Blasphemy......what is it?

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

The vague explanation that I get from people is that blasphemy is when someone says something degrading about Allah SWT, Prophet SAW or The Holy Quran.

Blasphemy, in Pakistan, is punishable by death.

Questions.

What is blasphemy?

Is it an Islamic law or a Pakistani law?

If its an islamic law, can anyone provide quranic references to indicate that?

My personal views about blasphemy are that its a very questionable issue. I seriously doubt it that its an islamic law.

There is no biggest disrespect in Islam than the act of shirk. Now each and every non-muslim in this world, according to islamic guidelines, is engaged in shirk. The question arises…why arent all non-muslims in Pakistan punished for shirk? and why are they targeted for blasphemy, when blasphemy is clearly a lesser sin than shirk?

Another point…realistically, what on earth would one expect from a non-muslim? Do we expect non-muslims around the world to sing praises of Allah SWT and Muhammad SAW, when they dont even believe in them? Of course non-muslims are going to talk bad of Allah SWT and Prophet SAW! much like muslims do of other religions.

Plus…i dont see any examples from Prophet’s SAW life where he resorted to extreme measures simply because a kaafir said something bad about Allah SWT or Prophet SAW himself. Prophet SAW was pelted with stones, he was cursed to no end, he was pelted with garbage…yet he never said a single word, or made a single bud dua for any of them.

Then why does Pakistan insist on using this non-sensical law? why does it get passed as an ‘Islamic’ law, when it clearly is not.

Respect begets respect. Prophet SAW established his reputation by his actions, which led him to be known as ‘sadiq’ and ‘ameen’ even among the kuffaar. These days we are more intent on using words and power of the gun to get our point across, rather than demonstrate Islam in our attitude. We expect people to respect Islam and muslims without displaying the qualities of Islam in us. For some reason we believe we will head off to jannat just because we inherited Islam from our parents.
Sad state of affairs for muslims.

2

I don't think its islamic jurisprudence. Its more of a "love-mania" and too much love for the Prophet Mohammad(pbuh) that we have in Pakistan.
We have created many other useless ways to praise him.

Prophet Mohammad(pbuh) said: "Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians exaggerated in praising the Son of Maryam (Eesaa) (alaihis-salaam), for verily I am only a slave, so say slave of Allaah and His Messenger " [Bukhari]

I totally agree with your other logical and rational statements.

*V~V~V*He came, He saw, He conquered*V~V~V*

----*High Priest-OF-Painful Truth*----

"Nay! We hurl truth against falsehood, so it destroys it: and behold, falsehood is vanquished..."Quran, al-Furqaan 25:33 ]

3

According to my research, blasphemy laws in Pakistan are not based on religious rulings rather they are based on historical evidence.

It is clear (I maybe wrong) that according to Quran and Sunnah there is no prescribed penalty for someone uttering blasphemous statements against the Prophet (SAWW).

However, the laws against blasphemy are not unusual, as these are present in UK and many other countries too. I am mentioning UK because our (Pakistani) laws are directly copied from UK. And these laws are created keeping in view the ground-reality.

Suppose someone makes a speech in Vatican rediculing the Pope, there is a chance that a devout and emotional christian may kill the transgressor. The responsibility of the state, is to ensure that a situation does not arise where the citizens take the law in their own hands. Hence laws are made to ensure that popular public perception that ‘Rule of Law is Supreme’ is maintained, while discouraging any person from harming another person.

This is just LAW-101, sorry for that.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Anyway, coming to the point, the blaspehmy law in Pakistan was passed in Gen Zia’s time. The historical evidence and the rationale for this law is the emotional attachement which people of the sub-continent have with the personality of the Prophet (SAWW). Remember Ghazi Ilm Din.

Now regardless, of whether we agree or not with the religious acuracy of the law, it is a proven fact from history that in the absence of any law, people (guided by religious leaders) may take unlawful action against anyone committing blasphemy. To circumvent such a situation, the law is passed which gives the perception that the state will take action against blasphemours. The wordings of section 295-C of Pakistan Penal Code is as follows:

“Use of derogatory remarks, etc, in respect of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) by word, either spoken or written or by visible representation or by importation, innuendo or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiling the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and shall be punished with death or imprisonment for life, and shall be liable to fine…”

Kher… to cut a long story short… this law has been grossly misused to settle personal vendatas and to settle scores against religious minorities. This is sad and unacceptable.

By the way, this topic is discussed earlier. Do check out Blasphemy link.

[This message has been edited by Pristine (edited February 14, 2001).]

4

Yes, we can say that about x number of laws that we have in Pakistan, but I dont see a utility of this laws' imposition in Pakistan. And Im not too sure this was formulated because of british laws overwhelming the subcontinent. This sounds more like a politically motivated statute than anything else. It has no religious value and sense whatsoever.

Pristine, the explanation u gave, is indeed the explanation that Pakistani govt uses to justify the blasphemy law. Basically it says that in order to ensure the fulfillment of one law, they have enacted another law.
Which brings us to the point.....why not enforce the first law properly in the first place?

Basically they are trying to mask their inability to maintain law and order by enacting another law, just to please the majority, which is silly. In order to prevent Muhammad Khan from killing Hamid Masih because Hamid Masih cursed the Prophet SAW, the govt makes a law that ensures Hamid Masih will be punished/killed. Why not rid the country of this baseless law, and ensure compliance of the more logical law, i-e making sure Muhammad Khan does NOT harm Hamid Masih to begin with.

Now regardless, of whether we agree or not with the religious acuracy of the law, it is a proven fact from history that in the absence of any law, people (guided by religious leaders) may take unlawful action against anyone committing blasphemy. To circumvent such a situation, the law is passed which gives the perception that the state will take action against blasphemours.

The "people taking unlawful action" against blasphemors are not above the law, are they? So why does the government choose to forego them and formulate a law for the non-muslim minority? Laws are supposed to be universal. And besides, this is a mere masking of the govt's inability to enforce the law that is a natural precursor to the incomprehensible law of blasphemy.

5

Well, Akif, I happen to agree with you, but let me throw out a different argument, which I don't necessarily support:

Laws in a democracy are:
(a) defined by the majority
(b) meant to make sure they serve justice, and not necessarily to be fair. This is a fine distinction - the laws are meant to make sure one group is not favored over another, but not so that concessions are made to all parties.

Given (a), a law against blasphemy should be repealed if the majority are against it. That is the point of a democracy. However, if a majority support, no matter how we feel about it, then it stays. I will assume, for the latter part of this discussion, that the democracy in Pakistan is efficient in the sense that, in this case, the anti-blasphemy laws represent the majority opinion.

Given (b), the anti-blasphemy law is, on some level, fair. No one is categorically allowed to make these remarks, which means everyone is on a level playing field. If we determine that minorities would be unfairly treated by the majority, if given the right to blaspheme, then the state has a problem. Yes, the state should not allow citizens to take the law into their own hands. But the problem is that the majority opinion happens to agree with the law, which means the blasphemer will be punished for his remarks, one way or another. So, a law against blasphemy makes it clear to the minority citizen that the majority thinks in a certain way.

This may sound like rambling, but I can see it making sense.

[This message has been edited by astrosfan (edited February 15, 2001).]

6

Yes...i understood ur post astrofan....

Regarding (a), Im not sure this law is supported by the majority population in Pakistan. Im not sure the population was even consulted on it. If the law is repealed, it will draw opposition only from politically motivated 'religious' groups, who will support it not because they hold Islam near and dear more than me or any jo blo, but because that attitude will portray them as die hard muslims, and will earn them political accollades from people who dont have a clue about whats going on.

If the blasphemy law was not in place, and a non-muslim were to indulge in blasphemy, he wouldnt be breaking the law. Now in that situation, if a 'politically motivated' muslim were to jump out and harm that non-muslim in anyway, that muslim would have to be arrested. Now why cant the government impose the law right there? Why would they choose to let go of this muslim? And why formulate a new law, just to enable the police to do what that muslim did in the first place......just that now it would be legal? This is a classic case of abusing Islam....and thats unfortunately whats happening in Pakistan.

If such a law is to be made, then there has to uniformity in it. Whats good for one, should be good for all, regardless of who is in the majority. If a non-muslim berates Islam or Prophet SAW, punish him.....but then when a muslim berates christianity or hinduism or judaism, punish him as well. Because this is NOT an islamic law...and hence, its imposition cannot be restricted to beraters of Islam.

7

Well, one can have a law to protect his faith but the question is how far he is allow to go. The question is that can a person enforce his faith on other person. If answer is yes than you can have a blasphemy law and can hang anybody for any reason but if answer is no than you can't punish anybody for whatever he says and believes. We have to look at Hazoor SAW life and see if he punished anybody for insluting him, if he did than we have full right to do it otherwise you have no right to do something which was not practiced in Hazoors SAW time.