Saturday, December 4, 2010

Blasphemy Law; It is very much a true Islamic law having basis in Koran and Example of Mohammad.

Is blasphemy law, whose lethality and repercussions are felt by religious minorities in Pakistan, UN-Islamic?

People who have come across the news of struggle of Asia Bibi who was sentenced to death on charges of blasphemy, insulting Islam, might think that blasphemy law has no basis in Islam and Islam stands against such laws  and punishments because media writes like this on advice or under influence from so called Muslim moderate intellectuals who wish that Islamic doctrines and laws still remain esoteric.

Despite the attempts of the media and Muslims to gloss over anachronistic laws such as prescribing death penalty for apostasy, leaving Islam to another religion, and blasphemy, criticism of Islam and saying anything negative about Islam and its founder Prophet Mohammad, people increasingly all over the world, if not India, are learning that these laws are part and parcel of Sharia Law and have roots in Koran and deeds of Mohammad. These people are even understanding the end purpose of having such laws.

The roots and foundation of this blasphemy law, killing people who criticize Mohammad and Koran, tap in to what Mohammad did or ordered his followers to do.Biographies of Prophet of Islam,  written by pious Muslims like Ibn Ishaq, Tabari and Ibn Sa'ad, mention many incidents where Mohammad, as he was becoming powerful politically in Medina, orders killing of people, Jews and idolaters, for simple reasons that:

1. They criticized him, his ways and acts as he was sending armed groups to raid caravans for the purpose of looting and taking people as captives for ransoming for money later; or some times as slaves.
2. They questioned him, his religion and his teachings; more importantly questioned his claim of prophet-hood. Even they understood that no God's prophet would raid caravans.
3. Some of them lampooned him by writing satirical poems.

At the end of this post, I will be presenting two of such incidents from authentic Islamic sources. Apart from deeds of Mohammad, Sunna, blasphemy law also exists in Koran as Koranic verses 9:64-66 say that any Muslim mocking or questioning, or even doubting, Mohammad, his prophet-hood, Allah and verses in Koran amounts to reverting to disbelief from belief in Islam. That is, such Muslims are declared apostates and punishment for apostasy is death penalty.

It is based on these primary sources (Koran and Deeds of Mohammad i.e. Sunna) that Sharia Law describes what is blasphemy and prescribes death penalty as punishment for it (one can read about sharia law on blasphemy from here; chapter 8 and section 7 (o8.7) for Muslims; Chapter 11 and section 10 (o11.10), clause 5 for Non Muslims.). All four major schools of Sunni Islam support death penalty for blasphemy and also hold the view that apostates must be killed. Shia branch of Islam also supports this blasphemy law; all one has to do is to recall famous fatwa on writer Salman Rushdie for writing novel,Satanic Verses, by father of Iranian Islamic revolution, Ruhollah Khomeini.

When ever Muslims come across news that is unfavorable to idea of Islam as moderate, tolerant, non violent or inclusive, they reflexively resort to negating sharia law saying that it is man made i.e. written by men and Koran and Sunna do not support instruments in questions e.g. like blasphemy law. They simply try to detach, sometimes willfully, Sharia law from Koran and Sunna as if later two are furthering just cause. Unfortunately, this view of falsehood on sharia is bought by main stream media and is passed on to its gullible readers. But irrefutable fact is that Sharia is explicitly based on Koran and Sunna. Some ordinary Muslim people might be ignorant about true Islamic history and what Islam teaches but those who write in media are just dissembling real motives of Islam and its followers.

As I stated earlier in the post that Mohammad ordered his followers to kill people who lampooned him by writing satirical poems; following are two such incidents (of course one can come up with many names, but the topic here is blapshemy that is why I am restricting myself.).

Case 1. 120 year old Jew, Abu Afak.
Abu Afak was one of the B. Amr b. Auf of the B. Ubayda clan. He showed his disaffection when the apostle killed al-Harith b. Suwayd b. Samit and said:........... (Ibn Ishaq mentions poem supposedly composed by Abu Afak, which I am not producing here.). The apostle said, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the "weepers", went forth and killed him. (The life of Mohammad, Ibn Ishaq, Page 675)
Ibn Sa’ad, see note below, also mentions this incident, in his work, but tries to reduce the blame of Mohammad by writing that he was instigating people against Islam and Prophet which is nothing but preposterous.
Then occurred the "sariyyah" (raid) of Salim Ibn Umayr al-Amri against Abu Afak, the Jew, in the month Shawwal in the beginning of the twentieth month from the hijrah, of the Apostle of Allah. Abu Afak, was from Banu Amr Ibn Awf, and was an old man who had attained the age of one hundred and twenty years. He was a Jew, and used to instigate the people against the Apostle of Allah, and composed (satirical) verses (on Mohammad).
Salim Ibn Umayr who was one of the great weepers and who had participated in Badr, said, "I take a vow that I shall either kill Abu Afak or die before him. He waited for an opportunity until a hot night came, and Abu Afak slept in an open place. Salim Ibn Umayr knew it, so he placed the sword on his liver and pressed it till it reached his bed. The enemy of Allah screamed and the people who were his followers, rushed to him, took him to his house and interred him. (, Kitab Al Tabaqat, Vol. 2, Ibn Sa’ad, Page 31)
Case 2: A woman, Asma Bint Marwan.
ASMA' D. MARWAN She was of B. Umayyya b. Zayd. When Abu `Afak had been killed she displayed disaffection. `Abdullah b. al-Harith b. Al-Fudayl from his father said that she was married to a man of B. Khatma called Yazid b. Zayd. Blaming Islam and its followers she said:......
When the apostle heard what she had said he said, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?" `Umayr b. `Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O `Umayr!" When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her", so `Umayr went back to his people. (The Life of Mohammad, Ibn Ishaq, Pages 675, 676)
Then (occurred) the sariyyah of `Umayr ibn `Adi Ibn Kharashah al-Khatmi against `Asma' Bint Marwan, of Banu Umayyah Ibn Zayd, when five nights had remained from the month of Ramadan, in the beginning of the nineteenth month from the hijrah of the apostle of Allah. `Asma' was the wife of Yazid Ibn Zayd Ibn Hisn al-Khatmi. She used to revile Islam, offend the prophet and instigate the (people) against him. She composed verses. Umayr Ibn Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind, and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her chest till it pierced up to her back. Then he offered the morning prayers with the prophet at al-Medina. The apostle of Allah said to him: "Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?" He said: "Yes. Is there something more for me to do?" He (Mohammad) said: "No. Two goats will butt together about her. This was the word that was first heard from the apostle of Allah. The apostle of Allah called him `Umayr, "basir" (the seeing).  (Al-Tabaqat, Vol. 2, Ibn Sa’ad, Page 31)
These are the earliest biographies of Prophet Mohammad. Many modern biographers also mention these but in a twisted way. But, In "23 Years; A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad", by an Iranian, Ali Dashti, (Mazda Press, 1994), Dashti also references the murders of Abu `Afak and `Asma' b. Marwan. He wrote:
Abu Afak, a man of great age (reputedly 120 years) was killed because he lampooned Mohammad. The deed was done by Salem b. 'Omayr at the behest of the Prophet, who had asked, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" The killing of such an old man moved a poetess, Asma b. Marwan, to compose disrespectful verses about the Prophet, and she too was assassinated. (page 100)
Prophet Ordering his people to kill those who criticize him points to his intolerance and intellectual bankruptcy that too when he claims he was sent as a mercy to entire mankind; yes, Koran says this. Other noteworthy thing from above passages is how he says that it (murdering those who criticize him) was for sake of Allah. Lets also recall that when he was in Mecca, he himself was abusing Pagans, their gods, their ways of life, their fore fathers and also how he refused to stop reviling Pagans and their customs when Meccans called for respecting all religions. One can easily see parallel in present day Islamic world after all, they all have learnt from their prophet. Prophet can abuse others but when others protest and wants an end to it, Muslims call it persecution. But when others abuse Islam, Islam authorizes that those people be killed for sake of Allah. Readers themselves can make the judgement on such ideology.

Further reading: Yet another Islamic scholar on Blasphemy law.  

Note 1: I referred to It is from here that I quoted Ibn sa'ad's work.
Note 2: The biographies I constantly refer to are:

1. Sirat Rasul Allah by Ibn Ishaq. This was translated in to English by A. Guilaume under the title The Life of Mohammad. It is this English translation I refer to by pointing page numbers.

2. Al-Tabari is another one I refer to, though not here in this post. He is easily considered as the greatest historian of all biographers. His work is Tarikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk or in short, Tarikh al-Tabari (In English, History of the Prophets and Kings). This was also translated in to English and it is from this translation one refers to.

3. Ibn Sa'ad wrote books under direction of Waqidi; he is popularly called scribe of Waqidi. The name of his work is is Kitab Tabaqat Al-Kubra. In short it is called Tabaqat. It was translated in to English under the title 'The Book Of Major Classes.'

Last two run in to many volumes (Ibn Sa'ad's in to 8 volumes while Tabari's in to 40 volumes.)

Another thing I must confess is I only own one book i.e. 'The Life of Mohammad' by Ibn Ishaq. But I point to other works as I have noted these references from various works.


dinopak said...

I am sorry but this law isn't Islamic at all
Go through this post.

The Mindset said...

Your research on Islam, the terror is really awesome. I have given a Blogroll Link to your blog from my blog.
Keep up the good work

admin said...


I went through your post and ridiculous things you have written there. It looks like your own brothers of Ummah are in disagreement with you.

What you wrote in your post is sly or ignorant.

Did you read my post? I guess not.

I already put up the verses supporting blasphemy law. In fact there are more in the same chapter.

I will put them here in detail for your own sake and later in blog itself; because I do not want people to get confused.

Other than verses, I showed two instances of Prophet ordering killing those who lampooned him.

In your blog, you state 2 or 3 examples where he had forgiven.

So we have some cases where he showed mercy (in your words) and some cases where he asked them to be killed. How do we resolve this?

WE come to this later. But lets look at verses 9:64-66 and 9:74.

.....Say: Go on mocking, surely Allah will bring forth what you fear. (Shakir; 9.64)

And if you should question them, they would certainly say: We were only idly discoursing and sporting. Say: Was it at Allah and His communications and His Messenger that you mocked? (Shakir; 9:65)

Do not make excuses; you have denied indeed after you had believed; if We pardon a party of you, We will chastise (another) party because they are guilty. (Shakir, 9:66)

....therefore if they repent, it will be good for them; and if they turn back, Allah will chastise them with a painful chastisement in this world and the hereafter, and they shall not have in the land any guardian or a helper. (Shakir; 9:74)

On which verse of these 4, you have doubts about punishment to blasphemy?

Verse 74 says punishment in this life and also in hereafter. Lets see the context behind this verse:

When Mohammad was on his way to wage war against Romans, Tabuk campaign, two brothers Julas and Harith decide to stay back in Medina and Julas said of MOhammad, "If this man is right we are worse than donkeys".

This was reported to Mohammad by one of Julas's relatives....Julas and Harith, cornered, denied that Julas had spoken the offending words, whereupon Allah revealed verse 74. And they repented.

(Rest of reply will be in next comment.)

admin said...

You mentioned that Mohammad forgave his former scribe; lets read from your sources: (Tabari; vol 8; pages 178 and 179)

Muhammad ordered that certain men should be assassinated even if they were found behind the curtains of the Ka'aba. Among them was Abdallah bin Sa'd. The reason that Allah’s Messenger ordered that he should be slain was because he had become a Muslim and used to write down Qur'an Revelation. Then he apostatized, reverted to being a polytheist, and returned to Mecca.

Abdallah bin Sa'd fled to Uthman, his brother, who after hiding him, finally surrendered him to the Prophet. Uthman asked for clemency. Muhammad did not respond, remaining silent for a long time. (Then he does reluctantly and they depart.)

Muhammad explained, 'By Allah, I kept silent so that one of you might go up to him and cut off his head.' One of the Ansar said, 'Why didn't you give me a sign.' Allah’s Apostle replied, 'A prophet does not kill by pointing.

Another case, where he kills a slave girl because she sung some satirical poems on Mohammad; you mentioned that her owner, Abdallah bin Khatal, was killed for murdering a slave neither for apostasy not blasphemy. Tabari mentions he was killed for apostasy.

But why did he kill the slave girl? Of course he forgave one of the two when she converted to Islam.But the other one, why? Lets read from your sources: (same page 179)

"The girls used to sing a satire about Muhammad so the Prophet ordered that they should be killed along with Abdullah." "Abdallah was killed by Sa'id and Abu Barzah. The two shared in his blood. One of the singing girls was killed quickly but the other fled. So Umar caused his horse to trample the one who fled at Abtah, killing her."

The list goes on. And you just mention half facts in your blog.

Tell me why he has to kill slave girls? They were doing what their master was telling; expecting to be treated fairly these innocent girls will only try their best to impress their master.

Your Mohammad has no heart and it is a shame that you are defending him. It looks like you have habit of rejecting all info. which shows your Prophet as murderous and accepting info. which show him as some what good or humane.

dinopak said...

Dear admin,

I guess you didn't really go through my post about blasphemy law.

I have clearly shown that the executions on the day of conquest were purely on the basis of the past activities which they did.

Ibn Khatal (the one which many Mullahs use) was executed solely for his MURDER of the slave.

It wasn't about blasphemy at all, you point out Qura'anic verses and yet you fail to mention where 'execution' is mentioned in there.

Muslims are not on the right path I agree but I am trying to preach what my religion and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) really is.

While you may continue your hateful propaganda, only truth will win.

Check out my posts on Christianity too, very shortly I am gonna cover Judaism too.

Peace be on you.

admin said...


I read your post and replied to you. OK, you do not have to read my whole post and comments, but you tell me why did Mohammad order those slave girls to be killed.

Muslims killed at least one of them. It is just one of many murders at the behest of your Prophet.

When you mention something, point out the sources like for Khatal being killed for murder and not apostasy.

It looks like I have to teach Islam to you.

Khatal killed a slave; so his punishment for killing a slave is not death penalty.

Forgot your law; free for free and slave for slave. (I think the verse number is 2:178.)

So, you are going to teach true Islam i.e. your Islam or the Islam you wanted it to be.

But this never existed in the past 1400 years and it is rejected by 99% of Muslims today.

But, I wish you all the best.

Even I want truth to win; looks like we both agree here.

Is this a hate site?

Then what is your Koran? It it not a book of hate and incitement to murder?

You can write on Christianity, Jews and Hindusim; it is your right.

admin said...


It looks like I forgot to reply to your comment on verses.

Yes, those verses do not say that blasphemers be executed.

But, Islam is not 'Koran only' affair. Laws come from what Prophet did and teach.

In this aspect of blasphemy, he pretty much set a standard.

Anonymous said...

Ibn Ishaq is know to be one of the most weakest of narrators in the history of Islam. His original biography of the Prophet is lost, and his hadith do not mention the isnad. Thus most of the sources you narrate are worng. furthermore Ibn Ishaq is known to have been friends with the Jew of the time.

admin said...

To above anonymous,

Sirat contains isnad. You say that it does not. Strange.

Some other Muslim says that isnad in Sirat is not reliable. Another Muslim says that isnad is broken. Any other varies I come across, I will let you know.

The most famous quotation from Muslims I come across is that this Koran is not original and many verses were added later. But you decide.

It is true that Ibn Ishaq's original work did not survive. It survived through works of Inn Hismam's and Al-Tabari's.

Translated version is from Ibn Hisham's but Guilaume gives credit to Ibn Ishaq rather than Hismam, why?

Because Ibn Hisham simply copied from Ibn Ishaq's surviving one and deleted many parts which bring bad name to your Prophet. He himself says this in his work.

Guilaume says that what is copied from actual Sirat can be distinguished from what Ibn Hisham added. The most popular one is introduction of flimsy reason for expelling Banu Qaynuqa.

I can just go on.

But anyway, 6 canonical Hadith too shed light on these incidents.

Tabari too mentions these incidents and you must know that he did independent work rather than just copying from Sirat.

Ibn Ishaq's friendship with Jews? Yeah, that is why he builds the case against Jews from beginning itself.

Anyway, now Jews are even being blamed for what Muslims have written on your religion 1200 years back?

Will Muslims ever stop blaming Jews for every thing that is faulty with themselves?

Anonymous said...

may be jews have added some verses to koran like mossad trained sharks to attack tourists, that too foreign tourists, on beaches of egypt.

dinopak said...

Dear admin,

Let me make it easy for you. The Hadith is something that 'IF' it makes common sense 'then and only then' it will be followed. You have to view Sunnah in the light of Qura'an, if it contradicts, then it is not reliable at all.

You mentioned earlier, a slave for slave a free for free. Let me tell you that the 'slave' was Muslim while Ibn-e-Khatal repented and 'joined the ranks of the enemy' His execution is both for murder and conspiracy/rebellion against the state.

Today, every government hangs the rebel or exile them from the state, if according to you it is wrong then I suppose you have to say your constitution is also based on 'Shariah law'

admin said...


It is good to see that you can change your view after reading.

But can you tell me where did you find that his killing was for both?

Can you tell me what was his so called crime against Medina apart from killing his slave?

Yet again, you are avoiding the question I asked: Why did Mohammad order that his (Khatal's)two slave girls be killed?

If you are not going to answer this then I consider that this discussion is closed.

Regarding Hadith, in some cases Sunna abrogated what Koran stated like Mutah marriage.

You can check your major sources of Islam and the way it was understood for past 1400 years.

Please do not come up with some superficial explanations.

The Mindset said...

Dear Admin,
You can use the following code for changing backgroound color :

<div style="background-color:#99CCFF;">

Type Text Here