Blasphamy in Islam [Muslim spirited responses ONLY please]

Zombrex

Given the recent coverage of people being charged in Pakistan for frankly ridiculous charges of blasphemy (including a man being investigated because the threw away a business card with the name Muhammad on it), can any Muslims here clear up what exactly is the standard mainstream position of blasphemy in Islam

I'm assuming what is happening in Pakistan isn't it since it is hard to see a religion surviving such harsh rules.

What is considered blasphemy, is it considered a crime and (if yes and yes) what is the punishment?

The Wikipedia page on blasphemy in Islam wasn't that helpful.

Thanks.

* I don't know if the Islamic forum has a Muslim spirited Only concept like on the Christian forum, so for anyone who doesn't know I'm not interested in discussing the Pakistan news, nor turning this into a rant about extremist Islam.

Jaafa

Well I think its really down to the individual muslim to decide whats is blasphemy.

I mean after the obvious 'dont use any of our holy names inappropriately' its becomes up to the person.

The problem in Islam is that its hard to find a universal answer to questions like these that apply to every muslim. For as may know there are Shia's and Sunnis...Kurds and Sufis. Each with their different interpretation of these less than fundamental rules of islam. (after the (5 pillars).

So to answer your question there is no 'mainstream position' as such.

hivizman

A problem with giving a clear statement of "the Islamic position on blasphemy" is that it is very closely tied up with the concept of "apostasy", where a Muslim is considered to have rejected Islam. Rejection of Islam was from an early date associated with rebellion against the Islamic state, and so matters that non-Muslims would consider mere disagreements over religious beliefs were interpreted as tantamount to treason, which hence merited the death penalty.

In principle, anything that could be construed as denying beliefs of Islam, or as insulting Allah, the Qur'an, Muhammad, his family, or any other prophet could be claimed as constituting blasphemy. This can lead to sectarian problems where the views of a particular sect are regarded as taking that sect outside Islam. For example, the Ahmadiyya, while accepting the Qur'anic description of Muhammad as the Seal of the Prophets, deny that this implies that Muhammad was the last and final prophet, with no subsequent prophet being possible. This is considered by many mainstream Muslims as blasphemous, as it is seen as diminishing the special position and esteem in which Muhammad is held.

Blasphemy becomes a particularly difficult concept when it is applied to acts, omissions or statements of non-Muslims. For example, the Qur'an suggests that Jesus was not crucified - is it therefore, from an Islamic point of view, blasphemous for Christians to state that Jesus was crucified? Does an atheist blaspheme through denying the existence of Allah?

The Pakistani law on blasphemy arguably takes things to extremes and provides many opportunities for oppressive behaviour. Although the law was originally mainly directed against the Ahmadiyya, it is also used arbitrarily against Muslims and non-Muslims alike. In theory, people accused of blasphemy should be provided with the opportunity of recanting and repenting, but this seems not to be the norm in Pakistan, where matters get tied up in what to non-Pakistani Muslims may appear strange notions of honour. "Insulting" someone who is alive can, in theory, be remedied through an apology, if the injured party accepts this. But as Muhammad is dead, he cannot accept an apology, so "insults" aimed at Muhammad become regarded as "unforgiveable" and hence must be avenged through punishing the offender.

Often, prosecutions for blasphemy are initiated out of bad faith, where personal gain is the main motive. In this, Pakistan is not unlike the Roman Empire at the time of Caligula, where Roman citizens were prosecuted for blasphemy, on the basis of informers' reports, for such "crimes" as taking a coin with an image of one of the Roman emperors (who were, according to the state religion, gods) into the latrine - the informers benefited from generous rewards taken from the wealth of the accused citizens. Maybe the drafters of the Pakistan blasphemy laws had received a British-style "classical" education.

craggles

Surely then an act of blasphemy would have to constitute apostasy, as the irreverance or insulting of the religion is tantamount to rejection of it?

hivizman

craggles wrote: »

Surely then an act of blasphemy would have to constitute apostasy, as the irreverance or insulting of the religion is tantamount to rejection of it?

You can only be an apostate from a religion which you have previously followed. So Salman Rushdie, born and brought up as a Muslim, was accused of apostasy following the publication of the allegedly blasphemous book The Satanic Verses. If I, as a non-Muslim, had written The Satanic Verses, I could be accused of blasphemy but not of apostasy from Islam.