. Correct question should be, "Is blasphemy an offence?".

 

[Dubious]

Punishing based on religious books is not the civilized, correct way of doing things, IMHO. So, the question itself is loaded. Correct question should be, "Is blasphemy an offence?".

Correct question should be what the hell is blasphemy? Define it not screaming it everytime you want to get even with someone

 

[Arya Desa]

We are in the 21st century and people are still using the word blasphemy. I guess not all of has have made it there yet.

 

[SipahSalar]

Its pardonable if you are a mullah and do it in front of everyone else on TV. Its not pardonable if you are a non-muslim and someone accuses you of it without proof.

 

[TankMan]

'death for apostasy' does not exist in The Quran

Not just doesn't exist in the Quran but it even contradicts the Quran. This removes the possibility that the Hadith prescribe it. (they do not but some people interpret it as such - their interpretations are wrong).

One reasoning many people in favor of Apostasy laws use is that 'The Quran doesn't describe Salah either, we need to get that from hadith, so will you now say that salah doesn't exist in the Quran.. bla bla (and so on).
This logic is so flawed it's like comparing apples with watermelons.

1) The Quran does mention Salah - it is not explained in detail but it is clearly ordered
“And establish Salah and give Zakah, and bow down (in worship) along with those who bow down (in worship)” [Al Baqarah 2:43]

2) Killing someone for blasphemy is not just 'not in the Quran', it is in contradiction of the Quran. Thus, it is a direct violation of Islamic Law (not just a baseless addition).

( I know you're not saying this but Its relevant and sooner or later someone is going to try to use this reasoning against our arguments, which is why I'm saying it now.)

 

[Sneaker]

Correct question should be what the hell is blasphemy? Define it not screaming it everytime you want to get even with someone

It can be whatever.. imagine your worst case scenario. Should it be an offense?

 

[Dubious]

It can be whatever.. imagine your worst case scenario. Should it be an offense?

That isnt a law...that is some joke!

That is why I said if they want it there they should define it...THAT is how Islam works not use 1 word sword to chop where they please!

Not just doesn't exist in the Quran but it even contradicts the Quran. This removes the possibility that the Hadith prescribe it. (they do not but some people interpret it as such - their interpretations are wrong).

One reasoning many people in favor of Apostasy laws use is that 'The Quran doesn't describe Salah either, we need to get that from hadith, so will you now say that salah doesn't exist in the Quran.. bla bla (and so on).
This logic is so flawed it's like comparing apples with watermelons.

1) The Quran does mention Salah - it is not explained in detail but it is clearly ordered
“And establish Salah and give Zakah, and bow down (in worship) along with those who bow down (in worship)” [Al Baqarah 2:43]

2) Killing someone for blasphemy is not just 'not in the Quran', it is in contradiction of the Quran. Thus, it is a direct violation of Islamic Law (not just a baseless addition).

( I know you're not saying this but Its relevant and sooner or later someone is going to try to use this reasoning against our arguments, which is why I'm saying it now.)

I quoted the verses to show just that

 

[Pakistani E]

The whole blasphemy fiasco has been engineered by the radical mullahs of wahabis. None of the major Islamic school of thoughts in the Sub-continent ever had any punishment for blasphemy. Consider for example the case of berelvis in Pakistan, these people followed great sufi saints who's view were that blasphemy can only be punished by Allah Ta'ala alone. Yet the mullahs of berelvism have become increasingly extremist in trying to "out-Islam" the wahabis by adopting the punishment of death for blasphemy (see the case of Mumtaz Qadri for reference, and his subsequent defence by Sunni Tehrik).

The only way to get rid of these laws is to challenge the ignorant mullahs who espouse them directly. That in itself is pretty easy, but the problem arises when the mullah orders his even more ignorant follower to blow your head off if you disagree with his demi-God aka the mullah.

 

[Khalid Newazi]

Just sugar coat blasphemy with racism.