You are here
"The proof of the necessity of killing anyone who curses the Prophet or finds fault with him"
The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorised as an unbeliever. The judgement of the unbeliever is that he is killed.
Allah says, "Those who harm Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and in the Next, and has prepared for them a humiliating punishment." (33:57). He said something similar about those who kill the believers. Part of the curse on them in this world is that they are killed. Allah says, "Cursed they will be. Wherever they are found, they are seized and all slain." (33: 61) He mentions the punishment of those who fight, "That is humiliation in this world for them." (5:45) "Killing" (qatl) can have the meaning of "curse". Allah says, "May the conjecturers be killed!" (51:11) and "May Allah fight them! How they are perverted!" (9:30) i.e. may Allah curse them.
This is because there is a difference between their harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgement against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe - the death penalty.
The judgment regarding someone who maligns the Prophet without deliberation or really believing what he has said We have already discussed killing the person who, with intent, curses the Prophet, belittles him or slights him in any way. The judgement in this case is clear. The second case concerns when it is necessary to clarify what someone has said. This applies to someone who speaks about the Prophet without intending to curse or belittle him and not believing his words to be true, but who nonetheless speaks about the Prophet using words of disbelief which curse him, revile him or call him a liar or ascribe to him something that is not permitted or deny one of his necessary attributes, all of which constitutes disparagement in respect of him. For instance, he might ascribe a major wrong action to the Prophet, or say that he had failed to convey the message or had fallen short in a judgement between people or he might lower his rank, the honour of his lineage, the extent of his knowledge or his asceticism, or deny a famous matter reported from him which has come by many paths of transmission with the intention of refuting the report, or say something insolent and ugly or of a cursing nature in respect of him. However, the state of this individual indicates that he does not mean to censure the Prophet nor to curse him but that ignorance, discontent, drunkenness, carelessness, arrogance or hasty speech has led him to say what he has said. The judgement in this case is the same judgement as that applied to the first individual. Such a person is killed without hesitation since no one is excused for disbelief by ignorance or by claiming a slip of the tongue or by any of the things which we have mentioned if his intellect is basically sound. The only exception is when someone is forced to do it while his heart is at rest in belief. (Page 329)
The Prophet had given orders that in entering Mecca none but those found in arms to oppose him should be slain, and two women that had chanted satires against him. Like Muqis bin Saba, Abdullah bin Sadda bin Abi Sarah, Abdullah bin Hanzal and two female singers. He commanded that these proscribed persons should be killed, though found clinging to the curtains of Kaaba.
On the issue of blasphemy, there are no real differences of opinion between various sects of Islam - whether between Barelvi and Deobandi sects of Sunni Islam, or between Shi'ites and Sunnis - though for reasons of expediency, some of them may differ on a certain case. Much like Mumtaz Qadri, the Shi'ite clerics in Pakistan have also opposed any likely reforms in Pakistan's blasphemy laws. On December 16, 2010, a group of Shi'ite scholars told their followers in Karachi that the Pakistani government cannot amend the blasphemy laws. A media report quoted Shi'ite cleric Maulana Shahanshah Hussain as telling the crowd: "Muslims in Pakistan will not accept any amendments to the blasphemy law."
There is a broad ideological movement in Islam for the support of blasphemy laws, which require Muslims to take the law into their own hands to kill a person who is accused of blaspheming the Prophet Muhammad. After the Charlie Hebdo attacks, leading Urdu-language Pakistani daily Roznama Ummat published a 43-part series titled "Martyrs of the Prophet's Honor." A review of the series I had conducted revealed that the streets of Lahore in the 1920s and 1930s look liked the streets of Paris today - for similar reasons. The review revealed that those who avenged blasphemy included lone wolves such as Qazi Abdur Rasheed in December 1926 and Ghazi Ilmuddin in April 1929; Ghazi Murid Hussain, a lone wolf jihadi from the Sufi school of Islam; Ghazi Miyan Muhammad, a soldier who killed his soldier-colleague long before Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan did the same; and Babu Merajuddin, a soldier who stabbed a Sikh officer, among others.
The example was set by Muhammad:
Bukhari Volume 3, Book 45, Number 687:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
Allah's Apostle said, "Who would kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf as he has harmed Allah and His Apostle ?" Muhammad bin Maslama (got up and) said, "I will kill him."