Blasphemy: Islamic Concept
Offering insult (sabb ) to God, to the prophet Muḥammad, or to any part of the divine revelation is a crime in Islamic religious law, fully comparable to blasphemy in Christianity. In the Christian tradition, blasphemy properly denotes mockery or lèse majesté of God.
There is no exact equivalence to blasphemy in the Islamic tradition, although the Qurʾanic phrase “word of infidelity” (kalimat al-kufr ) comes fairly close.
From the viewpoint of Islamic law, blasphemy may be defined as any verbal expression that gives grounds for suspicion of apostasy (riddah).
In theological terms, blasphemy often overlaps with infidelity (kufr), which is the deliberate rejection of God and revelation; in this sense, expressing religious opinions at variance with standard Islamic views could easily be looked upon as blasphemous.
Blasphemy can also be seen as the equivalence of hearsay (zandaqah ), a pre-Islamic Persian term used in reference to the revolutionary teachings of Mani and Mazdak; in this sense, it can mean any public expression of teachings deemed dangerous to the state.
Thus, in describing the Islamic concept of blasphemy, it is necessary to include not only insulting language directed at God, the Prophet, and the revelation, but also theological positions and even mystical aphorisms that have come under suspicion.
Blasphemy In Early Islam
During his own lifetime, the prophet Muḥammad ( Salla-llahu alehi wasalam) encountered strong opposition from the leaders of the Arab clans of Mecca when he preached the worship of the one God and attacked the traditional polytheism of the Arabs.
Most frequently, this opposition took the form of verbal disputes and abuse, by which the pagan leaders rejected and ridiculed the Qurʾanic teachings on the unity of God and the resurrection.
Muḥammad’s opponents, moreover, mocked his claim to be an inspired prophet and accused him variously of being possessed, a soothsayer, a magician, a poet, or an unscrupulous power-seeker.
From the beginning, as the Qurʾān attests, the blasphemous language of the Prophet’s opponents thus consisted of calling divine revelation a lie (takdhīb ). Insult to the Prophet was particularly blasphemous, since Muḥammad was the chief medium of that revelation.
Among Muḥammad’s opponents , the Qurʾān (sūrah 111) singles out Abū Lahab above all as destined to punishment in hellfire; according to traditional accounts, the Qurʾān turns back on Abū Lahab the very words that he had used to curse Muḥammad.
The Qurʾān stresses the opposition that previous prophets experienced, as in the notable case of the Pharaoh who called the revelation to Moses a lie, saying, “I am your highest Lord” (79:24). As a rejection of divine lordship, this saying is usually considered to be the height of blasphemy.
Within the early Islamic community itself, the “hypocrites” (munāfiqūn ) uttered blasphemous jests about God and the Prophet (9:65–66). Such mockery constituted infidelity (kufr ) after professing faith (īmān ) and invalidated whatever good deeds they might have previously performed (5:5).
Blasphemy in Islamic Law
Building upon the descriptions of and pronouncements on blasphemy found in the Qurʾān and the example (sunnah ) of the Prophet, the various legal schools have elaborated upon the nature, conditions, and punishments for blasphemy.
Jurists describe it as the expression of denigration (istikhfāf), contempt (iḥānah ), or scorn (ḥaqārah ) for God, the Prophets, the Qurʾān, the angels, or the traditional religious sciences based on revelation.
The legal handbooks of the Ḥanafī school, in particular, offer numerous examples of blasphemous sayings, usually classified under the heading of “words of infidelity” (kalimāt al-kufr; see sūrah 9:74).
Conditions To Be Considered Before Someone Can Be Convicted Of Blasphemy
Legal authorities agree that the conditions for blasphemy include adulthood, lack of duress, and being of sound mind, and it is immaterial whether the offender is a Muslim or not.
Accidental blasphemy is, in general, not excused, although Ḥanafī jurists allow suspicious statements to be construed innocently if a legitimate case can be made for the interpretation.
The Mālikī school permits an excuse to be made for one who has converted to Islam from another religion, but otherwise views blasphemy as entailing apostasy (riddah ).
Punishment For Blasphemy
The punishment for blasphemy differs somewhat from one school to another.
The Ḥanafīyah define blasphemous statements as acts of infidelity (kufr ) and strip the blasphemer of all legal rights: his marriage is declared invalid, all religious acts worthless, and all claims to property or inheritance void. The death penalty is a last resort that most authorities try to avoid, especially if some element of accident or doubt is present.
Repentance, however, restores all previous rights, although it is necessary to renew marriage. A few cases are mentioned in which a woman uttered blasphemies as a stratagem to annul her marriage, with the intention of repenting later to regain her other rights. The Mālikīyah, treating blasphemy as apostasy, call for immediate execution of the offender; as in cases of apostasy, they do not offer the chance to repent.
An exception is made for female blasphemers, who are not to be executed but punished and encouraged to repent. In cases of minor blasphemies, or cases supported by only a single witness, the Mālikīyah prescribes a discretionary punishment in place of the death penalty.
Deborah’s Case In Sokoto
Coming down to Deborah’s case in Sokoto Nigeria, on her alleged blasphemous statement against the prophet (salla-llahu alehi wasalam) in a WhatsApp group account which was expressly and singlehandedly opened to discuss the group’s matters and what concerns their educational and personal developments.
It was alleged that Deborah before her murder had complained against the indiscriminate dumping of Islamic messages and the Hadith of the prophet, in particular, in the group’s WhatsApp, which had not been primarily opened for such exercises.
It was reported by her friend that her classmates, who were predominantly of Islamic faith, took exception to that, and instantly gone haywire, threatening her with all vituperation and harsh invectives.
Deborah knowing her right and for feeling that she was a bonafide member of the class, did not relent in claiming her right, called her mates bluff as said in Hausa language ” nothing will happen to us” and in the ensuing heat of the moment, she uttered something allegedly insulting on the Prophet’s Hadith and she was sought out, mobbed and finally murdered just like it!
Yes, Deborah was pursued from one end of the school to another as depicted in the viral video of the incidence; lynched and killed even not like a ram but like a rat and burnt like it , while the mob ignored her pleading and the refrain ” what do you want to gain from this!”; referring to the action of the mob and preempting them on the gain in wanting to kill her!
Yes, what has her murderers gained for themselves or the prophet (salla-llahu alehi wasalam) or the religion of peace that which the prophet to which the mob are claiming to be defending, belong, except hullabaloo and more hates to the peaceful and respectful religion of Allah and His Apostle ( Muhammad salla-llahu alehi wasalam)
Oh my Goodness! In all the Islamic procedures on Blasphemy explained above, please readers, where do you see indiscriminate mobbing, murdering and setting ablaze someone who had insulted the prophet or God over there?
Which court of law had the Muslim students of Shagari College of education first referred the case to for prosecution before resulting into jungle justice and killing a soul just like that?
Is setting human being, even animal ablaze Islamic? Or do the Hausa and Fulani traditional manners of punishing crimes and offences do not contain extral judicial killing and inflicting arson on the culprits and suspects?
Is that Islam which has in her reference such statements such as:
_ “…And do not kill one another, for Allah is to you oft-merciful !”_ Qur’an 4:29
” Take to forgiveness and enjoin good and turn aside from the ignorant” _ Qur’an 7:199
And,
” Whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land , it is as though he slew all men: and whoever keeps it alive , it is as though he kept alive all men!”
_ Qur’an 5:32
Or had her killers carefully determined if her words constituted ”mischief in the land” as contained in the Qur’an 5:32 above? Or have they found her utterances to be causing ” mischief on in the land? Did they even presume her innocent and allow the court of law to check minutely if her words contained an “istikhfaf” ,i.e a denigration of the prophet, or an “ihanah” i.e, a contempt, or ” haqarah” i.e, a scorn, as laid down by the system of law to which they pinned her murder on? Is Sha’riah law to be arbitrarily implemented? It is a mob-inspiring system of law? It is a jungle justice that gives the accused no chance to prove her innocence?
A careful and open-minded reading of Sha’riah law procedures will reveal to an objective reader that Islamic law is not a law that is based on jungle justice manners and methods. It will also reveal to him that it offers a deliberate and methodical judicial processes which are deployed to save lives rather than to exterminate them.
Besides, punishments, even after a thorough evident-based judgement by a Qadi or Qudut as the case may be, are inflicted as a last resort. It is not a system of law that is arbitrarily fixated with punishing the offenders too often.
Rather, the punishments are inflicted to serve as example to others but not to spite the offenders or to denigrade their humanity. These punishments are also reformative, retributive and redressive!
The Nigeria northern youths and their elders who daily give their youths a false and wrong knowledge and hope that Islamic law and its appendages can be applied any how must seek caution.
They should please allow the experts and certified jurisprudents among them take over knowledge productions and teaching of Islamic studies.
Truth be told, the many senseless killings of people who have different world views, religions inclinations and ethnic disparities with the people of the of the north are becoming too much and unbearable to others in the country.
And in the final analysis, their youths must be schooled and schooled well both in Islamic ways and western wise, so as to avoid future recurrence of senseless killing of people living in that area.
It is a pity and yet , senseless for the Sokoto youths to go ahead and protest the arrest of those that instigated and murdered Deborah!
What still pains one the more is the unthinking elders and learned people who are standing behind the murderers for the authority to have arrested them.
Let assume that Deborah’s words were blasphemous, contained denigration and contempt of the Prophet’s personality and Hadith, is murdering her without trial in the Shari’a court, the Sha’riah law prescriptions to deal with her?
I will say, for a peaceful Northern area of the country, the owners of the area must first of all seek the face of God and offer a solemn apology to Him to please forget and forgive their too many intransigence in terms of murdering innocent souls in the area!
Besides, Deborah’s parents must be begged to pardon them while they offer Diyah, blood money to them in lieu of their daughter!
Though, it cannot bring back their daughter, but it is God’s way of compensating the family of the murdered!