Why blasphemy law is not ‘Islamic’
November 30, 2010 44 Comments
After my previous post on the subject of ‘The Blasphemy law: (From being unIslamic to Islamic)’, I have been getting a lot of hatred for calling the law un-Islamic. Sadly, all of it is coming from (so called) Muslims. It is a disappointment that people do not ponder into religious history in the light of the Holy Qur’an and the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). I was shocked to see people defending the law as if it was a part of some Holy Scripture.
None of them could answer my simple questions that were
“Give me any example where the Allah commanded to kill the blasphemer? Why didn’t The Prophet (peace be upon him) killed any blasphemer in his life? Why is it, that this ‘blasphemy law’ wasn’t in place during the Khilafat-e-Rashidah (the period of ruling of the four Caliphs of Islam)?”
While many came up with stories about it, some just opted to talk rubbish. The stories were fascinating, I was amazed to see how individuals can distort facts just to gain their interest and influence. Not only it is a distortion of facts about the personality of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) but it is a distortion of the teachings of the peaceful religion called Islam.
The (so called) scholars focus on the execution orders that were given out by the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) on the day of Mecca’s conquest. Here are some names and their real cases:
Abdullah ibn Sa’d:
Abdullah ibn Sa’ d, who had become Muslim and been appointed as a scribe of revelation by the Prophet. He later reneged and joined the infidels. After the Conquest of Mecca, when he heard that the Prophet had ordered his execution, he took refuge with his milk-brother Uthman. The latter gave him shelter, then took him to the Prophet with a request once again to accept his conversion to Islam. The Prophet remained silent. Then Uthman asked a second time, whereupon the Prophet accepted Abdullah ibn Sa’d’s oath of allegiance. The latter subsequently became governor of Egypt during the caliphate of Umar and Uthman, playing a major part in the conquest of Africa.
Abdullah ibn Khatal:
Abdullah ibn Khatal, who had previously accepted Islam and been sent by the Prophet to collect alms tax. A slave and one of the Ansar (dweller of Medina) went along with him. Coming to a halt in their journey, Abdullah ibn Khatal told the slave to prepare a chicken for a meal, but the slave went to sleep instead, and was unable to prepare the food in time. Abdullah ibn Khatal became angry and killed the slave. Fearing that if he returned to Medina, the Prophet would exact retribution for the slave’s death, he reneged and joined the infidels. On the day Mecca was conquered, he was executed upon orders of the Prophet (peace be upon him), not for apostasy, not for blasphemy, but for the killing of the slave.
Miqyas ibn Ayubabah:
Miqyas ibn Ayubabah, Hisham ibn Ayubabah’s brother. In the Dhu Qarad campaign, an Ansari(Medina dweller) had killed Hisham by mistake. After this Miqyas came to Medina and accepted Islam. He asked the Prophet for compensation for his brother’s death, and his request was granted. He stayed in Medina for a few days, then killed the person responsible for his brother’s death, escaped to Mecca and reneged. The Prophet ordered that he be put to death.
Ikrimah ibn Abu Jahl:
Ikrimah ibn Abu Jahl who, following in his father’s footsteps, was an uncompromising opponent of Islam. Seeing that he was sure to meet his end in Mecca, he fled to the Yemen. His wife, Umm Hakim bint Harith, who had accepted Islam, appealed to the Prophet for asylum on behalf of her husband. Her request was granted, and she went to the Yemen to collect Ikrimah. He returned with her and became Muslim at the hand of the Prophet.
Habbar ibn al-Aswad:
Habbar ibn al-Aswad, who had been responsible for great persecution of the Muslims. When the Prophet’s daughter Zaynab, was on her way from Mecca to Medina, he stabbed her camel’s side with a spear. The camel went into a frenzy and Zaynab fell down. She was with a child at that time. Not only did she suffer a miscarriage, but the effects of the mishap remained with her for the rest of her life. Orders were given for him to be killed, but he came to the Prophet and pleaded for mercy. “Prophet of God,” he said, “forgive my ignorance. Let me become a Muslim.” The Prophet forgave him.
Where in all of these events, was an execution for blasphemy? One should remember that before the migration of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), all the time he spent in Mecca was among those who used to conspire his murder, abuse him in front of the crowds, attack him and chase him through streets. Why were those people set free? Of course the ones who were executed were also blasphemers, but the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was a greater man. He never seek revenge upon anyone for his personal grudges.
If however, we are lead to believe that the Prophet (peace be upon him) ordered those executions on the basis of ‘crimes of blasphemy’ then it will make it seem like that was (God forbid) an act of revenge. Qur’an is clear about revenge
‘And the recompense of an injury is an injury the like thereof; but who so forgives and his act brings about reformation, his reward is with Allah. Surely, He loves not the wrongdoers.’
[Ch. 42 V.41]
There had been incidents where even God wanted to take revenge for the abuse and blasphemy done with Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), the famous incident of Ta’if should be recalled. The Prophet asked God for their mercy from God not revenge!
For those who still think the infamous blasphemy law is Islamic, they should re-visit Islamic history and see on that day when Mecca was down on its knees, Prophet Muhammad had all the chance to take revenge from each and every living being in that city. If blasphemy law was Islamic, the Mecca should have had been bathing in blood. The truth is death penalties have never been common in Islam.
The actions and decisions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) on that day clearly showed the world that he was a very wise intellectual and what he did on that day was justice to those who were wronged by these individuals mentioned above.
About Hasan
Epimetheus 
Whats wrong with people…
islam always saying that you cant kill an human being and the killing of one men on earth is the killing of all men, its mean that allaha forbid it for us, the rule of islam is very clear for the humanity
It goes against Islam to specify death without any opportunity given for the offender to repent for blasphemy, especially as defined in Pakistan which is 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 (PBUH).
It is certainly true that our beloved Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) ordered political assassinations of those men and women who lampooned him mercilessly, but this we must bear in mind was a time when Islam was still in a rather weak position politically. Such assassinations were justifiable as they were done for the greater good of the community. However we also know that the Prophet was magnanimous in victory and we have at least one occasion where an offender who had been marked for liquidation was forgiven by the Prophet when she sought his forgiveness. Indeed numerous are the occasions when the Prophet forgave even his most sworn enemies. To incorporate a political reality existing at one time into legislation and making it into an oppressive law that does not give an option for the offender to repent is far from Islamic and is reminiscent of the tribal and intolerant ways of the Jews. This harsh law needless to say is also abused to settle rivalries and victimize minority communities, especially Christians who enjoy a high status in Islam.
As such we may ask could a law like this be the work of a true Muslim or an enemy of Islam keen on ridiculing this noble faith in the eyes of the world. Looking back this is exactly what the madman and insecure American puppet known as Zia-ul-Haq accomplished. His very death testifies with whom his loyalties lay. Even when Zia died, it was in the company of the greatest enemies of Islam – the US military. When Zia-ul Haq’s plane blew up on August 19, 1988, it killed him along with the American ambassador to Pakistan Arnold Raphel and the head of the US military mission General Herbert M. Wassom. Another theory would have it that Zia on account of a retarded daughter he had, sought to retard his entire nation with a rather perverse and perverted interpretation of Islam the likes of which were never seen in the history of Islam which is a universal message of mercy. Be it as it may, the man succeeded in putting Pakistan many centuries back and ridiculing Islam in the eyes of the world. What could be a greater blasphemy ? we may ask.
Truly is it said that the evil men do live after them. Zia despite his ignoble death is survived by his children, the misled extremists of his country belonging to heretical sects like the Barelwi to which sect the killer of the Punjabi Governor belonged. The killer Qadri who was assigned to protect the Governor said he killed him because he had turned ‘apostate’ by opposing the blasphemy law and giving protection to a Christian woman Asia Bibi who had been sentenced to death for the offence Those extremists supporting the killer are said to have declared that he “fulfilled his duties as a Muslim”. So now killing fellow Muslims seems to have become the “duty” of Muslims according to these fanatics. It’s a pity they have not read the Quranic verse that lays down that anybody who intentionally kills a believer will abide in hell. (Qur’an 4: 93). What an evil end.
It is no doubt the emergence of bigots like these that our beloved Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) warned us about: “Beware of extremism in religion because the only thing that destroyed those before you was extremism in religion” (Ibn Majah and Nasai). The Prophet also declared: “The Mutanatti’ūn are destroyed”, repeating it three times (Abu Dawud). As Al-Nawawī explains, “The ‘Mutanatti’ūn’ are the overly-strict people, those who go too deep (into religious matters), the extremists, those who go beyond the permissible limits in their statements and actions”.
Indeed, these extremist elements of Pakistan are strangely reminiscent of the Kharjites, that heretical group that emerged in the early days of Islam as a thorn on the side of the early Islamic community. These rebels numbering several thousands separated themselves from the rest of the community and elected as their ruler one Abdullah Ibn Wahb Al-Rasibi known for his fervour in reciting the Qur’an and who was nicknamed Dhu al-Thafanat (the one whose kneecaps appeared like two humps of a camel because of the intense and extended nature of his prostration in prayer). The rebellion eventually degenerated into open hostilities against the larger Muslim community and the killing of innocents, among the first victims of the rebellion being Abdullah ibn Khabbab al-Aratt, one of the governors of Ali, who along with his pregnant wife, was hacked to death by the mob.
The basic dogma of this heretical sect appears not to have been built upon the teachings of Islam, but on Takfir or charging with unbelief all those who disagreed with them on any theological issues and the right to kill them with impunity. It was no doubt of extremist outfits such as this that our Holy Prophet (PBUH) stated: “My Ummat is destined to differ and be divided. So a group will arise whose talks will sound very good but their character will be misleading. They will read the Quran but it will not descend below their throats (just oral reading). They will leave Deen just as an arrow pierces and goes right through the prey. They will not return to Islam. They are the worst of creation because of their nature and constitution. They will call the people towards the Quran and Deen whilst in reality they will have nothing to do with Islam. Whoever will confront them, he will be the most beloved servant of Allah” (reported by Anas).
How strangely similar indeed. Rebellion against established authority, suicide bombings of innocents which has almost become a daily occurrence in this lawless country, charging with unbelief those who disagree with their views and even the killing of a governor. It is clear that the so-called ‘Islamic’ extremists of Pakistan are the Kharjites of the modern age.
It is high time the Pakistan government decided enough is enough and enforced a final solution to this evil. Appeasement is not the answer as it would only embolden these mischief makers as proven time and again. For those who do not respect human rights, there can be no rights. Deal with them like the early caliphs dealt with them – Ruthlessly. Introduce harsh punishments like cross amputation and crucifixion which the Qur’an lays down for criminals such as these to give it Islamic legitimacy and start with Qadri. Label them as heretics, as the Kharjites of the modern age and deal with them accordingly.
That is perhaps the only way to wipe out this scourge and redeem the good name of Islam!
[quote]It is certainly true that our beloved Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) ordered political assassinations of those men and women who lampooned him mercilessly, but this we must bear in mind was a time when Islam was still in a rather weak position politically. Such assassinations were justifiable as they were done for the greater good of the community.[/quote]
Dear Ahmed,
I welcome your opinion but I have a major problem with the para I quoted from your comment. As a Muslim, we believe that God has all the power to do anything. And God has taken the responsibility to protect His one and true religion which is Islam. Then how can you say words like ‘Islam was weak’ at that time. God has been always there for everyone and He has been there for Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Please look for alternative historical sources which will give you a broader perspective on why were the assassinations carried out.
Because the point of view that you are throwing out does not make a good case for Islam. From day one it has been a religion of peace and mercy and it will always be like that.
Pingback: Burnt alive: religion is served « Epimetheus
Will someone please tell me in detail what statements and actions constitue blasphemy against Allah and the holy prophet(pbuh) so that i can avoid these.
Bless you.
Dear Oracle,
You cannot Blaspheme Allah or the Holy Prophet (pbuh), they are much more greater than anything and anyone
Pingback: Blunt hypocrisy « Epimetheus
Dear Hassan ! M an undergraduate student. When Salman Tasir was killed , that day I was quite down.Some feeling was sprouting from my heart that this was wrong. I dont know.but that he must not have been killed. When everyone around me supported this act, I started to research whether Islam permits it or not. I came to read your artice, and believe me you have totally satisfied me. Islam is the best religion of the world and never allows taking life of others specially your brothers ( Muslims).
I cant thank you enough for providing me such a great knowledge.Proud to be a Muslim not a Musalman !
You don’t have to thank me shaheer, I take it as a duty to my faith, Islam has been maligned by the clerics, who nowadays (sadly) seek power and nothing else.
The Quranic evidence, given by the (so called) scholars in favor of blasphemy are all deceiving, as I have mentioned here: https://dinopak.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/the-art-of-deception/
Pingback: Shariah, the Saudi style « Epimetheus
Pingback: Page not found « Epimetheus
Pingback: What “Mullah” want « Epimetheus
Pingback: The deadly blasphemy law claims another victim « Epimetheus
Pingback: Make hay while the sun shines « Epimetheus
Dear Hassan
Yesterday in mr Talat’s Newsnight program in DAWN an islamic scholar came and claimed that 4 ppl including a woman was killed under blasphemy law after Mekkah conquest by the prophet.
If so there is serious discrepency in Islam. (though I believe that its not possible but i am not religious scholar or historian).
Your logical views are good but then why would an Islamic scholar came so with such story?
Dear mamoon,
You should understand that the ‘clerics’ are just deceiving the masses, one of the clerics went so far as to distort Qura’anic verses, See the post here https://dinopak.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/the-art-of-deception/.
Some of the people who were killed (which the clerics claim were on blasphemy) are mentioned here above. The woman which the clerics are speaking of was one of the slaves of ibn-Khatal (mentioned above) she was executed on the account of mischief and disorder. It is to be remembered that ibn-Khatal’s second slave (who was a partner in crime with that woman) was set free because she repent from her old profession and promised to behave.
The clerics claim that only Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) has the authority to forgive the blasphemers, the simple question is what about those who hurt Muhammad (pbuh) by adopting Polytheism? Qura’an is clear on how Prophet Muhammd (pbuh) was hurt at this
The verses clearly tell, what the condition of the Prophet (pbuh) was.
In a state where Polytheism is free to be practices how can we implement blasphemy law? non-Muslims don’t even recognize Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as a Prophet. If blasphemy law was really Qura’anic we would have had seen it in action in the valley of Taif. Even God was furious at what the people of Taif did with the Prophet (pbuh). but , the Prophet of Islam was a living example of love,forgiveness and mercy.
Now it is upto you to use common sense, do not get hijacked by these clerics who have made religion a source for their income
Dear Hassan, Thanks for this article and will you also ponder some light on examples which lastly brother isa has given. or would you please give complete detail reply on the last reply from Isa. Thanks.
Please read my reply to brother Hamza, I hope it satisfies your intellectual needs.
Dear akhee hasan,
first of all clear one thing i notice from few days that in my believe there is only one ”Rehmatalil aalimeen” our beloved prophet hazrat Muhammad (Salallaho alaihe walihi wasalam) and just he can forgive anyone but who are those saying that blasphemer law is unislamic. please brother understand 1 thing we are not same like our prophet it is his characteristics to forgive anyone.According to your thinking if prophet forgive anyone than why he split moon because he is Hazrat Muhammad (Salallaho alaihe walihi wasalam) only one Habib Allah not all muslims, his face shining more than moon and noor (light) come from his teeths why because he is Hazrat Muhammad (Salallaho alaihe walihi wasalam) Habib Allah not every muslims like him understand. And last thing on the day of Qayamat he Muhamamd (Salallaho alaihe walihi wasalam) the only one who make SHIFAAT for muslims even no hazrat Adam,Musa, Esa,Ibrahim made SHIFAAT but they sent all peoples go to Habib Allah Muhammad (Salallaho alaihe walihi wasalam). In quran if one person kill someone then it is the choice as mentioned in Quran 1) Qasas 2) forgive. According to hadith sahih sharif Hazrat Muhammad (Salallaho alaihe walihi wasalam) telling us love me more than your parents and reletives and every thing.
According to Quran if we have choice to kill that person who kill any human than why we not kill blasphemer.
Brother Hamza,
I do not mean to hurt your feelings, but for me I suppose we should ALL atleast try to follow in the footsteps of the Prophet (pbuh). I say this over and over again, not to make the Prophet (pbuh) above God, because that will be the biggest blasphemy on to the Prophet (pbuh) as Christians did with Hadhrat Isa (A.S.).
Qura’an clearly quotes two cases in which it is ‘NECESSARY’ to take a life of someone. 1) If he has murdered someone. 2) If the alleged person is a terrorists and terrorizes innocent human beings. Apart from this NOTHING else is mentioned.
The actions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as mentioned above in the article are exactly in synchronization with Qura’an, he executed the murderers and terrorists, you can see that he forgave some people too, why did he do that? It is perfectly in line with the Qura’an, the people who were forgiven included apostates and mischievous people. But there is NO mentioning in the Qura’an to kill them. He even forgave Hind who chewed on the liver of Prophet (phuh)’s martyred Uncle. If He (pbuh) followed the Qura’an, who gave us the right to take matters in our own hands?
My question for everyone who is ‘for’ the blasphemy law is simple
We can allow blasphemy towards Allah the almighty, by letting Hindus and other pagan religions right to worship their idols. It is a clear blasphemy towards God the supreme ruler of the universe. But, if someone does blasphemy towards the Prophet (pbuh), who was a messenger and in his own words a servant to the will of Allah, we execute that person. Is this not clearly putting Hadhrat Muhammad (pbuh) above Allah almighty who created human beings?
Let me tell you a story about Prophet Noah (A.S.) after the great flood and when the water dried up, Hadhrat Noah disembarked off his boat. Allah commanded him to make some toys out of clay. After weeks of hard work, Hadhrat Noah (A.S.) completed his work and put it in front of Allah to get His approval. Allah asked him to destroy everything he created, Prophet Noah (A.S.) got confused but he brought forward God’s command.
Allah inquired from him, “O Noah (A.S.) how are you feeling about it”, he replied, “O Allah my Lord, I put in a lot of effort into those clay pots, I was disheartened when I destroyed them”. Allah replied back, “How do you think I felt when you asked me to destroy my creation (referring to the great flood).”
It is true as Muslims we are showered in the love of the Prophet (pbuh) but we should not forget that we should love Allah almighty even more, my Allah is one who is all knowing, with all the conscience and the one who is said to love more than 70 mothers.
Who are we to take something from someone to which we cannot give back (i.e. a person’s life). This is what Islam teaches us, this is what the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taught us. Please take some time to think what you are binding towards him and Allah almighty.
I hope you get enlightened.
Pingback: The real blasphemers « Epimetheus
Pingback: Ignorance is a bliss « Epimetheus
Pingback: Killed in the name of religion « Epimetheus
Pingback: An idea whose time has come – Daily times editorial « Epimetheus
“Give me any example where the Allah commanded to kill the blasphemer? Why didn’t The Prophet (peace be upon him) killed any blasphemer in his life? Why is it, that this ‘blasphemy law’ wasn’t in place during the Khilafat-e-Rashidah (the period of ruling of the four Caliphs of Islam)?”
the simple answer is Islam teach us to tolerate and leave the rest on ALLAH , what people cant do….
well, hassan you are right upto some extent and you have qouted a neat n clean statement that i dont think one should talk rubbish about….
Akhee Hasan,
So, the Qur’aan does not mention that apostates should be killed. Lets’ go by this for a moment.
Let me be the one asking questions that beg answers:
What about the Ahaadeeth from Bukhari and Muslim that I presented in my initial post here that state apostates should be killed?
What about Abu Bakr Radiya’L-Laahu `anh (during the Riddah Wars) or `Ali Radiya’L-Laahu `anh’s reaction (towards the cult of `Abdullaah ibn Saba’?) towards the apostates?
What about the narration of Abu Burda Radiya’L-Laahu `anh (I just realised that I misspelt his name in my original post), where Muadh Radiya’L-Laahu `anh insisted that the apostate be killed before he even sat?
If it was something not allowed, by Islaam, why did Rasulu’L-Laah Sallaa Allaahu `alayhi wa Sallam have people go out after certain apostates, only to have his order rescinded upon intervention?
wa’S-Selaamu `alaykum
Brother Isa,
Apostasy is a crime for which Allah will grant punishment, we humans are mere mortals. I will write about it in detail sometime as it is a very vast subject with a history.
Speaking of which, Islamic history has been distorted over time, hence the 72 sects. The first true act of apostasy execution took place in Abbasid Empire, it was a mere political imposition. To gain backing for it, the scholars of the time tried to find loopholes in religious history, and created some of their own.
Akhee Hasan,
How can one say that it was imposed during the Abbasid Empire, when there is reference that the Sahaabah did it?
Are the Saheeh narrations of Imaam al-Bukhaari and Imaam Muslim not enough?
I don’t get it?
Pingback: An example of how to use blasphemy law « Epimetheus
Laa ilaaha illaa Allaah!
Akhee Hasan,
I just skimmed through my post and realised that I made a grievous mistake!
In the paragraph that begins with:
“I am surprised that you didn’t recall the Riddah Wars and . . .”, in response to your “When did the Khulafaa’ pratice this ‘kill the apostates’ law?” statement, I wrote (la ilaaha !) by mistake. It was supposed to complete the phrase: “laa ilaaha illaa Allaah!”, where I was denouncing the divinity of any creature, and that only Allaah is Divine.
Please change that mistake. JazaakaAllaahu Khayr.
As for the reply to your question:
That is also clear as day Akhee!
Allaah `Azza wa Jall is talking about those people that have traversed between belief and disbelief, in their hearts, and not openly. Whereas Aayah 91, from Surah an-Nisaa’ clearly states:
Meaning that this is the law regarding people that outwardly practice this.
The 137th Aayah from Surah an-Nisaa’ is talking more about an inwards state, rather than an outwards one.
InshaaAllaah that answers your query?
Akhee, before you forget, I would like to re-remind you to please change my mistake of writing (la ilaaha !) to “laa ilaaha illaa Allaah”. JazaakaAllaahu Khayr for your time and efforts.
Your Brother,
Isa,
wa’S-Selaamu `alaykum.
Dear Brother Isa,
Let me give you a detailed account on Surah Al-Nisa verse 91
The reference in this verse is to those people who had no alliance with the Muslims or any other Muslim Ally tribe. They were time-servers who awaited their opportunity. These people had alliances with any party though they didn’t have the strength to assert themselves, going back and forth sometimes with enemies sometimes with allies.
You should know that at that time, alliance of any ally with an enemy was an act of treason NOT blasphemy. Why are you confusing these verses with blasphemy law at all?
Ok Akhee al-kareem Hasan 😀
In all humility and humbleness, I still stand by what I stated. The Aayah is clear in my eyes, that apostasy is the case. Otherwise, why would the Aayah talk about “returning to disbelief“? Allying with another tribe does not constitute belief, for it to be considered disbelief when they commit treason! Am I making myself clear, my dear Akh?
Whilst I get further clarification on the matter inshaaAllaah, could you please perhaps respond to the other points? As only gathering a reference from Al-Qur’aan, when we see Rasulu’L-Laah SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa `alaa aalih, and the Sahaabah kill apostates is futile, w’Allaahu A`lam.
JazaakaAllaahu Khayr.
Your Brother,
Isa,
wa’S-Selaamu `alaykum
Dear Brother Isa,
Let me clear it for you again. I do not know where you get the translation but, here is the one I got
So the question of beliefs is not relevant with this particular verse. There was NO killing of apostates, only in the cases where one revert from Islam and joined enemy ranks. Qura’an has clearly told Muslims not to raise sword on anyone who is among the allies.
Dear Akhee Hasan,
Ok, let’s agree to disagree on that matter . . . for now. As I said, give me some time to look into it further more inshaaAllaah.
If it is any consolation to you, after a bit more looking into the matter, I am starting to lean towards Surah an-Nisaa, Aayah 91 not meaning what I initially took it for.
The translation I got was in the link of my initial quote of the Aayah.
Well, instead of stagnating on the Aayah perspective, let’s be more productive inshaaAllaah. Please continue with the rest of the points mentioned. i.e. Ahaadeeth, Sahaaba and the Kulafaa’ Ar-Raashidoon’s stance upon the matter inshaaAllaah. As these are also views that are taken to make up the Sharee`ah. Especially Saheeh Ahaadeeth. And there were a few provided in my response to your question, alongside your examples of Rasulu’L-Laah SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam sending hit squads after the apostates (which were stopped only via asking for clemency by an intercessor, or the person themself).
Brother Isa,
Like I said in my previous post
once more not to be belligerent or anything but it’s hard for me to believe that. here are a few other examples from islamic sources:
One Muslim scholar and jurist provides several examples of people who were killed for satirizing or making fun of Muhammad:
In a sound hadith the Prophet commanded that Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf be killed. He asked, “Who will deal with Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf? He has harmed Allah and His Messenger.” He sent someone to assassinate him without calling him to Islam, in distinction to other idol-worshippers. The cause of that lay in his causing harm to the Prophet. That indicates that the Prophet had him killed for something other than idol-worship. It was for causing him harm. Abu Rafi’, who used to harm the Messenger of Allah and work against him, was also killed.
Similarly on the Day of the Conquest, he ordered the killing of Ibn Khatal and his two slavegirls who used to sing his curses on the Prophet.
In another hadith about a man who used to curse the Prophet, the Prophet said, “Who will save me from my enemy?” Khalid said, “I will,” so the Prophet sent him out and he killed him.
‘Abdu’r-Razzaq mentioned that a man cursed the Prophet, causing the Prophet to say, “Who will save me from my enemy?” Az-Zubayr said, “I will.” He sent az-Zubayr and he killed him.
It is related that a woman used to curse the Prophet and he said, “Who will save me from my enemy?” Khalid ibn al-Walid went out and killed her.
It is related that a man forged lies against the Prophet and he sent ‘Ali and az-Zubayr to kill him.
Ibn Qani’ related that a man came to the Prophet and said, “Messenger of Allah, I heard my father say something ugly about you, so I killed him,” and that did not distress him.
Ibn ‘Abbas said that a woman from Khatma satirised the Prophet and the Prophet said, “Who will deal with her for me?” A man from her people said, “I will, Messenger of Allah.” The man got up and went and killed her. He told the Prophet who said, “Two goats will not lock horns over me.” (Muhammad Messenger of Allah (Ash-Shifa of Qadi ‘Iyad), Qadi ‘Iyad Musa al-Yahsubi, translated by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah Press, Inverness, Scotland, U.K. 1991; third reprint, paperback], pp. 378-379)
Dear Methodus,
Islamic history has been distored/misinterpreted over time by the scholars. Ka’b bin Ashraf was more than an idolater, he was a conspiring individual. Here is what I know about this guy and his tribe
There lived at Medina three Jewish tribes Banu Qainuqua, Banu Nadir and Banu Quaraizah. They all had a treaty with the Muslims of Medina. Banu Nadir and Banu Qainuqua had acted treacherously towards Muslims on several occasions, They had hatched plots and had entered into secret alliances against the Muslims of Medina.
They had repeatedly broken their plighted word and had repudiated the solemn agreement that they would remain neutral between the Holy Prophet and his enemies, and even had conspired to take his life. Their leader Ka’b bin Ashraf had gone to Mecca to eillist the help of the Quraish and of other pagan tribes around Mecca in order to drive out the Muslims from Medina.After the temporary reverse suffered by Muslims at Uhud, their machinations and defiance of the Prophet had greatly increased. It was when
the cup of their iniquities had become full to the brim and their presence in Medina had proved to be a constant source of mortal danger to Muslims and the Islamic State that the Holy Prophet had to take action against them. They were told to leave Medina. But the Prophet was exceptionally kind and considerate to them. He allowed them to carry their goods and chattels with them, and they departed from Medina in perfect safety, but not until they had despaired of the help they had expected from their Meccan allies and from the Hypocrites of Medina, and had also found that their fortresses which they thought were impregnable could not save them.
The execution of Ka’b bin Ashraf wasn’t based upon ‘personal grudges’, He broke all the treaties and lead his tribe into breaking them. Even after numerous pardons and ‘letting goes’ he stood their stubborn.
I didn’t study the other traditions nor I found them in my Hadith books. As I have said before, Islam has been made complicated over centuries, just like Christianity and Judaism, why else do you think we have 73 sects in Islam?
I did find a tradition for you to ponder at, it is from the Sahih (authentic) Hadiths.
This is the teaching of the Prophet (Peace be upon him), no where in the Qura’an you find anything about blasphemy. Don’t believe in stories, find the facts from the Qura’an and the Authentic Hadiths.
Ghamdi???
Kinmdly read the reason why blasphemy is such a biggest crime.
A prophet (pbuh) who is known for his forgivingness,kindness and generosity. Who forgave the murderer of his(pbuh) loved one says about killing of ibn khatal that (meaning) even if some one find him clinging with the curtain of ka’aba.
I guess you didn’t read correctly Jawwad, What you are quoting is true that ibn Khatal was ordered killed even if he was clinging to the cloth of Ka’aba, but you are not viewing WHY he was ordered to kill.
It wasn’t on the account of blasphemy at all. I just quoted the reason why. He killed a human being and as a punishment he had to lose his life. It was justice to the slave. In the life of the prophet (peace be upon him) there have been many blasphemers, even his relatives used to mock him.
But he never executed anyone because it would fall in the category of revenge. You yourself are distorting the Holy character of the prophet (peace be upon him) but saying he (God forbid) murdered people who mocked him.
P.S.: This isn’t Ghamdi or any other scholar’s views. I myself am a student of Islamic theology.
no offense but didn’t he order the murder of that one woman poet who mocked him in her poetry? so in some cases your prophet did murder people who blasphemed against him. this therefore leads me to believe that while a blasphemy law is indeed unjust, it is islamic.
The woman you are talking about was a slave of Ibn Khatal (the guy who was executed on the offense of murder) who was stubborn to carry on in the same profession, which was equivalent to a modern day stripper and prostitute. Blasphemy wasn’t her offense.
It should be remembered that her companion Quraybah (also slave of Ibn Khatal) who was her partner in crime, came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and asked for asylum which was granted. If Fartana might have had asked for mercy I am sure she would have been left alone too.
a’S-Selaamu `alaykum Akhee Hasan.
I know… It’s been over a week since the last post, but I just came across it recently, so here goes inshaaAllaah.
Firstly, I think methodus was referring to your claim:
Secondly, I actually wanted to add something else. Namely a quasi-reply to your question inshaaAllaah:
In Surah an-Nisaa’, Aayah 91, Allaah `Azza wa Jall states (in the translation of the meaning):
The Aayah clearly talks about apostasy. Returning to disbelief is only possible after belief. Hence apostasy. And you read yourself that the Aayah commands us (under an Islaamic State) to kill them.
You continue:
First and foremost, it was never recorded (at least by reliable sources, that is) that Rasulu’L-Laah SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam ever killed anyone in his lifetime. With the exception of a man during war, who died as a result of a wound, inflicted by Rasulu’L-Laah SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam.
And as much as I agree with your above statement (for the most part), it is not as if the Prophet SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam never intended to do so, or as if he never had ordered it. Ahaadeeth regarding this will be provided later on inshaaAllaah. Anyway, you yourself give ripe examples of this in your recount of all the above people during his, SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam’s time, with the exception of Abdullah ibn Khatal. Until you bring proof that he was killed purely due to the crime of murdering his female slave, then I will have to respectfully contest your claim, and say that he was killed on all counts charged, including apostasy. Also the case of Miqyas ibn Subabah (somehow you made the same typo twice :p) holds the same reasoning. He was killed on both charges, i.e. murder and apostasy. Unless you can clearly prove otherwise, I will remain unchanged in my thoughts regarding the issue, alongside other Muslims that feel the same way.
The Prophet SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam intended very much so to kill the apostates (or at the very least, to have them killed), but due to his beloved fellow Sahaabah requesting clemency on the apostates’ behalf that he, SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam came across, for whatever reason they had, he, SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam granted it. It was also granted to Habbar ibn al-Aswad, due to Habbar Radiya’L-Laahu `anh claiming ignorance. As you are well aware, there are different types of apostasy. Some that do not require an immediate execution. It seems that most of the examples you gave were of that type, w’Allaahu A`lam.
So, the issue is as simple as that. You must agree that if there were no interventions on behalf of the apostates’, then surely we would have had a few records of seeing apostates being killed.
The Saheeh Sunnah indicates that it is essential to put the apostate to death. Here are Ahaadeeth from Imaam al-Bukhaari rahimahu’L-Laah regarding apostates, sharing our beloved Prophet SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam’s view on the matter:
`Abdullaah ibn Mas`ood said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “ It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am the Messenger of Allaah, except in one of three cases : a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a previously-married person who commits zina; and one who leaves his religion and separates from the main body of the Muslims.”
Narrated Ikrima, “Some 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 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, “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.”
Narrated Abu Bruda, “Abu Musa said…..Behold there was a fettered man beside Abu Musa. Muadh asked, “Who is this (man)?” Abu Musa said, “He was a Jew and became a Muslim and hen reverted back to Judaism.” Then Abu Musa requested Muadh to sit down but Muadh said, “I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and his messenger,” and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, “Then we discussed the night prayers”
This last narration is especially meaningful, as it shows that apostasy is punishable by death according to both Allaah and His Messenger’s judgment.
And from Imaam Muslim we have the following Hadeeth:
`Abdullaah ibn Mas`ood said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “ It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allaah and that I am the Messenger of Allaah, except in one of three cases : a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a previously-married person who commits zina; and one who leaves his religion and separates from the main body of the Muslims.”
I know, Imaam Bukhaari also narrated the above Hadeeth.
You must concede, that even though we may have no authentic sources relaying incidents where there were apostates being killed due to apostasy, bar the ibn Khatal and Miqyas ibn Subabah, Radiya’L-Laahu `anhumaa examples, Rasulu’L-Laah
SallaaAllaahu `alayhi wa Sallam had every intention to do so.
Moving right along… You continue;
I am surprised that you didn’t recall the Riddah Wars and when `Ali ibn Abi Taalib Radiya’L-Laahu `anh had the heretics that claimed he was Allaah (la ilaaha !) burnt? Both instances were clearly a reciprocation for apostasy!
Anyway, you said any example, and b’idhni’L-Laah , I believe that examples have been provided for you in all three instances of your request, w’al-hamduli’L-Laah, which should be sufficient inshaaAllaah.
Any mistakes within what I have written are from myself and shaytaan, and all right information is from Allaah.
SubhaanAllaaha wa bi hamdiK, ash’hadu an laa ilaaha illaa Ant, astaghfirooka wa atoobu ilayK.
Your Brother,
Isa,
wa’S-Selaamu `alaykum
Those who believe, then disbelieve, then again believe, then disbelieve, and then increase in disbelief, Allah will never forgive them nor will He guide them to the way. Al-Qura’n [4:137]
If apostates are to be killed then why does Qura’an talks about those who believe then disbelieve then believe then disbelieve?