Man sentenced to death for blasphemy

[pak-marine]

here we go another persons life is in shambles because of this silly medevil stupid non sense blasphemy law

 

[my2cents]

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.


What is day of resurrection? Who or what is getting resurrected? When does it take place?

 

[Twain Shakespeare]

@Twain Shakespeare, man you are so funny, your first amendment doesnt work in this forum, man you are speaking some strange words, satagaha?? what is it??

Ahimsa (non-violence) was Mahatmajah Gandhi's philosophy. Satagahya(sp?) (soul-force) was his name for his practice of non-violence.

I practice the first Amendment, for which I have been beaten with golf clubs, expelled from the RCP, and fired from jobs for practicing it in the US so it doesn't work here either.. If it gets me kicked off this forum, it would be the forums loss, because I am very funny.
Peace. Love. Wisdom. Ahimsa

 

[Twain Shakespeare]

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.


What is day of resurrection? Who or what is getting resurrected? When does it take place?

An Abrahamic myth. According to the original version, it happened within the life time of the Apostle John, and all the yids who followed Isa were going to resurrect and rule the Earth by 1200 AD. This has been a great embarassment to the Institutional churches, but if you can believe a girl got pregnent beacause a dove crapped in her left ear, you can believe anything, and I'll sell you eternal life for your total allegiance in this life.
Joking
Peace.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

...
What is day of resurrection? Who or what is getting resurrected? When does it take place?

1.The day of resurrection is your second birth. 2.Every human and every jin will be reborn, maybe animals too. 3.Nobody but Allaah knows.

 

[Secular Revolution]

Bilal, Yaar I'm very busy at the moment and I'm really not in the mood to engage into a debate, I posted AUTHENtIC Ahadith, WHOLE Ummah have consensus on the issue and I have argued enough with many members lately, you don't agree? alright! Keep going that way!

You're more accurate in this post when you state that the "Ummah" have concensus on the issue. Ummah which constitutes of mere mortals like ourselves.

Yet the promoters of the death punishment claim that it is a Divine Law to kill one who commits blasphemy and your very own posts demostrates that the Quran does not mention this at all. I'm not concerned about hadith here. It's merely an account written by men based on the communication passed by other men on what the Holy Prophet (S) is alleged to have said or done and cannot be used as the basis of putting someone to death.

The major question standing in your way and that of others who promote such a punishment is, why does the Quran fall short on this issue?

Also, if there needs to be a punishment for blasphemy then it should be fair and just and should apply to all faiths equally. Why is that Muslims get huffed up if their religion is attacked but do not think twice before abusing other faiths and what they hold sacred?

The murder of Rajpal - the author of Rangeela Rasool by Ghazi Ilm ud Din Shaheed is a prime example of this.

 

[my2cents]

1.The day of resurrection is your second birth. 2.Every human and every jin will be reborn, maybe animals too. 3.Nobody but Allaah knows.

When does it take place?? Right after death or when the world ends????

 

[Twain Shakespeare]

1.The day of resurrection is your second birth. 2.Every human and every jin will be reborn, maybe animals too. 3.Nobody but Allaah knows.

The Day of Resurrection was a concept developed by the Pharissees, who stole it from the Persians twenty-five hundred years ago. The Apostle John said it happened in his life time, and that a mega-gross of Yids who followed Isa would be resurrected and rule the earth by 130 AD, which either accounts for the total absense of wars, plagues, and famines for the last 1900 years, or is a great embarassment to the institutional churches.

My Muslim brothers and sisters, a word of advice from a post Christian. Isa ain't coming back.
And, sincerely, peace love and wisdom upon y'all.

 

[T-Faz]

Blasphemy law has no place in the modern world, such laws are an insult to Islam itself, words cannot and would not harm religion, its Prophets or its adherents. The Quran as the source of information does not mention anything about such laws being a part of Islamic doctrine.

Similarly Pakistan never had the death penalty for blasphemy prior to the change that was implemented by Naway Sharif's government in the early 90's. This law was made specifically for protection of all religions in the 1930's but it was amended under Gen. Zia to target the minorities of Pakistan, sectarian as well as religious.

Unfortunately this current version of the law has been promoted heavily and incorrectly by religious elements through distorted scripture recollection and translation. Many people believe death is the sentence for blasphemy but it cannot be because mere words cannot damage religion, even then there is the concept of after life and punishment for a specific reason. All such incidents do is show Islam in a negative light and turn away people from it, it gives its opponents a chance to malign this religion further.

I would also present a example of this shameful distortion by none other than the shameless Jamaat-e-Islami:

 

[Twain Shakespeare]

Gandhi is not the topic for this thread. Please stop talking about him here.

Just replying. And I think I would try anything to make Muslims ashamed of this action. Peace

 

[Twain Shakespeare]

Said Secular Revolution "Also, if there needs to be a punishment for blasphemy then it should be fair and just and should apply to all faiths equally. Why is that Muslims get huffed up if their religion is attacked but do not think twice before abusing other faiths and what they hold sacred?"

Thankyou, Secular. I am descended from the martyr Anne Hutchinson, the first person expelled from Massachusetts for religious dissent, and one of the Founders of Rhode Island, the first known Christian polity to have no laws forbidding blasphemy or compelling worship.

I am performing a "religious duty" by preaching on this thread today.

People, stop killing blasphemers. I won't tell you to stop killing. As long as drones are killing people, be they school children or Ghaddafy, I'll concede the need to struggle against the war machine, to my immeasurable sorrow.

Peace, and if a Kaffir may be allowed to say it, wa'alakum salaam, brothers and sisters of star begotten carbon

 

[Secular Revolution]

It is not a fairly serious offence in its own right to associate a man-made law with God and call it a Divine Law which is what the mullah is doing in this instance.

Please observe the following verse of the Holy Quran,

They swear by God that they said nothing (evil), but indeed they uttered blasphemy, and they did it after accepting Islam; and they meditated a plot which they were unable to carry out: this revenge of theirs was (their) only return for the bounty with which God and His Apostle had enriched them! If they repent, it will be best for them; but if they turn back (to their evil ways), God will punish them with a grievous penalty in this life and in the Hereafter: They shall have none on earth to protect or help them. (9:74)

For those who are unaware - the plot being referred to in the verse was to murder the Holy Prophet (S) - (MazAllah). You can refer to any tafsir for detailed explanation on the matter.

The Quran is explicit regarding the comitting of blasphemy in this respect yet does not prescribe an earthly punishment to be carried out nor does it prescribe a law. Instead, Allah States that He Will Punish them both in this life and the Hereafter.

This verse is clear on the matter that the Quran does not prescribe a punishment for the blasphemers. It is thus naught but an invention of the Mullah.

 

[Secular Revolution]

Victim of Blasphemy Law

Dr Younus Shaikh (M.Younes Sheikh), a renowned rationalist and founder-President of the Pakistan based organization 'Enlightenment' who was in the prison under sentence of death for blasphemy and then released at the end of 2003, sent the following article for Mukto-mona members.

Readers may remember that Mukto-mona had conducted an international campaign with IHEU, Rationalist International and with Bangladeshi intellectuals, Rationalists and humanists and other Human Rights activists to ensure the release of Dr. Shaikh. More related news for the new members :

Mukto-mona secular News: Younus Shaikh Free!


Blasphemy

Muslims are the first victims of Islamism. In a novel and unethical way, Pakistani Mullahs have started abusing the dreadful Islamic Blasphemy laws to terrorise liberal and moderate Muslims.

I am a Pakistani doctor, a physiologist, a patriotic and law-abiding citizen, a Muslim by birth. I trained as a surgeon and worked for some years in the United Kingdom. I gave up my job in the UK in order to return to Pakistan to serve the people of my own country. I obtained a position as a lecturer in Physiology at the Capital Homeopathic Hospital, Islamabad.

One of my reasons for returning to Pakistan was to campaign for Human Rights and civil liberties in Pakistan: to work for the Pakistan-India peace movement, to struggle for liberalism, secularism and humanism, and to counter the forces of religious extremism and fundamentalism.



My Case

On 1st October 2000 I attended a meeting of the South Asian Union in Islamabad on the topic of Pakistani-India Relations and Nuclear War. In a statement from the floor of the meeting I expressed the view that Pakistan and India should agree that in the interest of the people of Kashmir, that the present line of demarcation should become the peace line: the international border between the two countries. I also expressed the view that if Pakistan continued to support “freedom fighters”- terrorists - in our neighboring country, then our neighbor might respond in a similar way, culminating in a new calamity like the one we experienced in the 1971 Civil War and the loss of East Pakistan.

Following my statement, Mr. Shaukat Qadir, a Brigadier from military intelligence, the ISI, (now an employee of SDPI Islamabad and a Columnist with the Daily Times, Lahore-Pakistan) threatened me and said that he would “crush the heads of those who think and talk like that”.

Two days later, I was called into the office of the principal of the college and was summarily dismissed from my job without notice. No reason was given. On 4th October, I received a message asking me to present myself in the principal’s office. I did so, and was immediately handed over to the police. I was arrested on a charge of blasphemy. The complaint had been filed under section 295/ C of the Pakistan Penal Code by a Muslim cleric of the Majlis Tahaffuz Khatm-i-Nabuwat (Committee for the Finality of the Prophethood) with the added suspicion that I might belong to the “heretical” Ahmedi community.

The charges against me centred on some utterances I was alleged to have made in the course of a lecture at the college on 2nd October 2000, that neither the Prophet of Islam nor his parents could have been Muslims before Islam was revealed to the Prophet. I was also alleged to have said that the Prophet was unlikely to have shaved under his armpits since the custom was probably unknown to his tribe at the time. These remarks were interpreted by my accusers, the Mullahs, as an insult to the Prophet. I did not actually make the alleged remarks. The mullahs themselves never heard me make any such remarks, nor did they investigate whether any such incident had ever occurred. In fact, I gave no lecture at the time alleged. During the course of the trial the chief witness against me was totally discredited. He admitted that he was not actually present in the college on the day the alleged remarks were made.


My trial

If you are accused of blasphemy in Pakistan, you will usually be denied bail and held in custody until trial. If found guilty, you will face a mandatory death sentence. My trial was held in a series of sessions throughout the summer of 2001. Although neither a body of crime was established nor did the evidence prove any occurrence of blasphemy, I was pronounced guilty on 18th August 2001, fined 100,000 rupees, and sentenced to death - nearly nine months after my arrest.

The specific charge on which I was found guilty was “Insulting the Prophet”. To many European observers it might seem illogical that death sentence could be awarded without proving the incidence or establishing the body of crime, however, that is the way blasphemy cases are adjudicated upon in the very Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

For the next two years, I was held in solitary confinement in a very small death cell in the Central Jail, Rawalpindi, a dark and dirty death cell with unbearable, stinking and distasteful food. There was no facility for walking or exercise, and I was without books, newspapers, medication or treatment for my worsening diabetes. I remained constantly under threat of murder by Islamic fundamentalist inmates in jail for murder and gang rape, and by some religiously-minded prison warders. I appealed. My appeal was heard over several sessions lasting 15 long months before the two judges managed to disagree over their verdict, one Islamic/minded judge rejected the appeal without giving any legal grounds for doing so, while the other legal-minded judge stated that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and that the witnesses were neither trustworthy nor reliable. The referee High Court judge took another year and sent the case for retrial.

The retrial was held in November 2003 at the Court of the Session in Islamabad. Because of threats and harassment no lawyer was ready to plead my case, and I was forced to defend myself for survival, which I did after secretly smuggling law books into my death cell. At the retrial the courtroom was full of mullahs and the Pakistani Taliban. The two mullah advocates and the Public Prosecutor tried to exploit the religious feelings of the court but I confined my defense to legal arguments. I was inspired by the defense speech of Sir Thomas More in A Man for All Seasons. Fortunately the outcome in my case was different. The judge accepted my legal arguments and found charges against me baseless. My accusers, the two Mullahs and the Islamist students had lied under oath.

I was acquitted on 21st November 2003.


My Ordeal

I feel I have been a victim of Islamic Mullah terrorism through he abuse of the state apparatus and the civil law. My first trial was a show trial almost reminiscent of the trials and tortures of the infamous Spanish inquisition, and the trials and burning of European women as witches. After my acquittal and release, I wanted to stay in my country with my family and friends but instead I found myself under a fatwa by the same mullahs that I should be killed. I had to say goodbye to my loved ones and flee to Europe for my safety.

I am very thankful to the International Humanist and Ethical Union, the various humanist organisations and individual humanists, Mukto-Mona and all of the other human rights organisations who campaigned on my behalf: Amnesty International, Physicians for Human Rights USA, the Jubilee Campaign USA, and the many honorable senators and congressmen from the United States, and UK members of parliament. I also want to thank the Swiss and US embassies in Islamabad and the Swiss government for their ceaseless support for justice and equity in my case. I am very grateful to the Swiss government for granting me refugee status in Switzerland.


What is blasphemy?

What then constitutes blasphemy? Unfortunately the Pakistani Penal Code provides little guidance. The law is vague and the term is undefined. In view of the mandatory death penalty for the offence this would seem to be an important oversight. The law is a relic of 1860 British colonial criminal law, but was modified in 1926 again under the British, then in 1986 by General Zia to make it more strictly in accordance with the Sharia, and finally in 1992 when the death penalty was made mandatory – this under the democratically-elected prime minister Nawaz Sharif.

Whereas the original law had been even-handed and applied equally to all religions, under the revised law the death penalty applies only to blasphemy against Islam. More than a hundred victims are currently in jail awaiting trial, 15 of whom face the death penalty under section 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code. Mercifully, none have so far been executed.

In another famous case, a Christian, Ayub Masih was condemned to death for blasphemy on the unsupported evidence of a neighbour, Muhammad Akram who was involved with him in a land dispute and who was awarded property belonging to the accused after the case was decided. The verdict and sentence were upheld by the Lahore High Court on July 25, 2001. However, after seven long years of unnecessary incarceration in the death cell, he was found innocent and acquitted by the Supreme Court.

Despite their successes in obtaining convictions, the fundamentalists have not been willing to leave judgement and execution to the courts. Several people have been murdered by Islamic zealots after having been acquitted by the courts. Others accused of blasphemy have been murdered in jail while awaiting trial and even a High Court judge was murdered after finding one prisoner not guilty.


Pakistan’s shame

The blasphemy law has brought shame on Pakistan. The law itself is unjust and inequitable, the offence it treats is poorly defined and open to abuse, and its operation has been widely misused and abused. Since the introduction of Sharia law in Pakistan in 1986, the blasphemy law has been used on hundreds of occasions by fundamentalists to silence moderate opponents, to intimidate non-Muslims and to settle personal scores.

While praising President General Pervez Musharraf for his liberal and secular steps, and for his courageous fight against Islamic Jihadi terrorism, I appeal to him to curb this menace of Islamic Mullah terrorism: the abuse of Pakistani Islamic blasphemy laws. I call upon the Commission on Human Rights to press the government of Pakistan:

1) to urgently review the cases of all those currently charged or convicted of blasphemy and awaiting execution, including an urgent judicial review of all cases currently sub-judice;

2) to immediately review the application of the blasphemy law and to introduce safeguards against its abuse;

3) to replace the blasphemy law by laws which respect the human rights of individuals in conformity with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which Pakistan is a signatory.

4) and finally to compensate the victims of these unjust and iniquitous laws and to punish the false accusers and untruthful witnesses.

Thank you.


Blasphemy - My Journey through Hell- Statement by Dr M. Younus Shaikh:

 

[v9s]

Here you go! References are from Sunan Abi Dawood, one of the six most authentic books of Hadith!

According to Qur'an and Sunnah.. the punishment for blasphemy?

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.

What i see in your post:

Blah blah blah, i can't think for myself so let me just parrot a few words of my islami superstar scholars, who themselves parrot on stuff which was written by humans in the 10th century.


Quit posting stuff from hadith books. They're not the word of God. And stop misinterpreting the Quran.

 

[nForce]

no it has, as long as they dont blaspheme islam and other religions and remain within limits, i have learned dark wave member here is atheist and frequently types here in this forum while living in islamabad

So,in that case the atheist or a pagan for example will be limited to practicing what he does,in his drawing room only.If he tries to propagate his idea,then it is directly against the values of Islam.So,it is blasphemy right?
Just trying to understand the limit and scope of the law here.