“ The Bared sword upon the neck of the Blasphemer of Rasool Allah”: Defending Article 295-C

[Super Falcon]

Never been negotiable never willbe

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

1. Execution of Ka'ab:

The Prophet said, "Who is ready to kill Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Muhammad bin Maslama said, "O Allah's Apostle! Do you like me to kill him?" He replied in the affirmative. So, Muhammad bin Maslama went to him (i.e. Ka'b) and said, "This person (i.e. the Prophet) has put us to task and asked us for charity." Ka'b replied, "By Allah, you will get tired of him." Muhammad said to him, "We have followed him, so we dislike to leave him till we see the end of his affair." Muhammad bin Maslama went on talking to him in this way till he got the chance to kill him.

It is mentioned in Kashaf Al Bari that Ka'ab wrote insulting poems.


Reference: Sahih AL Bukhari, V-2, P-576

2. Execution of Abi Rafae:
Abi Raafe used to hurt the Apostle of ALLAH in two ways; he used to financially assist the enemies as well as speaking ill. So, Prophet PBUH sent people to execute him.


Reference: Sahih AL Bukhari, V-2, P-577

Original screen shot of Sahih Al Bukhari reference about execution of Ka'ab.
The sentence after sign of question mark in second line is the reason behind orders of Ka'ab execution.
View attachment 373372

That was not the reason for his execution. Let me quote this: "had gone to Mecca after Badr and provoked Quraysh against Muhammad. He also composed verses in which he bewailed the victims of Quraysh who had been killed at Badr. Shortly afterwards he returned to Medina and composed amatory verses of an insulting nature about the Muslim women."

There were many poets who insulted the Prophet but the only poets executed were those who incited violence and war against Muslims and insulted Muslim martyrs/women in the grossest way possible and refused to stop when warned.

People insulted the Prophet right to his face; there was even an incident in which the father of a recently converted Muslim abused the Prophet (SAW) in the open and his son was preparing to kill his father but was stopped by the Prophet (SAW).

The so called hadith which 'support' killing of blasphemers are either weak or out of context/confused for another reason.

“Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah,
lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance.
Thus We have made alluring to each people its own doings.
In the end will they return to their Lord,
and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did. [6:108]

“O ye who believe! Let not some men among you ridicule others:
It may be that the (latter) are better than the (former):
Nor let some women ridicule others: It may be that the (latter are better than the (former):
Nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other, nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames:
Ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness, (to be used of one) after he has believed:
And those who do not desist are (indeed) doing wrong. [49:11]

“Those who avoid the greater crimes and shameful deeds, and, when they are angry even then forgive;” [42:37]

Let me quote these as well:

"If blasphemy was punishable by death in Islam, then the Prophet

would have been the first one to order the killing of hundreds of his foes who later became his closest companions. With the exception of a very few earlier Arabs who accepted the Prophet

as the Messenger of Allah

, the majority of people of Makkah opposed him, humiliated him, cursed or blasphemed him or even tried to kill him, yet he preferred to practice forgiveness and to seek the divine mercy for them.

The old woman who used to throw garbage on the Prophet

was visited by him when he did not see her throwing it any more to learn that she was not well. When Suhail bin Amr, a poet who composed poetry blaspheming the Prophet

was taken as a prisoner of war after the battle of Badr, the Prophet

asked his companions to show kindness to him. There are examples after examples to prove that the Prophet

was never resorted to violence against those who were showing utter disrespect to him."

 

[The Accountant]

And that's why it should be on open forum. First of all, it shouldn't even be in Pakistan. We are not a Sharia following fanatics. Pakistan has a huge minority populations and because of that all laws should be so that they are fair for every person.

Where ever these blasphemy incidents happen, do you seriously think that poor minority would say such things unless provoked by our angel hearted blessed Muslims??
No. The Muslims almost always provoke (in Pakistan) and force them to such situations and i won't be surprised they do this by cursing out their religion.
And i don't think anyone is qualified to discuss this unless you bring a prophet or a messenger back to earth and let them deal with it

You call others as sharia following fanatics ... and as per quran we are muslims ... thats why i was against putting this onopen forum ao that every tom dick and harry will jump in giving his opinion ... its like asking with general publuc whether einstien's theory of relativity is correct or not ...

Do you even know the meaning of word muslim ... myslim means one who submits his will to Allah and as per quran and shariah anyone who denies to submit to Allah's will ceases to be muslim ... a person not following sharia but believing its truness remains a muslim but a person refusing to acknowledge basic principle of islams and refuse to accept sharia ceases to became muslim ... So Mr. kind self intellectual ,,, declaring yourself as a non-follower of sharia you declared yourself a non-muslim ....

You illeterate liberals has no knowledge of Islam but gives your opinion as you are the expert ... Being a muslim is not a inheritory claim ... but it is a belief based on quran + sunnah = sharia ... if you dont believe in Sharia than you have no right to cliam yourself as muslim ...

Regarding miss-use of blasphemy law ... why you liberals keep your eyes closed on miss-use of Pakistan Penal code... I don't see any campaign for abolishment of Pakistan penal code despite of gross miss-justice by the system ... we have several 100 time more cases of miss use of Pakistan Penal code but as this law was handed over to you by your British masters therefore you don't raise a single voice against it ...

Furthermore, do you know what blasphemy is ??? Blasphemy means passing degratory remarks against Allah and his Prophet (SAW) .. How double standard you are ... Pakistan local law do not allow to pass defamatory remarks against individuals and he can sue the other person ... You are Ok with this ... But you are saying that law should not prohibit people to pass defamatory remarks against leaders of Billions of people on earth ... Do you have any shame in passing such statements ???

I failled to understand how double standard a person could be ...

 

[Yaseen1]

When any Muslim comit any such act he become non Muslim and converting from Islam to any religion punishment is death

 

[punit]

WTH?? PDF shouldn't allow members to praise murderers? @WAJsal @Jungibaaz

u forgot to tag @Horus

 

[I.R.A]

@User bro your expertise are needed here

I have no expertise brother, in fact we are not experts but Muslims only. The only thing that comes to my mind is May ALLAH never show me the Hell to cool down my anger.

We need to consider the enormity of punishments when something involves disrespecting personalities and concepts bigger than our petty human selves. Those punishments are way enormous than "we" while living in this mortal world can ever imagine. You need to read Surah e Feel ......... WHO punished whom (in this world on this Earth) and what for, and then look at how Messenger Muhammad (Peace be upon him) and his companions showed restraint on various occasions. Showing restraint doesn't mean you are a less pious Muslim but it would help you act justly.

However, needless to remind here that Quran hasn't prohibited any form of Government system from formulating and implementing blasphemy laws. I would always support any legislation that ensures and prevents people from violence or incitement to violence, outrage and destruction of public property, based on any event originating from hatred spewed against and directed at religion and its beliefs and personalities.

 

[Mutakalim]

Bro, if you are interested in serious and productive debates/arguments, then you need to learn the basics first.

Following you lately and learning from you

Why can't we accept your interpretation/understanding ?

Your heading should be "Why can't we accept Ijma e Ummat". If you think that there is no Ijma e Ummat on this issue then you should provide the evidence. You could start by quoting Ulema e Ahl e Sunnat who negated the capital punishment issued to a blasphemer.
Anyone can dump my interpretation, my interpretation has no value in sharia. I have just presented the interpretation of Ulema e Tafseer, hadess, and fiqh. If you want to blame anyone, then blame rest with Ulema e Ummat. I have just compiled the evidence. Don't shoot compiler, shoot the sources

Also the consensus among the Majority of Ulema in the past had been that Blasphemy is a pardonable offense... Which means that they also didn't consider Blasphemy as "Fasad fil Arz"

Any proof ^^ ... Or just a pious wish ??

So your opinion is in contradiction with the Holy Quran, Hadith, and the consensus of the ulama of the past, therefore it can't be accepted

I have intentionally skipped your whole paragraph because I am learning from you. I have started the argument and presented the evidence. Now it's your job to negate all the arguments and provide counter arguments with proofs from shariah. Regarding my interpretation of Fasad Fil Arz you can dump it wholeheartedly. My interpretation meant nothing in Shariah.
If you can pick one point from the whole discussion then so can I., As a result, this discussion will lead to nowhere.





.

 

[PDF]

I demand that if the thread needs to be deleted because it's against forum rules than all discussion regarding blasphemy law should be banned immediately. Add this topic to banned list so that no one can argue for or against it.

The pdf management must promptly stop any discussion on the topics which are not allowed to be discussed. But, it must keep in view that all and I repeat all threads should be stopped. It has been repeatedly observed that posters are free to mock these topics and little chance is given to defend the content.

This discussion can only be held within the Ulema who have studied the subject and have the grip of the topic. Inadequate knowledge will have serious consequences for the people. Please refrain!


{Muslims regard the most reliable Qur'anic commentary as being contained in the Qur'an itself. In other words, the ways in which certain ayat clarify other ayat are regarded as being the most significant form of commentary. A second form of Qur'anic commentary is how the Prophet interpreted the Qur'an. And his comments on the Qur'an (as well as everything he ever said or did) are recorded in the hadith collections. After these two forms of commentary, knowledgeable companions and later generations of pious and learned Muslims expressed their view of the meaning of various ayat.}
The best explanation of Quran is Quran. But if You can not have adequate understanding from only Quran, Then Ahadith is the best way. If you can not find the explanation is Hadiths, Then the Scholars will tell us.
Quran>Hadiths>Qiyas>Ijma
It is noted that many times hadiths are compulsory to understand and interpret the the Quran. Forexample, Quran orders us to Pray Salat. Now we do not get to know the method to how to pray. Now the Hadiths and Sunnats guide us.


@Gillani88 I appreciate your work. Jazāk Allāhu Khayran (جزاك اللهُ خيرًا).

Anyway, I request the moderaters to observe to forum rules and do justice to all parties.No Bias should be found.

It is to be noted that our opinions are insignificant in the light of Shariah. We must follow The Quran, Sunnah, Ahadith and what our Ulema have stated. The OP have constructed a genuine thread with proper references. But it is best not to involves ourselves into which we have inadequate knowledge. It should only be discussed by our well-knowledged and authentic Islamic Scholars.

 

[krash]

The purpose of this article is to defend Capital Punishment which is mentioned in the article 295-C against the Blasphemer of Rasool Allah(P.B.U.H). Arguments are presented from Quran, Hardees and Ijma e Ummat as these things constitute the basic sources of Shariah. The article only discusses the legitimacy of Capital punishment to a person whose blasphemy has been established. I will only stick to Dalail e Sharia. It should be noted that I have just collected the evidence.

Note that given the urgency of the matter and the limited time available to me, I will be responding in parts to your complete post.

Evidence from Quran:

1. Indeed, those who abuse Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment. Ahzab-57

Allah has indeed. However I fail to see where the ayat has directed to capital punishment in the matter? However in a few verses before Allah says,


33:48
"And do not obey the disbelievers and the hypocrites but do not harm them, and rely upon Allah . And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs."

There are more directly addressing the matter. I will be presenting them as well.

· In this verse Abuse of Allah is the abuse of messenger because no one can hurt or abuse Allah as God doesn’t exist in any Materialistic form. Tafsir e Roohul bayan V-7 P-237, Tafseer e Mazhari V-9 P-289

Not mentioned in the ayat in any shape or form and is in fact a commentary by Mazhari for which you have not provided any reasoning to show how or where he reached this conclusion from or how is it related to the verse mentioned. Yet this is supposedly a proof from the Quran...

· Insult and abuse of Prophet (whether it's direct or indirect) of his personality, religion and ancestry is infidelity. A person who is involved in committing such act became apostate(Murtad) and he is liable to Death. Tafseer e Mazhari V-9, P-291

The ruling of apostasy is understandable given that any true believing Muslim would never insult or abuse the Prophet (PBUH) intentionally. However, the penalty of death is again mentioned just like that without any reasoning behind it claiming that it is related to the verse above when the verse itself does not mention anything of the sort. And this is also being presented as supposed 'proof' for the punishment from the Quran...

· “Respect of Allah and His prophet is same thing” Allama Ibn e Qayam

Not found in the Quran or the Ahadith and related to a relatively unknown Suffi scholar who was mentored by a very controversial figure. But sure, I'll let it be. However, I fail to see the relevance of this with the argument at hand.

· “Abuse and Insult of Prophet is Kufr” Ibn e Taimiyah

Obviously since no believing Muslim would ever indulge.

· “Ibn e Hamam Said The person who Abuses prophet become apostate, his repentance will not be accepted and he will be killed” Tafseer e Mazhari

Again just a statement presented without establishing its link to the verse above or anything else said in the Quran. How is this proof from the Quran?

· “According to one tradition Hazrat Abu Bakar Siddiq Also gave the same fatwa” Tafseer e Mazhari

How is a fatwa by Hazrat Abu Bakr a proof from the Quran? Please present the Fatwa with its credibility measures. I'll make it easier. Show me any implementation of a law pertaining to this in the time of Hazrat Abu Bakr.

· “They (People who commit blasphemy) are cursed in this world and their final punishment is death” Tafseer e Saadi

How was this extracted from the verse above? This is becoming a trend with your 'proofs'...

· “It is stated in this verse that It is obligatory to kill those people who intentionally abuses Allah and His prophet” Ibn e Taimiyah

Where? How? When? Through what reasoning???

Side note: Read up on Ibn e Taimiyah and his many different rulings. You'd stop presenting him as any support for anything.

· Same thing is stated in Tafsir Abi Saod V-4, P-77, Saadi, Abu lais Samarqandi

Kindly quote. And again, how did the scholar reach this conclusion through a verse which does not mention anything of the sort.

Surely for all these statements above the scholars must have thoroughly explained their reasoning and you must have obviously read it all.

And those who harm believing men and believing women for [something] other than what they have earned have certainly born upon themselves a slander and manifest sin. Ahzab 58

· Try to understand the difference between abuse of Holy prophet and abuse of Believers. Same word “Yu’uzoon” has been used but punishments are different.

Not in any empirical form whatsoever, also have a stark similarity of being exacted by God.

If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is disease and those who spread rumors in al-Madinah do not cease, We will surely incite you against them; then they will not remain your neighbors therein except for a little. Ahzab 60

Did He? And what do you think that incitement would have been like? Do you have the divine capacity to infer it? From how most of the scholars translate it, it seems to be exile.

How can you possibly present this as another 'proof'? Please explain how you reached your conclusion from this verse?

Accursed wherever they are found, [being] seized and massacred completely. Ahzab 61

A warning to the hypocrites that they will meet devastation if they do not fix their ways. As given way too many times elsewhere in the Quran as well. Or as better explained,

"This is a permanent law of Allah’s Shariah that in an Islamic society and state such mischief-mongers are never given an opportunity to flourish and prosper. Whenever the system of society and state is established on divine law, such people will be warned to mend their ways and if they still persisted in their evil ways they would be severely dealt with and exterminated."
http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=33&verse=1&to=73

How is this related to the blasphemy law?

· Prophet said “Curse on Momin amounts to(is equal to) his death” Bukhari, Muslim

Surely you are not saying that the Prophet (PBUH) here has said that if a person is cursed then he is to be killed, right?

· Reason of their curse is mentioned in previous verse that they used to Abuse prophet

Seriously? You take a Hadith pertaining to metaphoric speech, translate it literally, put it besides a completely un-related ayat and present it as proof? The Quran has warned us of this. Do you know where? I'll provide that too.

· As they are accused so wherever they are found seize them and kill them. Sarim ul Maslool

That is not the accepted or literal translation of the verse at all. Refer to my above quote about ibn e Tayymia.

[This is] the established way of Allah with those who passed on before; and you will not find in the way of Allah any change. Ahzab 62

Which in other Abrahamic religions is also known as the Covenant of Abraham. And it has nothing to do with worldly punishment meted out by men.


The above mentioned surrah is specifically with regards to the propaganda being spread by some about the Prophet's (PBUH) marriage with Hazrat Zainab. Tell me how many of those people were put to death for this?


*This will be continued tomorrow.*



I don't even know where to begin with all of the above. None of it makes any sense or even relates to the matter or the Quran. You have cherry picked unknown and at times down right scandalous 'scholars' with cherry picked translations, coupled them with blank statements and completely unrelated ahadith and then presented it all as the essence of the surrah and hence proof from the Quran where as the very Surrah only a few verses before on the exact same matter is explicitly telling the Prophet (PBUH) that "do not harm them". I can't help but wonder if this was deliberate.


Abu Dhar said, "I was with the Prophet (SAW) one day and I heard him saying: "There is something I fear for my Ummah than the Dajjal." It was then that I became afraid, so I said: "Oh Rasool Allah! Which thing is that?" He (SAW) said; "Misguided and astray scholars."

[Musnad Ahmad (5/145) No. 21334 and 21335]

Since you two gave the post positive ratings @Horus @Khafee

Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H) personally encouraged and ordered killing of blasphemer Kaab bin Ashraf... it is in Bukhari

Do you know the holes in that related hadith? Leaving aside the credibility of the 2 original narrators, you are telling us that the Prophet (PBUH) ordered and was an accessory to murder? A man was killed without due process or reasoning given, through connivance, going directly against the explicit teachings of Islam and the Prophet's (PBUH) character, just because the Prophet (PBUH) had 'had it with him'? Do you know the amount of people who ridiculed and made fun of the Prophet (PBUH)? The number that spread lies about him? The number that conspired against him? The number of them forgiven? Why they were forgiven? Do you know the number of them never responded to? Do you know who were the people who physically assaulted Him? What he did in response? Do you know the number of direct ayats sent exactly to teach the Prophet (PBUH) and his companions the response to this ridicule? Do you know what that response is? Would you like me to quote those ayats here?

What this hadith and its proponents are saying is that the Prophet (PBUH) under divine guidance and dictation went directly against his own character and the direct principles sent by God. An act which was never repeated when it was warranted a million times more. An act which we find no parallel of anywhere else in the life of the Prophet (PBUH) or the Caliphs that followed him?

 

[Zaem]

Kind of weird how Muhammad is being treated as the God, even tho he is only mane, sinner like the rest of us. Yet, he who abuses him, sinful human, gets the same punishment as he who blasphemes Holy God.... Its like Muhammad was Jesus, except not Son of God, but kinda was.
Killing Gods prophet would be the same as killing God, but in Muhammads case, he who doesnt respect him is at the same time not respecting God, even tho God is Holy, Muhammad sinful man...

 

[XenoEnsi-14]

I can't believe how bored I am.

 

[Valar Dohaeris]

Kind of weird how Muhammad is being treated as the God, even tho he is only mane, sinner like the rest of us. Yet, he who abuses him, sinful human, gets the same punishment as he who blasphemes Holy God.... Its like Muhammad was Jesus, except not Son of God, but kinda was.
Killing Gods prophet would be the same as killing God, but in Muhammads case, he who doesnt respect him is at the same time not respecting God, even tho God is Holy, Muhammad sinful man...

In Islamic believes no Prophet of God is sinful. All the Prophets are sinless and innocent.

 

[Zaem]

In Islamic believes no Prophet of God is sinful. All the Prophets are sinless and innocent.

So they are as pure as God, even tho the reason we lost conmectbto God was sin, the thing why we need to be saved from hell which we all deserve?
Dont you Muslims have same Adm and Eve story as Bible?

 

[M. Sarmad]

Following you lately and learning from you

Your heading should be "Why can't we accept Ijma e Ummat".

Bro, that was in response to your claim that "Blasphemy is Fasad fil Arz" ...

As for your "majority is right" argument, I for one do not accept it. But as you do, let me tell you that Hanafi and Shafi`i schools of jurisprudence accept the repentance of blasphemers. Almost two thirds of the Muslims are adherents of these schools of jurisprudence and they are widespread in countries such as India, Pakistan,Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Central Asia, The Caucasus, The Balkans, Turkey,Parts of Iraq, Egypt, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Sri lanka, Maldives, Palestine, Jordan, Lebanon, Yemen,East Africa (Somalia, Kenya, Tanzania) . .

Hanbali and Maliki schools of jurisprudence do not accept repentance. These schools of thought are prevalent in Saudi Arabia (Hanbali) and African Countries(Maliki) only. (However, Non Muslims can be forgiven if they convert to Islam).


Now, one may think that why, in a country like Pakistan where 60 -70 % of the total Population is Hanafi, do we have (laws closest to) Hanbali/Saudi laws ?? (Hanbali jurisprudence is the only jurisprudence with a mandatory death punishment for Blasphemy cases, both for Muslim men and women)



Engage Pakistan did a research on How could such a clearly stated Hanafi postion that blasphemy is a pardonable offense, maintained for centuries, be so misinterpreted?.... They found out that Advocate Ismaeel Qureshi, the architect of the blasphemy law made a mistake. Qureshi acknowledged that mistakes had been made in the research upon which the judicial interpretation of Pakistan's blasphemy law now rests.

In his best-selling book on blasphemy and his petition, Qureshi apparently built his case of an irrevocable death penalty, with no scope for pardon on the works of leading Hanafi authorities, and ironically, Imam Ibn Abidin himself.

In an a case of history repeating itself, he followed in Al-Bazzazzi’s footsteps in erroneously subverting the position of Imam Ibn Abidin.

At one point, in Fatawa e Shami, Ibn Abidin takes Bazzazzi’s claim – ‘the punishment for blasphemy is death, it is unpardonable and anyone who disagrees is also guilty of blasphemy’ – dissects it and goes on to criticise it for the next six pages.

Advocate Ismaeel Qureshi, grasping the first thing he saw, slaps Imam Ibn Abidin’s name on to the very position that Abidin so passionately refuted right after quoting the original problematic claim:

http://www.dawn.com/news/1149558/the-untold-story-of-pakistans-blasphemy-law




The history and process of how the events transpired to produce the law in its current form reads like a series of unfortunate errors. As the first step, I request you to read more about 295 C (that you are so vehemently defending here) ,"how" (by whom, and why) it was enacted and on what "basis" ...

Regards

 

[AhsanAmin]

I read the original first post but I do not find anything that could justify capital punishment or any punishment for that matter for blasphemy. I agree with @krash above and will try to write my own views in a later post. But Most rude hadiths cited are authentic according to Ibn-e-Tamiyyah, a guy who lived more than six hundred years after the prophet. Here is what wikipedia says about this guy. Below is quote from wikipedia.

"Taqī ad-Dīn Aḥmad ibn Taymiyyah (Arabic: تقي الدين أحمد ابن تيمية), known as Ibn Taymiyyah for short, was a controversial[11][12]medieval Sunni Muslim theologian, juriconsult, logician, and reformer. A member of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence founded by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn Taymiyyah was also a member of the Qadiriyya Sufi order founded by the twelfth-century mystic and saintAbdul-Qadir Gilani.[6][7][8][9] A polarizing figure in his own lifetime, Ibn Taymiyyah's contentious and iconoclastic views on such widely accepted Sunni doctrines of the medieval period such as the intercession of saints and the veneration of saint's tombs made him very unpopular with the vast majority of the orthodox religious scholars of the time, under whose orders he was imprisoned several times during his life.[13]

Often viewed as a minority figure in his own times and in the centuries that followed,[14] Ibn Taymiyyah has become one of the most influential medieval writers in contemporary Islam,[15] where his anti-classical interpretations of the Qur'an and the Sunnah and his rejection of some aspects of classical Islamic tradition are believed by some scholars to have had considerable influence on contemporary Wahhabism, Salafism, and Jihadism.[16][17][18] Indeed, particular aspects of his teachings had a profound influence on Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, the founder of the Hanbali reform movement practiced in Saudi Arabia known as Wahhabism, and on other later Wahabi scholars.[2] Moreover, Ibn Taymiyyah's controversial fatwa allowing jihad against other Muslims, is referenced to by Al-Qaeda and other jihadi groups.[19][20]"

You can guess on your own when such people are cited for authenticity of hadiths and Ijma of Muslim scholars then any ugly thing can be justified about Islam.