Why is IS the basis for judging issues? Being different from IS is not a principle. IS is wrong where they are wrong and they are right where they right.
The narrations of killing blasphemours have nothing to do with the law concerning blasphemy in Islam. The Gustakhs at the Prophets time were killed in Jihad. The Islamic laws concerning insulting the Prophet and religion are based on other things. Mumtaz acted in Jihad not in law.
The narrations they have are most probably the same narrations we have too, but it is how they are interpreted, acted upon and put into context that counts.
We are not basing our rules on narrations Mufti Abu Mohammed. Our rules were written thousand of years ago in books. Everything is clear to the one who knows these books. We don't need to discuss about narrations. Everything is clear.
@concerned, please state the exact issues where IS is wrong (of course there are some or many) and then say what makes this topic like these wrong IS-things.
The murder of sulman taseer can't be justified of course.
We can't prove that he ma'azAllah did blasphemous talk about Rasoolullah saww. He blasphemed blasphemy law. I don't think that it can be called as blasphemy towards Prophet saww.
But the scholars, specifically barelwis called him gustakhe rasool which was the cause of the action of mumtaz qadri. We can't doubt his love and ikhlas.
But his action in any case can't be justified.
But in Pakistan you can't go just technically into the issue, without looking at the political and other aspects.
An American comes to Pakistan, kills several Pakis and goes away unharmed under the sanctuary of Pak government.
Many Shiites commit 100% severe blasphemy and still manage to get away from the punishment.
On the other hand a person who kills the advocate of Asia bibi is hanged, because he killed in the name of ishq e rasool.
So the trials that are being run on the enemies and blasphemers towards rasoolullah saww and sahaba RzA, are being delayed, and the one that was regarding an ashiq e rasool saww has been concluded, to please whome??
And killing blasphemers in the love of rasoolullah saww and not allowing trial isn't new in the history of Islam. A true Ashiq can't wait for judicial activities, you understand, this is natural, in love. We might keep on talking about the rightness or wrongness of the actions of ushaaq, but these ushaq can't think that deep. This reason may not justify some actions, but they are.
Mumtaz Qadri has been punished. If he had done some wrong, even then after being punished, he is free from that sin. He did that in Prophet's saww love, and we can't deny it. It might have some negatives, but a great positive thing is that the enemies of Rasoolullah saww will think a million times before speaking regarding Prophet saww.
I already mentioned that you can only murder a Muslim. Salman was not a Muslim. So murder is a totally inappropriate term.
He was not an apostate because of supposed blasphemy. His apostasy has nothing to do with Asia Bibi or Pakistans blasphemy laws. The Barelwis are upon ignorance. Just like many Deobandis in Pakistan. They don't know that Salman is an apostate. They only thought this because his statements about Pakistans blasphemy laws.
We are not concerned with Pakistans blasphemy laws. Pakistan is not an Islamic state. Many secular Western states have blasphemy laws especially in the past. It has something to do with respect for religious feelings but not with Islam as a religion itself. We are not concerned nor do we demand anything regarding laws in an infidel state.
If it was a sin he would not be free from it because the Pakistani state executed him like you say. That is a rule in an Islamic state. The law of an infidel state has absolutely no significance for a Muslim.
Someone should ask Mawlana Desai about this. He will explain it sufficiently.
i've often heard Ulama glorifying individuals like Mumtaz Qadri Saheb (may Allah forgive him, ameen). How after murdering famous blasphemers they would see Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam in a dream or even while awake, how they would experience great sukoon and rahmah while in prison, etc. Of course, the Ulama would make sure to say these actions are not actually condoned by shariah or by law and we shouldn't do these things. a common theme in these anecdotes is that the vigilante is a jaahil.
the understanding I take from these talks is that the vigilante made a mistake, Allah Ta'ala will deal with him for that. we shouldn't copy his mistake even if it seems like Allah Ta'ala is favouring him for it.
But an Aashiq-e-Rasul did what his heart told him to do and each man shall have what he intended.
then the same must be true for people who join isis with the intention of establishing a khilafat and establishing shariah. would you say they will be amongst the shuhadah even if they wrongfully behave contrary to the quran and sunnah, but due to their love for allah and his rasool .
Some Positives Achieved By The Action Of Qadri Rh
1. Enemies of Rasoolullah saww will think thousand times before speaking.
2. Liberals of Pakistan specifically will not speak blatantly against Islam and Islamic Laws.
3. Nawaz Sharif, and his party will not win elections any more inshAllah.
4. The spirits of Pakistanis is clear regarding religion and prophet of Islam saww. In case of any shameful act of government towards Islam, a single fatwa will suffice inshAllah.
5. Media has been unveiled.
6. Our politicians will realize that they are not secure, even in the protocol of their guards.
7. This execution instead of giving plus to liberals who are against blasphemy law, has fallen against them.
8. Now we have got a strong point. That if our judicial system will fail to protect the dignity of Islam and Prophet of Islam saww, people like Mumtaz and many others, will do that job. So this will provide a strength to the stance of those who are in favour of blasphemy law.
Pervaiz Rashid was insulted publicly by a mob in the airport after the incident of Qadri. One slipper was banged in is head too lol.
I haven't read through the whole thread, but if we accept Abu Muhammad's post above, then we should have no problem with Is is , and the arguments they use. [/quote]
this is part of my point. we need consistency.
[quote]I have no knowledge of this incident , but I read one person on social media saying that if this incident is not condemned, then what is to stop barelwis from going around harming deobandis or salafis who, in their eyes , have insulted the Prophet Salalahu alyhi wasalam? Your thoughts?
good point. according to barelvis we are also gustakh e rasool. now what?
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
We apologise but you have been denied access to report posts in this thread. This could be due to excessively reporting posts and not understanding our forum rules. For assistance or information, please use the forum help thread to request more information. Jazakallah
did what his heart told him to do and each man shall have what he intended.
