A SECOND LOOK AT BLASPHEMY IN ISLAM
Last week, a young man named Khalid Faisal shot dead a man claiming Prophethood inside Peshawar High court.
He instantly was lauded as a ‘ghazi’ or warrior of Islam by a large part of the population, especially those active on social media.
However, other Muslims have challenged the supporters of such acts, arguing that any extra judicial killing is contrary to the teachings of the Final Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him).
The ensuing debate, has seen many claims and arguments advanced to legitimise and defend such actions.
This article will ‘fact-check’ the claims being made, seeking to establish their actual basis.
Claim 1: The Courts in Pakistan do not give death sentences to blasphemers, so this leads to people taking the law into their own hands.
VERDICT: FALSE
The Courts have regularly and repeatedly given death sentences for blasphemy.
Indeed it is exceptionally rare for anyone charged with blasphemy to be given a lesser punishment, leave alone actually being acquitted.
It is a different matter that many death sentences are not carried out for many years, if at all. Nonetheless, people accused of blasphemy (even falsely) often spend their whole lives behind bars.
Furthermore, around 75 people have been killed by members of the public based on blasphemy accusations, before the courts had a chance to make a determination.
In fact, most of the delays in blasphemy cases are in hearing appeals that might acquit an innocent person wrongly accused. For instance, Imran Masih has had his appeal hearing postoned 70 times!
Here are some examples of cases where people were awarded the death penalty by the courts:
- Yusuf ‘Kazzab’
- Shagufta Kauser/ Shafqat Emmanuel
- Junaid Hafeez
- Naveed James
- Taimoor Raza
- Faisal Mahmood
- Sawan Masih
Claim 2: Aasia Bibi was guilty but let go by judges, to please the West.
VERDICT: FALSE
She was acquitted because the case against her was full of false testimonies, contradictions and other flaws.
See this article for 7 major reasons given in the Judgment why the allegations against her cannot be accepted as true.
Simply because someone has been accused of blasphemy does not mean it is true and they should be punished in all cases. Punishing an innocent person is a grave crime in Islam.
A question to those angry about this verdict: Do you think Prophet Muhammad (saw) would be happy if an innocent person was sent to their death in his blessed name on a FALSE charge?
Indeed, Justice Asif Khosa beautifully explains how the accusers had grievously violated the Prophet’s Charter of Privileges and thus disobeyed him:
… the Muslim ladies… after deliberating over the matter for five long days, had decided to go after the appellant with a false allegation regarding commission of blasphemy… the Muslim witnesses in this case had violated a covenant of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) with those professing the Christian faith… It is reported that in or around the year 628 A.D. a delegation from St. Catherine’s Monastery, the world’s oldest monastery located at the foot of Mount Sinai in Egypt, came to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him), requested for his protection and he responded by granting them a charter of rights. That charter, also known as The Promise to St. Catherine, was translated from Arabic to English language by Dr. A. Zahoor and Dr. Z. Haq as follows:
“This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.
No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).”
The promise made was eternal and universal and was not limited to St. Catherine alone. The rights conferred by the charter are inalienable and the Holy Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) had declared that Christians, all of them, were his allies and he equated ill treatment of Christians with violating God’s covenant.
Justice Asif S. Khan Khosa/ “Aasia Bibi vs State of Pakistan” 2018
Claim 3: Disagreeing with the blasphemy law means you are not a sincere Muslim and do not love the Prophet (Peace be Upon him)
VERDICT: FALSE
The Messenger of Allah (upon him be peace) strictly forbade Muslims from making negative assumptions about the intentions of other believers. As such, nobody has any right to make such a judgement about another. Making such assumptions about other Muslims is a grave sin.
I personally agree that the should be a blasphemy law in Pakistan.
However many our esteemed scholars from the Salaf (early Muslim generations) such as Imam Abu Hanifa did not believe in a blasphemy law for Non- Muslims:
If a dhimmi (non-Muslim) insults the Holy Prophet, he will not be killed as punishment.
Imam Abu Hanifa cited here
Thus it is valid and legitimate for scholars to have an academic discussion on this matter based on textual evidence.
Equally the Blasphemy laws in Pakistan were drafted by human beings and may not be perfect in every respect.
Reasonable criticism of the legislation with the intention to make it more Islamic and just, should be welcomed not condemned.
At the moment the law is often misused to settle scores or destroy an enemy. There should be better safeguards against this.
Indeed it is precisely because I love the Prophet (saw) that I regard it as tauheen-e-risalat that a law drafted in his name, should be misused against his teachings and commandments, to punish innocent people.
Claim 4: Any Muslim with a sense of a honour would react in this way.
VERDICT: FALSE
It is certainly true, that a person cannot be a true Muslim until he loves Prophet Muhammad (saw) more than his own life. It is also true, that a true Muslim will feel angry, aggrieved and hurt by a blasphemy committed in his presence. However true love for the Prophet (saw) means obeying him even in the most testing of circumstances and against one’s own emotions and inclinations. This was demonstrated by his followers as recorded in numerous Ahadith.
For instance see this example:
The Messenger (saw) never allowed Muslims to take the law into their own hands. Even in an extreme situation of emotional provocation a Muslim cannot act extra-judicially.
The following Hadith illustrates this plainly and makes it clear ones sense of ‘honour’ cannot overide the rule of law:
Abu Huraira reported: Sa’d ibn ‘Ubadah said, “O Messenger of Allah, if I find another man with my wife, should I leave him alone until I bring four witnesses?” The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Yes.” Sa’d said, “Never! By the one who sent you with the truth, if that happened to me I would quickly grab the sword!” The Prophet said, “Listen to what your leader is saying. Verily, he has a sense of honour, and I have a greater sense of honour than him, and Allah has a greater sense of honour than me.”
Sahih Muslim 1498
If a Muslim is expected to rein in his anger and hand over his wife and her lover to the authorities in a situation where he finds them together – rather than kill them himself- he equally is expected to stay within the bounds of the shariah of someone blasphemes in front of him.
Indeed both the Messenger (saw) and Sahaba were explicitly guided by Allah to expect the disbelievers to mock and blaspheme and were urged to observe the greatest restraint.
Abu Amina Elias notes:
The general answer to blasphemy (sabb ala Allah wa rasulihi) as commanded in the Quran is to respond with patience, beautiful preaching, and graceful avoidance. The Quran records the fact that the Prophet (ṣ) was called a “sorcerer,” a “madman,” and a “liar,” yet Allah commanded him to be patient and to increase his acts of worship.
Allah said:
وَاصْبِرْ عَلَىٰ مَا يَقُولُونَ وَاهْجُرْهُمْ هَجْرًا جَمِيلًا
Be patient over what they say and avoid them with gracious avoidance.
Surat al-Muzzamil 73:10
And Allah said:
فَاصْبِرْ عَلَىٰ مَا يَقُولُونَ وَسَبِّحْ بِحَمْدِ رَبِّكَ قَبْلَ طُلُوعِ الشَّمْسِ وَقَبْلَ الْغُرُوبِ
So be patient over what they say and exalt with the praises of your Lord before the rising of the sun and before its setting.
Surat Qaf 50:39
And Allah said:
فَاصْبِرْ عَلَىٰ مَا يَقُولُونَ وَسَبِّحْ بِحَمْدِ رَبِّكَ قَبْلَ طُلُوعِ الشَّمْسِ وَقَبْلَ غُرُوبِهَا
So be patient over what they say and exalt with the praises of your Lord before the rising of the sun and before its setting.
Surat Ta Ha 20:130
These insults deeply hurt the feelings of the Prophet (ṣ) and his companions, but Allah did not prescribe revenge for them.
Allah said:
وَلَقَدْ نَعْلَمُ أَنَّكَ يَضِيقُ صَدْرُكَ بِمَا يَقُولُونَ فَسَبِّحْ بِحَمْدِ رَبِّكَ وَكُن مِّنَ السَّاجِدِينَ
We already know that your heart is constrained by what they say, so glorify the praises of your Lord and be among those who prostrate.
Surat al-Hijr 15:97-98
In fact, Allah told the Prophet (ṣ) and his companions to expect more insults and mockery from the followers of other religions, and that they should remain patient and not let their abuse shake their faith.
Allah said:
لَتُبْلَوُنَّ فِي أَمْوَالِكُمْ وَأَنفُسِكُمْ وَلَتَسْمَعُنَّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُا الْكِتَابَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ وَمِنَ الَّذِينَ أَشْرَكُوا أَذًى كَثِيرًا ۚ وَإِن تَصْبِرُوا وَتَتَّقُوا فَإِنَّ ذَٰلِكَ مِنْ عَزْمِ الْأُمُورِ
You will surely be tested in your possessions and in yourselves, and you will surely hear from those who were given the Scripture before you and from those who associate others with Allah much abuse. But if you are patient and fear Allah, that is of the matters requiring resolve.
Surat Ali ‘Imran 3:186
In other verses, Allah commands the believers to simply avoid those who mock Islam and not to sit with them until they discuss something else.
Allah said:
وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَ الَّذِينَ يَخُوضُونَ فِي آيَاتِنَا فَأَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُوا فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ
When you see those who engage in offensive discourse concerning Our verses, then turn away from them until they enter into another conversion.
Surat al-An’am 6:68
And Allah said:
وَقَدْ نَزَّلَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِي الْكِتَابِ أَنْ إِذَا سَمِعْتُمْ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ يُكْفَرُ بِهَا وَيُسْتَهْزَأُ بِهَا فَلَا تَقْعُدُوا مَعَهُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَخُوضُوا فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ ۚ إِنَّكُمْ إِذًا مِّثْلُهُمْ ۗ
It has already been revealed to you in the Book that when you hear the verses of Allah, they are denied and ridiculed. So do not sit with them until they enter into another conversation. Verily, you would then be like them.
Surat al-Nisa’ 4:140
Generally, the Prophet (ṣ) was commanded to endure any insult or mockery from his enemies which resulted from their bad character.
Allah said:
خُذِ الْعَفْوَ وَأْمُرْ بِالْعُرْفِ وَأَعْرِضْ عَنِ الْجَاهِلِينَ
Show forgiveness, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the ignorant.
Surat Al-A’raf 7:199
Abdullah ibn Zubair explained this verse, saying:
أُمِرَ نَبِيُّ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنْ يَأْخُذَ الْعَفْوَ مِنْ أَخْلاَقِ النَّاسِ
The Prophet (ṣ) was commanded to forgive the people’s bad character.
Source: Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4787, Grade: Sahih
There are many recorded incidents in the life of the Prophet (ṣ) in which he was mocked, defamed, and even physically attacked for his faith in Islam, but despite this abuse the Prophet responded with patience, forbearance, mercy, and forgiveness.
‘Islam between blasphemy and extremism‘
Claim 5: The Prophet executed several people for blaspheming against him.
VERDICT: MISLEADING / PARTIALLY FALSE
Allah had instructed the Messenger (peace be upon him) to show patience and forgiveness in the face of abuse and blasphemy, as we have already seen.
The whole of the Prophet’s life is full of such incidents that illustrate his supreme moral standing. I have cited a number of them in my book.
On the other hand there are a handful of reported instances where the Prophet (saw) ordered the killing of some individuals who had insulted him.
Let’s look at the common examples given, one by one.
1. K’ab ibn Al Ashraf
Abu Amina Elias explains:
The story cited in this regard is the killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf, who was a leader among the armies that were fighting a war of extermination against the Muslims, as is made clear in the several narrations concerning this incident. He was killed because he was an enemy combatant who also criticized Islam in poetry. Anti-Muslim writers only cite his poetry while they ignore his unwarranted aggression.
Badr al-Din al-‘Ayni comments:
In these traditions it is shown that they were not killed merely for their insults. Indeed, they were only killed due to their aiding the enemy and preparing for war against him. Source: ʻUmdat al-Qāriʼ Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 34/413
2. Abu Rafi ibn Abi Al Huqaiq
This man was a vicious enemy of Islam and active warmonger. He helped gather troops and ammunition to fight the Muslims in violation of the treaty of Medina.
By no means was he executed for blasphemy alone. This article produces a stunning array of references to prove this.
3. Abdullah Bin Khatal
He committed apostasy, treason and murder and not ‘simple’ blasphemy.
See https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/03/29/abdullah-bin-khatal-took-an-innocent-life/
4. Asma Bint Marwan
The entire story is fabricated and baseless see here.
Claim 6: The Prophet did not object when Muslims killed blasphemers on their own initiative.
VERDICT: FALSE
Of all the claims this is the most dangerous. It gives Muslims an apparent licence to kill others in cold blood with the slightest pretext of ‘blasphemy’ and makes a mockery of the rule of law in Islam.
A closer examination shows these stories are all weak, unsubstantiated and entirely baseless.
Example 1: UMAR (RA) BEHEADED A SO-CALLED MUSLIM WHO CHALLENGED THE PROPHET’S VERDICT.
Response: The report is totally weak and unreliable, as Dr Shehzad Saleem notes:
… 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”).
‘Punishment for Blasphemy against the Prophet’
Example 2: A MUSLIM STRANGLED A JEWISH WOMAN FOR BLASPHEMING AGAINST THE PROPHET. HER BLOOD MONEY WAS WAIVED BY THE PROPHET (PBUH).
Response: Sunan Abi Dawud 4362 is the relevant report.
It is classified as weak in chain, by Shaykh Nasir Albani and cannot therefore be used as proof.
Example 3: A BLIND MAN WAS EXCUSED FOR MURDERING HIS CONCUBINE, WHO WAS IN THE HABIT OF CURSING THE PROPHET.
Response: Abu Amina Elias sums up the precarious authenticity of this Hadith as follows: “…the problematic hadith of the blind man is based on the authority of a questionable narrator, who narrated an unusually small number of hadith, who was criticized and rejected by some scholars, and whose narrations are otherwise not widely-regarded as legal evidence. On this basis alone, Muslims are not required at all to accept the authenticity of the story or the legal ruling it supports.
There are other such reports. Most being totally baseless and weak. If for argument’s sake any such report does meet the standards of authenticity of the Hadith scholars, it likely is being totally misrepresented and misunderstood.
Any act of blasphemy in Medina would had serious political consequences and would have occured in a environment where Muslims were defending their nascent state from powerful internal and external enemies. Such acts could rightly be seen as warlike, seditious or treasonous acts and been treated differently from blasphemy in general.
However, this is just a hypothetical discussion. Since there does not appear to be any authentically narrated report which could suggest any permissibility for vigilante action against blasphemy, even in this context.
FINAL THOUGHTS
- The Qur’an & Hadith provide clear evidence that Muslims should never take the law into their own hands in cases of blasphemy or otherwise.
- The right and honourable thing for a Muslim to do, is to graciously avoid those who commit blasphemy and refer them to the court authorities. This is what the Sharia commands and commends, not Murder.
- It is right and correct that there should be laws to prevent blasphemy in Pakistan and elsewhere and these should be properly implemented. However Judges should be free to acquit innocent people if there is not enough evidence. The mob should not always believe every claim of blasphemy, as many such claims have proved to be untrue.
- Muslims should not labour under any false assumption that anyone who murders a blasphemer, will be rewarded for this act as there is not a shred of evidence for this in the Qur’an or Hadith. Nor should they treat such an indvidual as a hero or a ghazi, since they have not followed the guidance given by the Sharia even if they had good intentions.
- Musaylma Kazzab was not punished by the Prophet (saw) in his lifetime and only killed by Abu Bakr (ra) when he sought to attack Medina. No individual Muslim from the Sahaba ever took it upon themselves to kill any of the claimants of Prophethood, until ordered by the Amir ul Mumineen.
- Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed Prophethood in India, during the lifetime of the celebrated scholars of Deoband and Bareilly, Maulana Ashraf Ali thanvi & Maulana Ahmad Raza Khan Bareilvy. They did not issue any Fatwa for individual Muslims to kill him and not a single Muslim ever tried to assasinate him despite his open blasphemy and false claim of Prophethood. Did they not do so out of cowardice? Rather I believe, they knew that Allah will deal with his enemies, and the job of a Muslim is to oppose such individuals with the force of argument and scholarship rather than to kill them in cold blood.
- If someone commits a wrongful act, even against someone we despise for good reason we should be just and call a spade a spade. The Qur’an says that People of the Book were cursed by Allah because they would not criticise wrong acts by their own people (5:79), and we must always adhere to justice even against a person or people who we hate (5:08).
- Allah the Almighty will never allow blasphemers to escape the consequences of their crimes. We should never assume that he is somehow dependent upon us (na’oudhibilla) to punish those who lie and blaspheme against him or his beloved Messenger (endless peace, salutions and blessings be upon him). They will return to him and a far greater punishment than any individual or court could ever muster on earth.
…Indeed, those who invent falsehood about Allah will not succeed.
[It is but] a brief enjoyment, and they will have a painful punishment.
AL-QURAN 16: 116-7