For anyone who comes across this post, please read the entirety of it. I know it's long but that's only because the poster kept repeating the same nonsense over and over again. You will see how these dishonest bigots and hate peddlers, who know nothing about your religion, deliberately fool you and corrupt your religion to further their own agenda.
1) They will give you quotes which only apply to Muslim blasphemers and claim that they prove the death sentence for non-Muslim blasphemers. As you will see below, they do not.
2) They will lie without any proof and reject direct statements from some of the greatest Muslim scholars ever clearly stating that
non-Muslim blasphemers cannot be killed. This is proof enough of their deliberate dishonesty. This member has in fact rejected,
without any reason, direct rulings from three different sources which state that you cannot kill non-Muslim blasphemers. Then he provided statements
from the exact three sources which are only applicable on Muslim blasphemers and tried to use them to claim that they allow the non-Muslim blasphemers to be killed as well.
3) They will give you statements that are corrupted, and have been known to be corrupted since long before we were born.
4) They will claim that specific scholars support the killing of non-Muslim blasphemers. This is to throw you off the truth and keep you from reading their rulings. If you spend two minutes to find their actual rulings, you will realize that they in fact forbid the killing of non-Muslim blasphemers.
5) They will give you three false Ahadith. All three of these Ahadith have been rejected by the majority of scholars over 1400 years. You can read all about them online.
6) They will keep on claiming that there are "numerous Ahadith and traditions" on the issue but will never be able to present any except for the three mentioned above.
7) They will try to use "technical" terms to intimidate you. Don't worry, they don't know their meanings themselves and are using them incorrectly.
8) They will keep repeating statements such as "It's been proven", "there is so much proof", "as I have proved", "there is Ijma", without ever proving or providing anything to support it. Keep an eye out for it. It is a crass tactic to overwhelm the listener and fool him/her.
9) They and their sources will contradict them in the same discussion multiple times over. It is because they themselves have no idea what they are talking about. They are just throwing random statements, which are either out of context or corrupted, at you to fool you. Keep an eye out for this as well.
10) They will threaten you. Don't worry, it's only because they know they have nothing and are nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
@Mutakalim: Never have I seen so much bandwidth wasted on so little.
Life of Shatmeen and Murtadeen is not protected under Islamic law. For Muslims, words of Prophet A.S are more sacred than lives of Kufar and Murtadeen.
Hogwash, as already proven above. Just because you keep repeating it does not make it true.
Before moving towards four school of thoughts lets see what Prophet A.S said about Murtadeen and whether their life is protected or not.
Firstly, there are
five schools of thought not four. Are you trying to sideline the Jaffari Fiqh?
Secondly, why? The entire debate concerns the capital punishment for non-Muslim blasphemers. Can a non-Muslim be a murtad? You thought you could justify the murder of non-Muslims through laws which do not apply to them? You thought you could dishonestly change goal posts and I wouldn't notice? You think I'll let you do it?
Furthermore, I will gladly discuss the roots of the punishment for Apostasy and/or blasphemy for Muslims but
only after you have admitted that your 'dishonest claims of capital punishment for non-Muslim blasphemers being undisputed' are lies that you fabricated without knowing anything. I will not let you divert the debate anywhere except for the death penalty for non-Muslim Blasphemers. Keep this in mind while reading my post and then responding to it.
Moreover, whether death penalty is granted based on liability to treason or is their any restriction of treason in case of blasphemy or apostasy? Lets see!
1. Ibn e Abbas R.A narrated, The Apostle said: Kill those who change their religion. (Sunan Abi Dawud 4351)
There is no mention of treason in this narration. The Hukm e Sharai derived from this ruling is Aam e Mutlaq and it can not be restricted unless a stronger Nas is available, according to Hanfis. (Usool e Shashi). Imam Shafai also argued on the basis of this narration that this hukm is Mutlaq and will not be restricted.
As this Nas is derived from Mutafaq Alaih Ahadith, therefore, to restrict this hukm e Sharai, Nas e Qatai is required. You haven't provided any Nass e Qatai,
Yes, I haven't. Maybe because the debate and my entire post was on the capital punishment for
non-Muslims based on blasphemy? You went ahead and provided a source for the capital punishment for
Muslims based on Apostasy. Good job.
instead you relied on childish claim of consensus ("every school of thought in Islam") without any evidence.
What claim of consensus are you talking about here? Quote it, be clearer. Otherwise, best you keep the rhetoric to yourself.
2. Abd Allah (b. Mas`ud) reported the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) as saying: The blood of a Muslim man who testifies that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah should not be lawfully shed but only for one of three reasons: married fornicator, soul for soul, and one who deserts his religion separating himself from the community. (Sunan Abi Dawud 4352)
Again a ruling explicitly
for Muslims and not non-Muslims.
Although, separation from the community is mentioned in this narration but this is not the condition of Irtidad, nor it was understood as such by four school of thoughts, as we will see.
The separation from community is given as the reason behind the punishment for Irtidad not an added caveat for the punishment to be applicable, please read what you post more clearly. Regardless, won't add any further to it until you accept that you were wrong with regards to the capital punishment for non-Muslims.
Moreover, Laws of Muharba and treason are mentioned in separate chapters in books of Hadith and Fiqh and for 1400 years Ummah is treating them as separate issues. Moreover, Imam Bukhari and Imam Abu Daood treated both cases separately.
Again,
nothing to do with non-Muslims.
3. Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal: AbuMusa said: Mu'adh came to me when I was in the Yemen. A man who was Jew embraced Islam and then retreated from Islam. When Mu'adh came, he said: I will not come down from my mount until he is killed. He was then killed. One of them said: He was asked to repent before that. ( Sunan Abi Dawud 4355)
Again,
nothing to do with non-Muslims.
4. Abu Burdah said: A man who turned back from Islam was brought to Abu Musa. He invited him to repent for twenty days or about so. Muadh then came and invited him (to embrace Islam) but he refused. So he was beheaded. (Sunan Abi Dawud 4356)
Again,
nothing to do with non-Muslims.
5. Narrated `Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to `Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn `Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"
(Chapter: Al-Murtad and Al-Murtaddah,
Sahih al-Bukhari 6922)
Again, nothing to do with non-Muslims.
Imam Ibn e Hajar Asqalani while interpreting this Hadith didn't mentioned any condition of treason. Moreover, those people were the citizens of Islamic state and were not involved in any treason except the fact that they changed their religion.
Again, nothing to do with non-Muslims.
Ibn e Hajar Asqalani while interpreting one of the traditions in this chapter quoted Imam Ibn e Munzar, “a person who abuses Prophet A.S in explicit terms must be killed. Furthermore, Imam Abubakr Farsi Shafai said that a person who abuses prophet must be killed and his repentance will not be accepted.
Again,
nothing to do with non-Muslims.
6. Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas: A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (ﷺ) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (ﷺ) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (ﷺ) was informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.
Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood. (Sunan Abi Dawud 4361)
That women didn't rebelled, nor she committed any treason. She was punished by the Companion of Prophet for blasphemy and Prophet A.S later sanctified that action.
There we go. The first highly contested narration. As I said, one of the only three, IIRC, that you could've used, against the hundreds if not thousands of universally accepted ones. The only man this story originates from is considered a serial week narrator. Do you know his name? Regardless,
this too has nothing to do with non-Muslim blasphemers. Once you've accepted your dishonesty against the non-Muslims I will be glad to show who, how, and why with dozens of sources ripping this false hadeeth apart.
This Hadith is enough for a straightforward Muslim to acknowledge the truth,
Yeah, maybe for one who has no clue how Ahadeeth work. As Ibn Wahb stated,
"Were it not for Malik and Al-Layth, I would have been ruined. I used to believe that everything narrated about the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, should be acted upon."
Again, I'll educated you further on why this is but only once you've accepted your dishonest claims for the punishment of non-Muslims.
however, those who are blinded by the love of blasphemers will try to hide behind exceptions of law.
You mean Imam Abu Hanifa and the entirety of the Hanafi School? Think before you speak, at least. You don't know how the schools work, do you? Don't even realize that the entire Hanafi School is derived directly from the rulings of Imam Abu Hanifa and his direct mentees.
A Hanafi Scholar is bound to Imam Abu Hanifa's rulings and he cannot reject or change them. As per the
usul (principles) of the Hanafi jurisprudence, a consensus of Abu Hanifa and his students cannot now be challenged. This is one of the primary principles of taqlid in Islamic legal thought. If they do, then they cease to be a part of that school. Exception of the law? Your lies become more brazen by the number.
Also, do you now admit that your pompous claims of "
not a single scholar in the entire history of Islam has said that" were uneducated? Do you admit that you fabricate religious decrees without knowing anything about the religion just to support your illiterate argument?
7. AbuBarzah said: I was with AbuBakr. He became angry at a man and uttered hot words. I said: Do you permit me, Caliph of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), that I cut off his neck? These words of mine removed his anger; he stood and went in. He then sent for me and said: What did you say just now? I said: (I had said
Permit me that I cut off his neck. He said: Would you do it if I ordered you? I said: Yes. He said: No, I swear by Allah, this is not allowed for any man after Muhammad (ﷺ).
Abu Dawud said: This is Yazid's version.
Ahmad bin Hanbal said: That is, Abu Bakr has no powers to slay a man except for three reasons which the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had mentioned: disbelief after belief, fornication after marriage, or killing a man without (murdering) any man by him. The Prophet (ﷺ) had powers to kill.
(Sunan Abi Dawud 4363)
Again, even not a hint of treason. To qualify a Hukm e Aam there needs to be a ruling more stronger than that hukm , its a basic principle of Usul ul Fiqh and you havent provided any evidence of explicit ruling.
So, again
nothing to do with non-Muslims?
In fact, any man who can read would clearly see that a non-Muslim blasphemer does not fall under any of those three categories beyond which "
Abu Bakr has no powers to slay a man". Which means, if you still didn't get it, Hazrat Abu Bakr has no right to kill a non-Muslim for blasphemy. Thanks for shooting yourself in the face.
Btw, it also clearly states that Muslims do not posses the same powers to kill as the Prophet (S.A.W) had. Yet you have kept claiming that you will kill where the Prophet (S.A.W) has not. Shot yourself twice in one go. Nice.
Imam Abu Daood wrote a whole chapter in his sunan about a person who reviles Prophet A.S. "Chapter: The ruling regarding one who reviles the prophet (pbuh)". Moreover, he didn't restricted the capital punishment to treason. It's just your invention.
Again,
nothing to do with non-Muslim blasphemers.
8. Imam Tahawi Hanfi narrated in his book:
View attachment 733165
Those people were spreading religion of Musailma and didnt committed any treason, in fact they were residing inside Islamic state. They were killed on the orders of Usman bin Affan R.A, due to the fact that they changed their religion.
Do you know who you quote and for what? First you reject the
direct quote I provided from Imam Tahawi in Mukhtasar al-Tahawi,
explicitly stating that a non-Muslim cannot be killed for blasphemy. Then you respond to that very post by quoting the very same man yourself in a completely incorrect context, which only pertains to Muslims, and try to present it as proof that he allows non-Muslim blasphemers to be killed. Is this a bad joke, bud? That's the third time you've shot yourself in the face.
Furthermore, and equally as importantly if not more, the entire war against the three false prophets was waged on the basis of treason; they had refused to pay zakat and were gathering forces against the Muslims. Pop quiz: What did Hazrat Umar, along with many other Sahabah, advise Hazrat Abu Bakr to do against them? This is what happens when a completely illiterate simpleton tries to take the charge of Islam. That's the fourth time now. Don't bother responding to this bit because I will not explain any further until you've admitted your lies against the non-Muslims.
Now lets move to four school of thoughts and find out whether they restrict capital punishment of Riddah or Sabb to treason or not.
So four schools? Again?
Or in other words whether they advise it base on liability to treason or whether a shatim or Murtad can be killed just because of his act of Riddah or Shatm, without any treasonous act.
Did I not explicitly state that it is the Hanafi Fiqh which mandates treason in addition to blasphemy to prescribe capital punishment for Muslims?
Looks like I did.
ps: I'm also beginning to think you did not understand; "In fact, every school of thought in Islam which does advise the death penalty advises it based on liability to 'treason' and not 'blasphemy'." This sentence does not mean that the person has to commit treason after committing blasphemy to be given the capital punishment.
1. Imam Qadoori in his Mukhtasir ul Qadoori the foundational text of Fiqh e Hanfi said, " And if a Muslim turned back from Islam then he will be convinced to revert back and his objections will be clarified. He will be imprisoned for three days and if he didn't revert back then he will be killed. (Mukhtasir ul Qadoori, Bab ul Riddah) (Fatawa e Aalamgeeri)
So, again,
has nothing to do with non-Muslims.
Btw, this source allows repentance, but below you claim that it is a "hudd punishment" and that repentance cannot be accepted? You can't even keep your sources coherent? Fifth time now.
Again, no mention of treason and Muharbah, in fact I have read the whole chapter and didn't found anything. Therefore, according to Fiqh e Hanfi, this ruling is explicit and is applicable to all Muslims residing in Darul Islam.
No it isn't. As will be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt after you have accepted your lies against the non-Muslims
whom this narration has nothing to do with.
I dont know how you managed to quote Fiqh e Hanfi to support your claim,
Was pretty easy. I took an uncontested and completely unambiguous statement of
IMAM ABU HANIFA (The same guy whom the entire Fiqh is named after) and quoted it. Then I backed it up with more statements of the exact scholars you and Pakistan follow, attesting to Imam Abu Hanifa's ruling. I think that's usually how it works.
when according to its rulings the killer of Murtad will not be killed. Should we apply this ruling in Pakistan? Will you support it? Or your sole purpose is to defend shatmeen by picking statements from here and there?
Lies will not get you anywhere, this is not your household discussion. Please refrain from them.
You are given the undisputed ruling, from the exact Fiqh that you follow, clearly stating that
a non-Muslim will not be killed for blasphemy. Then, since you can't find anything to dispute it, you proceed to presenting narrations from competing schools (The exact ones which you do not follow) which either contradict your claim, or contradict each other, or are universally accepted as week, and on top of it all are exclusively concerning
Muslim blasphemers and
NOT non-Muslim blasphemers. And now you pretend that you have successfully countered what I have presented? Please, grow some integrity.
You have no supposed love for the religion or the Prophet (S.A.W). You are a remorseless liar, hellbent on corrupting the religion and the country.
Another important thing to note in Mukhtasir ul Qadoori is the fact that the rulings concerning treason and rebellion are mentioned just below the Ahkam of Riddah and Imam Qadoori didn't mentioned the condition of treason or liability to treason in apostasy.
And again
nothing to do with non-Muslims. Will not be answered until you've accepted your dishonesty against the non-Muslims.
2. Imam Tahawi Hanfi said, "the ruling of Murtad is like a non Muslim fighter and he will be killed". (Faiz ul Bari, Ibn e Hajr)
The important thing to note here is that the ruling or punishment of Murtad is like a non Muslim fighter, or in other words he will be killed just like a person who is non Muslim and fighting Islamic state. The punishments of Harbi Kafir and Murtad are similar and treason is not the condition of irtidad, there is a clear difference.
Again,
has nothing to do with a non-Muslim blasphemer.
His life will not be protected, unlike your claim.
My claim? Quote it. Pardon me but I won't believe a word you say without proof. Especially when I said nothing of the sort.
3. Murtad women are to be subjected to physical punishment with an interval of three days till they repent. (Qadoori, Fatwa e Alamgeeri, Jamae Sagheer)
However, Murtad women will be killed acording to Ibn e Umar R.A, Imam Zuhri and Ibrahim Nakhai.
I am not sure, which punishment is more severe for Murtad women, capital punishment or physical punishment with an interval of three days. Should we implement this law in Pakistan?
And you did it again. Not just shoot yourself in the face for the 7th time. You quoted Fatwa e Alamgeeri, the exact same source which you rejected as an "exception" when I gave you
the direct quote from it stating that non-Muslim blasphemers cannot be killed. Now you go and quote it yourself, in a completely incorrect context, trying to fool us into believing that it supports the killing of non-Muslim blasphemers. Copy pasting isn't as simple.
Also,
has nothing to do with a non-Muslim blasphemer.
Or you just want to pick and choose Hanfi laws, according to your own liking?
Pakistan, you, and I follow the Hanafi Fiqh. The Hanafi Fiqh has a unanimously accepted and undisputed ruling from Imam Abu Hanifa with regards to the punishment of
non-Muslim blasphemers, as has already been shown in ample detail above. Your blatant lies and rejection of that fact will not be entertained. No one is buying it. You have no option here, that is the only ruling you can follow since you are a follower of the Hanafi Fiqh. That is not my stance, that is the stance of all of the
five schools of thought in Islam. In fact you haven't just switched schools on a whim but you've then tried to poach rulings which are not only from competing schools but are also explicitly meant for Muslims and not non-Muslims.
You are picking and choosing "laws" which have nothing to do with the matter. And very transparently so, my dishonest little friend.
It is clear from above mentioned narrations and sayings of Mujtahideen that lives of Murtadeen and shatmeen will not be protected and they will be killed. Moreover, the Hukm of death for Murtadeen and Shatmeen is Aam e Mutlaq and will not be restricted. Moreover all the above mentioned punishments were awarded due to change of religion or blasphemy, not due to treason. Countless other narrations of Prophet A.S and sayings of Mujtahideen can be quoted regarding irtadad and blasphemy but for a sane minded person these evidences will suffice.
Same shameless lies again.
You are given the direct and very explicit ruling which you are bound to from your own school (which is also the largest Fiqh in the world) for non-Muslim blasphemers, you pretend it was nothing and brush it aside. You then proceed to present rulings from schools that Pakistan and you yourself do not follow, each and every single one of which is explicitly meant
only for Muslims/Murtadeen, and then try to pretend that you have proved the capital punishment for non-Muslim blasphemers. Just to make it seem that you know what you are talking about, you go on to use terms such as "Aam e Mutlaq". Tell me, how is a ruling Aam e Mutlaq when it itself explicitly states that it is for Muslims? Good job, bud. What an exemplary Musalman you are.
Unfortunately for you, my sentiments are supported by Ahadith and by absolute majority of Muhadiseen and Mujtahideen.
No they aren't....lol. Nothing in that statement is true. Prove it.
Moreover, my sentiments are reflected in Pakistan's law and people like you cant do anything about it, besides whining on an online forum.
That is exactly what is being debated here.....that your sentiments are the reason behind that un-Islamic law and not Islamic law itself. 8th time?
As I have said earlier, the love for blasphemers of Prophet A.S has blinded your eyes and clogged your mind to an extent that you even cant recognize the fact that your are claiming one thing and providing evidence of another. What you have written is reflection of your twisted mentality. Read your statement again.
Empty dishonest rhetoric again? You think anyone will buy it?
You claimed that, " Had you had any education on the matter you would have known that there is a sea of scholars opposing these punishments ever since they were brought about. In fact, the majority of today's blasphemy laws were imported in Muslim countries through British Imperialism. Regardless, there are more than 50 verses in the Quran directly advising on what to do when faced with ridicule against Islam, Allah (S.W.T), or the Prophet (S.A.W). You can easily google them."
You claimed that Islam doesn't grant capital punishment to blasphemers of Prophet A.S and blasphemy laws are not Islamic, in fact they are enacted as a result of British imperialism.
You think we can't go back and confirm if I ever said "Islam doesn't allow capital punishment to blasphemers of Prophet (S.A.W)". Please go ahead and quote it. How could you possibly think that this would work?
Moreover, you also claimed that blasphemy laws were not enacted during the time of Prophet A.S or Sahaba R.A. When I confronted you and demanded evidence, you came up with an exception in Hanfi law.
That is an illiterate statement. The onus of proof lays on the claimant. You have the responsibility of proving that they were enforced during their times. You cannot ask people to prove a negative. Otherwise, you lick windows when no one can see you. Please proceed to prove that my statement is false.
Furthermore, you were only given the Hanafi ruling after you explicitly and pompously asked for it,
"Why dont you name some of those scholars who have opposed capital punishment for blasphemer of Prophet A.S? Educate us please!"
Do you feel educated now? I doubt it.
It is also not the "exception". It is the largest ruling given the fact that the Hanafi Fiqh is the largest Fiqh in the world. It is also the Fiqh you claim to follow. It is also the Fiqh that Pakistan's legal system follows. It is also not a ruling given just in Hanafism, I have already given you one source in one of the other schools, can you figure out which one? Regardless, you will now have to present the rulings demanding death for
non-Muslim blasphemers. Not rulings demanding death for
Muslim blasphemers.
You need to enlighten me again that how an exception can render the rule void?
Already enlightened. You only have dishonest statements. Just because you keep claiming that it is an exception does not make it so.
You also didn't bothered to look at numerous narrations of Prophet A.S, acts and Fatawa of Sahaba R.A.
The ones so numerous that you still haven't been able to present a single one? Except for the one false hadeeth pertaining only to Muslims. There are two more, let's see if you can find them.
Are you not aware of Sahih Ahadith about about that matter? Or you just ignored them because they doesn't suit your twisted and disgusting ideology?
Are you? Can you present any? You keep claiming of "all these Sahih Ahadith" about killing the non-Muslims for blasphemy but yet haven't presented a single one.
Secondly, does Madhab e Hanfia denied the capital punishment of Murtad? Or did they absolutely denied the capital punishment for Shatim? Everyone know that some Hanfis create an exception in case of women and some hanfis also make an exception in case of Zimmis. There is also a clear difference of opinion, in Fiqh e Hanfi itself, regarding capital punishment of women and Zimmis, as some Aima awarded capital punishment to them while other denied it. However, their is a consensus about capital punishment of a Muslim male blasphemer in the school of Imam Abu Hanifa. According to jamhoor, the capital punishment for shatim is absolute and they dont make any exception in cases of women and Zimmis, as well. You just picked a Qol e Marjoh and rejected the overall ruling based on an exception, which is also not Mufta beha anymore.
Have some decency please. You are lying against and about one of the greatest Muslim scholars ever to have been. The man your Madhab takes its name from. It takes an especially low person to lie so brazenly. This is quite disgusting.
Stop trying to fallaciously create doubt where there is none. You are the Fitnah the Prophet (S.A.W) warned us against. The largest Madhab in the world is Fiqh Hanafi, the most number of scholars in the Deen belong to Fiqh Hanafi, virtually all of them reject capital punishment for non-Muslim blasphemers. It is not "an exception" as you have shamelessly and dishonestly tried to portray it (exactly as you were claiming in your previous post that no such scholars even exist). It is the only legal decree on the matter in the school. It is also the only school followed by you and the Pakistani legal system.
Furthermore, I will not explain or get into any debate with regards to Murtads, women, Muslim blasphemers,
or anything else until you have accepted your lies against the non-Muslims. You think I don't see your desperate and deliberate attempts to divert the debate? Do you or do you not have anything to prove that
the death penalty for non-Muslim blasphemers is mandatory in all Islamic schools as has been your dishonest claim since the beginning.
Thirdly, how about you accept the ruling of largest Fiqh in Islam and the very school that is the primary reference for all official Islamic jurisprudence in Pakistan? Their ruling regarding a male Muslim blasphemer is absolute. Are you ready to accept that ruling?
First you say that there is an exception in the Hanafi Fiqh and now you are saying that the ruling in the Hanafi Fiqh is "absolute"? At least put some effort in your lies. You keep contradicting your own self.....
Finally, their is no consensus in Fiqh about the ruling that capital punishment shouldn't be awarded to Zimmis. Just a group in Hanfis granted that exception with clear difference of opinion.
Again you clearly exhibit how you will readily fabricate lies on the spot to corrupt your own religion and fiqh just to further your bigoted agenda. "Just a group in Hanafis"? Just like before, you have no clue what you are talking about and still you keep lying through your teeth. You think whoever reads your post can't easily google and find the unanimous ruling in the Hanafi Fiqh? Imam Abu Hanifa is just a group in Hanafis?
What Imam Abu Hanifa says is the highest authority in the Fiqh.
That difference of opinion will be highlighted later. While other three school of thoughts are quite clear about the ruling with absolutely no difference of opinion that shatim will be awarded capital punishment irrespective of gender or religion.
Again idiotic claims out of thin air without any proof. Also, will only be satisfactorily ripped apart after you have admitted to your lies about the non-Muslims.
What is the status of Saif ul Maslool in Fiqh e Hanfi? You need to first learn about the Umhat ul Kutb of Fiqh e Hanfi and how the saying of Imam Abu Hanifa are ascertained and verified by Hanfis.
You need to first learn how referencing works. Please don't give moronic excuses. It doesn't matter where it is written as long as it is authentic.
Secondly, and most importantly, exceptions can not be quoted to deny the rule. The rule is quite clear and unambiguous across all Madhahib that punishment of irtidad and Sabb is death. I dont know how this exception is supporting your claim that blasphemy laws are not Islamic. Moreover, how this saying of Abu Hanifa is supporting your claim that Fiqh e Hanfi grants capital punishment to only those people who also commit treason apart from blasphemy?
Same lie being repeated for the nth time. Already answered three times.
1) It is not an exception
2) Since the hanafi fiqh forbids death for non-Muslim Blasphemers and Pakistan's shariat courts are governed by the Hanafi Fiqh, the law is un-Islamic. Quite a few other un-Islamic factors about it which will only be explained in detail once you have admitted that your claim that "everyone commands death for a non-Muslim blasphemer" is a lie you concocted yourself, without knowing anything.
3) Did I say that I have presented any evidence for the "treason part" yet. As is very clear from my post, it will be provided to you only once you have admitted that your claim of "everyone commands death for a non-Muslim blasphemers" is a lie you concocted yourself, without knowing anything.
I won't respond to this repeated drivel again, not in this post, not in the thread.
Thirdly, even a student of Fiqh e Hanfi knows that Hanfis reject a lot of sayings of Imam Abu Hanifa concerning Masail because they dont follow him in Masail, instead they follow him in Usul. Sometimes rulings of Sheikheen are preferred over Abu Hanifa, while on other instances ruling of Abu Hanifa is preferred. Even on some instances, ruling of Imam Zufar is preferred over Ashab e Salasa. Books of fiqh e hanfi are filled with such examples.
You mean Deobandis and Barelvis? Good job, great examples of nobodies in the Fiqh or Deen. Also, ones who cannot challenge Imam Abu Hanifa or his mentee's rulings as per the 'Usuls' of the Fiqh, the same 'usul' they and you claim they follow.
You keep speaking of things you have no idea about.
Nothing of that sort is mentioned in Mukhtasir ul Qadoori. Matn will always be preferred upon Sharah or Fatawa. Again you need to learn Tabqat ul Kutab of Fiqh e Hanfi. My objection stand as it is.
That is a desperately idiotic objection. It is stated in Al-Tajrid, does not matter if it is stated in another book or not.
Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Quduri (d. 428 AH/1036 CE). Al-Tajrid, vol. 12, p. 6266
أهل الذمة يسبون الله تعالى ويقولون له ولد ، والمجوس يقولون له ضِدٌ وهو أمر بَينِّ فلا ينقضون العهد بذلك ، فسب النبي مثله. ولأنه نوع كفر فلا ينقض بذلك العهد كسائر أنواعه ، لأنهم لو سبوا النبي في كنائسهم وبِيَعهم لم ينقضوا به العهد وما لا ينتقض العهد في كنائسهم لا ينتقض به غيرها كضرب الناقوس وإظهار الخنازير
The people of dhimma blaspheme against Allah by saying He has a son, and the Zoroastrians by saying He has an “opposite.” These are clear realities, and these (sayings) do not break their covenant (of security). So, insult of the Prophet is the same. Because, it is just one type of disbelief, so it does not break the covenant, in the same way the other types (of disbelief do not).
If they insult the Prophet in their churches, and in their transactions, it does not nullify their covenant. And what does not break their covenant in their churches, doesn’t break it it in other ways, such as in them ringing bells, or displaying pigs.
Furthermore, you have not presented anything supporting your false claims from the 'Matn'. Yet you repeatedly keep claiming that you have, "All those numerous Ahadith"......See the dishonest hack you are? You can't stay straight for two consecutive sentences. You did not even present any 'Sharah' or Fatwas against it. The fact is clear and simple, many of the most famous Islamic jurists say that you are a liar.
*Below you keep presenting supposed fatwas (they aren't fatwas, they are narrations) to support your claim while rejecting all fatwas here.*
Anyone who reads this: According to him it doesn't matter if person A said something in book X since he did not say it in book Y.
Moreover, Imam Ibn e Humam Hanfi Said, "According to me, if a Zimmi (Non Muslim under the protection of Islamic state) abuses Prophet A.S, he will be killed and his covenant with Islamic state will be considered broken". (Fath ul Qadeer Vol 5, Page 303)
Thank you! I've been waiting through all the dishonest drivel above for you to quote him or anyone else referencing from Al-Bazzazi. I'm surprised you did not quote the others as well.
Al-Kamal ibn al-Humam (Whom you referred to as 'Imam Ibn e Humam Hanfi')
attributed this ruling in Fath ul Qadeer directly to al-Bazzazi's narration of
another scholar. Zayn al-Din Ibrahim Ib Nujaym also refers to it in al-Ashbah wa al-Naza'ir. His student Abd Allah al-Khatib al-Tumartashi refers to it in his books. Guess who that 'other scholar' is?!?..........
Imam Abu Hanifa. Al-Bazzazi misquoted Imam Abu Hanifa and ibn al-Humam referenced that misquote.
Al-Kamal inb al-Humam is basing his statement on a misquoted ruling presented by Al-Bazzazi from Imam Abu Hanifa - (Ibn Abidin, Kitab al Jihad, Bab al Murtad). And you were trying to challenge Imam Abu Hanifa with Al-Kamal ibn al-Humam's statement.....?
Guess what else?!? Al-Bazzazi, even in his misquote, only talks about Muslim blasphemers and not about non-Muslim blasphemers. Guess what else?!? No one in the world disputes this. As Ibn Abidin (below you lie and claim that he supports your stance**) states, "Al-Bazzazi's negligence has put the later scholars in error for they relied on his report and blindly followed him.
None of them reported the issue from any of the books of Hanafis". Allama Al Asr Sheikh Mustafa Al Reemati Ayyubi, regarding Al-Bazzazi's mistake, warns future scholars that they must show wisdom in this issue and not believe in every statement brought to them lest they are fooled by it and stray from the right path.
Guess what else?!?!?!? The entire case for the capital punishment of non-Muslim blasphemers in Pakistan is built on exactly this misquote from Al-Bazzazi. Advocate Ismaeel Qureshi not only referenced this exact misquote of Imam Abu Hanifa, he misattributed it and then misquoted it even more himself.
Al-Bazzazi's misquote of Imam Abu Hanifa's ruling,
“A Muslim blasphemer of the prophet PBUH will be killed under hudd and his pardon won’t be acceptable.” – (Ibn Abidin, Kitab al Jihad, Bab al Murtad)
Ismaeel Qureshi changed it to,
“A kafir blasphemer of the prophet PBUH will be killed under hudd and his pardon won’t be acceptable.” – (Ibn Abidin, Kitab al Jihad, Bab al Murtad)
The most mind blowing part is that Advocate Qureshi quoted Al-Bazzazi's misquote
from the very book by Ibn Abidin which states that it is a misquote. Shamelessness and dishonesty is clearly found in abundance in Pakistan. You'd get along well with Advocate Qureshi. Btw, he has, since then, admitted Al-Bazzazi's and his own misquote.
Anyone else reading this post: This is how these illiterate self-aclaimed thekedars of your religion corrupt it and fool you.
You were claiming that there is a consensus in Fiqh about punishment of non Muslims for blasphemy. There goes your claim of consensus. Even there is a difference of opinion in Fiqh e Hanfi and you were claiming absolute consensus.
Its a fact that Fiqh e Hanfi is not unanimous about prohibition of capital punishment for non Muslim blasphemer. Let us see.
1. Imam Ibn e Humam Hanfi Said, "According to me, if a Zimmi (Non Muslim under the protection of Islamic state) abuses Prophet A.S, he will be killed and his covenant with Islamic state will be considered broken". (Fath ul Qadeer Vol 5, Page 303)
Now have some shame! please. Moreover, why you always forget to mention the unanimous ruling of Fiqh regarding capital punishment for a Muslim blasphemer?
And there it comes back again! This is too funny.
2. It is accepted rule among hanfis that Sharuh will be preferred over Fatawa, therefore, the rulings of Fatawa e Aalamgeria will not be relied upon when ruling of Sharah, in this case, Fath ul Qadeer is present.
3. Imam Ibn e Humam Hanfi further said, " Shatim will be killed as Hadd and his repentance will not be accepted". (Tafseer Mazhri Vol7, Page 381) (Tanqeeh ul Fatwa)
Imam Ibn e Abdeen Shami, Imam Haskafi, and Imam ibn e bazaz hanfi also gave the simillar fatwa that blasphemer will be killed as hadd. (Radul Mukhtar 4:232)
Ruler has no discretion in case of Hudood and as mentioned by Ibn e Humam capital punishment of blasphemer will be granted as Hadd. Moreover, their is no sign of treason in these quotations.
Do you taste the foot in your mouth now? I'm sorry, it's just that I've been waiting for you to quote anything referenced from Al-Bazzazi's misquote for so long. You felt so pompous while typing this out, didn't you?
4. Imam Burhan uddin Hanfi said, " there is a consensus among Mutakhreen Mujtahideen about capital punishment of Shatim and absolute majority of Mutaqadmeen are also in favour of capital punishment". (Khulasat ul Fatawa Page 386)
5. Imam Ibn e Abdeen Shami recorded consensus about capital punishment of blasphemer and that his repentance will not be accepted. (Fatawa e Hamdia)
6. Imam Khair ud din Ramli Hanfi said, "ordinary murtad will be granted time for repentance, however, shatim e Rasool will not be allowed to repent, he will be killed. This is the Madhab of Abu Bakar Siddiq R.A, Abu Hanifa, Ahl e Kofa and Imam Malik". Fatawa e Kheria Vol1, Page 170)
Every single one of these references only pertains to Muslim blasphemers
and not non-Muslim blasphemers. Shocker......and once you have accepted your lies and deceit with regards to non-Muslim blasphemers, I will be more than glad to prove that there is no Ijma on the ruling and it is not a hudd punishment for Muslim blasphemers either. You can keep repeating the same lies, misquotes, and corrupt sources till the end of times but I will not let you divert this from the non-Muslim blasphemers.
7. Imam Tahawi said, " a person who abuses Prophet A.S is murtad and his ruling is like common apostates. (Bahr ur Raiq 5: 125)
Are you ready to accept this ruling of tahawi?
For Muslim blasphemers? Yeah. Are you ready to accept the following ruling from the same guy, Tahawi, for non-Muslim blasphemers?
From Mukhtasar al Tahawi:
"If a non-Muslim commits blasphemy, he will be given a verbal warning. If he repeats the offense, he will be punished but not killed."
How many times has it been so far? I've lost count.
Only hiding place left for you to bury your head is under the feet of Ghamdi, as every other scholar is negating your claims.
This statement almost feels as if you are desperate. Especially since nothing in any of my posts is referenced from Ghamidi.
Dont you think that your claim of 220 million people wanting to impose Fiqh e Hanfi in Pakistan is exaggerated? There is a considerable majority of Muslims in Pakistan who dont follow Fiqh e Hanfi and still they support blasphemy laws.
Yeah they do because either a) they are lying, conniving, deceiving, quacks like you, or b) they are being lied to, connived against, and deceived by quacks like you.
Secondly, no one claimed that Pakistan should be governed according to Hanfi laws and that too word by word. You dont have to create a straw man to defend your twisted ideology.
Another claim created out of thin air? Not only do you have no clue what the "Straw Man" fallacy is, you have no clue that the Fiqh Pakistan's Federal Shariat Court is dictated by has to be a single one. How do you think the court decides on laws that contradict each other from one school to the other? I will give you brownie points if you can figure out all on your own where this is officially stated.
Also, what school would you recommend then if not the one followed by the majority of Pakistanis? While we are at it, how about Fiqh Jaffari?
Explicit ruling about what? You are promoting your claim like there is consensus among Fuqaha on the prohibition of capital punishment for blasphemer.
The explicit ruling quoted from Imam Abu Hanifa. It's literally there, it doesn't get any clearer than a direct quote.......
In reality, there is just a difference of opinion in Fiqh e Hanfi regarding the punishment of non Muslim blasphemer. Some prohibited it on the grounds that the non Muslim's covenant with the state will not be broken if he commits blasphemy, while others rejected it. On the other side, there is consensus between fuqaha on the punishment of a Muslim blasphemer. You conveniently forget to mention that fact and picked up an exception to support your disgusting claim that blasphemy laws are introduced as the result of British imperialism. Their is no need to beat that drum of consensus as its already busted.
So, still tastes good?
Btw, good thing that now you've accepted that there are bona fide Muslim scholars who forbid the killing of non-Muslim blasphemers. Before you wanted me to show you any. Funny how still in the very same post you oscillate from "there is difference of opinion" to "there is a unanimous decision". TBH, it's not funny anymore, just repulsive.
Most abundant rulings of Fuqaha of all school of thoughts and most importantly, numerous Ahadith are supporting my claim that Islam grants capital punishment to blasphemer of Prophet A.S. That's the reason of my inflated chest. Unlike you, I am not hiding behind an exception in Hanfi law.
Still waiting on those "Ahadith". Or any sources, Hanafi or otherwise, declaring that Imam Abu Hanifa's stance is an "exception". And before you go on your pretend trips again, the Hanafi sources you gave above are the misquotes of Imam Abu Hanifa himself.
Bet the inflated chest has lost a bit of girth now? No? Well, one does need some integrity for it.
What you know is not relevant. What is written in Pakistani law is important. You should make efforts to change that law by confronting the Muslims of Pakistan,
That is a stupid statement. It made no sense. Are you not a Muslim or are you not a Pakistani? Do only non-Muslims and non-Pakistanis visit this forum?
And how that quote is supporting your claim? Did Imam Abu Hanifa said that their is no capital punishment for blasphemer, at all? Or did he claimed that blasphemy laws are enacted under the influence of Kufaar? Or did he claimed that there was no blasphemy laws at the time of Prophet A.S? Its amusing for me how a person can close his eyes from numerous Ahadith, the sayings of Prophet A.S, acts of Sahaba and sayings of absolute majority of scholars, and starting to beat the drum of single exception in Hanfi law. You need a treatment.
Every time I stop myself from responding to you in the manner you deserve, you come up with more dishonest and idiotic statements like these. Every single statement is not only idiotic but has already been answered. Just because you're pretending that it hasn't does not make it so. And stop with the teasing please, present those "Numerous Ahadith, the sayings of Prophet (S.A.W), and acts of Sahabah, and sayings of absolute majority of scholars".
Hanafism doesn't categorically forbids the death punishment for non Muslims.
Prove it.
The quotes of Hanfi Scholars are provided, now stop beating that drum. My argument doesn't rely solely on Fiqh e Hanfi.
Yeah, the ones that are known to be false since hundreds of years? Good job.
Instead it relies on numerous traditions of Prophet A.S and rulings of absolute majority of scholars.
The "numerous traditions of the Prophet (S.A.W) and rulings of absolute majority of scholars"....yeah, those. This is getting pathetic, my friend.
Also, it is S.A.W (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) not A.S (Alaih-e-Salam). Using only A.S is disrespectful to him (S.A.W). Do you know why? You claim to be such a lover of the Prophet (S.A.W) and you didn't even know that? Something which every 3 year old knows? What a pretentious little man you are.
Why you are shedding tears on the conditions of Hanfis, when you purposefully neglected numerous Ahadith and found an exceptiion in Hanfi law. I am sure Hanfi's will be forgiven in afterlife by not enacting few rulings considered by Imam Abu Hanifa.
Same lies repeated again. "Numerous Ahadith", "Exception in Hanafi law", no proof, garbage.
Oh, woww, federal Shariat court misquoted Abu Bakar Jassas al Razi. That is a revelation, and I am much impressed. Did FSC solely relied on Abu Bakar Jassas Al Razi for granting their verdict? What about those numerous traditions of Prophet A.S which were quoted?
No. As mentioned above, they also quoted Al-Bazzazi. Well, misquoted his misquote of Imam Abu Hanifa. Just like you, the FCS could not produce those "numerous traditions of Prophet (S.A.W)".
How do you not feel any inhibition while lying through your teeth like that? I've only seen this in another group of people but you don't want to know who.
What about long list of scholars including Hanfis who gave fatawa against punishments for non Muslims?
So in this very post you said that you won't accept a Fatwa over Matn. Not only do you not present any Matn, now your defense is only those supposed fatwas? Well you still haven't presented any fatwas either, except those that were not fatwas and just incorrect narrations of Imam Abu Hanifa.
Btw, there's a fatwa out there that you are wajib-ul-qatl. So, how do you want it done?
Anyone else reading this: Don't be confused by his deliberate use of words he does not know the meaning of himself. Matn is anything in the Quran or Ahadith. Fatwa, is a legal ruling passed by a qualified mufti. He has not presented either. He has presented one false hadith (you can easily read on its veracity online) and incorrect/corrupted narrations of Imam Abu Hanifa, which he is calling fatwas. I'd like to point out again that he presented those incorrect narrations from Imam Abu Hanifa to counter Imam Abu Hanifa's actual stance which he agrees is authentic. You see how they create confusion and corruption? It was amusing how he had no idea where that ruling from Ibn Humam came from.
Moreover, as far as Abu Bakr Jassas is concerened, he said in his Ahkam ul Quran, "there is no difference of opinion among Muslims on the matter concerning a person who abuses Prophet, even if he call himself Muslim, he is an apostate and will be killed. (Ahkam ul Quran 3:102)
Are you ready to accept this ruling of Abu Bakar Jassas Al Razi? Or you just quoted him for your own purpose and to defend Shatmeen?
I am beginning to doubt your cognitive capacity. Because I don't believe any amount of dishonesty could make you expose yourself this way.
You are trying to apply Abu Bakr al-Jassas' ruling which
only applies to Muslim blasphemers on to
non-Muslim blasphemers. And you are doing this while responding to the post which has already given you Abu Bakr al-Jassas'
direct ruling for non-Muslim blasphemers. Third time you've done this in this post.
"Whoever insults the Prophet, non-Muslims will not be given a death punishment."
You can start your long walk by negating numerous traditions of Prophet A.S about Riddah and Sabb. If you had cared for religion then your course of action must have been different. Instead, you tried to defend the lives of Shatmeen e Rasool. It is a pitty, may God show you the right path.
Hardly a long walk. Not surprising though, lies and deceit do not stand for long.
I dont know what is the problem with your lot. You cant tolerate attacks on Ghamdi, but you are ready to tolerate attacks on Prophet A.S by non Muslims. What can I say more than that.
Notice how you've attacked Ghamdi multiple times and I did not care for it once. Your infatuation with Ghamidi is unhealthy.
Let me make it more interesting for you.
1. Abu Bakar Farsi Shafai said, "if any person accuses any Prophet A.S of wrongful act then he will be killed because accusation on Prophet A.S is liable to death". He recorded Ijma regarding it. (Raoz ut Talib Vol4, P-122)
No. He directly quoted Imam Shafii's position which was pertaining to a Muslim blasphemer.
Nothing about non-Muslims again, sorry. Also, Shafi'i school? Will not entertain it until you accept the Hanafi position on non-Muslim Blasphemers.
2. From Sahaba to this era there is Ijma on the matter that blasphemer of Prophet is liable to death. (Shifa 933)
Show me the ijma. And show it from the time of the Sahabah. More importantly, if Imam Abu Hanifa categorically disagrees with it, how is there an ijma? Do you know what an ijma is?
Anyone else reading this: He is again just spurting out lies in hopes of fooling us, while contradicting himself. An 'Ijma' is when there is a consensus on an Islamic Law which is not already directly stated in the Quran or Ahadith. The consensus, depending on the school of thought, is considered to be that of the first generation of Muslims only; or the consensus of the first three generations of Muslims; or the consensus of the jurists and scholars of the Muslim world; or the consensus of all the Muslim world, both scholars and laymen. Firstly, when he claims that there is an Ijma on the matter he is directly contradicting his repeated claims that "there are numerous Ahadith and traditions on the matter" (which btw he has never presented). If there were, there would be no need for an Ijma. Secondly, since he has already accepted that Imam Abu Hanifa categorically rejects this ruling, there is by definition no consensus on this ruling, i.e. no Ijma. Also, there are only 6 countries which allow the death penalty for blasphemy. Clearly the Muslim world and scholars have no Ijma on this.
3. "Any person who abuses Prophet A.S, whether he is a Muslim or a non Muslim, is liable to death" Ibn e Taimiah claimed Ijma on that matter. Moreover, he also claimed Ijma of Sahaba and Qaroon e Oola on that matter. (As Sarim ul Maslool 565,3)
You conveniently forgot to mention this claim of ibn e taimiah while quoting an excerpt from his book. Or he was working for Britishers, that's why you neglected his whole book and picked one statement? You must have learnt this trick from Ghamdi.
Hate to break it to you, bud.........I never quoted anything from ibn Taimiah. I would never since he was and still is widely considered a heretic. The same man who was punished multiple times for distorting Islam. It is only agenda driven illiterates like you and al-Qaeda who quote him. Also, he was Hanbali, not Hanafi. Good job, quite interesting indeed.
4. Imam Abu yousaf hanfi gave fatwa of of Capital Punishment for blasphemer of Prophet A.s. (Rooh ul Bayan 3:394)
More lies? Quote it here. Abu Yusuf has explicitly narrated the punishment for
Muslim blasphemers,
"If a
Muslim man insults the Messenger of Allah, denies him, or reproaches or diminishes him, he has disbelieved in Allah, and his wife is separated from him. He must repent, or else is killed."
Well, guess he too accepts repentance.......
5. Repentance will be accepted from Murtad in all cases except from blasphemer of Prophet. He will be killed as Hadd. (Rad ul Mukhtar 4:231, Tanweer ul absaar)
Again, explicitly meant only for Muslim blasphemers and
has nothing to do with non-Muslim Blasphemers.
6. Imam ibn e Sakhnoon Malki said, " there is consensus among Muslims that blasphemer is Kafir and is liable to death. (Rad ul Mukhtar 4:232)
Again, explicitly meant only for Muslim blasphemers and
has nothing to do with non-Muslim Blasphemers.
7. "In essence, there is no difference of opinion regarding the Kufr and capital punishment of blasphemer of Prophet A.S and this is narrated from four Imams "(Imam Ibn e Abdeen Shami)
Again, explicitly meant only for Muslim blasphemers and
has nothing to do with non-Muslim Blasphemers.
9. "Repentance of blasphemer after arest will not be accepted as per Ijma, he will be killed" (Abu Saood Hanfi)
Explicitly meant only for Muslim blasphemers and
has nothing to do with non-Muslim Blasphemers.
10. Hanfi scholars who gave fatwa of death for blasphemer: Imam Haskafi, Ibn e Hummam, Ibn e Abdeen, Qazi Sana Ullah, Abu Bakar Jassas, Imam Burhan ud deen Sahib e Muheet, ibne nujeem Hanfi, ibn e bazaz, Imam Abu Yousaf, Imam Tahawi, abu saood hanfi, Sheikh Muhammad bin Abdullah
More dishonesty.
Firstly, these were not fatwas, these were narrations. You clearly don't know what a fatwa is.
Secondly, all of these were only concerning Muslim blasphemers. Surprise, surprise!
Thirdly, blatant lies again.
1) "Ibn e Bazaz" or Al-Bazzazi was directly narrating Imam Abu Hanifa
incorrectly.
2) **Ibn e Abidin actually called Al-Bazzazi out for it and corrected him. Disputed Bazzazi's ruling to kill non-Muslim Blasphemers.
3) Ibn e Hummam was directly referencing from Al-Bazzazi's incorrect narration.
4) Al-Tahawi has stated explicitly that there is no capital punishment for non-Muslim Blasphemers.
5) Abu Bakr al-Jassas has stated explicitly that there is no capital punishment for non-Muslim Blasphemers.
You thought you would just throw in names and I wouldn't know? All of this has already been provided to you above with direct quotations and references. Why do you keep lying like this?
Anyone else reading this: Note how he even included names of those scholars who have explicitly and unambiguously forbidden the killing of non-Muslim blasphemers? He has provided no references, no quotes. He is either a liar or an illiterate who has no idea what he is typing here.
Names of Scholars who recorded Ijma regarding capital punishment of blasphemer:
Ibn e Munzar Neshapori, Abu bakar Farsi, Qazi Ayaz, Ibn e Taimiyah, Imam khatabi, Imam Ishaq bin Rahwae, Imam Abu Bakar Jassas, Ibn e Abdin Shami, Imam ibne Sakhnon Malki, Imam Ibn e Atab Malki.
Names of Scholars who gave the fatwa of Capital Punishment for blasphemer of Rasool Allah A.S:
Allama Ismail Haqqi Sahib e Rohul Bayan, Imam Ibne qayam, Imam Ibne taimiayah, Imam Ibn e Munzar, imam malik, imam lais bin saad, imam ahmad bin Hanbal, imam ishaq bin rahwae, imam shafai, imam abubakar farsi shafai, Qazi Ayaz Malki, imam khatabi, Hazrat Umar bin abdul aziz, imam khalal, Ibn e Aqeel Abul Khatab, Imam Halwani, Qazi Abul Hussain, Ibne Munir, allama Ibn e Kasir, Sana Ullah Pani Pati, Hafiz Saadi, Imam Darqutni, allama waqdi, sheikh muhammad bin abdullah altamartashi, Abu saod hanfi, imam Abdullah bin alhakam, imam abu yousaf, imam tahawi, , Imam usman bin kanana malki, imam azbakh malki, abu lais samrqandi, imam abu nasar adabusi, imam ibn e bazaz hanafi, imam khair udin ramli hanfi, imam ibn e najim hanfi, abu lais samrqandi, abu nasar adabusi, imam burhan udin mahmud, imam abu ali bin albana, , qazi abu yala, abul mawahib al akbari, qazi abu ali bin abi musa, imam haskafi, , imam abul hassan qabsi, imam muhammad bin abi zaid, imam ahmad bin sulaiman, imam abdullah bin atab, Maulana Hussain ahmad madni, Imam Subki Shafai
Again, explicitly only for Muslim blasphemers,
has nothing to do with non-Muslim blasphemers.
Many of the names in there have clearly forbidden death for non-Muslim blasphemers. Others are extremely controversial. Good job for lying again. Nice try though.
You haven't felt shame while defending the right of life for Shatmeen e Rasool A.S and here you are giving lectures to others. I dont want to use strong words against a fellow Muslim, otherwise, I dont have any respect for a person who tries to defend blasphemers.
Well, given that you clearly know nothing about Islam, I don't care for what you have to say. Since you are a proven liar, your respect or lack thereof, means nothing to me. Thanks, but no thanks.
Please refer to above mentioned traditions of Prophet A.S.
What "traditions"? You presented a single extremely contested narration concerning only Muslim blasphemers from a single guy who is considered a serial week narrator. There are two more of these "traditions". Let's see how long it takes for you to get to them.
I am acting on verified traditions of Prophet A.S, ashab e Rasool and Mujtahideen which grant capital punishment to Murtadeen and Shatmeen. Evidence of which is quoted above.
Again, same lies. You did not present anything, except lies, incorrect, inaccurate, highly contested, or not applicable references. Sorry bud, no one will believe it just because you keep repeating it.
Actually, in Deen e Ghamdi every other tradition which doesn't fit in his ideas is contested. I am fully aware of that fact. If you ever tried to negate those traditions, which are not just two, we will see reflections of that fact. Traditions of Bukhari, Nisai, Tirmazi, Abu Daood with different chain of narrators are all contested, however, deen e Ghamdi is absolute, free from error and can be accepted with absolute certainty. How convenient!
You do realize that these traditions were contested by scholars way before and far larger than Ghamidi right? This is getting unhealthier by the minute.
Anyone else reading this: He is trying to throw you off. Nothing from Ghamidi was ever presented. He just has nothing to defend his claim.
Hundred and even thousands of which instances? Who unanimously accepted the claim that there were no blasphemy laws in the era of Prophet A.S? Who claimed that punishment of Murtad is not death? Who said that blasphemy laws are a product of British imperialism?
Maybe, the sources I have already provided you?.......
Also,nonsensical friend, when you claim that there were blasphemy laws in the time of the Prophet (S.A.W)
you have to present the proof that they were. Otherwise, the Khulafah enacted a law stating that every time "Mutakalim" posts something stupid on PDF he should go and slap himself three times in the mirror. Please prove that this law did not exist.
That sea of Hanfism is awarding death punishment, with an exception of non Muslims and women. That too is not unaniomous, in fact that Qol is Marjoh and Muftis give their fatwa on Qol e Rajeh, which is stated above.
So now you admit that there is an exception for non Muslims and even women in the school? Good. It is in fact unanimous, except for the incorrect and corrupted sources you provided.
Anyone else reading this: Again, he's just trying throw around terms he doesn't understand while lying. 'Qol e Majrooh' (not Marjoh) is a statement whose authenticity is contested. Imam Abu Hanifa's statement's authenticity is not contested by anyone. Not even the scholars from other schools who disagree with it. He also has not provided any evidence of it and is only putting forth another false claim. You shouldn't be surprised by now.
Why are you not including other scholars in that sea beyond hanfis? I have quoted sayings of those scholars and also provided a list. Jo chahe Apka Husn e Karishma Saaz Kare!
1) Because Islamic law in Pakistan is officially dictated by the Hanafi school.
2) Because you follow the Hanafi school.
3) You have quoted irrelevant, incorrect, and corrupted sayings of those scholars......as has already been shown above.
Please add names of those scholars who absolutely rejected capital punishment of blasphemers in all cases including Muslim men.
Why would I. Please quote exactly where I said anything of the sort. As I keep repeating, lies will not get you anywhere. Also, as I keep repeating, the
debate for now is only about the death penalty for non-Muslim blasphemers. I will not let you derail it until you accept your lies against this matter.
Or all those scholars who gave absolute Fatawas for blasphemers were also uneducated, following their self serving narratives for 1400 years? Or all of them were lying and only truthful person in entire Ummat e Muhammadia A.S is Ghamdi?
There it is again, that unhealthy infatuation with Ghamidi. Have you tried sending him a facebook friend's request? Maybe you have a chance.
Anyway, same repeated empty lies.
As I have said earlier, I am not protector of Islam, nor does I claim any such thing. In fact, protector of Islam is God Himself, he doesn't need protection of anyone. Lets say for instance that I am defending Islam, however, for whom you are writing all these words? For blasphemers of Prophet A.S?
Yes, I am defending the rights of the non-Muslims which were given to them by Allah (S.W.T) and his Prophet (S.A.W). You are defending your insecurities.
Prophet A.S gave that right to His Khulafa R.A and then onward to all Muslim rulers to punish His blasphemers in this world so that peace and tranquility can be maintained in Muslim society.
Not just another lie but a lie you have exposed yourself in this very post of yours. You can't even keep your own post coherent. As you have provided above,
"
Abu Bakr has no powers to slay a man except for three reasons which the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had mentioned: disbelief after belief
(Irtidad), fornication after marriage
(Zinnah), or killing a man without
(murder) any man by him
. The Prophet (ﷺ) had powers to kill."
I know you don't. Instead, ask them if they generally feel discriminated against in the country. If you ask me the same question then my answer will also be Affirmative. I have also faced discrimination several times, sometimes gender based, sometimes ethnicity based and sometimes looks based...
defence.pk
Anyone else reading this: You see?
Go and read Fatawa of Hanfis and consider yourself educated. Although, defenders of blasphemers are beyond reproach or education.
Okay, let's do it.
"If a dhimmi (non-Muslim) insults the Holy Prophet, he will not be killed as punishment. A non-Muslim is not killed for his kufr (denying the Prophet) or shirk (polytheistic beliefs). Kufr/Shirk are bigger sins than sabb e rasool. – (Therefore non-Muslims will not be killed for sabb e rasool.)" - Imam Abu Hanifa.
Hazrat Imam Abu Hanifa gave Fatwa of death for Murtadeen including Muslim blasphemers, one thousand three hundred and twenty two years ago. And here you are, arguing for all blasphemers. See, there is a difference.
I never argued for all blasphemers. If I did, prove it, quote it. Otherwise, please stop lying, you've exposed yourself enough.
People dont demand death for a person who insulted their mother. However, Muslims demand death for blasphemers because they love and respect Prophet A.S more than their mothers.
No they don't. No you don't. Another pretentious lie.
As far as Zimmis are concerned, their protection is the duty of Islamic state. For that protection, they have to submit to Islamic state and accept its authority. However, the case of non Muslim minorities living inside Pakistan is different. They are not Zimmis, they didn't submitted themselves to Islamic state, they were not conquered and they dont pay any Jizya to Pakistan. Therefore, they are not Zimmis and Hanfi law of Zimmis is not applicable on them. For application of Hanfi law the existence of covenant with Islamic state is mandatory.
Hanafi law does not base itself on the covenant, it is based on the Kufr of the non-Muslims. Also, I have already provided proof that the non-payment of Jizya does not break the covenant. Also, the state of Pakistan does not demand Jizya from them. Also, they pay every other tax that you do, jizya, thus, is inapplicable. The covenant is applied by default since it has been given by God, no one cares if you signed it or not, you are not the concerned party, you are no one. Sorry bud, but you again have no clue what you are talking about. Just desperate lies, one after the other.
That authority belongs to Islamic state, I am not claiming any authority over blasphemers.
Funny then how you are the one spewing lies, threatening people, and falling in love with Ghamidi here.
I have quoted traditions of Prophet A.S
No you haven't.
No you haven't.
and Mujtahideen. Read them and try to throw these insults on them, as well. As they are also not agreeing with deen e Ghamdi.
Incorrect, in-applicable, and corrupted.
Lets pray that your defense (mine too) will be accepted.
Only one will be, as stands the nature of the stances.
If someone ridicule Hindu God then the publishing of blasphemous content against Prophet A.S is justified?
Another nonsensical statement, disjoint from what was said and what was answered. Please keep it coherent.
No one should be allowed to ridicule religious figures of all religions.
So you do explicitly demand that Muslims who ridicule a Hindu God should be put to death?
Only a disgusting, miserable soul can do this. Lanat bar Shatmeen wa Awanehi.
instead of hiding under the protection of Kufaar.
Are you protecting your religion by hiding under the cloaks of Kufaar? Maybe its allowed in Deen e Ghamdi. Why you left your country while you knew that it was threatened by corrupt people? Why are you not relying on your spine to oppose blasphemy laws publicly? Why are you not showing your character in front of your fellow Muslims? Grow up! and stop hiding behind protection of Kufaar.
Actually, insolent mouths of some miserable souls starts churning out filth when they leave the jurisdiction of Pakistani state. We have seen many such examples like guraya and gul bukhari, in the past.
You could bring your entire worth, multiple times over, and I would not notice it. I'd recommend attacking my arguments instead, I am beyond your reach and capacity. My arguments are as well.
No I mean those scholars who gave fatawas of death against your beloved blasphemers. Go, check out their name and start targeting them.
You haven't given any.
Proved. Now, negate them.
Heh....
Why shouldn't I. Majority has the right to enact laws for themselves, dont you believe in democracy? Or you only believe in the democratic right of French people?
Please keep a coherent line of discussion. Your response has nothing to do with what was being said or what was being answered.
At least, we are not defending blasphemers.
Just killing innocents, those you have no right to. All to placate your own insecurities born from knowing that you are insignificant and will never amount to anything. You clearly are not religious, given the fact that you know nothing about it. Not even the basic fact that you have to write the complete form of the durood every time you mention him (S.A.W).
Helplessness against Deen e Ghamdi? Helplessness against those miserable souls who seek protection of Kufaar to spit filth against their fellow Muslims? Its just amusing.
Helplessness against basic indisputable facts.
This isn't your drawing room, these "quippy" come backs might work in your head, they sound awfully desperate to everyone else.
Us? You mean yourself, followers of Ghamdi and Ghamdi himself? Prophet A.S foretold us about Ahl ul Biddah, many have emerged and disappeared, never to rise again. Khwarij, Muatazila, Jabrya, Qadrya and Qadianis. You are just like them, in fact worse than them and your lot will also disappear. The Name and Deen of Muhammad e Arbi A.S will always remain.
"No, you"? That's your response?
Against you, who knows nothing about the religion, fabricates religious laws, and then associates them to scholars who never said anything of the sort. An illiterate bigot who corrupts his religion to serve his own agenda born from insecurities.
My grandparents supported Quaid, we left our homes and properties and moved to a new land to support his cause and have suffered atrocities of Hindus to establish an Islamic state. We gave our toil and blood for this state. Your attacks are misdirected.
I'm sure they did. You clearly are not smart enough to have.
Quoted few of them, not all. Now please negate them, one by one. This time around, dont hide behind exceptions of law. Lets see, how knowledgeable defenders of blasphemers are.
One by one, indeed.
You are following the path of goraya. Are your parents from Pakistan? It seems to me that you are the only soul who is honest, everyone else in Pakistan is dishonest and corrupt, thats why you left Pakistan.
You need to learn few things from Ghamdi including humility, respect and good manners. As far as knowledge and arguments are concerned, I dont need to brag about anything.
I am still better then you at this small place. At least, I am not under the protection of Kufaar.
Yes.
Again, more and more chest thumping.
Well, if you say so.....
Before you respond to this post remember to strictly adhere to the below.
1) Keep the discussion limited to "non-Muslim" blasphemers. Once you have admitted to your lies in this regard, only then will we discuss Muslim blasphemers, women blasphemers, nature of the punishments, their extent, or anything else. I will not let you divert and muddle the discussion.
2) Refrain from straw man-ing. Fabricating things which I haven't said and then answering them will not work. This is the internet and everyone can read our previous posts.
3) Research first on what you present. Putting forth corrupted and false claims that have been known to be so for decades if not centuries only makes you look like the lying, deceiving, and conniving hack that you are.
4) Do not lie and falsely associate statements and decrees with anyone, especially not some of the most celebrated scholars in Islamic history. If you don't have the proof for it, don't type it.
5) Do not throw around terms you have no idea about. It only makes you look like a desperate fool.
6) Read what you already have been provided. Three times in this post you have rejected, without a reason, my direct quotes of three different sources explicitly stating that a non-Muslim blasphemer cannot be killed. Then in the same post you have quoted the exact three sources on Muslim blasphemers and claimed they support the killing of non-Muslim blasphemers. I had a chuckle at your expense but it's still a waste of time.
7) Write concisely, for heaven's sake. There is no reason to repeat the exact same 3 lies 12 times each in the same post. It does not make it any more credible. No one will believe it, they might not even read it. Your post was a massive waste of time.
