By A. Faizur Rahman,
The brutal assassination of Salmaan Taseer, the outspoken Governor of Punjab, is an ominous indication that Pakistan is plunging headlong into a state of ataxia. And one wonders if it would ever come out of it. Salmaan was killed, as confessed by his murderous bodyguard, for being a staunch opponent of the blasphemy law of Pakistan and seeking Presidential pardon for Aasia Bibi, the Christian woman who was recently awarded the death penalty under section 295-C of the Pakistani Penal Code for allegedly abusing Prophet Muhammad.
It is a fact that the use of derogatory language against Prophet Muhammad, or for that matter any Prophet, is considered a great sin in Islam. But it is also no ordinary crime to sentence somebody to death without evidence. So far the charges against Aasia Bibi have not been incontrovertibly proved. Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Minorities, Shahbaz Bhatti, is on record saying that the case against her is concocted as the complainant and major witnesses were not present at the site of incident. But then the courts in Pakistan work under tremendous right-wing pressure. It may be recalled that in 1997, Lahore High Court judge Arif Iqbal Bhatti, who had acquitted two Christians accused of blasphemy in 1995, was shot dead.
But the bigger question is: Is there any evidence in the Quran to justify capital punishment for the crimes mentioned in section 295-C of the PPC? Also, what was the Prophet’s own reaction to such personal insults? The answers to these questions assume the significance of a categorical imperative (to use a Kantian term) because, insofar as the Islamic shariah is concerned any law made in contravention of the universality of the Quranic doctrine as expounded by the Prophet is void.
Interestingly, the Quran records some of the nasty insinuations that were hurled at the Prophet (see 25:41 and 38:4-5) and defends and consoles him without suggesting any mundane punishment for the abusers. Such invectives would certainly have hurt the Prophet and therefore, he is assuaged with, “Have patience with what they say, and leave them with noble dignity” (73:10) and, “You possess the most exalted standard of character” (68:4).
After having comforted the Prophet thus, the Quran advises him, and through him his followers, to “forgive and overlook; for God loves those who are kind” (5:13). Another verse points out that when evil is repelled with goodness “then will he between whom and you was hatred become as if he were your intimate friend” (41:34). The Prophet followed this exhortation to the letter, a fact acknowledged by the Quran which confirmed that he indeed was kind to the people and never “harsh-hearted” (3:159).
There are several instances in the Prophet’s life which show that he tolerated the foul language of even his sworn enemies. For instance, when a Jew who was opposed to Islam cursed him saying As-saamu-alalikum, (death be upon you) and his wife Hazrat Aisha responded with As-saamu ‘alaikum wal-laa’na (death and Allah’s curse be upon you too) he expressed his strong displeasure saying, “Be gentle and calm, Aisha.” And when one of his companions wanted to harm the Jew, the Prophet silenced him with an emphatic “No” (Sahih Bukhari). According to another tradition a man demanded his debts from the Prophet in such a rude manner that his companions wanted to beat him up. But the Prophet said, “Leave him, for he has the right to demand it” (Sahih Bukhari).
But one of the most thought-provoking examples set by the Prophet was the pardoning of Ikrimah the son of Abu Jahal. Both father and son had fought several violent battles against the Prophet and yet when Makkah was reconquered Ikrimah too was among those who benefitted from the general amnesty declared by the Prophet who told his companions: “Ikrimah ibn Abu Jahl shall come to you as a believer and amuhajir (a refugee). Do not insult his father. Insulting the dead causes grief to the living and does not reach the dead.” It may be noted here that the companions are being asked not to curse even Abu Jahal, the bitter enemy who had died fighting the Prophet. And it was in this spirit that the Prophet warned; eeyakum wal ghulu fiddeen, fa innahu ahlaka man kaana qablakum al ghulu fiddeen (Ibn Maaja) which translates as; “Eschew extremism in religion, for extremism has destroyed its practitioners in the past.”
The foregoing evidence proves that there is no scriptural basis for the histrionic emotionalism and the maddening perversity of thought that marks the defense of the blasphemy law in Pakistan where a cleric has placed a price of $6000 on the head of Aasia Bibi. We have here the strange case of the Prophet himself forgiving a person of unquestionable antagonism towards Islam and his devotees announcing monetary rewards to anyone who kills a poor village woman who is not a known enemy of our religion and whose guilt has not been established beyond doubt. And shockingly, this is being done in the name of a great Messenger of peace who was crowned Rahmath al lil aalameen (mercy unto humanity) by the Quran.
It is precisely this kind of fiendish behaviour that fuels Islamophobia across the globe. In fact, Muslim extremism and Islamophobia now enjoy a symbiotic relationship feeding on each other’s fanaticism. This of course is not to condone organised attempts to malign religious personalities such as the publication of the Danish cartoons in 2005. Such defamatory campaigns are in reality Machiavellian designs to incite communal hatred and therefore they deserve to be condemned by not just Muslims but all right thinking people for the sake of world peace.
Finally, one of the reasons for Muslim extremism to flourish today is the unrestricted flow of petro-dollars into Muslim societies which has resulted in the proliferation of prejudiced preachers and radical televangelists who populate the airwaves with their fanaticism. Such is the sway of these preachers that Muslims in large numbers are falling prey to their manipulative agenda and have started to exhibit a supremacist attitude that looks down up on all those who are reluctant to get initiated into their kind of puritanism. And the only way out of this mess is to stimulate debates among the Muslims on the interpretations of Islamic texts with the ultimate aim to countering religious chauvinism through appeals to reason and logic as done by the Prophet himself.
(The author is Secretary-General of Chennai-based Forum for the Promotion of Moderate Thought among the Muslims. He may be reached at [email protected]).