The PPK Muslims (Proud, Practicing, Knowledgable) : September 2018

Blasphemy against Prophet Mohammed

What the Quran and Sunnah ordain v/s How the Muslims perform and Why?

ABSTRACT

“When you see people mocking Our revelations, turn away from them so that they may change the subject. If Satan causes you to forget this, do not sit with the unjust people when you remember”.

The operative word in the index ayah is يَخوضونَ (yakhuzoona) which means offensive, vain or false discourse. Another word used in this ayah that needs elaboration is آياتِنا (aayaatenaa). This has multiple connotations: our signs, our verses or our revelations.

This ayah and many others like it announce a very clear and definite message and command to us Muslims in the face of criticism, derision or mocking on any item of our Deen by the non-believers: TURN AWAY OR LOOK THE OTHER WAY IN A FRIENDLY WAY; join them again after they start behaving themselves.

I was tempted to select this ayah for our discussion when I read about the planned competition of drawing images of our Holy Prophet in the Netherland

What is blasphemy? Can it be labelled openly and clearly an Islamic concept? No. Works of legal luminaries like Justice Shafiq Usmani endorse the view that the concept of blasphemy is unknown to Islamic jurisprudence. It may be defined as something done or said that shows disrespect for God or sacred things. A related word sacrilege is used for the violation, desecration, or theft of something considered holy or sacred or the disrespectful or irreverent treatment of something others consider worthy of respect or reverence. Historically, the blasphemy laws began in Christian Europe as a means to prevent dissent and enforce the church’s authority. They were exported to Muslim majority nations via British imperialism. It is worth mentioning that blasphemy laws were introduced in the Indo-Pak subcontinent by the British back in 1860 in a misguided attempt to reduce tension between Hindus and Muslims. The laws were instituted for purely administrative reasons and do not have any basis in religious tenets. Today, just about every Muslim majority nation that has blasphemy laws can trace them back to British statute from centuries prior.

A quick look at the words and deeds of our beloved Prophet will bear out that he never indulged in any reaction in face of worst personal insults and humiliation. While the Quran refers to blasphemy repeatedly, it does not ordain any worldly punishment for it; this is deferred for the Hereafter. Yet there are strong Islamic scholarly opinions to uphold death penalty for blasphemy. As I have mentioned in the Prelude to this series “It should sound unbelievable but factually appears to be true: Many of our prevalent, widespread and important concepts and opinions about religious matters do not have a basis in the Quran and sometimes even appear to be in obvious conflict with the teachings of the Quran”. Blasphemy is a classical example of this phenomenon.

How does this come about? It is the confusion and ambiguity about the second source of Islam: the Sunnah of our Holy Prophet; his preachings and practice. Where do we find the Sunnah? Here again the primary source should be the Quran. Once Bibi Ayesha was asked by the Sahaabaa for some information on the life and practice of the Holy Prophet. She told them to read the Quran adding that Prophet Mohammed is a walking Quran.

The next source of Sunnah is Seerat-e-Paak or biographies of our Prophet. These also show that The Holy Prophet’s life is a beautiful illustration of the word forgiveness. There are multiple examples in the life of our Prophet of his mercy and forgiveness even to his open and vocal foes and enemies; show of any anger or punishment is conspicuous by its absence.

The controversy over the punishment for blasphemy props up with the introduction of the third source of the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet, the Hadith and the uncritical conformity to it. This is a very valuable historical document (and the only one for details of Ibaadah) to learn the sunnah. It is not part of any teaching program of our Holy Prophet. It is on record that he was initially opposed to the writing of hadith; later he rescinded. The first book of hadith, the Mawatta of Imam Malik was compiled one hundred and fifty years after the demise of our Prophet. The sahihain—Bukhari and Muslim—followed a century later. Hazrat Umer, the second caliph remained hostile to writing of hadith till the end. He had predicted very aptly that later Muslims will cling to this at the cost of the Quran. This is exactly what many of us including our scholars are practicing. So, Hadith is not sunnah per se; it is a very important source for sunnah. It has to be tackled very seriously and carefully because it tends to be confusing, controversial and contradictory; also polluted by forgery, a fact widely accepted. Imam Bukhari had to reject nine hundred and ninety five ahaadith for every five that he accepted.

It is on the basis 0f some ahaadith that there is a strong Islamic scholarly opinion—Imam Ahmed, Imam Malik, Imam Ibn Taymiyyah— advocating death as a punishment for blasphemy.

The article suggests that the blasphemy law of Pakistan is clearly the greatest blasphemy against the most commendable personality of our beloved Holy Prophet and quotes authorities to support this view.The way it is being implemented flouts the primary demands of ordinary justice, let alone the high bar which our Holy Prophet upholds through the teachings of our Holy Text.

September 29, 2018

Read ONLY, IF AND WHEN you have time and mood for:

“An Ayah of the Quran for 30 Days” -- September 2018

Choose the section you have time, in the next 30 days to read this ayah:-

Prelude: Recurrent Primary Message 1st. Page

Starting Dua, a note & The Ayah 2nd. Page

A Short Summary: For the Busy Bee Two + Pages

The Main Story: Recommended Seven Pages

Footnotes: For the Perfectionist Four Pages

PRELUDE

From the Pen and Perspective of a self-styled PPK Muslim (Proud, Practicing, Knowledgeable) with a humble submission that Islam totally rejects Blind Following BUT vigorously focusses on the Limitations of Pure Human Reasoning..............and clearly and comprehensively AlLAH knows best.

In the beginning of the seventh century C.E., the folks of Mecca and Medina had a fascinatingly unique window: they had direct access to the Heavens through one of their own. They were blessed with a regular stream of Divine counseling and guidelines. Question and answer sessions were part of the program. Even individual questioner was graced by an answer. In the short Introduction to this scheme they were assured that at the end of this twenty-two year project, Divine Directions and Admonitions will continue through the agency of the PEN. The whole discourse has been preserved and archived till eternity under the guarantee of our Lord and Creator. This record in known as the Quran.

It should sound unbelievable but factually appears to be true: Many of our prevalent, widespread and important concepts and opinions about religious matters do not have a basis in the Quran and sometimes even appear to be in obvious conflict with the teachings of the Quran. It would be very educative and helpful to discuss an Ayah once a month to see if it supports or rejects our views and actions in our daily life. I wish and hope this generates a fruitful interactive discussion.

DUAA’

بِسمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحمٰنِ الرَّحيمِ

In the name of Allah, we praise HIM, seek HIS help and ask for HIS forgiveness. Whosoever Allah guideth none can misguide; whosoever HE allows to fall astray, none can guide him right. We bear witness that there is none worthy of worship but Allah alone and we bear witness that Mohammed, SAW is HIS slave-servant and the Seal of HIS Messengers.

Further, we recall that Allah Ta’aala has declared in HIS Book¹

“He granteth wisdom to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom wisdom is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message (or remember or receive admonition) but men of understanding (or intellect)”

and we also recollect that he has warned us about the day of judgement²

“Then on that day you shall most certainly be questioned about the boons (joy, pleasure).”

We realise, that there cannot be a greater boon or blessing or benefit than wisdom and we wonder if this should be a timely reminder to very many of us sincere and practicing Muslims who use our critical thinking to enhance the mundane for ourselves and our families but in matters religion we choose to

resort to blind following -- taqleed, doctrine of classical Sunni Islamic Fiqh.

(NOTE: I have filtered out the proofs and details into the Footnotes for those who have the time and interest for them. The main text will then be of reasonable length, hopefully for the busy majority. What follows is not a sermon; I do not feel qualified to give one, anyhow. I wish, it may provide a food for thought. A caveat seems in order: If the ayah selected pertains to issues we face in our daily life with our family, friends, neighbours or peers it may affect us personally and lead to some self analysis and soul searching which in turn could be divisive and distressing. If taken in the right spirit, it can be a humble attempt towards finding the “straight path”.)

THE AYAH

Surah Al An’am (no.6), Ayah 68

وَإِذا رَأَيتَ الَّذينَ يَخوضونَ في آياتِنا فَأَعرِض عَنهُم حَتّىٰ يَخوضوا في حَديثٍ غَيرِهِ ۚ وَإِمّا يُنسِيَنَّكَ الشَّيطانُ فَلا تَقعُد بَعدَ الذِّكرىٰ مَعَ القَومِ الظّالِمينَ

“When you see people mocking Our revelations, turn away from them so that they may change the subject. If Satan causes you to forget this, do not sit with the unjust people when you remember”.

A SHORT VERSION

“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” — Imam Shafa’i

Allow me to reinforce this message with an almost identical ayah elsewhere in the Quran³

“And, indeed, He has enjoined upon you in this divine writ that whenever you hear people deny the truth of God's messages and mock at them, you shall avoid their company until they begin to talk of other things1 - or else, verily, you will become like them. Behold, together with those who deny the truth God will gather in hell the hypocrites”.

As per the sunnah of Allah Ta’aala Subhaanahoo, this topic being an important one is repeated across the Quran.⁴

Another word used in this ayah that needs elaboration is آياتِنا (aayaatenaa). This has multiple connotations: our signs, our verses or our revelations. In Ahkam al-Qur’an……………(See the main story)

These two ayahs and many others like them announce a very clear and definite message and command to us Muslims in the face of criticism, derision or mocking on any item of our Deen by the non-believers: TURN AWAY OR LOOK THE OTHER WAY IN A FRIENDLY WAY; join them again after they start behaving themselves.

I was tempted to select this ayah for our discussion when I read about the planned competition of drawing images of our Holy Prophet in the Netherland. I was flooded by the memories of the violent disorder and riotous confusion in multiple countries following a similar attempt few years earlier in Denmark. Fortunately for all, wiser counsel prevailed and the event was cancelled. This gives us a peaceful environment to ponder over this very artificial and unnecessarily created problem of Blasphemy.

Let us first quickly mention and readily set aside the attitude of the West in this matter. Yes they betray double standards by accepting a ban on denial of Holocaust but refusing to do so for our demand. Their attitude of absolute and unlimited free speech is morally wrong and practically unachievable; etc etc. But I am not concerned with the Western thought right now. My concern is the message our Holy Text is conveying to us about our attitude and reaction to acts of “blasphemy” in our times.

and deeds of our beloved Prophet will bear out that he never indulged in any reaction in face of worst personal insults and humiliation.

If an individual has the temerity to tarnish in any way our great Prophet, it depicts his ignorance and his mean character. It does not, not in the least have any bearing on the glory of my Prophet. I would just ignore it as dictated by the ayahs under discussion. To think otherwise betrays a great disregard of the Holy Quran, depicts a disproportionate and unhealthy hero worship and emotionalism and even some inferiority/superiority complex.

While the Quran refers to blasphemy repeatedly, it does not ordain any worldly punishment for it; this is deferred for the Hereafter. Yet there are strong Islamic scholarly opinions to uphold death penalty for blasphemy. As I have mentioned in the Prelude to this series “It should sound unbelievable but factually appears to be true: Many of our prevalent, widespread and important concepts and opinions about religious matters do not have a basis in the Quran and sometimes even appear to be in obvious conflict with the teachings of the Quran”. Blasphemy is a classical example of this phenomenon.

The controversy over the punishment for blasphemy props up with the introduction of the third source of the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet, the Hadith and the uncritical conformity to it. This is a very valuable historical document (and the only one for details of Ibaadah) to learn the sunnah. It is not part of any teaching program of our Holy Prophet. It is on record that he was initially opposed to the writing of hadith; later he rescinded. The first book of hadith the Mawatta of Imam Malik was compiled one hundred and fifty years after the demise of our Prophet. The sahihain—Bukhari and Muslim—followed a century later. Hazrat Umer, the second caliph remained hostile to writing of hadith till the end. He had predicted very aptly that later Muslims will cling to this at the cost of the Quran. This is exactly what many of us including our scholars are practicing. So, Hadith is not sunnah per se; it is a very important source for sunnah. It has to be tackled very seriously and carefully because it tends to be confusing, controversial and contradictory; also polluted by forgery, a fact widely accepted. Imam Bukhari had to reject nine hundred and ninety five ahaadith for every five that he accepted.

It is on this basis some ahaadith that there is a strong Islamic scholarly opinion advocating death as a punishment for blasphemy as shown hereunder:

…………….Imam Ahmad was asked about those who insult Abu Bakr, Omar, and A'ishah and he replied, "I do not think they are Muslims any longer".

Imam Malik said, "Whoever insults one of the Companions of Muhammad — Abu Bakr, Omar, ‘Uthman, Mu’awiyah, or ‘Amr Ibn Al-‘Aas — by saying that they were astray and disbelieving shall be executed.

The fourteen century outstanding scholar Imam Ibn Taymiyyah is a prominent supporter of this view. He has said "Blasphemy against Allah or His Messenger (prayers and peace of Allah be upon him) is an act that nullifies faith, both outwardly and inwardly, whether the blasphemer knows that this is haram, deems it halal, or is not aware of the ruling at all". This ruling is applicable even in relation to criticizing or blaming the Prophet as regards any of his deeds, sayings, etc. Ibn Taymiyah clarified, "If someone criticizes a judgment or instruction by the Prophet, he should be executed, as the Prophet told us to do in his life and after his death". This ban is then extended to the noble companions. "If someone believes that it is halal to insult Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), then he has become a disbeliever” says Ibn Taymiyyah. A hadith is quoted in support "Whoever reviles my Companions let the Curse of Allah, the Angels, and all people befall him" (Declared Hasan by Al-Albani in “Series of Authentic Hadith Books: 2340”).

Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdel-Wahab said…………….(See the main story)

Dr. Shahid of Al Maurid illustrates how studying a hadith can be tricky:……(See the main story)

Zeeshan Hasan in his article Islam and blasphemy law in his blog liberalislam.net has nicely discussed the relative importance of the sources of Islam. He concludes: ………(See the main story)

I would like to add that “the assassination of a Pakistani Christian cabinet minister……(See the main story)

It is this attitude about blasphemy, that the cartoon issue has been blown out of all proportion. There is perhaps some element of underlying “Islamophobia”. However the main driving force behind these cartoons is their exaggerated emphasis on free speech and their knee jerk antagonism to any curb on that freedom. “Muslim intolerance” in this regard is a challenge to them. I am sure if we had ignored these cartoons according to the dictates of our Holy Text, the issue would have remained confined to the minor magazine with a very limited circulation where it was first published.

I had sent an email on the occasion of publication of the infamous Danish cartoons under the heading:

The Muslim World has proved what the Cartoons hinted;

Blasphemy and Sacrilege by Muslims in Muslim Lands

I am reproducing parts of it as they remain relevant to our discussion:…………….(See the main story)

As I am closing down, I would like to put on the table a suggestion that the blasphemy law of Pakistan⁶ is clearly the greatest blasphemy against the most commendable personality of my beloved Holy Prophet. There are many authorities to support this view.⁷ The way it is being implemented flouts the primary demands of ordinary justice, let alone the high bar which our Holy Prophet upholds through the teachings of our Holy Text.⁸

........and Allah knows best.

May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.

THE MAIN STORY

Allow me to reinforce this message with an almost identical ayah elsewhere in the Quran³

As per the sunnah of Allah Ta’aala Subhaanahoo, this topic being an important one is repeated across the Quran.⁴

The operative word in the index ayah is يَخوضونَ (yakhuzoona). In their tafseer, the scholars do not depend only on the literal meaning of a word in an ayah but also factor in the context of the ayahs preceding and following it. Hence this term has been rendered variously as: offensive, vain or false discourse; blasphemy against Our signs; meddle with Our revelations; false discourses about Our communications; mocking Our revelations; “nuktaa chinee” i.e. criticism of our ayah; vain discussion about the signs of God, seeking to deny and deride them; engage in a false conversation about Our Verses by mocking at them and lastly plunge into Our signs. Yousuf Ali extends the reach of this word when he states “If in any gathering truth is ridiculed, we must not sit in such company”. Mufti Mohammed Shafi explains that this word is derived from the term “khawd” which basically means to enter into water and wade through it. Then, it also denotes entering into activities which are “vain, absurd or futile”. Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanavi and Shaykh al-Hind, Maulana Mahmud al-Hasan have construed this word “in the sense of fault-finding and disputing”. Javed Ahmed Ghanmdi defines it as :

“ جس کا مقصد کسی بات کو ہنسی، دل لگی اور مذاق میں اڑادینا ہو”

Imam Amin Ahmed Islahi interprets this word as “اگر کوئی شخص یا گروہ علانیہ خدا اور رسول کے خلاف بکواس کرتا ہے”

Another word used in this ayah that needs elaboration is آياتِنا (aayaatenaa). This has multiple connotations: our signs, our verses or our revelations. In Ahkam al-Qur'an, Imam al-Jassas amplifies its meaning: This verse tells that Muslims should abstain from every such gathering where things are being said against Allah Ta’aala, His Rasool and the Shari'ah of Islam….”

The ayah is thus commanding HIS beloved Rasool and through him the Muslim community to turn away amicably from any meeting where HE or HIS Rasool or HIS Deen is being derided, ridiculed or scorned. It would be a sin not to do so.They are asked to return once “they immerse themselves in talk other than this”. Imam al-Jassas adds in Ahkam al-Qur’an “and where it is not within one's power and control to stop or have it stopped, or, at the least, be able to say what is true and right. However, participating in such a gathering with the intention to reform and to carry the message of truth to them does not matter”. The research scholar Ghamdi seems to differ. He maintains it would be improper to participate in such an atmosphere even for tabligh and da’wah. Nasr et al refers to some reports that connect this prohibition even to discordant factions among the Believers “who would engage in fruitless and divisive debate about religion”. Some literalists have carried this logic to the extreme and “have taken this verse to mean a prohibition against all discussion and debate regarding religious issues, and thus as an indication that one should rely only on a literal reading of the scripture”. However al-Razi refutes this verdict.

As far as the reaction to blasphemy is concerned, these ayah clearly and forcefully negate the blasphemy law of Pakistan and the violent reaction of Muslims to the cartoons in Denmark. A quick look at the words and deeds of our beloved Prophet will bear out that he never indulged in any reaction in face of worst personal insults and humiliation.

“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”. He could or should have ordered killing of all these people if blasphemy was punishable by death in Islam. In that case we would have been deprived of some really great Sahaabaa.

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.

The Quran and the authentic teachings of the Prophet describe the practice of showing irreverence to God and his messenger as acts of ignorance, deliberate provocation or hatred. Yet the two sources of Islamic guidance never proposed punitive action on the basis of theological dissent or religious differences or irreverence.

“The tyranny of religious scholars is so intense that those opposed to these laws are condemned as non-Muslims punishable by death. Some of the scholars even encourage their followers to unleash terror against such people. Their arrogance has reached to a point that they do not want to listen to any argument based on the Quran and the teachings of the Quran. The religious and educational institutions of the Muslim world suffer from the tyranny of these scholars who justify their ignorance and arrogance on the basis of a literature that emerged at a time, when Muslims had lost connection with the Quran and by and large were at the mercy of despotic rulers and their hired religious scholars” according to Dr. Aslam Abdullah, editor in chief of the weekly Muslim Observer and director of the Islamic Society of Nevada.

The Holy Qur’an records:

"Indeed, when we return to the City (we) the ones most worthy of honour will surely drive out therefrom those most contemptible ones!……….”⁵

This is reportedly the statement of Abdullah bin Ubayy made in public. He is exalting himself and demeaning the Holy Prophet and his companions in public. Yet he received no retribution at all.

He lived peacefully in Madinah until his demise. The Holy Prophet himself led his funeral prayer.

At the fall of Makkah, the Holy Prophet pardoned all those who had rejected him by calling him a sorcerer, madman, or liar. He let go Abu Sufyan despite all the wars he led against our Prophet. Similarly he forgot Wahshi, the killer of Hazrat Hamzah and Hinda, the wife of Abu Sufyan, who had torn out Hadhrat Hamza’ liver and chewed it out of spite. He had also pardoned Habbar, who attached the camel carrying Hadhrat Zainab, pregnant at time from Makkah to Madinah. She miscarried as a result and eventually passed away. And yet the Holy Prophet forgave even him.

The controversy over the punishment for blasphemy props up with the introduction of the third source of the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet, the Hadith and the uncritical conformity to it. This is a very valuable historical document (and the only one for details of Ibaadah) to learn the sunnah. It is not part of any teaching program of our Holy Prophet. It is on record that he was initially opposed to the writing of hadith; later he rescinded. The first book of hadith the Mawatta of Imam Malik was compiled one hundred and fifty years after the demise of our Prophet. The sahihain—Bukhari and Muslim—followed a century later. Hazrat Umer, the second caliph remained hostile to writing of hadith till the end. He had predicted very aptly that later Muslims will cling to this at the cost of the Quran. This is exactly what many of us including our scholars are practicing. So, Hadith is not sunnah per se; it is a very important source for sunnah. It has to be tackled very seriously and carefully because it tends to be confusing, controversial and contradictory; also polluted by forgery, a fact widely accepted. Imam Bukhari had to reject nine hundred and ninety five ahaadith for every five that he accepted.

It is on this basis some ahaadith that there is a strong Islamic scholarly opinion advocating death as a punishment for blasphemy as shown hereunder:

It is claimed that “at the conquest of Makkah, the Holy Prophet Muhammad announced general amnesty to all except those who were guilty of blasphemous acts and sacrilegious statements”. A very nebulous and vague incident (no names, no specific information) is quoted in it’s favor: “A slave Jew woman was killed by her master for her repeated blasphemy against the Prophet and when the case was brought to the Prophet’s notice he declared no retaliation against the master” (Nasai and Sunan Abu Daud, Hadith No.4348).

One of the dogmatic statements says “The death punishment assigned for blasphemy is agreed by all Islamic scholars of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah and, is normally covered in Kitabul Hudud in Islamic juridical texts. The evidence for blasphemy punishment being based on Ahadith, certain reported incidents during the lifetime of the Prophet (p.u.h.) and unanimous agreement of all Islamic scholars in all the ages (Ijma)”.

Imam Ahmad was asked about those who insult Abu Bakr, Omar, and A'ishah and he replied, "I do not think they are Muslims any longer".

Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Abdel-Wahab said, "So, whoever insults them (i.e., Prophetic Companions) will be disobeying Allah's Ordinance to honor them. Also, whoever believes in something immoral about some or all of them will be denying Allah's confirmation of their perfection and virtuousness, and, by extension, whoever denies something stated by Allah is definitely deemed a disbeliever".

Dr. Shahid of Al Maurid illustrates how studying a hadith can be tricky:

“Here, someone might also refer to oft-related incident in which 'Umar (rta) is reported to have struck off the head of a man who refused to accept the Prophet's legal verdict on a certain occasion. Our 'ulama relate this incident from the pulpits and directly encourage people to show the same attitude as reflected in the narrative towards those whom they perceive as blasphemers of the Prophet (sws). However, the fact is that not just the first and second degree of Hadith collections (in terms of authenticity) but also the third degree works are devoid of this narrative. Even Ibn Jarir al-Ṭabari, who often relates narratives in all categories, has not regarded it worthy of consideration. This narrative comes from a gharib (with isolated chain of narrators) and mursal (with omissions in the chain) Hadith that has been cited by some exegetes in their commentaries; however, those acquainted to some extent with Hadith sciences have clarified that, in the chain, its attribution to Ibn 'Abbas (rta) is absolutely implausible. Moreover, in the sanads of Ibn Mardawayh and Ibn Abi Hatim, the narrator Ibn Lahi'ah is dai'if (“weak”)".

Zeeshan Hasan in his article “ Islam and blasphemy law in his blog liberalislam.net has nicely discussed the relative importance of the sources of Islam. He concludes: “However, once the Muslims triumphed over Mecca, the association of apostasy and treason ends. In peacetime, apostasy should once again be considered only a personal matter of faith, and the death penalty based on treason during wartime is not applicable. Rather, the position of the Qur’an, which never advocates any earthly punishment for blasphemy or apostasy, makes more sense as the default position of any Islamic law outside the context of the Quraysh/Muslim war. And where there is clear difference between the precepts laid down by the Qur’an and the apparent legal stricture suggested by the Hadith, surely Islamic laws should follow the reasoning of the Qur’an”.

I would like to add that “the assassination of a Pakistani Christian cabinet minister for speaking against the blasphemy law is a stab in the heart of Islam and a humiliation of the Prophet by those who claim to be his followers. Those who are supporting his killing or similar actions are the worst enemy of Islam who neither understands Islam nor respects the Prophet . No matter who they are, they must be challenged on the basis of the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet” .

I had sent an email on the occasion of publication of the infamous Danish cartoons under the heading:

The Muslim World has proved what the Cartoons hinted;

Blasphemy and Sacrilege by Muslims in Muslim Lands

I am reproducing parts of it as they remain relevant to our discussion:

The cartoons published in Danish newspaper are outrageous and provocative to us. They have caused great grief and pain to all Muslims world over. As pointed very fluently by Robert Frisk in the Sunday, February 5, 2006 issue of the Dawn, these cartoons have surfaced once again the hypocrisy and duplicity of certain sections of Western opinion. However these nefarious cartoons have in no way even touched the impeccable personality of our great Prophet nor have they violated any injunction of the Holy Quran or any dictate of our Prophet. It is just that we are hurt and hurt badly. Does this justify a response that flouts the basic teachings of our Deen?

The Holy Book repeatedly and at the end of many an injunctions strongly forbids us from committing excesses and transgression. This has been the Sunnah- by words and deeds- of our Holy Prophet PBUH all through his commendable life. He has been a pattern and paradigm to whole Humanity to show forbearance, tolerance and restraint in face of open insults and even physical harm to his person. He has commanded us in strong terms not to use violence until it is done on you; not to destroy properties even during war. He has repeatedly ordered us to preferably forgive or avenge to degree you have been harmed and no more. He wants us to respect every Human being as sacrosanct; killing of one individual is tantamount to killing of whole Humanity. He has instructed us to protect and guard our guests of whatever denomination till they have been sent home in safe custody. Studying life events of Prophet Muhammad also show that he neither punished nor cursed his enemies when they threw stones or garbage on him or rejected him as the last Messenger of Allah. Disbelievers argued with him openly and he always tried to convince them through reasoning without annoying or announcing punishment. Prophet Muhammad had never restrained freedom of speech in the name of Islam. In Islamic teaching, there is no punishment for the act of blasphemy as some of the hardliners believe.

As a reaction to the despicable Danish cartoons, protests across the Muslim world and sharp denunciations were called for. Instead we have forcefully and openly flouted the clear Sunnah of our great Prophet by violent demonstrations. It appears as if we have gone berserk. In his name and to protect his image we have gone on the rampage: protests, economic boycotts and warnings of possible retaliation against the people, companies and countries involved and even those not involved like UK and USA; burning of Norwegian and Danish flags; demands for economic boycotts and to break away diplomatic ties; stoning and storming and burning their embassies which is our sacred duty to protect; threats to KILL citizens of Denmark; across Iran to Indonesia demanding "Danish blood”; declaring a reward of 100 kg. of gold for the killer of the Cartoonist. Laban, the Danish Muslim cleric who is mainly responsible to internationalize this issue has said that he supports peaceful protests and that violence and economic boycotts are “counterproductive."

I dare say, this reaction itself is pure blasphemy against the admirable and exceptional Personality and Teaching and Conduct of our great Prophet. More so as it is done apparently to respect him. The cartoons are symbolic and harmless blasphemy. The reaction of Ummah is factual and hazardous sacrilege: at least seven Muslims have lost their lives in Muslim Lands. The Ummah will be responsible if there is a back lash against 200000 Muslims living in Denmark who have been prudent and civilised. Many Muslims in Denmark have disavowed the vehemence of the protests. "The majority of Muslims don't care about this," said Naser Khader, a Syrian-born member of Parliament. "This is an Islamist agenda," he has said and added "We don't want those imams to talk for us. All of us, across cultures and religions, have to say 'enough is enough' to the Islamists." he added,

While the debate rages, an important point has been overlooked: despite the Islamic prohibition against depicting Mohammed under any circumstances, hundreds of paintings, drawings and other images of Mohammed have been created over the centuries, without a word of complaint from the Muslim world. Such imagery has been part of Western and Islamic culture since the Middle Ages. One of the archives about this subject, has at least 116 depictions of Mohammed in Full and with Face hidden, starting from Islamic Medieval period through the Christian Medieval period to the present day. A Muslim Irani woman has portrayed a “young Mohammed”. It was accepted as it predates the prophethood. When a delegation of Danish imams went to the Middle East to "discuss" the issue of the cartoons with senior officials and prominent Islamic scholars, the imams openly distributed a booklet that showed 15 images -- not only the original 12 cartoons, but three other anti-Mohammed depictions that were much more offensive than the ones published in Denmark.

The chain of events illustrates how the blind and passionate emotionalism of Muslims given the current climate of tension between Islam and the West, a small spark, printed on an inside page of a midsize unknown newspaper in a small country, can escalate into an international conflagration. The issue has been deliberately and definitely politicized beyond recognition to the original issue of defending our emotions and ideals about our Prophet?

The crucial and original nidus of this ugly episode is the laudable concept of freedom of speech. The media in general and the Western media in particular have a very fundamentalist approach to this: focusing only on this to the exclusion of all other relevant issues. To them this conception is as sacrosanct as the respect for our prophet is to us. This is typified by the reply Rose offered: "I apologize for having offended them," he said. "But as an editor, as a newspaperman, as long as I'm operating within the law, as long as I am not breaking any code of conduct in the Danish context, I cannot apologize for that." Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen has refused to apologize. In a recent speech, without mentioning the controversy, he denounced "any expression, action or indication that attempts to demonize groups of people on the basis of the religion or ethnic background." But he added that "freedom of speech is absolute. It is not negotiable." In this international furor Europeans are trying to stand up for Western principles of freedom of speech and not cave in to self-censorship in the name of multiculturalism and fear.

The entire controversy started when culture editor of conservative, mass-circulation Danish daily Jyllands-Posten Flemming Rose smelled a good story. He said he'd read that museums in Sweden and London had recently removed artworks and portraits from their gallery for fear of offending Muslim sentiments. A Danish comedian told him that he felt free to desecrate the Bible but that he'd be afraid to do the same to the Koran. Then Rose read that a Danish author Kåre Bluitgen complained that he could not find illustrators who dared draw Muhammad for a new book on Islam. Rose, suspected the art world was self-censoring out of fear of Islamic radicals. So he contacted 25 Danish newspaper cartoonists with a challenge: Draw Muhammad as you see him. Twelve responded, and the newspaper printed their submissions in September 2005 and were reprinted three weeks ago in Magazinet, a small evangelical Christian newspaper in Norway. "We have a tradition of satire in Denmark," Rose, 47, said in an interview. "We do the same with the royal family, politicians, anyone. In a modern secular society, nobody can impose their religious taboos in the public domain." But the newspaper is offering a gesture to its critics: On Sunday, Rose said, it will publish a full page of cartoons satirizing Jesus and the Israel-Palestinian conflict. One, he said, is by Kurt Westergaard, who drew the picture of Muhammad with the bomb in his turban. The cartoon that will be reprinted shows a Star of David attached to the same kind of bomb. The present scenario of “ Islamic terrorism” is clearly seen in the content of these nefarious cartoons. In the ensuing brouhaha, the original book was almost forgotten; it has now been released, and does feature page after page of Mohammed depictions. The satirical French magazine Charlie-Hebdo has reprinted the cartoons of Prophet Muhammad, citing freedom of expression. As well as publishing the Danish cartoons, Charlie-Hebdo published other cartoons on its back page which caricatured other religions including Christianity and Judaism.

Respect and consideration for our values is to be commanded by our attitudes. It cannot be demanded and certainly not enforced by threats, hijacking and killings.The media in the West is well known for their independence from any official pressures and enjoys using and abusing their absolute freedom. The response to these senseless self inflicting wounds by the Muslims is that they have come up with more of these cartoons of our Prophet. The front page of the same weekly magazine carried a new drawing of Muhammad. He is burying his face in his hands and saying: "It's hard to be loved by fools". The only concession they have made to our irrational and un-Islamic demonstration and wild protest is that they have come out with fresh cartoons about Prophet Jesus and Israel. The newspaper, as a gesture to its critics has published a full page of cartoons satirizing Jesus and the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Another by Kurt Westergaard, who drew the picture of Muhammad with the bomb in his turban shows a Star of David attached to the same kind of bomb. Rose said. "We are trying to show that we are not giving anybody a free ride."

An article written by John Ward Anderson in the Washington Post Foreign Service on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 was headed as “Cartoons of Prophet Met With Outrage; Depictions of Muhammad in Scandinavian Papers Provoke Anger, Protest Across Muslim World”.

I have edited some of the notable points made therein: Islamic critics charged that the cartoons were a deliberate provocation and insult to their religion designed to incite hatred and polarize people of different faiths. Defenders of the newspapers and artists said the 12 published cartoons simply were intended to highlight Islam's intolerance……….The clash is being fueled by a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment in staunchly secular Denmark, where many express frustration that the country's 200,000 Muslim immigrants are resisting assimilation into Danish society……….”People are inclined to see Islam and political extremism as two sides of the same coin," he said…….The tumult passed, but was reignited even more furiously when Magazinet, the evangelical Christian paper in Norway, reprinted the cartoons. The editor, Vebjoern Selbekk, wrote that he was "sick of the ongoing hidden erosion of the freedom of expression." He told the Reuters news agency that he had received 15 death threats and more than 1,000 hate letters…….."The question here is how far do you show sensitivity and self-control over issues without falling into self-censorship," said Medhi Mozaffari, a professor at Aarhus University in Denmark, who defended his government's stance not to apologize……"This is Islamists putting democracies on trial to see how far they can be pressured.”

As can be seen, there may or may not be an underlying element of “Islamophobia” in publishing these degrading cartoon. The main driving force behind is their exaggerated almost distorted concept of freedom of speech and their visceral opposition to any limitations put on this liberty. They regard it their duty to resist “Islamic intolerance” seen in their country. There appears to be a strong dose of anti-immigrant sentiments in the back ground.

Another article by Ibrahim Barzak of The Associated Press dated Friday, February 3, 2006 based at Gaza City, Gaza Strip describes the exaggerated, misplaced and indiscriminate reactions of the Muslims in areas far and wide in blatant disregard of the Quranic ayahs we have just studied. I have included some of the reports in this article:

Outrage over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad escalated in the Arab and Islamic world Thursday, with Palestinian gunmen briefly kidnapping a German citizen and protesters in Pakistan chanting "death to France" and "death to Denmark.”……….Palestinian militants surrounded European Union headquarters in Gaza, and gunmen burst into several hotels and apartments in the West Bank in search of foreigners to take hostage………..The issue opened divisions among European Union governments. Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik said EU leaders have a responsibility to "clearly condemn" insults to any religion. But French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said he preferred "an excess of caricature to an excess of censorship.”……….The Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, had asked 40 cartoonists to draw images of the prophet. The purpose, its chief editor said, was "to examine whether people would succumb to self-censorship, as we have seen in other cases when it comes to Muslim issues.”……France's Grand Rabbi Joseph Sitruk said he shared Muslim anger. "We gain nothing by lowering religions, humiliating them and making caricatures of them. It's a lack of honesty and respect," he said. He said freedom of expression "is not a right without limits.”…….One of the militants, flanked by two masked men with assault rifles, said the governments of Germany, France, Norway and Denmark must apologize for the cartoons by Thursday evening. If no apology is issued, the gunmen said they would target citizens of the four countries and shut down media offices, including the French news agency.

Once again please note that the real bone of contention is the distorted emphasis on free speech by one side and equally distorted and totally un-Islamic reaction to it by the other.

. ........and Allah knows best.

May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.

Dr. Khalid Mitha

FOOTNOTES

(1) Surah 2/269

يُؤتِي الحِكمَةَ مَن يَشاءُ ۚ وَمَن يُؤتَ الحِكمَةَ فَقَد أوتِيَ خَيرًا كَثيرًا ۗ وَما يَذَّكَّرُ إِلّا أُولُو الأَلبابِ

(2) Surah 102/8

ثُمَّ لَتُسأَلُنَّ يَومَئِذٍ عَنِ النَّعيمِ

(3) Surah 4/140

وَقَد نَزَّلَ عَلَيكُم فِي الكِتابِ أَن إِذا سَمِعتُم آياتِ اللَّهِ يُكفَرُ بِها وَيُستَهزَأُ بِها فَلا تَقعُدوا مَعَهُم حَتّىٰ يَخوضوا في حَديثٍ غَيرِهِ ۚ إِنَّكُم إِذًا مِثلُهُم ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ

جامِعُ المُنافِقينَ وَالكافِرينَ في جَهَنَّمَ جَميعًا

(4) Other ayahs on the same subject

Surah 6/91

ثُمَّ ذَرهُم في خَوضِهِم يَلعَبونَ

………Then leave them to play around in their impious gossip.

Surah 6/112

فَذَرهُم وَما يَفتَرونَ

……..So leave them with what they fabricate

Surah 7/180

وَذَرُوا الَّذينَ يُلحِدونَ في أَسمائِهِ

……and abandon those who commit sacrilege in His names……

Surah 43/83

فَذَرهُم يَخوضوا وَيَلعَبوا حَتّىٰ يُلاقوا يَومَهُمُ الَّذي يوعَدونَ

So leave them to gossip and play until they encounter their day which they are promised.

(5) Surah 63/8

يَقولونَ لَئِن رَجَعنا إِلَى المَدينَةِ لَيُخرِجَنَّ الأَعَزُّ مِنهَا الأَذَلَّ

(6) Blasphemy laws in Pakistan

Offenses relating to religion: Pakistan Penal code 295-B Defiling, etc, of copy of Holy Quran. Whoever will fully defiles, damages or desecrates a copy of the Holy Quran or of an extract therefrom or uses it in any derogatory manner or for any unlawful purpose shall be punishable for imprisonment for life. The relevant articles:

295-C Use of derogatory remarks, etc; in respect of the Holy Prophet. Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) shall be punished with

death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

298-A Use of derogatory remarks, etc..., in respect of holy personages. Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo or insinuation, directly or indirectly defiles a sacred name of any wife (Ummul Mumineen), or members of the family (Ahlebait),

of the Holy Prophet (PBUH), or any of the righteous caliphs (Khulafa-e-Rashideen) or companions (Sahaaba) of the Holy Prophet description for a term which may extend to

three years, or with fine, or with both.

298-B Misuse of epithet, descriptions and titles, etc. Reserved for certain holy personages or places.

1. Any person of the Qadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves Ahmadis or by any other name) who by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation:

a. refers to or addresses, any person, other than a Caliph or companion of the Holy Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), as "Ameerul Momneen”, "Khalifat-ul-Momneen", "Khalifat-ul-Muslimeen","Sahaabi" or "Razi Allah Anho";

b. refers to or addresses, any person, other than a wife of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH), as Ummul-Mumineen;

c. refers to, or addresses, any person, other than a member of the family (Ahle-Bait) of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH), as Ahle-Bait; or

d. refers to, or addresses, any person, other than amember of the family (Ahle-Bait) of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH), as Ahle-Bait; or

e. refers to, or names, or calls, his place of worship as Masjid; shall be punished with imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

2. Any person of the Qadiani group or Lahore group, (who call themselves Ahmadis or by any other names), who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, refers to the mode or from of call to prayers followed by his faith as "Azan" or redites Azan as used by the Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

298-C Persons of Qadiani group, etc, calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith. Any person of the Qadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves Ahmadis or any other name), who directly or indirectly, posses himself as a Muslim, or calls, or refers to, his faith as Islam, or preaches or propagates his faith, or invites others to accept his faith, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or in any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may

extend to three years ans shall also be liable to fine.

(7) Opinions against the blasphemy law:

(A) Section 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code pertains to the use of derogatory remarks—“…

whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any

imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the

Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for

life, and shall also be liable to fine”. Many have argued that this section is against the

teachings of the Prophet. Works of legal luminaries like Justice Shafiq Usmani endorse

the view that the concept of blasphemy is unknown to Islamic jurisprudence. Chaudhry (the News 14.06.2000) argued that the section 195-C of Pakistan Panel Code is against

the teaching of the Holy Prophet. Similarly, Hussain, referring to the work of Justice

Shafiq Usmani argues, that the concept of blasphemy is unknown to Islamic

jurisprudence. He indicates only two Quranic verses that could be relevant to the concept

of blasphemy: “Allah’s are the fairest names; invoke Him by them and leave the company

of those who blaspheme his names. They will be required in what they do (7:180)”; and,

“Surely, those who slander Our signs are not hidden from Us.…..Do whatever you will,

He sees whatsoever you do (41:40).” This author has found another verse of the Quraan

that could be related to blasphemy, “Verily, those who annoy Allah and His Messenger

Allah has cursed them in this world, and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a

humiliating torment (33:57).” None of the above verses show that people can be charged

for blasphemy by other people. Reading the Quran shows that Allah has not given

authority or despotic power to any individual, a community or a state to act as a guardian

of religion and these Quranic verses support the argument, “And We have not made you

a watcher over them nor are you set over them to dispose of their affairs (6:107); “you

are not a dictator over them (88:22); and only “Allah has promised the hypocrites; men

and women, and the disbelievers, the Fire of Hell,….Allah has cursed them and for them

is the lasting torment (9:68).” In another Quraanic verse a great message in a broad sense

is given to the hardliners that they refrain from acting like a religious despot: the Quraan

tells, “He it is Who created you, then some of you are disbelievers and some of you are

believers. And Allah is All-Seer of what you do (64:2).

(B) Studying life events of Prophet Muhammad also show that he neither punished nor

cursed his enemies when they threw stones or garbage on him or rejected him as the last

Messenger of Allah. Disbelievers argued with him openly and he always tried to convince

them through reasoning without annoying or announcing punishment. Prophet

Muhammad had never restrained freedom of speech in the name of Islam. In Islamic

teaching, there is no punishment for the act of blasphemy as some of the hardliners

believe.

proposing moderate reforms have to tread with caution. In 2000, President-General

Pervez Musharraf had announced that measures would be taken to amend the procedure

for the registration of blasphemy cases to prevent misuse. However, nothing came of it

owing to the protests by religious groups. That the political leadership of the country and

the government should step around this issue so gingerly is not surprising. The relevant

law that concerns blasphemy was introduced in 1986 by General Zia-ul Haq. This was the

period when the state had embarked on an overtly theocratic vision of itself and was

working in close co-operation with the religious lobby which viewed the law as its

special creation and instrument of control. On the other hand the mainstream polity of Pakistan, in moments of competitive populism, cultivates the hardliners by pandering to their special interest in the blasphemy laws. In 1992, then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, went so far as to make capital punishment the only possible sentence that could be awarded for those convicted under blasphemy law. So

long as this end of the political spectrum—the religious extreme— retains influence, little

change can be expected in the current status of the law and its use or misuse.

(D) Pakistan is indeed a Muslim country but she is also a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, multireligious and multi-sectarian society. It may sound harsh to the Muslim hardliners but the

fact is that contingency factors such as education, cognitive abilities and personality traits

influence people’s interpretation about Islamic doctrines. It is Allah’s gift that He has

given us different mental faculties and abilities so that we ponder on different phenomena

of this universe including religion. Of course, during the process of pondering, people can

interpret Islamic codes differently than the segment of people who proclaims themselves

as authority on religion. We must remember that religion is what remains in a person’s

heart and not what one pronounces from the tongue. One is considered hypocrite in Islam

if one pronounces what one does not believe from mind and soul; and hypocrites are

despised more than pagans. These hardliners do not appreciate that they encourage

hypocrisy by restricting people’s freedom of speech and thought in the name of religion.

(E) At the root of the problem is a small segment of religious hardliners who exploit religious

sentiments and inflame popular passions using any excuse available. Blasphemy cases are useful instruments for them and they use religious hypersensitivity to add to the general climate of sectarian intolerance accompanied by violence and death. The hardliners have been consistently exerting pressure on the government to strengthen blasphemy laws. They ignore the historical fact that blasphemy laws were introduced by the British backin 1860 in a misguided attempt to reduce tension between Hindus and Muslims. The laws were instituted for purely administrative reasons and do not have any basis in religious tenets

(8) Examples of disgraceful misuse of the Blasphemy Law of Pakistan

(A) Dr. Younus Shaikh, rationalist and founder-President of the Pakistan based organization Enlightenment, was arrested without arrest warrant by Islamabad police on 4 October 2000. He was booked under Section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code for blasphemy.Dr. Shaikh is a 45 years old medical doctor and worked as a lecturer in a medical college in Islamabad. The blasphemy accusation against him was based on a statement, which he allegedly made in one of his lectures while answering some questions raised by the students. He was accused of defying the Prophet Mohammed by stating that the Prophet did not become a Muslim till the age of 40 (i.e. until he received the first message from God) and the Prophet’s parents were non-Muslims because they died before Islam existed. The FIR was registered in Islamabad’s Margalla police station by one Maulana Abdur Rafoof. Informer was a fanatic student of Dr. Shaikh with the name Muhammed Ansgar Ali Khan. None of the "witnesses" had

personally attended Dr. Shaikh's lecture. According to Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, police can arrest an

accused without obtaining a warrant of a judicial magistrate. After his arrest, Dr. Shaikh was kept for 15 days in police custody.

There were reports that his reading glasses were broken, leaving him in a state of helplessness. On 19 October 2000, he was presented in the court. He had no lawyer, since most of the lawyers in Pakistan don’t dare to appear in blasphemy cases for fear of becoming target of fundamentalists themselves. In the court room, an aggressive group of about 20 clerics of the Islamic fundamentalist organization Majlis-IKhatam-I-Nabuwat were present and tried to exert pressure. "Dr. Shaikh's life in danger", we reported on 20 October in Rationalist International Bulletin # 52 and called for the first time upon our readers to write letters to General Pervez Musharraf, Chief Executive of Pakistan asking for his intervention to release Dr. Shaikh. In Pakistan, blasphemy-accused are not only facing death penalty, if found guilty, but even without a verdict, they are in permanent danger to be killed by a fanatic mob, as it has happened in many cases. Since the the arrest, Dr. Shaikh has been held in judicial remand in Adyala Jail, Rawalpindi under primitive and humilating conditions. He was cut off all his contacts. Only close family members and some Human Rights activists could contact him in the jail. Rationalist International established trusted contacts in Pakistan and is in close communication with activists in Pakistan who are in contact with the government and the court. The letter campaign initiated by Rationalist International mobilized hundreds of letters to General Musharraf.

(B) In Pakistan, people can be charged for blasphemy under section 295 A, B, C and 505 of

Pakistan Penal Code. Recent events of blasphemy cases in Pakistan once again raised the issue of blasphemy and prompted that it must be discussed openly whether or not Blasphemy is an Islamic concept. Blasphemy laws have severely misused in the past. One such tragic case was that of Gul Masih who was sentenced to death in 1992 for allegedly passing a remark on Prophet Mohammed. In a more recent case, Munawar Mohsin, a subeditor of the Frontier Post was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of PKR 50,000 in July 2003, for publishing a letter to the editor titled “Why Muslims Hate Jews”, which contained allegedly derogatory references to Prophet Mohammad. Most recently, an accused in a blasphemy who had been released on bail was killed on 06.09.2003 in Kasur. In another instance, a Lahore shoemaker also attracted charges under the blasphemy law in Lahore. And in one of the most celebrated cases in the country, which attracted international attention, a medical lecturer in Rawalpindi, Younus Shaikh, was sentenced to death in 2001. Hussain (daily News 21.05.2000) indicates that

many lawyers fear to take up blasphemy cases and the fear in solicitors escalated when Justice Arif Iqbal Bhatti of Lahore High Court in 1997, for he acquitted two persons

charged for blasphemy.

Search This Blog

Blasphemy against Prophet Mohammed What the Quran and Sunnah ordain v/s How the Muslims perform and Why?