Jinnah's only lost case- Defending the "killer" of a Blasphemer, Ghazi Ilm Deen (R.H)

[Xestan]

[9:63] Did they not know that anyone who opposes GOD and His messenger has incurred the fire of Hell forever? This is the worst humiliation.

[9:64] The hypocrites worry that a sura may be revealed exposing what is inside their hearts. Say, "Go ahead and mock. GOD will expose exactly what you are afraid of."

[9:65] If you ask them, they would say, "We were only mocking and kidding." Say, "Do you realize that you are mocking GOD, and His revelations, and His messenger?"

[9:66] Do not apologize. You have disbelieved after having believed. If we pardon some of you, we will punish others among you, as a consequence of their wickedness.

[9:67] The hypocrite men and the hypocrite women belong with each other - they advocate evil and prohibit righteousness, and they are stingy. They forgot GOD, so He forgot them. The hypocrites are truly wicked.

[9:68] GOD promises the hypocrite men and the hypocrite women, as well as the disbelievers, the fire of Hell, wherein they abide forever. It suffices them. GOD has condemned them; they have incurred an everlasting retribution.

The verses are pretty clear. God has warned the hypocrites of the retribution they will face in the hereafter due to their mocking, and has condemned them. It does NOT, however, command believers to kill them.

Going back to verse 5:33, "Fighting against God and His messenger" doesn't mean doing something which is not approved by the Quran. People are free to do what they want, as long as they do not hurt other people of course. We learn this from several verses in the Quran. Here are a few:

[25:63] The worshipers of the Most Gracious are those who tread the earth gently, and when the ignorant speak to them, they only utter peace.

[60:8-9] GOD does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. GOD loves the equitable. GOD enjoins you only from befriending those who fight you because of religion, evict you from your homes, and band together with others to banish you. You shall not befriend them. Those who befriend them are the transgressors.

[18:29] Proclaim: "This is the truth from your Lord," then whoever wills let him believe, and whoever wills let him disbelieve. We have prepared for the transgressors a fire that will completely surround them. When they scream for help, they will be given a liquid like concentrated acid that scalds the faces. What a miserable drink! What a miserable destiny!

[4:114] There is nothing good about their private conferences, except for those who advocate charity, or righteous works, or making peace among the people. Anyone who does this, in response to GOD's teachings, we will grant him a great recompense.

Look at the second portion of verse 5:33 again, "those who commit horrendous crimes." So what are horrendous, unspeakable, and horrific crimes?
People that like to rape and murder children, people that kidnap children from their parents and use them to prostitute them, people that kill for money and people that kill other innocent people, etc

Certainly there are crimes for which it is justifiable to invoke the death penalty, but in the case of mocking the Prophet by mere words, it is not, as clearly ordained in the Quran.

Isn't condemnation by God Almighty enough?

You wasted my time, seriously!

You are again repeating the same thing, the verses are NOT meant for what you're using it..

I have posted plenty of Ahadith and views of great scholars of Islam in my las post, read it again.

 

[v9s]

You wasted my time, seriously!

You are again repeating the same thing, the verses are NOT meant for what you're using it..

I have posted plenty of Ahadith and views of great scholars of Islam in my las post, read it again.

No, you're wasting my time.

I asked for references from the Quran, not hadith. The Quran has clearly stated when death penalty should be applied. It has warned the blasphemers of the consequences, i.e. condemnation from God and retribution in the hereafter. It does NOT, however, ordain people to kill blasphemers.

I'd suggest you to read my posts thoroughly.

 

[Xestan]

No, you're wasting my time.

I asked for references from the Quran, not hadith. The Quran has clearly stated when death penalty should be applied. It has warned the blasphemers of the consequences, i.e. condemnation from God and retribution in the hereafter. It does NOT, however, ordain people to kill blasphemers.

I'd suggest you to read my posts thoroughly.

Qur'an + Hadith is the complete ISLAM.

Al-Nasaa’i narrated (4071) that Abu Barzah al-Aslami said: A man spoke harshly to Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq and I said, ‘Shall I kill him?’ He rebuked me and said, ‘That is not for anyone after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) .’” (Saheeh al-Nasaa’i, 3795)

Do you think Hazrat AbuBakr didn't know Sharia'ah?

Do you better than him?

Every scholar from every sect have consensus on this issue AND you are trying to act like you're the authority over Deen?

When Imam Maalik, Imam Ahmad and other scholars defined this punishment and even Hazrat AbuBakr said this in his own words, you're still saying you're right?

 

[v9s]

Qur'an + Hadith is the complete ISLAM.

Al-Nasaa’i narrated (4071) that Abu Barzah al-Aslami said: A man spoke harshly to Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq and I said, ‘Shall I kill him?’ He rebuked me and said, ‘That is not for anyone after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) .’” (Saheeh al-Nasaa’i, 3795)

Do you think Hazrat AbuBakr didn't know Sharia'ah?

Do you better than him?

Every scholar from every sect have consensus on this issue AND you are trying to act like you're the authority over Deen?

When Imam Maalik, Imam Ahmad and other scholars defined this punishment and even Hazrat AbuBakr said this in his own words, you're still saying you're right?

No, i'm saying the Quran, God's Law, is right.

Is hadith the word of God?
Have you read these books yourself?
How can you be sure that what's in them isn't pure conjecture?

Seems to me you've chosen to ignore the Quran itself and blindly follow whatever is dished out by "religious scholars":

[17:36] You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

[9:31] They have set up their religious leaders and scholars as lords, instead of GOD.....

 

[Xestan]

No, i'm saying the Quran, God's Law, is right.

Is hadith the word of God?
Have you read these books yourself?
How can you be sure that what's in them isn't pure conjecture?

Seems to me you've chosen to ignore the Quran itself and blindly follow whatever is dished out by "religious scholars":

[17:36] You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them.

[9:31] They have set up their religious leaders and scholars as lords, instead of GOD.....

Are you denying Hadith?

You can refute me by reading the Sahih Nisai and post here if I wrongly quoted the reference.

What I'm saying is, I'm not blindly following any scholar, WHOLE Muslim Ummahhave consensus on this issue so do I, I don't wrongly interpret Qur'anic verses like you..

To understand Qur'an you have to go to Hadith.

Hazoor [S.A.W] said in one of his Hadith (context) : When searching for some answer, search in Quran, if you don't "find" it, then search in for what I said, even then if you don't find it, take your decision in a group or by the consensus of the group. May ALLAH forgive me if I wrote something wrong.

So my conclusion is, you are NO ONE to argue over the decision of almost all the Scholars from History till today

 

[k_n]

So agin it was the evil hindoos who were responsible for making Iqbal condone murder? Oh then its OK I guess. All that humiliation and anger, that gives one permit to murder people you don't like and then create nations through 'direct action' where you can name streets after the murderers. Despite the BS abt those 'times', fact is most of you still think that murderer was a hero. I don't expect you to understand whats wrong with that too, after all, religious supremacism is not exactly rational, is it? Lets kill the danish cartoonist now, after all these times are also humiliating, are they not mr lame excuses?

Well said . I cannot think of a more short and apt reply

 

[Haseebullah]

Doesnt matter a bit what a fvcking foreign magazine called him. He drew our gods nude and should have been punished legally for that.Period.

But I am also proud of the fact that despite this extreme provocation, no Hindu 'martyr' plunged a dagger into him and only registered FIRs against him in police stations within the ambit of Indian law.

i guess they didnt have the balls for it

 

[JonAsad]

Are you denying Hadith?

You can refute me by reading the Sahih Nisai and post here if I wrongly quoted the reference.

What I'm saying is, I'm not blindly following any scholar, WHOLE Muslim Ummahhave consensus on this issue so do I, I don't wrongly interpret Qur'anic verses like you..

To understand Qur'an you have to go to Hadith.

Hazoor [S.A.W] said in one of his Hadith (context) : When searching for some answer, search in Quran, if you don't "find" it, then search in for what I said, even then if you don't find it, take your decision in a group or by the consensus of the group. May ALLAH forgive me if I wrote something wrong.

So my conclusion is, you are NO ONE to argue over the decision of almost all the Scholars from History till today

Umer i agree with you.

Its really amazing that people think that those companions of our Holy prophet, whose status is so high in Islam that they will enter Jaanat without any question like Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat Ali, Hazrat Usman, Hazrat Omer, these suhabas who were very near to our Holy Prophet, they ate with him, slept with him, fought with him and these people here the so called modern liberals have the audacity to think that those mentioned suhabas interpreted the Quran and Hadith wrongly, and they are the so called blessed liberals of 21st century who can question the suhabas and their intrepetations.

The only bone of contention here is that Allah has taken responsibility on himself to safe guard the Holy Quran, so its wordings and teachings are exactly the same as 1400 years ago, no one can change its message, other wise like todays bible or other holy books, it would have been very easy to just remove any verse remotely related to blasphemy like it never existed.

You moderate muslims question the interpretation and understanding of Suhabas, let me ask you who the hell are you?

 

[v9s]

Are you denying Hadith?

You can refute me by reading the Sahih Nisai and post here if I wrongly quoted the reference.

What I'm saying is, I'm not blindly following any scholar, WHOLE Muslim Ummahhave consensus on this issue so do I, I don't wrongly interpret Qur'anic verses like you..

To understand Qur'an you have to go to Hadith.

Hazoor [S.A.W] said in one of his Hadith (context) : When searching for some answer, search in Quran, if you don't "find" it, then search in for what I said, even then if you don't find it, take your decision in a group or by the consensus of the group. May ALLAH forgive me if I wrote something wrong.

So my conclusion is, you are NO ONE to argue over the decision of almost all the Scholars from History till today

But you're blindly following scholars, rather than using your God given brain on your own.
You are going against the word of God when you say you need "scholars" and hadith to understand the Quran. This is the real blasphemy.

God says that Quran is COMPLETE, PERFECT, & FULLY DETAILED, and that you shall not seek any other source:

"We did not leave anything out of this book, then all will be gathered before their Lord (for judgment). Those who do not believe our verses are deaf and dumb; in total darkness. God sends astray whomever He wills, and directs whomever He wills in the right path." (6:38-39)

"Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He revealed THIS BOOK FULLY DETAILED? (6:114)

"The word of your Lord is COMPLETE in truth & justice." (6:115)

"Shall I seek OTHER THAN GOD as a source of law, when He has revealed THIS BOOK FULLY DETAILED? ....The word of your Lord is COMPLETE, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words; He is the hearer, the omniscient. Yet, if you obey the majority of people, they will take you away from the path of God. That is because they follow CONJECTURE, and they fail to think." (6:114-116)

Muhammad was forbidden from uttering any religious instructions other than the quran:

"This (Quran) is the utterance of an honorable messenger. It is not the utterance of a poet; rarely do you believe. Nor is it the utterance of a soothsayer; rarely do you take heed. A revelation from the Lord of the universe. HAD HE EVER UTTERED ANY OTHER RELIGIOUS UTTERANCES (attributed to us), we would have punished him severely, then we would have stopped the revelation to him (fired him). None of you could have protected him against us." (69:4047)

It's obvious you haven't read the sahih hadith books yourself and hence constantly refer to it to prove your point. Perhaps you should read this to open your eyes:

Does hadith explain the Quran?

Hadith - A critical evaluation with argument and counter-argument

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Pointless to discuss with those who completely reject Hadith...

 

[Awesome]

Modi is not a convicted murderer, and so is not Hafeez Saeed and all those other local heroes in your nation. So lets not drag them in and just talk about proven murderers being celebrated as heroes, shall we?

Unless you ALSO think killing a blasphemer is not murder. Nothing will surprise me now.

Killing an enemy is justifiable. The issue wasn't blasphemy, it was an us vs them scenario.

His Blasphemy didn't cause the split between Hindus and Muslims of British India. Iqbal identified with the man of action, against the enemy.

Modi is not a convicted murderer - that is even worse, as he should be.

As previously stated, don't parachute into discussions without reading the meat of the argument as previously stated.

 

[v9s]

Pointless to discuss with those who completely reject Hadith...

That's because you don't have an answer. The Quran exposes those who uphold the hadith as a religious source.

 

[Xestan]

That's because you don't have an answer. The Quran exposes those who uphold the hadith as a religious source.

Reposting for you again, Now the Sahabas did wrong and they did'nt know Qur'an? You know better than them?

Now read this with your open eyes...

The answer to this question may be given by addressing the two following issues:

1 – The ruling on one who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)

The scholars are unanimously agreed that a Muslim who insults the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) becomes a kaafir and an apostate who is to be executed. This consensus was narrated by more than one of the scholars, such as Imaam Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad, al-Khattaabi and others. Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/13-16

This ruling is indicated by the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

In the Qur’aan it says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The hypocrites fear lest a Soorah (chapter of the Qur’aan) should be revealed about them, showing them what is in their hearts. Say: ‘(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allaah will bring to light all that you fear.’

If you ask them (about this), they declare: ‘We were only talking idly and joking.’ Say: ‘Was it at Allaah, and His Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger that you were mocking?’

Make no excuse; you disbelieved after you had believed”

[al-Tawbah 9:64-66]

This verse clearly states that mocking Allaah, His verses and His Messenger constitutes kufr, so that applies even more so to insulting. The verse also indicates that whoever belittles the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also a kaafir, whether he was serious or joking.

With regard to the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (4362) narrated from ‘Ali that a Jewish woman used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him, so a man strangled her until she died, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ruled that no blood money was due in this case.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in al-Saarim al-Maslool (1/162): This hadeeth is jayyid, and there is a corroborating report in the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Abbaas which we will quote below.

This hadeeth clearly indicates that it was permissible to kill that woman because she used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Abu Dawood (4361) narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that a blind man had a freed concubine (umm walad) who used to insult the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and say bad things about him. He told her not to do that but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she did not heed him. One night, when she started to say bad things about the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and insult him, he took a short sword or dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it and killed her. The following morning that was mentioned to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He called the people together and said, “I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right over him that he should stand up.” The blind man stood up and said, “O Messenger of Allaah, I am the one who did it; she used to insult you and say bad things about you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not give up her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was kind to me. Last night she began to insult you and say bad things about you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.” Thereupon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Bear witness, there is no blood money due for her.”

(Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 3655)

It seems that this woman was a kaafir, not a Muslim, for a Muslim could never do such an evil action. If she was a Muslim she would have become an apostate by this action, in which case it would not have been permissible for her master to keep her; in that case it would not have been good enough if he were to keep her and simply rebuke her.

Al-Nasaa’i narrated (4071) that Abu Barzah al-Aslami said: A man spoke harshly to Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq and I said, ‘Shall I kill him?’ He rebuked me and said, ‘That is not for anyone after the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) .’” (Saheeh al-Nasaa’i, 3795)

It may be noted from this that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had the right to kill whoever insulted him and spoke harshly to him, and that included both Muslims and kaafirs.

The second issue is: if a person who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, should his repentance be accepted or not?

The scholars are agreed that if such a person repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him.

But they differed as to whether his repentance should be accepted in this world and whether that means he is no longer subject to the sentence of execution.

Maalik and Ahmad were of the view that it should not be accepted, and that he should be killed even if he has repented.

They quoted as evidence the Sunnah and proper understanding of the ahaadeeth:

In the Sunnah, Abu Dawood (2683) narrated that Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqaas said: “On the Day of the Conquest of Makkah, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) granted safety to the people except for four men and two women, and he named them, and Ibn Abi Sarh… As for Ibn Abi Sarh, he hid with ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan, and when the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) called the people to give their allegiance to him, he brought him to stand before the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He said, “O Prophet of Allaah, accept the allegiance of ‘Abd-Allaah.” He raised his head and looked at him three times, refusing him, then he accepted his allegiance after the third time. Then he turned to his companions and said: “Was there not among you any smart man who could have got up and killed this person when he saw me refusing to give him my hand and accept his allegiance?” They said, “We do not know what is in your heart, O Messenger of Allaah. Why did you not gesture to us with your eyes?” He said, “It is not befitting for a Prophet to betray a person with a gesture of his eyes.”

(Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 2334)

This clearly indicates that in a case such as this apostate who had insulted the Prophet (S), it is not obligatory to accept his repentance, rather it is permissible to kill him even if he comes repentant.

‘Abd-Allaah ibn Sa’d was one of those who used to write down the Revelation, then he apostatized and claimed that he used to add whatever he wanted to the Revelation. This was a lie and a fabrication against the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and it was a kind of insult. Then he became Muslim again and was a good Muslim, may Allaah be pleased with him. Al-Saarim 115.

With regard to proper understanding of the ahaadeeth:

They said that insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) has to do with two rights, the right of Allaah and the right of a human being. With regard to the right of Allaah, this is obvious, because it is casting aspersions upon His Message, His Book and His Religion. As for the right of a human being, this is also obvious, because it is like trying to slander the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by this insult. In a case which involves both the rights of Allaah and the rights of a human being, the rights of the human beings are not dropped when the person repents, as in the case of the punishment for banditry, because if the bandit has killed someone, that means that he must be executed and crucified. But if he repents before he is caught, then the right of Allaah over him, that he should be executed and crucified, no longer applies, but the rights of other humans with regard to qisaas (retaliatory punishment) still stand. The same applies in this case. If the one who insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) repents, then the rights of Allaah no longer apply, but there remains the right of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which still stand despite his repentance.

If it is said, “Can we not forgive him, because during his lifetime the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forgave many of those who had insulted him and he did not execute them?” The answer is:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sometimes chose to forgive those who had insulted him, and sometimes he ordered that they should be executed, if that served a greater purpose. But now his forgiveness is impossible because he is dead, so the execution of the one who insults him remains the right of Allaah, His Messenger and the believers, and the one who deserves to be executed cannot be let off, so the punishment must be carried out.

Al-Saarim al-Maslool, 2/438

Insulting the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is one of the worst of forbidden actions, and it constitutes kufr and apostasy from Islam, according to scholarly consensus, whether done seriously or in jest. The one who does that is to be executed even if he repents and whether he is a Muslim or a kaafir. If he repents sincerely and regrets what he has done, this repentance will benefit him on the Day of Resurrection and Allaah will forgive him

 

[umed nau]

@ v9s

Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He revealed THIS BOOK FULLY DETAILED? (6:114)

still you believe in secularism??, hypocricy enuf??

 

[amna]

salman taseer pays the price of such lies being allowed to propagate and criminals like ilm deen being considered shaheed and worthy of emulation. you might be next.