This paper argues that the Quran, the primary source of Islamic teachings, does not support the harsh and punitive blasphemy laws enacted in many Muslim nations. Instead, the Quran emphasizes patience, forgiveness, and leaving judgment to God. By taking a leaf out of the Quran’s book, this paper advocates for the abandonment of such laws in favour of a more Quranically aligned approach to addressing blasphemy.

Blasphemy Laws in Muslim-Majority Countries

As of recent data, numerous Muslim-majority countries have enacted blasphemy laws, though their enforcement and severity vary widely. Countries with blasphemy laws include Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria (in some northern states with Sharia law), Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey (though recently debated and modified), United Arab Emirates, and Yemen.

Pakistan has some of the strictest blasphemy laws, with penalties including the death penalty for insulting Islam or the Prophet Muhammad. Saudi Arabia and Iran enforce harsh penalties for blasphemy under Sharia law. In countries like Indonesia and Malaysia, blasphemy laws are selectively applied, often targeting religious minorities. This patchwork of enforcement creates a legal minefield where individuals can be caught in a web of ambiguity and oppression. In Turkey, blasphemy laws were technically abolished in 1924, but restrictions on insulting religious values remain under other legal provisions. In Nigeria, blasphemy laws are primarily enforced in northern states where Sharia law is implemented.

Blasphemy laws in these countries are often rooted in Islamic jurisprudence and are used to protect religious sentiments, particularly those related to Islam. However, these laws are frequently criticized for being used to suppress freedom of expression, target religious minorities, or settle personal vendettas. Rather than upholding the sanctity of faith, such laws often become a double-edged sword, cutting deeper into the fabric of justice and fairness.

Hadiths Cited in Support of Blasphemy Laws:

Several hadiths are often cited to justify harsh punishments for blasphemy. Below are some examples:

“Whoever insults the Messenger of God, he should be killed.” (Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 83, Hadith 37; Muslim, Book 16, Hadith 4157)

“If anyone abuses God, the Exalted, or abuses the Messenger of God, or abuses the Ka’bah, or abuses the sacred months, the punishment for him is to be killed, unless he repents.” (Abu Dawud, Book 40, Hadith 4595; Ibn Majah, Book 20, Hadith 2636)

A blind man killed his slave-mother for repeatedly insulting the Prophet. When the matter was brought to the Prophet, he said, “If he had come to me, I would have given him a more severe punishment than that.” (Abu Dawud, Book 40, Hadith 4593; Ibn Majah, Book 20, Hadith 2634)

Reformed scholars question the authenticity or reliability of certain hadiths used to justify blasphemy laws. They argue that not all hadiths are of equal strength, and some may have been fabricated or misinterpreted over time. They use the science of hadith criticism (Ilm al-Rijal) to evaluate the chains of narration (isnad) and the content (matn) of hadiths. In essence, they are separating the wheat from the chaff, ensuring that only the most authentic sources inform legal and theological discourse.

Quranic Perspective on Blasphemy

The Quran does not explicitly prescribe a specific worldly punishment for blasphemy. Instead, it emphasizes patience, forgiveness, and leaving judgment to God. Several Quranic verses provide guidance on how to respond to blasphemy, emphasizing the importance of restraint, respect, and wisdom.

In the face of offensive discourse, the Quran advises believers to exercise patience and avoid conflict. As stated in Quran 6:68, “When you see those who engage in [offensive] discourse concerning Our verses, then turn away from them until they enter into another conversation. And if Satan should cause you to forget, then do not remain after the reminder with the wrongdoing people.” This verse suggests that engaging with blasphemers is like adding fuel to the fire; instead, one should walk away and let the storm pass.

The Quran also emphasizes the importance of leaving judgment to God. In Quran 42:40, it is stated, “The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof; but whoever forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is with God. Indeed, He does not like wrongdoers.” This verse encourages believers to take the high road, leaving vengeance in God’s hands.

Furthermore, the Quran prohibits insulting others’ beliefs, emphasizing that respect is a two-way street. As stated in Quran 6:108, “Do not insult those they invoke other than God, lest they insult God in enmity without knowledge.” This verse underscores the importance of treating others with dignity and respect, even if they hold different beliefs.

While the Quran does highlight the gravity of blasphemy, it emphasizes divine punishment rather than human retribution. In Quran 9:61-62, it is stated, “Among them are those who abuse the Prophet and say, ‘He is an ear.’ … Those who abuse the Messenger of God—for them is a painful punishment.” This verse reinforces the idea that ultimate justice rests with God, not humans.

Finally, the Quran provides guidance on how to engage with others in a respectful and wise manner. In Quran 16:125, it is stated, “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” This verse advocates a diplomatic approach, proving that honey catches more flies than vinegar. By embracing these Quranic principles, believers can promote a culture of respect, tolerance, and wisdom.

Responsible Freedom of Expression in Islam

The Quran emphasizes the importance of responsible freedom of expression, outlining etiquette for its exercise. Believers are encouraged to engage in respectful discussions, arguing “in the best way” (29:46) and “most courteous way” (16:125). The Quran warns against making unfounded assumptions, speaking ill of others, or spreading rumours without verification (49:12). It also stresses the need to verify information before sharing it, to avoid harming others (49:6).

The Quran highlights the value of thoughtful, evidence-based opinions expressed courteously, likening them to a fruitful tree (14:24-25). Conversely, it condemns abusive language, including slander, libel, and insults, warning believers not to revile others or use offensive language (6:108, 49:11). Ultimately, the Quran establishes both legal and moral boundaries for freedom of expression, promoting responsible communication and respect for others.

However, the Quran’s moral guidelines for expression are primarily directed at believers, with no equivalent expectations placed on non-believers. This raises questions about blasphemy, a concept historically intertwined with apostasy, heresy, and rejection of God and revelation in Islamic tradition.

As Mohammad Hashim Kamali’s book ‘Freedom of Expression in Islam’ demonstrates, juristic debates on these issues are complex and often opaque (Kamali, p.218–21). Historically, public opinions were categorized into three types: praiseworthy, blame-worthy, or doubtful. Praiseworthy opinions praised the Quran and Prophet Muhammad, while blame-worthy opinions were deemed blasphemous, seditious, or heretical.

Some Muslims understand Islam as a coercive system that dictates piety by force and eradicates impiety, apostasy, or blasphemy. However, this approach is not compatible with modern liberal standards. In fact, the Quran offers a more nuanced response to blasphemy, one that prioritizes responsible expression and respect for others.

In contrast, some Islamic countries continue to impose harsh punishments for blasphemy, including death. This approach is at odds with modern human rights standards and the principles of responsible freedom of expression outlined in the Quran.

As Kamali notes, the punishment for blasphemy in Islamic law is based on certain narratives in the Hadith literature that are open to interpretation (Kamali, p. 249). These narratives can be understood in their historical context, rather than as a basis for modern laws and punishments.

In conclusion, responsible freedom of expression is a fundamental principle of Islam, one that emphasizes respect, courtesy, and thoughtful communication. While some Islamic countries continue to impose harsh punishments for blasphemy, the Quran offers a more nuanced approach that prioritizes responsible expression and respect for others.

As noted by Ziauddin Sardar, a renowned British scholar, writer, and cultural critic, the debate surrounding blasphemy laws and Islam is succinctly captured in his insightful commentary, which highlights the complexities and nuances of this critical issue:

 “Classical juristic opinion is at odds, as it frequently seems to be, with the spirit and teachings of the Quran. I find the whole idea of blasphemy irrelevant to Islam. Either you are free to believe and not believe or you are not. If there is no compulsion in religion then all opinions can be expressed feely, including those which cause offence to religious people. The believers will show respect and use respectful language toward God and His Prophet simply because they are believers. Non-believers, by definition, take a rejectionist attitude to both. We should not be too surprised if non-believers resort to the use of what the believers would regard as unbecoming language towards sacred religious notions. The Quran expects this; and this is how the real world behaves.” God, ‘the Self-Sufficient One’, in His Majesty, is hardly going to be bothered if a few insults are hurled at him. He can certainly look after himself: ‘the Most Excellent Names belong to God: use them to call on Him, and keep away from those who abuse them—they will be requited for what they do’ (7:180). In other words, punishment or reward for those who abuse God lies with God; we have nothing to do with it and are required simply to stay away from such matters. As for the Prophet himself, he was constantly abused and blasphemed, in everyday words as well as poetry, during the period of his prophethood, particularly his time in Mecca. He took no action against those who ridiculed him. If the Prophet himself did not penalise those who uttered profanities against him, who are we to act on his behalf? Of course, we, the believers, have the right to be offended. But we have no right to silence our critics. To do so would be to act against the clear injunctions of the Quran and the example set by the Prophet. In matters of blasphemy, unfair criticism or expression of serious differences, the Quran expects the believers to show moral restraint, and not to be unnecessarily oversensitive. When the differences become truly irreconcilable, the Quran asks the believers to live and let live: Say ‘O unbelievers! I do not worship what you worship; nor do you worship what I worship; nor will I ever worship what you worship; nor will you ever worship what I worship. You have your religion and I have mine.’ (109:1–6)” (Sardar, p.339-340).

Blasphemy: A Call for Reform and Justice

The Quranic emphasis on patience and forgiveness is unmistakable. In the face of insults or mockery, believers are encouraged to respond with restraint, avoiding conflict whenever possible. As the Quran teaches, justice must be served on a silver platter of mercy, not an iron fist of punishment.

Notably, the Quran does not prescribe specific worldly punishments for blasphemy. Instead, it emphasizes divine retribution in the afterlife, leaving humans to focus on forgiveness and compassion. This approach is in stark contrast to the harsh punishments often meted out in the name of blasphemy laws.

These laws often violate fundamental human rights, silencing dissent and stifling growth and progress. Silencing dissent is akin to caging the wind – it is a futile endeavour that ultimately undermines the very fabric of society.

Furthermore, blasphemy laws are frequently misused, twisted to serve personal grudges rather than uphold justice. A law that can be manipulated in such a way is no law at all.

Ultimately, the Quran promotes a culture of mutual respect and tolerance. Muslims are prohibited from insulting the beliefs of others (Quran 6:108), recognizing that respect is a bridge built from both sides. By embracing this ethos, we can create a more harmonious and inclusive society, where freedom of expression is cherished and human rights are protected.

Reconciling Faith and Freedom in the Muslim World

The Quranic approach to blasphemy offers a profound lesson in patience, forgiveness, and humility. By leaving judgment to God, Muslims can focus on promoting a culture of tolerance, mutual respect, and compassion. This approach not only aligns with the Quranic spirit but also protects human rights and dignity.

As Muslim nations navigate the complexities of blasphemy laws, they have an opportunity to turn over a new leaf. By embracing the Quranic values of mercy, forgiveness, and coexistence, they can create a more just and harmonious society. As the metaphor goes, true faith is like a candle—it should illuminate the path, not consume everything in its path. By choosing the path of tolerance and understanding, Muslims can create a brighter future for all.

Bibliography

Kamali, Mohammad Hashim, Freedom of Expression in Islam, Kuala Lumpur: Berita Publishing, 1994

Sardar, Ziauddin, Reading the Quran: The Contemporary Relevance of the Sacred Text of Islam, New York, Oxford University Press, 2011

—

V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. He can be reached at vamashrof@gmail.com)

Courtesy: New Age Islam

The post Why Muslim Nations Should Abandon Blasphemy Laws appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Khadim Husain Rizvi, who suddenly collapsed and died, had the dubious credential of heaping insults on those with whom he disagreed. One such insult was heaped on Abdul Sattar Edhi, the now deceased Pakistani philanthropist, whose foundation runs the world’s largest ambulance network. In an irony, which would have been lost on Khadim Husain had he been alive, the man was rushed to a nearby hospital in an Edhi Foundation ambulance. But this cleric, who rose from being a petty state official to one of the most important mobilisers of religious passion in recent times, not just insulted others. He threatened all those whom he thought had disrespected the Prophet and rallied to further strengthen the already infamous blasphemy laws. In short, he weaponised Islam and in the process, Barelwis themselves.

Barelwis were long considered moderate Muslims which the west was happy to fund and showcase. This myth got busted in Pakistan when a Barelwi got up and shot dead Salman Taseer, the governor of Punjab. His fault? He was campaigning for the release of Asiya Bibi, a Christian women, jailed on the charges of blasphemy. As the Barelwi logic goes, anyone who defends a ‘blasphemer’ becomes one himself. And the same punishment should be meted out to him, which is to kill him. A conscientious Muslim, Mumtaz Qadri, whose professional duty was to protect Salman Taseer, pumped 27 bullets in him. One of those who had inspired Qadri was Khadim Husain, who being a Barelwi ideologue had been campaigning against Taseer. After Qadri was arrested (and later hanged), Khadim Husain launched a movement to free this killer, arguing that Qadri had done nothing wrong; what he did was in accordance with the teachings of Islam. After he was hanged, Qadri was declared as a Ghazi or a holy warrior by the same Khadim Husain and millions of his followers.

Having thus made a name for himself as the most important Ashik e Rasul, Khadim Husain set about to organise the Barelwis as a potent political force. It is true that in the past, the Barelwis have been the target of numerous terror groups in Pakistan. Wrongly understood as lax Muslims, their mosques, shrines and even some of the leadership had been bombed out of existence by groups like the Taliban, who, being Deobandis, detest Muslims going to shrines. Despite being the numerical majority, the Barelwis found themselves not only singled out for targeted killings but also out of structures of power. Khadim Husain, by taking up issues like the protection of blasphemy laws, gave voice to this beleaguered majority who were now tasting power after many years. The man and his followers had the power to bring Islamabad to a halt, bring the government to its knees and even ask the all-powerful military establishment to negotiate with the government regarding their religious demands.

But as with many sectarian movements, the Barelwis’ assertion of power must necessarily be against a perceived enemy. That enemy can may be the secular state, the Deobandis, the Ahmadiya Muslims or the Shia. And we saw this through the person of Khadim Husain whose many speeches against the Ahmadiya and Shia make them vulnerable minorities within their own country. Anyone who thinks of Barelwis as the moderates within Islam must ask the Ahmadiya and the Shia what they think of this movement within Pakistan.

But then Khadim Husain should not be held solely responsible for this anti Shia vituperative rhetoric. In many ways he was being true to the Barelwi teachings which have for long held the Shia to be astray and treated the Ahmadiyas beyond the pale of Islam. The foundational texts of the Barelwis, as represented through the writings of Ahmad Riza Khan, themselves are responsible for much of the scorn that is poured on these so called deviant sects. In their love for the prophet, the Barelwis declared anyone who did not follow their interpretation of Islam as Kafir. More nearer to our history, the Barelwis were the first to raise the issue of blasphemy in the wake of the publication of Salman Rushdie’s book. Other protesting sects were just following the lead of the Barelwis.  

It also must be said that in the context of Pakistan, various religious sects have been used against each other for many decades now. There was a time when the Deobandis and the Ahle Hadis were the favourite of Pakistani establishment, as they could be used in Afghanistan against the Soviets.

The sudden visibility of these scriptural sects was not because of the purported superiority of their Islamic interpretation but more so because the state had started to patronise them, thereby giving them more visibility as compared the Barelwis. It is not improbable that forces within the Pakistani deep state now think that courting the Barelwis will be beneficial for them and that’s why we are seeing this sect occupying the Pakistani streets.

Khadim Husain, though responsible for giving a sense of purposive militancy to the Barelwis might also have been an unconscious player in someone else’s strategic game. Whatever be the reason behind this, what is clear is that the path on which he has herded his followers does not lead to tolerance and religious ecumenism but only towards bigotry and violence in the name of religion.

—–

Arshad Alam is a NewAgeIslam.com columnist.        

‘This article was first published in New Age Islam and may be read here’

The post Khadim Husain Rizvi and the Weaponisation of Barelwis in Pakistan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Blasphemy Laws: Militant Islamists Define A Fanatic Strain within Islam appeared first on SabrangIndia.