Pakistan Blasphemy Laws , The West

Wadood

sunniport user
The West is after Pakistan, and its constitutional laws for religious blasphemy against Islam are in the spotlight.

Proof ? Look at this; she wins another Oscar. Eventually, she might come on to the topic of Blasphemy. Right now she was discussing honor killings, which are more prominent among indian hindu castes than Pakistan.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35690403

Unless, Sunnis become smarter in Pakistan, they are hammering their own foot. The wretched secular pakistanis are playing, as always, the victim card; that is, victim of Mullah rule and oppression. They are winning in their propaganda, and Pakistan's silent majority could be silenced by force. It doesn't matter if the country is 220 million strong. Religious circles are helpless in the face of current world politics.

This is because the general Pakistani awaam are more concerned about becoming a tiger economy;about dunya and progress. This economic pressure is extremely strong. Look at the environment of Pakistan. India, China, Iran etc are all developing. Pakistan cannot afford to be left behind. Sunnis must know this and play smarter. The good news is that Pakistanis, being overwhelmingly Sunni, are also concerned about Namoos e Risalat, no doubt. Therefore, Pakistanis being a diplomatic people, will try to reach a compromise. Thus, Sunnis should not be reactionary, and should be aware of all the desires of the Awaam. This is part of da'wat.

We need to keep the country religious and uphold Namoos e Risalat Shareef. Else, Malala Yusufzai, Geo, Dawn, and the Salman Taseer group will win.

Pakistani seculars are among the worst Muslim seculars i have ever seen. i shouldn't call them Muslims. Because, they are like ISIS khawarij jihadis. The are openly trying to reform Islam, even in religious dogma and jurisprudence. Many of them are genocidal, ultra capitalists, with few morals. In Turkey, the seculars largely stick to secularism, imposing it, but do not meddle in religious affairs.

Dr Tahir is also kind of a secularist, who is meddling in religion.
 
Last edited:
The wahabis do not support Sunnis or Mumtaz Qadiri Shaheed, because he is a Barelwi, a Sunni Sufi.

Taking advantage of the wahabi [ and their corresponding terrorist organizations ] apathy against Barelwis, the government carried out the hanging to make a show to the world. They knew wahabis would not react violently, and neither would the Sunni majority. President Mamnoon is the escape goat. For money anything can happen.
 
The wahabis do not support Sunnis or Mumtaz Qadiri Shaheed, because he is a Barelwi, a Sunni Sufi.

alHamdolillah, his shahadat has converted so many neutral & fence sitters, into good Sunnis. his shahadat has indeed injected a new life into mainstream Sunnism. he is alive, with Allah; may he live forever in our hearts too.
 
الحمد لله شكرًا والمن لله فضلاً
His shahadah has made the sunni's more stern
and the deviants more deviant.
Had a debate with a student on campus, it was rediculous how he was spitting the same foul play , "blasphmey" being an unjust , un-islamic, law and not applicable in this time; and he went to the extent to call belived Mumtaz , hell dweller. These are the "political" - muslims of america. It sickening to the stomoach.
 
Yet we have journalists making such remarks
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    458.5 KB · Views: 364
atabeck says

Again Abu Hanifa, and again rejecting the Hadeeth!!?

The Dhimmi (non-Muslim who lives under Muslim governer) who insults any of the prophets have to be killed accordingly to Malik, Shafei and Ahmad.
They have derived their opinion from some Hadeeths (see them in the comments).
Actually their school is mainly based on narrations that's why they are so quick to accept them, whereas Abu Hanifa doesn't hurry...

But Abu Hanifa as a usual rejects them and says; There is no death penalty for the Dhimmiy!

Obviously it doesn't mean that Abu Hanifa supports insulting the prophets, as other scholars support insulting the Mental and Sexual performance of the Prophets.
Both of course Abu Hanifa and Abu Mansur are tough and firm in their thought process. And consistency is one of the signs of correct analysis...

Then question; Why Abu hanifa doesn't accept the hadeeth about killing non-muslim who insults the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم?

The answer is very obvious;
Hadeeth is conflicting with Quran! (see it in the comments)

But as we know, unfortunately we have no any Hanafis now that's why we see all of that mess and bloodshed. I wish if there would be real Hanafis, you would feel safety and tranquillity, and Muslims would progress academically, mentally socially in many other fields...

Based on this we say that there was several errors;
1. The Pakistani Christian lady been sentenced for Death Penalty for insulting the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
2. Penjabi governor confirmed that there is no death penalty on her, and that was Hanafi position, but then group of people rebelling against him.
3. That guy killing this governor for him following the position of Abu Hanifah which is very well supported by quran and sunnah (in my understanding only Abu Hanifa was right in this issue)
4. This governor been oppressed and killed. My question to the ulema; If someone is killed for him supporting the truth (even if it is accordingly to Abu Hanifa) will he be illegible for the status of Shaheed ???

But, yes I understand that we are living in the time where Sha-Ma-Hanba-Lafiy Islam is presented as only the version of Islam.
I don't mind to have them as one of many other schools of Islam, but not as only schools of Islam.
We have Abu Hanifa, who's some of students are much more senior than Malik.
Let's see it in the comments...
 
Farnood Alam says

Case of Salman Taseer in the Court of Abu Hanifa (Translation of a brilliant article by Farnood Alam):

If you insist to argue on the basis of proof then here you go.
Salman Taseer made a statement that this law is black law. You have claimed that this statement is blasphemous, so this case will be put on trial in court.

Let's suppose that the Judge of the court is Imam Abu Hanifa.
Imam Abu Hanifa listened to the claims made by you and ordered that the accused be presented before the court.
Salman Taseer was brought before the court; Imam Abu Hanifa asked "Did you really say these words?"

Salman Taseer said: "Yes, I indeed said the same".
Abu Hanifa asked, "why did you say so?"
Salman Taseer said "Because people misuse these (blasphemy) laws".

Imam Abu Hanifa questioned him "How is it misused?"
Salman Taseer replied "People engage in personal conflicts and then all of a sudden one accuses the other of profane speech concerning Holy Prophet ﷺ and then prosecutes the person legally. Common public, without looking for any factual evidences show blind support to the accuser. The court is then pressurized by the public and one poor person loses his life."

Imam Abu Hanifa said "Do you have any proof for your claim?"
Salman Taseer said "Your honor! There are 56 Non Muslim countrymen imprisoned in the jails of Faisalabad alone. You can check their files to find what the actual issue is and for what they have been prosecuted. For instance, let's take the case of Aasia Bibi; firstly, she was wrongly accused; secondly, she apologized and made a public statement that she could never think of insulting the Holy Prophet. "

Imam Abu Hanifa calmly asked "Do you believe in the Prophet hood of Holy Prophet ﷺ?"
Before Salman Taseer could answer, a Sunni Hanafi stood up flaunting his turban and said "Imam Sahab, Aasiya Bibi,the "Gustakh" must be killed. She is an outright Gustakh without any pinch of doubt".

The court room was echoing with Hanafis shouting slogans "Gustakh e Rasool ki ek hi saza,sar tan se juda sar tan se juda!!"

Meanwhile, Imam Muhammad (Student of Imam Abu Haneefah) stood up to silence everyone and said "Idiotic emotional fools, you all don't even know that the punishment for a Non Muslim Gustakh is not death sentence in Hanfi Fiqh?"

All the Hanafi Muslims gave upsetting looks to each other and went to their seats fluttering their turbans in embarrassment.
Imam Abu Hanifa again questioned Salman Taseer "Do you believe in the Prophet hood of the Holy Prophet?"
He replied in affirmative.
Imam asked "Are you a Muslim?"
He said "Yes your honor! My father was the one who bore all the costs of the case of Ghazi Ilm ud Deen. "

Imam Abu Hanifa was about to say something when Salman Taseer interrupted and said "Shall I tell you about one more interesting thing?"
Imam said "Yes, go ahead"

"Few clerics/Maulvis in Karachi are involved in illegal land grabbing. They have built Minarets there and if the actual owners of those lands take any step to acquire their own lands, these Molvis accuse the real owners of blasphemy and prosecute them in court."

Imam Abu Hanifa remained silent for sometime and then said "Can you name few of such Molvis?"
Salman Taseer said "I don't remember such difficult names of those Molvis, Farnood Alam is sitting there in front, you may ask him."

I was petrified when Imam Abu Hanifa asked me to tell their names because I had seen the guard of Salman Taseer entering the court room. I gathered courage and said " I don't think I will be able to tell their names either but the leaders of Ansar ul Ummah and Tahreek e GhalbaIslam are involved in all this for sure".

Imam Abu Hanifa couldn't believe what I had just told, however, I managed to receive the title of enemy of Islam .
Now Imam Abu Hanifa turned towards Salman Taseer again and said "But these people here say that you have insulted the Holy Prophet ﷺ"

Salman Taseer said "No, definitely not"
Imam Abu Hanifa asked him " when you made the statement about the black law, did you clarify what you actually meant in detail?

Salman Taseer asked his secretary to show the interview he had given to BBC the very next day of making those statements.
The video was played in the court room in which Salman Taseer was shown explaining his stance in detail, proving his Iman and also the loopholes of the blasphemy laws.
The law is supposed to make judgement on that which is apparent and on the clarification of the accused.
Question is, after all the above clarifications by the accused, what decision will Imam Abu Hanifa take?

All those people who are creating a ruckus here must first do a sincere case study of the whole case, listen to the clarification of Salman Taseer and then they must do a case study of Aasia Bibi. If they correctly understand all the incidents, then they can come here. If they do not understand it then it is better for them to watch Madani channel than to spit on the clothes of a noble man.
 
post continues ..

They go for Qadi iyad because He is the most Strick person on this issue.


Hanafis are most lenient in matters of Blasphemy Law.

In Fiqh Hanafi, these 2 are agreed upon:
1. There is no capital Punishment for Non-Muslim.
2. There is no capital Punishment for Muslim Lady..

Regarding Muslim men:
- If we go by Usool, we will see that Capital Punishment cannot be established according to Abu Haneefah's view as it is proven by singular narration (not Quran) and singular narrations cannot establish Hudood especially those which involves taking lives.

- If we go by weak proofs and emotions, unfortunately, which we do, then the Ruling is your head should not be with your shoulder :))
 
btw, a fact correction lincoln's 7 million funeral is because it was put on a train. according to wiki:
The train passed 444 communities in 7 states (Lincoln was not viewed in state in the state of New Jersey).
see here.
 
anyway, the minhaji's point is valid that ONLY the janazah does not signify that he was right. because when his shaykh tahir dies, droves of minhajis may turn up and they may point this out. we concede that merely huge janazah attendance doesn't mean on haq.

but still, look at the support mumtaz qadri received has received from sunnis.

whatever the facts of the case, the blasphemer should be put to death by authorities.

---
concerning his question that why didn't muslims in the west support charlie hebdo's killers. that was because the countries they live in are not muslim countries and their apathy or even belligerence for muslims sentiments is expected. as tahir's interviewer on danish tv mentioned, blasphemy laws are made obsolete in the west - not to mention that those laws mainly were about christianity. however, that the scoundrels of hebdo were killed and dispatched to hell (in-sha'Allah) is not regretted. good riddance and and they are getting their just desserts. as these were not islamic countries, muslims remained distanced from hebdo killers. which is fine.

pakistan, however, is an islamic country. the law should favour muslims, and where was the need to hang mumtaz in such a hurry? when two white american spies killed two pakistanis on the roadside in broad daylight, they were caught but sent to america, where they live as free men.

besides, everyone agrees that mumtaz killed taseer only for blasphemy. he had no other interest nor personal grudge nor was he paid by anyone to do so. salman taseer was no saint. even if you assume that mumtaz made a mistake, then after all he just killed a profligate man. pay blood money and get over it. why then don't your western sensibilities feel hurt? just because a brown muslim was hanged? why not talk about capital punishment in this case? why the zeal to hang him?

what stopped the president from pardoning mumtaz qadri, even if he was found by the court guilty as charged?

filthy hypocrites.
 
Last edited:
sadly the argument "they" use is to say pakistan was never a muslim country, and never founded on islam rather secular views. Also, the blasphmey law was introduced 30 years after creation pakistan by the wahabi president (for get his name).

Clearly the young may be sincere in their reasoning, yet fail to realize, the binding of the law in the religion. It application may not be done in all fairness in this day in age , does not mean it is to be rejected.
 
Back
Top