What Constitutes Blasphemy?
Chowk P Room January 31, 2001
#161 Posted by ahmadb on February 3, 2001 4:21:55 am
In response to SameerJB (Reply # 154)
Dear SameerJB:
A conspiracy cannot be disregarded. Until recently, I was a regular visitor of the Frontier Post (in 1999, I had published some twenty or so letters and a couple of articles in it). I understand, the Frontier Post had a relatively open policy of free expression. For example, it published letters sent by the Indian contributors against the Kargil fiasco. And, people like Abid Ullah Jan in favor of the Taliban regime and against those who were opposed to the killing of Samia Sarwar (honor killing).
It is plausible that the drug trafficking case against Rahmat Afridi, the owner and managing editor of the Frontier Post and Maidan, is as politically-grounded and concocted as several other cases. Rahmat Afridi was arrested in Lahore, when the police found drug in the trunk of his car, and he (to my understanding) is in a Pakistani jail.
Did you see Farhatullah Baber’s piece (see Reply # 126)?
Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad
Dear SameerJB:
A conspiracy cannot be disregarded. Until recently, I was a regular visitor of the Frontier Post (in 1999, I had published some twenty or so letters and a couple of articles in it). I understand, the Frontier Post had a relatively open policy of free expression. For example, it published letters sent by the Indian contributors against the Kargil fiasco. And, people like Abid Ullah Jan in favor of the Taliban regime and against those who were opposed to the killing of Samia Sarwar (honor killing).
It is plausible that the drug trafficking case against Rahmat Afridi, the owner and managing editor of the Frontier Post and Maidan, is as politically-grounded and concocted as several other cases. Rahmat Afridi was arrested in Lahore, when the police found drug in the trunk of his car, and he (to my understanding) is in a Pakistani jail.
Did you see Farhatullah Baber’s piece (see Reply # 126)?
Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#162 Posted by MZaidi on February 3, 2001 10:08:52 am
tahmed321 #150 & adnan_672 #148
I already responded in an earlier post to tahmed`s references to the Quran--which I will again refer to, as vociferously as ever, as references that are inappropriate and out of context.
As far as scholarly guidance viz. interpretation, I even tried helping tahmed with that.
I will quote from the Quran again:
Surah No. 5: Al-Maaida
Ayah 33. ``The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.``
I do not condone the mob behavior of vandals and arsonists. There can be no vigilante justice in a well-governed society.
And I do leave the ultimate judgement of those who are liable for the Frontier Post letter to Allah.
But the tired rhetoric of an oft-confused psuedo-liberal doctrine and its self-aggrandizing mouthpeices has a severely limited attention span.
True. That laws in Pakistan, particularly the Qisas, Diyat, and Hudd (Hudood), as well as Blasphemy Laws, are broad and vague in their specifications, allowing for frequent abuse by right wing zealots with agendas that have less to do with Islam, and more with the emancipation of a primitive and irrational mode of life.
Truer still. That Pakistan`s system of justice leaves much to be desired in large part because it is governed by self-serving and destructive forces such as the neo-facist center/right-wing coalitions of the Punjab, or the still bleeding from their lips Jiyalas from Larkana.
Does that translate into a necessity that redefines the truth?
I think not.
Tahmed has constantly been referring to the Quran and to the idea of empowerment through learning about Islamic law from the original source.
This is the second presentation of one ayat from the Quran. I do not claim that it is necessarily applicable to this situation, but I would love to see someone argue contrary to that.
The fact of the matter is that there are some people to whom the call to the truth--and I emphasize my intent to NOT accuse or blame anyone in particular for this--but indeed, there are some people, to whom a call to the truth is useless.
A sincere assessment of the Quran, and its spirit, as well as due attention to the Shariah and the Hadith, are more than sufficient for anyone with an open mind and clean heart to understand that while Islam is an enormously compassionate way of life, it is not, has never been, and will never be a way of life that can be twisted to suit other ideologies.
Islam is complete and whole in every way.
The ideas of freedom of expression, and capitalism. The ideas of utilitarianism, democracy or of cultural relativism, among many others, are noble, in that they deconstruct social and political phenomena into the most basic elements and provide reasonable ways to deal with them, analyse them, and work in or around them.
But just because someone is taken by the idea that people should enjoy the liberty of saying what they want to say, whenever and however they want to say it--and is at the same time someone who is a Muslim--does not mean that Islam endorses those ideas.
Men and women who embrace Islam understand that it is they who must make concessions, compromises and adjustments to Islam. Not the other way around.
Islam is not your television set. You cannot change the channel just because you don`t like what`s on.
Life in post-modern 2001 is an intellectually harsh place to live in. There is a fundamental disconnect between the dominant global mode of production, global demographic realities, and the values that are inherent to Islam, and frankly to the vast majority of world religions.
Many obscure movements to ``modernize`` religion have tried, and consistently failed to garner a significant enough response to this disconnect, indeed this chasm.
But this is a chasm that people who choose religion must live with.
If the so-called great religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) claim that Adam was the first man, and Dr. Darwin claims that there was no first man, because man was a gradual state that came to be through the twists and turns of mutation and natural evolution, then there is a fundamental problem that science students of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths face.
To embrace the logic of Dr. Darwin, or to embrace the fluidity of ancient scripture? Boo hoo. What a dilemma.
Deal with it.
I don`t suggest that the two are mutually exclusive. On the contrary, Muslims are supposed to be well-adjusted, and contributing members of a robust and dynamic society. But it is Allah, who gets to set the terms and call the shots. Not you.
Religion`s not supposed to be easy. The whole notion is that if you suffer in this life, you get to go to Heavan (sans suffering) in the life hereafter. This isn`t a trip to Disneyland.
MZaidi
I already responded in an earlier post to tahmed`s references to the Quran--which I will again refer to, as vociferously as ever, as references that are inappropriate and out of context.
As far as scholarly guidance viz. interpretation, I even tried helping tahmed with that.
I will quote from the Quran again:
Surah No. 5: Al-Maaida
Ayah 33. ``The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.``
I do not condone the mob behavior of vandals and arsonists. There can be no vigilante justice in a well-governed society.
And I do leave the ultimate judgement of those who are liable for the Frontier Post letter to Allah.
But the tired rhetoric of an oft-confused psuedo-liberal doctrine and its self-aggrandizing mouthpeices has a severely limited attention span.
True. That laws in Pakistan, particularly the Qisas, Diyat, and Hudd (Hudood), as well as Blasphemy Laws, are broad and vague in their specifications, allowing for frequent abuse by right wing zealots with agendas that have less to do with Islam, and more with the emancipation of a primitive and irrational mode of life.
Truer still. That Pakistan`s system of justice leaves much to be desired in large part because it is governed by self-serving and destructive forces such as the neo-facist center/right-wing coalitions of the Punjab, or the still bleeding from their lips Jiyalas from Larkana.
Does that translate into a necessity that redefines the truth?
I think not.
Tahmed has constantly been referring to the Quran and to the idea of empowerment through learning about Islamic law from the original source.
This is the second presentation of one ayat from the Quran. I do not claim that it is necessarily applicable to this situation, but I would love to see someone argue contrary to that.
The fact of the matter is that there are some people to whom the call to the truth--and I emphasize my intent to NOT accuse or blame anyone in particular for this--but indeed, there are some people, to whom a call to the truth is useless.
A sincere assessment of the Quran, and its spirit, as well as due attention to the Shariah and the Hadith, are more than sufficient for anyone with an open mind and clean heart to understand that while Islam is an enormously compassionate way of life, it is not, has never been, and will never be a way of life that can be twisted to suit other ideologies.
Islam is complete and whole in every way.
The ideas of freedom of expression, and capitalism. The ideas of utilitarianism, democracy or of cultural relativism, among many others, are noble, in that they deconstruct social and political phenomena into the most basic elements and provide reasonable ways to deal with them, analyse them, and work in or around them.
But just because someone is taken by the idea that people should enjoy the liberty of saying what they want to say, whenever and however they want to say it--and is at the same time someone who is a Muslim--does not mean that Islam endorses those ideas.
Men and women who embrace Islam understand that it is they who must make concessions, compromises and adjustments to Islam. Not the other way around.
Islam is not your television set. You cannot change the channel just because you don`t like what`s on.
Life in post-modern 2001 is an intellectually harsh place to live in. There is a fundamental disconnect between the dominant global mode of production, global demographic realities, and the values that are inherent to Islam, and frankly to the vast majority of world religions.
Many obscure movements to ``modernize`` religion have tried, and consistently failed to garner a significant enough response to this disconnect, indeed this chasm.
But this is a chasm that people who choose religion must live with.
If the so-called great religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) claim that Adam was the first man, and Dr. Darwin claims that there was no first man, because man was a gradual state that came to be through the twists and turns of mutation and natural evolution, then there is a fundamental problem that science students of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths face.
To embrace the logic of Dr. Darwin, or to embrace the fluidity of ancient scripture? Boo hoo. What a dilemma.
Deal with it.
I don`t suggest that the two are mutually exclusive. On the contrary, Muslims are supposed to be well-adjusted, and contributing members of a robust and dynamic society. But it is Allah, who gets to set the terms and call the shots. Not you.
Religion`s not supposed to be easy. The whole notion is that if you suffer in this life, you get to go to Heavan (sans suffering) in the life hereafter. This isn`t a trip to Disneyland.
MZaidi
#163 Posted by sigalph235 on February 3, 2001 10:08:52 am
re krashid
``So whether Prophat PBUH is a property of Muslim or not. He is in such high esteem for us that we defend it more than our life, honor and whatnot.``
Please feel free to. Just make sure it is YOUR life, honor and whatnot you are putting on line, rather than someone else`s.
The FP incident showed amply that some folks were quite content risking OTHER people`s lives, honor and property to defend the Prophet`s (PBUH) name.
re adnan
You have just committed blasphemy by claiming that Muhammad (SAW) was a LAWGIVER. Under Islamic jurisprudence, the only competent LAWGIVER is Allah ta`ala Himself. Muhammad (SAW), was but a messenger.
Just goes to show how tricky, slippery, and utterly nonsense is this bandwagon of blasphemy laws.
Pax
``So whether Prophat PBUH is a property of Muslim or not. He is in such high esteem for us that we defend it more than our life, honor and whatnot.``
Please feel free to. Just make sure it is YOUR life, honor and whatnot you are putting on line, rather than someone else`s.
The FP incident showed amply that some folks were quite content risking OTHER people`s lives, honor and property to defend the Prophet`s (PBUH) name.
re adnan
You have just committed blasphemy by claiming that Muhammad (SAW) was a LAWGIVER. Under Islamic jurisprudence, the only competent LAWGIVER is Allah ta`ala Himself. Muhammad (SAW), was but a messenger.
Just goes to show how tricky, slippery, and utterly nonsense is this bandwagon of blasphemy laws.
Pax
#164 Posted by sattar2 on February 3, 2001 10:08:52 am
I am an Ahmadi-Muslim (aka Qadiani by some) and here are some of my thoughts regarding the matter at hand.
I believe Islam to be the culmination of religious evolution. Allah Almighty has sent Law and Prophets for the guidance of the mankind throughout the ages. This Law has been perfected in its final form, the Quran, which is meant to provide guidance to the believers till the hereafter.
The Law of Quran was revealed through an equally perfect, pure human being, Prophet Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon him), whose status is higher than that of any prophet, ever. He was a living embodiment of Islam. He put into practice the word of God, and set stellar examples for the believers.
Islam teaches peace and compassion. It provides for the followers the code for spiritual ascension and path to achieve nearness to Allah. Teachings of various religions (not only Islam, but also Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and more), the lives of prophets and the messages they brought to their people, the beauties of Quran (and other scriptures as well) have convinced me about the validity of Islam and authenticity of Quran. I am not a scholar in these matters, but whatever little I have read, and even lesser that I have understood, has convinced me that there is a method to this madness after all. Nature does not play Russian Roulette. There indeed is a Supreme Being Who is the All-Powerful Creator of the worlds - One Who is Gracious, Merciful, and the Master of the Day of Judgement.
I may draw varying levels of criticism from some readers for my belief (esp. from those with so-called ``liberal`` bent). But that`s life. People have the right to their opinions, and I am entitled to mine. Hopefully differences in opinion can be discussed and pondered over in a thoughtful, peaceful manner. After that every person has to live his own life. Different strokes for different folks. Only Allah can truly judge a person`s thoughts and actions.
In my opinion, present day Muslim-world has deviated from the teachings of Islam. The main-stream “keepers of faith`` (the so-called ``jamaati`` or ``talibaan`` type, for lack of a better word) seem to have forgotten the message of peace and compassion that was conveyed and practiced by the Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him). Verses from Quran are often mis-quoted to lend credence to acts of violence and oppression. This is in stark contrast to the examples set by Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him). Him and his companions bore the atrocities (this included severe physical torture) at the hands of Meccans without retaliating. Their only response was praying to Allah, practicing patience and perseverance, begging Allah Almighty for forgiveness for the enemies. Later on, on one occasion, the beloved Prophet even led “namaz-e-janazza” (funeral prayer) of one of his most bitter enemies and prayed for his forgiveness, despite protests from some of his (i.e. Prophet’s) close companions. Despite being in high positions, he never ceased to worry about the welfare of the people. On one occasion stones were pelted at him, causing him to bleed so much that his shoe got filled with his own blood. Even then he only had words of kindness for his enemies. Such are the examples set by our beloved Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him). This is how spiritual progress is made, such is the behavior that makes a person dear to Allah Almighty: extreme love for your fellow men, compassion that knows no bounds; when unbearable pain is inflicted upon one, forgiving the enemy, compromising one’s ego, and praying for well-being of the enemy. This is how hearts are won and blood-thirsty enemies are turned into loving brethren. This is how a person is reformed and attains perfection. Life history of our beloved Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is full of such examples. No wonder he is called “Rehmat-ul-Alameen” (Blessings for all the worlds).
The “Frontier Post” incident is an unfortunate one. It is unfortunate that this letter slipped through and got published. I glanced over the contents of the letter and found the material to be offensive and in poor taste. Whether this was a conspiracy or an error, is anybody’s guess. I do not mind a balanced approach to criticism, even criticism of Islam, as long as it is done with a sincere mindset. But this letter seemed to have been written with the intent of offending the “believing” reader. It twisted facts to make them fit the author’s hateful notions. It was in poor taste and lacked sound judgment.
The reaction of the protesters (from what I have ascertained by reading various posts) is also an unfortunate one. Being hurt by the contents of the letter is understandable, rather expected, of a believing person. But setting the press/building on fire is an uncivilized way of dealing with this anger. What is worse is that it may destroy the lives of completely innocent people, who happened to get caught in this whirlwind. Ironically Islam does not permit this type of reaction in dealing with blasphemy. In several places in Quran the issue of blasphemy is discussed (4:140 and 6:68). In these verses the believers are commanded not to keep company with people who ridicule the Signs of Allah, for as long as this ridicule continues. In the light of Quranic teachings and the examples set by Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him), appropriate responses would have been to protest and/or bycott the paper; to counter the arguments by publishing well-researched responses; and to take the opportunity to shed light on the immaculate character of the beloved Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the beauties of Quran! Sincere efforts combined with earnest prayer will not doubt bear fruits. It will replace hatred with love and respect for Islam in the hearts of others. This would be a lot of work and would require patience and time, but would pale in comparison to what the prophets went through to reform their respective nations throughout the course of history. We would follow the examples of such prophets, if indeed we were driven by our affection for them.
As for the blasphemy laws in Pakistan, (esp. sections directed towards Ahmadi-Muslims [see post #68]) …. it’s a joke. But that’s a whole another issue.
Re #129:
Naqshbandi Sahib …. I am curious about something you wrote in your response. When Hazrat Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him) offered to kill his mother for insulting the Prophet, what was the Prophet’s response? Your response will be much appreciated.
Regards,
Asad
San Jose CA
I believe Islam to be the culmination of religious evolution. Allah Almighty has sent Law and Prophets for the guidance of the mankind throughout the ages. This Law has been perfected in its final form, the Quran, which is meant to provide guidance to the believers till the hereafter.
The Law of Quran was revealed through an equally perfect, pure human being, Prophet Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon him), whose status is higher than that of any prophet, ever. He was a living embodiment of Islam. He put into practice the word of God, and set stellar examples for the believers.
Islam teaches peace and compassion. It provides for the followers the code for spiritual ascension and path to achieve nearness to Allah. Teachings of various religions (not only Islam, but also Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and more), the lives of prophets and the messages they brought to their people, the beauties of Quran (and other scriptures as well) have convinced me about the validity of Islam and authenticity of Quran. I am not a scholar in these matters, but whatever little I have read, and even lesser that I have understood, has convinced me that there is a method to this madness after all. Nature does not play Russian Roulette. There indeed is a Supreme Being Who is the All-Powerful Creator of the worlds - One Who is Gracious, Merciful, and the Master of the Day of Judgement.
I may draw varying levels of criticism from some readers for my belief (esp. from those with so-called ``liberal`` bent). But that`s life. People have the right to their opinions, and I am entitled to mine. Hopefully differences in opinion can be discussed and pondered over in a thoughtful, peaceful manner. After that every person has to live his own life. Different strokes for different folks. Only Allah can truly judge a person`s thoughts and actions.
In my opinion, present day Muslim-world has deviated from the teachings of Islam. The main-stream “keepers of faith`` (the so-called ``jamaati`` or ``talibaan`` type, for lack of a better word) seem to have forgotten the message of peace and compassion that was conveyed and practiced by the Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him). Verses from Quran are often mis-quoted to lend credence to acts of violence and oppression. This is in stark contrast to the examples set by Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him). Him and his companions bore the atrocities (this included severe physical torture) at the hands of Meccans without retaliating. Their only response was praying to Allah, practicing patience and perseverance, begging Allah Almighty for forgiveness for the enemies. Later on, on one occasion, the beloved Prophet even led “namaz-e-janazza” (funeral prayer) of one of his most bitter enemies and prayed for his forgiveness, despite protests from some of his (i.e. Prophet’s) close companions. Despite being in high positions, he never ceased to worry about the welfare of the people. On one occasion stones were pelted at him, causing him to bleed so much that his shoe got filled with his own blood. Even then he only had words of kindness for his enemies. Such are the examples set by our beloved Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him). This is how spiritual progress is made, such is the behavior that makes a person dear to Allah Almighty: extreme love for your fellow men, compassion that knows no bounds; when unbearable pain is inflicted upon one, forgiving the enemy, compromising one’s ego, and praying for well-being of the enemy. This is how hearts are won and blood-thirsty enemies are turned into loving brethren. This is how a person is reformed and attains perfection. Life history of our beloved Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is full of such examples. No wonder he is called “Rehmat-ul-Alameen” (Blessings for all the worlds).
The “Frontier Post” incident is an unfortunate one. It is unfortunate that this letter slipped through and got published. I glanced over the contents of the letter and found the material to be offensive and in poor taste. Whether this was a conspiracy or an error, is anybody’s guess. I do not mind a balanced approach to criticism, even criticism of Islam, as long as it is done with a sincere mindset. But this letter seemed to have been written with the intent of offending the “believing” reader. It twisted facts to make them fit the author’s hateful notions. It was in poor taste and lacked sound judgment.
The reaction of the protesters (from what I have ascertained by reading various posts) is also an unfortunate one. Being hurt by the contents of the letter is understandable, rather expected, of a believing person. But setting the press/building on fire is an uncivilized way of dealing with this anger. What is worse is that it may destroy the lives of completely innocent people, who happened to get caught in this whirlwind. Ironically Islam does not permit this type of reaction in dealing with blasphemy. In several places in Quran the issue of blasphemy is discussed (4:140 and 6:68). In these verses the believers are commanded not to keep company with people who ridicule the Signs of Allah, for as long as this ridicule continues. In the light of Quranic teachings and the examples set by Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him), appropriate responses would have been to protest and/or bycott the paper; to counter the arguments by publishing well-researched responses; and to take the opportunity to shed light on the immaculate character of the beloved Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the beauties of Quran! Sincere efforts combined with earnest prayer will not doubt bear fruits. It will replace hatred with love and respect for Islam in the hearts of others. This would be a lot of work and would require patience and time, but would pale in comparison to what the prophets went through to reform their respective nations throughout the course of history. We would follow the examples of such prophets, if indeed we were driven by our affection for them.
As for the blasphemy laws in Pakistan, (esp. sections directed towards Ahmadi-Muslims [see post #68]) …. it’s a joke. But that’s a whole another issue.
Re #129:
Naqshbandi Sahib …. I am curious about something you wrote in your response. When Hazrat Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him) offered to kill his mother for insulting the Prophet, what was the Prophet’s response? Your response will be much appreciated.
Regards,
Asad
San Jose CA
#165 Posted by PM on February 3, 2001 10:08:52 am
krashid:
``And that is why christians are not promised Ghulaman because in whites the most common mode of transmission of AIDS is homosexuality``
Aww shucks!! Ans all this time I was thinking that, ahl-e-kitab and all, I`d have my fair share of ghulamans and fair-skinned houris. What a dissapointment!! :(
On the other, `hearsay` matter, buddy, I`m telling you once again... you really don`t want me to point out some ahadiths for your edification.
(ok ok, and I`m really don`t want to have to go through the trouble of finding them either)
stay cool! Waisay bhi lagtay hai ke kissi bhi waqt chowk ka spontaneous combustion ka khatra hai.
PM
``And that is why christians are not promised Ghulaman because in whites the most common mode of transmission of AIDS is homosexuality``
Aww shucks!! Ans all this time I was thinking that, ahl-e-kitab and all, I`d have my fair share of ghulamans and fair-skinned houris. What a dissapointment!! :(
On the other, `hearsay` matter, buddy, I`m telling you once again... you really don`t want me to point out some ahadiths for your edification.
(ok ok, and I`m really don`t want to have to go through the trouble of finding them either)
stay cool! Waisay bhi lagtay hai ke kissi bhi waqt chowk ka spontaneous combustion ka khatra hai.
PM
#166 Posted by Yme on February 3, 2001 10:08:52 am
Lets get a proper perspective on this issue.
Some interactors here would be good subjects of the kingdom of Pharoas(Firaon if you will). If the almighty God had said(read Mr firaon)any one negating my almightiness and my absolute power over heaven and earth shall be put to death immediately, you guyes would have been the first in line to say ammana wa sadaqna and would have been enforcers of his will, and I have no doubt would have won kudos from your almighty God,you would have trampled on a lot of people who dared to suggest otherwise.
Please substitute firaon for mohammad in the letter and see how it sounds.You will see you are making the same mistake, you are putting a mere mortal on a fantastic pedestal.
Mohammad was a public figure His life,his works, and sayings ascribed to him have got to be debated in public forums. What is blasphemy to you may be a perfectly legitimate gripe against him by some one else that is a part and parcel of being in a public arena.
As for the letter(if the one touted here is the real thing)I for one don`t see any blasphemy in it, it may be a bit unflattering to him but hey if he can`t even take that much heat he ought to get out of the kitchen.
Some interactors here would be good subjects of the kingdom of Pharoas(Firaon if you will). If the almighty God had said(read Mr firaon)any one negating my almightiness and my absolute power over heaven and earth shall be put to death immediately, you guyes would have been the first in line to say ammana wa sadaqna and would have been enforcers of his will, and I have no doubt would have won kudos from your almighty God,you would have trampled on a lot of people who dared to suggest otherwise.
Please substitute firaon for mohammad in the letter and see how it sounds.You will see you are making the same mistake, you are putting a mere mortal on a fantastic pedestal.
Mohammad was a public figure His life,his works, and sayings ascribed to him have got to be debated in public forums. What is blasphemy to you may be a perfectly legitimate gripe against him by some one else that is a part and parcel of being in a public arena.
As for the letter(if the one touted here is the real thing)I for one don`t see any blasphemy in it, it may be a bit unflattering to him but hey if he can`t even take that much heat he ought to get out of the kitchen.
#167 Posted by tahmed321 on February 3, 2001 10:08:52 am
adnan #153 aoa
You write ``the prophet (SAW) was a LAW GIVER as well...basic flaw in ur thinking as i see it``
Dear Adnan,
I think the Quran is crystal clear and firm on this point: the Prophet is God`s Messenger and no more. He does not have the mandate from God to come up with his own rules.
In practice of course the Prophet was accepted as the leader of the muslims as well. But this authority was derived from the high regard with which the muslims of the time held him, not because of any authority vested by Allah. In other words, his authority derived from the voice of the people, not from the Word of God. This authority is entirely consistent with his role as a Prophet, since there is nothing in the Quran that says that the people cannot elect a leader of their choice. And certainly the Quran is very clear that there is no individual to whom the role of Messenger of God after the Prophet`s passes away. We have to take this point very seriously because there are constant attempts made in Pakistan by misguided individuals to use Islam to become dictators.
As for the books you recommend, I wish I had time to read them: trouble is, I dont think they are worth the time I do have since I believe as a muslim I should take my guidance on matters concerning Islam first and foremost from the Quran and not from the words of any man; and on other matters (science, technology, history, and so forth which I also like to read), these people have nothing to contribute anyway. Perhaps some day I may read them out of curiosity, but not as a supplement to the Quran by any means but as the views of individuals who are in no better position than I am (or indeed any other person is) to interpret the Word of God.
You also write: ``but u must be ready to tolerate other opinions...u seem bugged if someone differs``
I am aware that I speak a bit bluntly to people on what I consider are important issues for us in Pakistan - this is deliberate since I think clarity is more important than a gentle tone on important issues. However, I will remember your good advice, since it is better where possible to be clear and gentle at the same time, as you have shown by example in your posts.
You write ``the prophet (SAW) was a LAW GIVER as well...basic flaw in ur thinking as i see it``
Dear Adnan,
I think the Quran is crystal clear and firm on this point: the Prophet is God`s Messenger and no more. He does not have the mandate from God to come up with his own rules.
In practice of course the Prophet was accepted as the leader of the muslims as well. But this authority was derived from the high regard with which the muslims of the time held him, not because of any authority vested by Allah. In other words, his authority derived from the voice of the people, not from the Word of God. This authority is entirely consistent with his role as a Prophet, since there is nothing in the Quran that says that the people cannot elect a leader of their choice. And certainly the Quran is very clear that there is no individual to whom the role of Messenger of God after the Prophet`s passes away. We have to take this point very seriously because there are constant attempts made in Pakistan by misguided individuals to use Islam to become dictators.
As for the books you recommend, I wish I had time to read them: trouble is, I dont think they are worth the time I do have since I believe as a muslim I should take my guidance on matters concerning Islam first and foremost from the Quran and not from the words of any man; and on other matters (science, technology, history, and so forth which I also like to read), these people have nothing to contribute anyway. Perhaps some day I may read them out of curiosity, but not as a supplement to the Quran by any means but as the views of individuals who are in no better position than I am (or indeed any other person is) to interpret the Word of God.
You also write: ``but u must be ready to tolerate other opinions...u seem bugged if someone differs``
I am aware that I speak a bit bluntly to people on what I consider are important issues for us in Pakistan - this is deliberate since I think clarity is more important than a gentle tone on important issues. However, I will remember your good advice, since it is better where possible to be clear and gentle at the same time, as you have shown by example in your posts.
#168 Posted by vishal on February 3, 2001 11:59:28 am
POOR FRONTIER POST
AB tera kya hoga re editor.tune prophet ke bare me bola.Tujhe to bas ab RAM hi bacha sakta hai.India bhag aa.
AB tera kya hoga re editor.tune prophet ke bare me bola.Tujhe to bas ab RAM hi bacha sakta hai.India bhag aa.
#169 Posted by SameerJB on February 3, 2001 11:59:28 am
Bilal Ahmad #162: I agree with Farhat Ullah Babar article which you posted in reply #126. A case for blasphemy is difficult to built against FP staff. It may be a more of a case of negligence which should have been dealt with the dismissal of editorial staff by FP management. I am also very familiar with the case of the bookshop in Super Market Islamabad, mentioned in Farhat Ullah Babar`s article. I personally know the owner of that bookshop and there is absolutely no reason for him to be intentionally involved in any act of blasphemy.
I understand that publishing such material hurts public feeling with absolutely no gain. But hurt feeling should not translate into anger and rage and the resulting loss of an enterprise who was employing a number of people. Such outrageous acts might deter other publications being more responsible but the much bigger danger is a lawlessness and mob rule. The behavior of acting above the law in matters of so-called ``defense of religion`` and no cases being filed against the people taking part in the destruction of FP press do not help the cause of a just and responsible society.
I understand that publishing such material hurts public feeling with absolutely no gain. But hurt feeling should not translate into anger and rage and the resulting loss of an enterprise who was employing a number of people. Such outrageous acts might deter other publications being more responsible but the much bigger danger is a lawlessness and mob rule. The behavior of acting above the law in matters of so-called ``defense of religion`` and no cases being filed against the people taking part in the destruction of FP press do not help the cause of a just and responsible society.
#170 Posted by mo2000 on February 3, 2001 11:59:28 am
It is sad thing to know that in our country this thugs and common misfits damage and burn the private property. This is not lone incident. Few months back a prominent religious scholor was murdered by criminals. Then some criminals attacked and burnt a financial news paper in Karachi. This newspaper had not done anything to make this mob angree. What I find very sad is instead of arresting the attackers they arrested publishers.
About blasphemy
Either you are free or slave. Its like no one is partially pregnant. It is my opinion that free societies are rich and resilient. Closed societies will never progress beyond certain limits.People should have right say and write what they feel provided they do not act. USA is good example. KKK is allowed in fact law enforcement authorities make sure they can express their thinking and they are protected. They are not allowed to act on their fantasies. See how USA is advancing and all religious and super religious muslims want to have their sons migrate to usa or want to find son-in-law from usa.All pakistanis should have right to express as they please and it is duty of Govt. to provide law and order.
Some people think that it will be difficult for govt. This is not true. In our country democratically elected govt.s are dismissed and army takes over on regular basis. Nothing happens, life goes normal. Religious parties have never gathered more than 4 to 5% votes. Sindhi primeminister was hanged even 2 dozen people did not protest. All sindhi nation cried and buried their son of soil but no one dared to do any thing.This fear of religious parties is raised and encouraged by army to put fear in minds of people.We have so many mosques in Karachi from Mohalla to Mohalla but on friday prayers they are empty nobody bothers. This law is unlawful and needs to be scrapped. How many times on daily basis we act against islamic teachings and traditions? . Its creates hypocracy and destroys nation like cancer. Intolerant,fanatics nation groups will suffer due to all problems. I think are are harvesting all problems.
About blasphemy
Either you are free or slave. Its like no one is partially pregnant. It is my opinion that free societies are rich and resilient. Closed societies will never progress beyond certain limits.People should have right say and write what they feel provided they do not act. USA is good example. KKK is allowed in fact law enforcement authorities make sure they can express their thinking and they are protected. They are not allowed to act on their fantasies. See how USA is advancing and all religious and super religious muslims want to have their sons migrate to usa or want to find son-in-law from usa.All pakistanis should have right to express as they please and it is duty of Govt. to provide law and order.
Some people think that it will be difficult for govt. This is not true. In our country democratically elected govt.s are dismissed and army takes over on regular basis. Nothing happens, life goes normal. Religious parties have never gathered more than 4 to 5% votes. Sindhi primeminister was hanged even 2 dozen people did not protest. All sindhi nation cried and buried their son of soil but no one dared to do any thing.This fear of religious parties is raised and encouraged by army to put fear in minds of people.We have so many mosques in Karachi from Mohalla to Mohalla but on friday prayers they are empty nobody bothers. This law is unlawful and needs to be scrapped. How many times on daily basis we act against islamic teachings and traditions? . Its creates hypocracy and destroys nation like cancer. Intolerant,fanatics nation groups will suffer due to all problems. I think are are harvesting all problems.
#171 Posted by harimau on February 3, 2001 11:59:28 am
Ref anamika #: 89
[I rather doubt that with a name like FarangiKhush, he lives in the West. He cannot be that big a hypocrite.]
He lives in Canada all right.
He is probably itching to kill the infidels in Canada and take their women as war booty as recommended in his beloved Quran. (You will find thoughtful Islamic scholars who post on the Chowk defending the latter practice as the compassionate act of providing sustenance to the war widows, completely ignoring the fact that such a need would not have arisen if the former act of killing was not undertaken.)
Unlike Peshawar, the police in Canada actually help control crime thus preventing F_K from attaining shahadat by killing the kafirs.
[I rather doubt that with a name like FarangiKhush, he lives in the West. He cannot be that big a hypocrite.]
He lives in Canada all right.
He is probably itching to kill the infidels in Canada and take their women as war booty as recommended in his beloved Quran. (You will find thoughtful Islamic scholars who post on the Chowk defending the latter practice as the compassionate act of providing sustenance to the war widows, completely ignoring the fact that such a need would not have arisen if the former act of killing was not undertaken.)
Unlike Peshawar, the police in Canada actually help control crime thus preventing F_K from attaining shahadat by killing the kafirs.
#172 Posted by hamidm on February 3, 2001 11:59:28 am
Zahra and tahmed321
....... you are absolutely right - i am getting quite sick and tired of churning out the same george carlin stuff in response to your learned, but fatuous, regurgitation of gabriel`s book and bukhari`s editorials with a little bit of ghazzali and maudooodi thrown in ........ it is ironic, you must admit, that old george carlin is quite a match for the stalwarths of islam ...... makes me wonder - an ideology that feels threatened by stand-up comics must have some serious problems ?
ras siddique
.... thanks .....i was looking for an appropriate epitaph ........
``I passed through this world
when it was so ordained,
the dark of the night in my eyes
and the blaze of the sun in my heart.
And at the time ordained,
I came to stand before
the throne of the Almighty,
a paean of praise on my lips
and a glass of wine in my hand.``
........ this is so beautiful - it makes me want to cry .... i was contemplating a mason jar but this deserves a marble headstone with the kalima in all its calligraphic glory .......
....... you are absolutely right - i am getting quite sick and tired of churning out the same george carlin stuff in response to your learned, but fatuous, regurgitation of gabriel`s book and bukhari`s editorials with a little bit of ghazzali and maudooodi thrown in ........ it is ironic, you must admit, that old george carlin is quite a match for the stalwarths of islam ...... makes me wonder - an ideology that feels threatened by stand-up comics must have some serious problems ?
ras siddique
.... thanks .....i was looking for an appropriate epitaph ........
``I passed through this world
when it was so ordained,
the dark of the night in my eyes
and the blaze of the sun in my heart.
And at the time ordained,
I came to stand before
the throne of the Almighty,
a paean of praise on my lips
and a glass of wine in my hand.``
........ this is so beautiful - it makes me want to cry .... i was contemplating a mason jar but this deserves a marble headstone with the kalima in all its calligraphic glory .......
#173 Posted by Spinoza on February 3, 2001 11:59:28 am
re. Mzaidi #!63
``...tahmed`s references to the Quran--which I will again refer to, as vociferously as ever, as references that are inappropriate and out of context. As far as scholarly guidance viz. interpretation, I even tried helping tahmed with that. I will quote from the Quran again:
Surah No. 5: Al-MaaidaAyah 33. `The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.`
Mr. Zaidi, I wonder if your schoarly treatment of the above ayat might be able to throw some light on the ``context`` of the above ayat. Was it revealed in times of war or peace. You may have us believe that this is one of the timeless edicts of islam, embodying its very spirit--where it was revealed. But by the same token, tahemd can argue the same about the ayats *he * quoted. What/who is a good believer to believe?
Oddly, after lamenting the fact that `pesudointellectual`, liberal Muslims are making the mistake of trying to compromise on the principles of Islam, you follow up the quoted ayat with:
``And I do leave the ultimate judgement of those who are liable for the Frontier Post letter to Allah.``
But is it not clear from the ayat above that Allah decrees that the mischief makers must be judged and faced punishment her on earth too? Are, you, Mr Zaidi, not guilty of the very same prevarication you accuse other Muslims of? Why overlook the very clear injunctions on corporeal punishment here?
Later, you state that...
``Life in post-modern 2001 is an intellectually harsh place to live in. There is a fundamental disconnect between the dominant global mode of production, global demographic realities, and the values that are inherent to Islam, and frankly to the vast majority of world religions. ``
I am not challenging you on this point, but I wonder if you could elaborate a bit on the disconnect between the ``dominant global mode of production...and Islam``-- when time permits, of course. Just for our/my enlightenment.
``True. That laws in Pakistan, particularly the Qisas, Diyat, and Hudd (Hudood), as well as Blasphemy Laws, are broad and vague in their specifications, allowing for frequent abuse by right wing zealots with agendas that have less to do with Islam, and more with the emancipation of a primitive and irrational mode of life.``
Mr. Zaidi, after reading sections 295 B and C, one cannot agree with you on that the blasphemy laws are vague in their specifications. On the contrary, they are quite clear, though, as you rightly point out, broad in scope.
best regards
``...tahmed`s references to the Quran--which I will again refer to, as vociferously as ever, as references that are inappropriate and out of context. As far as scholarly guidance viz. interpretation, I even tried helping tahmed with that. I will quote from the Quran again:
Surah No. 5: Al-MaaidaAyah 33. `The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.`
Mr. Zaidi, I wonder if your schoarly treatment of the above ayat might be able to throw some light on the ``context`` of the above ayat. Was it revealed in times of war or peace. You may have us believe that this is one of the timeless edicts of islam, embodying its very spirit--where it was revealed. But by the same token, tahemd can argue the same about the ayats *he * quoted. What/who is a good believer to believe?
Oddly, after lamenting the fact that `pesudointellectual`, liberal Muslims are making the mistake of trying to compromise on the principles of Islam, you follow up the quoted ayat with:
``And I do leave the ultimate judgement of those who are liable for the Frontier Post letter to Allah.``
But is it not clear from the ayat above that Allah decrees that the mischief makers must be judged and faced punishment her on earth too? Are, you, Mr Zaidi, not guilty of the very same prevarication you accuse other Muslims of? Why overlook the very clear injunctions on corporeal punishment here?
Later, you state that...
``Life in post-modern 2001 is an intellectually harsh place to live in. There is a fundamental disconnect between the dominant global mode of production, global demographic realities, and the values that are inherent to Islam, and frankly to the vast majority of world religions. ``
I am not challenging you on this point, but I wonder if you could elaborate a bit on the disconnect between the ``dominant global mode of production...and Islam``-- when time permits, of course. Just for our/my enlightenment.
``True. That laws in Pakistan, particularly the Qisas, Diyat, and Hudd (Hudood), as well as Blasphemy Laws, are broad and vague in their specifications, allowing for frequent abuse by right wing zealots with agendas that have less to do with Islam, and more with the emancipation of a primitive and irrational mode of life.``
Mr. Zaidi, after reading sections 295 B and C, one cannot agree with you on that the blasphemy laws are vague in their specifications. On the contrary, they are quite clear, though, as you rightly point out, broad in scope.
best regards
#174 Posted by Zahra on February 3, 2001 12:44:26 pm
Hamidm:
[makes me wonder - an ideology that feels threatened by stand-up comics must have some serious problems ?]
You mistook it!
[Buzurgana Advice - Sober state of mind is the key in understanding these nitty gritty details - OK!]
Does the comedian feel challenged in any way or shape? Are his antics in jeopardy? Why is he becoming sensitive? Just like that ideology is not everyone`s cup of tea, the comedian`s humor may not hold the same place in every reader`s
heart and mind.
Clear!
[makes me wonder - an ideology that feels threatened by stand-up comics must have some serious problems ?]
You mistook it!
[Buzurgana Advice - Sober state of mind is the key in understanding these nitty gritty details - OK!]
Does the comedian feel challenged in any way or shape? Are his antics in jeopardy? Why is he becoming sensitive? Just like that ideology is not everyone`s cup of tea, the comedian`s humor may not hold the same place in every reader`s
heart and mind.
Clear!
#175 Posted by krashid on February 3, 2001 5:07:31 pm
MZaidi #163
The more you are writing more incoherency is obvious.
You are stating that it is Allah who is law giver etc.
I don`t see TAhmed arguing on this point.
The point is where does it says that a group of people take Klashinkov in their hand because they are the only one who have understood Koran and rest of the people cannot understand Koran.
TAhmed has given very pertinent examples from Koran. Moreover there is only one place where it is said in Koran that if you don`t understand something ask someone of knowledge.
Now by name you look Shia. Your scholars believe in Imamat. My scholars don`t. Who is right.
Your logic fails as soon as there are many interpretations of Koran and Islam.
And TAhmed is absolutely right. Unless someone convinces him with valid reasons. At least what is happening in Iran in religious terms these days and in Afghanistan in political and religious these days, who would you give authority to understand Koran for you or which one of them God has given authority to understand Koran for us. If you can answer it coherently, I might consider your option.
As far as your mention of Adam as something contradictory to evolution theory, you give me quotes from Quran to proove your point. I will Insha-Allah give you quote to proove it the other way.
The more you are writing more incoherency is obvious.
You are stating that it is Allah who is law giver etc.
I don`t see TAhmed arguing on this point.
The point is where does it says that a group of people take Klashinkov in their hand because they are the only one who have understood Koran and rest of the people cannot understand Koran.
TAhmed has given very pertinent examples from Koran. Moreover there is only one place where it is said in Koran that if you don`t understand something ask someone of knowledge.
Now by name you look Shia. Your scholars believe in Imamat. My scholars don`t. Who is right.
Your logic fails as soon as there are many interpretations of Koran and Islam.
And TAhmed is absolutely right. Unless someone convinces him with valid reasons. At least what is happening in Iran in religious terms these days and in Afghanistan in political and religious these days, who would you give authority to understand Koran for you or which one of them God has given authority to understand Koran for us. If you can answer it coherently, I might consider your option.
As far as your mention of Adam as something contradictory to evolution theory, you give me quotes from Quran to proove your point. I will Insha-Allah give you quote to proove it the other way.
#176 Posted by krashid on February 3, 2001 5:07:31 pm
Siagalph 235 #164
Neither I am a Mullah nor politician. So I have to be the ``Qurbani Ka Bakra`` myself.:-)
Neither I am a Mullah nor politician. So I have to be the ``Qurbani Ka Bakra`` myself.:-)