Opinion: Decriminalise Apostasy and Blasphemy Yesterday

Let the gods fight

There is a story in the Bible of Gideon who in an act of zealotry destroyed the altar of Baal. The worshippers found out and gathered a mob to lynch him when someone reasoned with them that if Baal was so aggrieved by the desecration of his grotto and altar, then Baal, the god the people worshipped should himself exact judgement on Gideon, the miscreant.

The reasonable message there was, despite the grievance and offence caused the worshippers, “If he [Baal] is a god, let him contend for himself, because someone has torn down his altar.” [Reference and context][Judges 6:25-32 – The Message]

More pertinently, the argument put forth is on many levels, first of all, men are prone to zealotry, sometimes taking extreme and provocative actions. People would be seriously offended and seek to take the law into their own hands by meting out some form of punishment to assuage their grievance.

Disarming our great gods

In so doing, they appear to disarm or belittle the ability of the deity to act for itself where the deity has been contemned. The question is, are men supposed to plead the case of their gods or are they supposed to allow the gods in whatever their omnipotent or omniscient capacity to seek retribution for any disrespect or desecration by any man?

“Are you going to fight Baal’s battles for him? Are you going to save him? Anyone who takes Baal’s side will be dead by morning. If Baal is a god in fact, let him fight his own battles and defend his own altar.” [Judges 6:31 – The Message]

I dare say, this should extend to all deities be it in established religions or any form of religious symbolism or act of worship. Much as each man should not seek to cause religious offence to others, it is important for the religious to let the gods fight their battles for the conscience, the soul or punish infractions of men.

No compulsion

“There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.” [Surah Al-Baqarah 2:256][Context]

The Al-Qurʾān is unequivocal about the issue of religion in this verse, there should be no imposition and it is a matter of choice. Yet, if people do cross the line (Taghut), this could mean many things from disbelief, through blasphemy to apostasy, the judgement for that is left with Allah rather than with men.

The other verses that support this quote clearly state that the choice is that of the man and the reward or punishment is of Allah.

Usurping the role of deity

It then begs the question why men have arrogated to themselves the duty to judge and pronounce judgements in place of their deities to punish men for their actions taking away the greater prerogative of mercy and longsuffering of deity in whom they believe?

Do men expect to be rewarded for taking the law into their own hands fighting for their gods where all do not believe the same nor are all of the same consciences even if they seem to follow the same religion?

What is the justification for exacting judgement on another man for what they choose to believe or not believe as they are persuaded of message, experience or life and where does this stop or who then controls this vigilantism?

The next question is why the state should ever get involved in these matters as if they now act in the stead of deity to criminalise people and exact judgement on behalf of God?

I covered the issue in the blog below.

Blog - The case for State law over religious guidance

Separating religion and state

It goes without saying that the state has no business promulgating laws that criminalise religious thought, be that disbelief, blasphemy or apostasy. The state however may sanction offence caused other by refereeing civil cases brought by the offended; not to abridge the freedom of speech and expression but to ensure that the use of such freedoms is not abused to incite violence or cause unrest amongst the people.

It is in view of the arguments that I have proffered above that I call on the 21 countries that criminalise apostasy and the many others that criminalise blasphemy to abrogate and expunge such laws from their statute books.

The state’s involvement in these matters first politicises religion which can be used to nefarious ends like the Muslim cleric who allegedly framed a Christian girl in Pakistan putting her at the risk of capital punishment and yet he was acquitted probably because the witnesses against him were nobbled.

There is also the risk of vigilantism as seen here and here, worse still is when it is used to oppress those of a different religion. What religion a person follows should always be an adult choice, it should never appear to have congenital provenance.

Personal choice above all else

If a person cannot make an independent choice of what to believe because of their heritage or what their parents believed in the 21^st Century, then we have moved the age of conscience back to before the Dark Ages where the powerful acted like demigods with impunity, answerable to no one but the whim of how much power they can wield.

The world is certainly more advanced than this, and more and more, blasphemy and apostasy laws are looking like a homage to Barbarity than a celebration of the freedom and the liberty of thought, the coming of the civilised man. Abrogate these odious laws without delay.

Other references

Blog - Editorial: Religion and custom that savages humanity

Blog - Opinion: Before the law, the veil is removed

Blog - Opinion: Finding Against The Gospel of NOT - That EHRC Judgement

Comments on Nigeria: Islam strongly discourages polygamy

Pointed in that direction

My blog on Nigeria: Islam strongly discourages polygamy seems to have gathered a bit of reading and reference along with comments from people who felt I probably should not be researching those areas.

The fact is I would never have been digging in those religious tomes if the learned leaders of the Supreme Council of Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) Kaduna State chapter had not categorically provided chapter and verse of what they claim supports their demand that the Senator decline invitations from the civil authorities on the accusation of marrying a child or even worse child trafficking.

My blog as I wrote it was not to be authoritative but enable a discourse that brought more scrutiny to what was accepted in relation to what was said or inferred to with regards to the verses quoted – it would be unfortunate if anyone suddenly finds offence where intelligent debate is the better means of learning and understanding the points that matter.

Facts of the 21^st Century

Most importantly, the human race has changed in interaction, knowledge and enlightenment since the 7^th Century of the times of the Prophet, the 1^st Century of Christ and the few Millennia before that of Abrahamic Judaism – the 21^st Century offers no carte blanche microcosm of civilisation that excludes us from the scrutiny of modernity if we live in these times but derive our verbatim societal standards from the times of yore.

All localities now suffer global intrusion of varying impact with the greatest import being the right to life, the right to free expression and the protection of the rights of the minorities – where those rights are impinged upon, regardless of allegiance the greater clamour of civilisation, civility, humanity and gradual liberalism that that affected all religions would demand that people be put first and not sacrificed on the altar of tenet, creed, tradition, culture, custom, belief or religion – all these came after humanity, not before.

We have to think for ourselves

This is where we all stand in the 21^st Century according to a ruling giving by Lord Justice Laws a few weeks ago.

“We do not live in a society where all the people share uniform religious beliefs. The precepts of any one religion – any belief system – cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of any other. If they did, those out in the cold would be less than citizens and our constitution would be on the way to a theocracy, which is of necessity autocratic.”

“The law of a theocracy is dictated without option to the people, not made by their judges and governments. The individual conscience is free to accept such dictated law, but the state, if its people are to be free, has the burdensome duty of thinking for itself.”

In essence, it is egregious for any religion to feel that its remit extends beyond that of its firm adherents and those adherents should not have that imposed on them by heredity but by individual choice because our societies now offer the scope and latitude for those decisions to fall to individuals rather than a hierarchy of unaccountable clerics – in the broadest sense – who are answerable to no man, no state, no constituted authority or earthly realm.

Comments to my blog

At first Portnoy wanted permission to translate my blog into Chinese for his audience to read my views which I promptly granted because this had become a matter for discussion.

I found your post via Global Voices and I really like the way you deal with this issue. I should translate this post into Chinese for more people to know what Qur’an really said. Do you mind?

Then Abdulkadir patronisingly addressed me with this

Akin my friend you need to understand Arabic language and sayings, action of Mohammad (peace be upon him) very well before you can understand Qur'anic verses. Please not say what you not know ask Muslims about their religion and make honest research.

To which I replied

The Qur'anic verses are clear about what they say, if you want them to mean something else that is another matter.

If you do have good objective teaching on these matters, publish them for serious scrutiny - that is the way learned people convey their knowledge in the modern world.

Subjective or objective

After that Auwal said

It is very impressive to see that a non Muslim is taking his time to study what Islam actually says. Unfortunately you are being objective with your interpretation, just like the rulers you are taking a jab at.

[I suppose he meant I was being subjective, because the rulers in my view were not being objective – fair point.]

The verse is referring to securing a good future for orphans. It doesn’t restrict the idea of polygamy to just marrying a widow. Because it goes on to say that if you fear that you may be unjust, then stick to one wife.  Simply because you are obliged to fulfil the rights of each wife, which is definitely not easy.

[Which was my point, I said polygamy was strongly discouraged because of difficulties with satisfying all the parties of the polygamy – I was highlighting the fact that human frailty was clearly identified as the issue – it would appear no one wants to accept that fact because they feel means and provision are the ready substitute for loving equally – sadly.]

Sunnahs and today

Abdulkadir then came back with this long comment

Muslims follow the both Qur'an and the Sunnah;  that’s (the sayings, actions, and approvals of Mohammad PBUH).

[Obviously, it is important to distinguish between the norms and mores of the 7^th Century compared with what can be the accepted in the 21^st Century – certain customs, traditions and habits of the 7^th Century as practised then cannot find expression today.]

(1). In Sahih Bukhari :: Book 7 :: Volume 62 :: Hadith 64 [I think he meant Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 Book 62 referring to the Nikaah ] Under Wedlock, Marriage (Nikaah), it been narrated from Aisha saying “that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).”

(2). In Sahih Muslim :: Book 8 : Hadith 3309 Under The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah),

 It’s been narrated from 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house at the age of nine. She further said: We went to Medina and I had an attack of fever for a month, and my hair had come down to the earlobes. Umm Ruman (my mother) came to me and I was at that time on a swing along with my playmates.

She called me loudly and I went to her and I did not know what she had wanted of me. She took hold of my hand and took me to the door, and I was saying: Ha, ha (as if I was gasping), until the agitation of my heart was over. She took me to a house, where had gathered the women of the Ansar. They all blessed me and wished me good luck and said: May you have share in good.

She (my mother) entrusted me to them. They washed my head and embellished me and nothing frightened me. Allah's Messenger (, may peace be upon him) came there in the morning, and I was entrusted to him.

[Without contention what was perfectly permissible in the times of the Prophet as betrothal at 6 and marriage at 9 in the 7^th Century cannot be justified in these times for medical, cultural and legal reasons in the 21^st Century – this is not aspersion on the acts of the leaders of religion, in much earlier times in Judaism Jacob the son of Isaac married two sisters something that is not considered acceptable in these times for medical, cultural and legal reasons too.]

Messages to obey?

[I am not sure if this last part constitutes a threat of sorts, because what we all should realise is that different people at different times in different places have had different messengers and messages that presage their religious allegiances – egregious and arrogance would not begin to explain the situation if any one religion begins to seek preponderance over all humanity – I would refer all readers back to the beginning of my blog and the statements of Lord Justice Laws .]

[If religions that predate accept that fact that there were differences between people, tribes, beliefs and systems whilst accommodating a sense of public secularly in those times – these modern times would more so deal unfavourably with belief system that impose themselves on others are not persuaded of the message they bring. Let me categorically state, I am not a Muslim and this is no time for crusades, jihads or lawlessness.]

Also in Chapter 4 Verse 80 Of The Holy Qur'an States. He who obeys the Messenger, has indeed obeyed Allah, but he who turns away, then We have not sent you as a watcher over them.

Meaning: Allah states that whoever obeys His servant and Messenger, Muhammad , obeys Allah; and whoever disobeys him, disobeys Allah. Verily, whatever the Messenger utters is not of his own desire, but a revelation inspired to him.

Leaders and rulers

Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah said, Whoever obeys me, obeys Allah; and whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah. Whoever obeys the Amir (leader, ruler), obeys me; and whoever disobeys the Amir, disobeys me.) This Hadith was recorded in the Two Sahihs. Allah's statement.

I am at a loss as to what this last part relates to with regards to the discourse but if Amir means leader and ruler we do have leaders and rulers in Nigeria who are custodians of our laws and constitution – where a legally constituted authority demands the attendance of any Nigerian citizen, I would suppose regardless of religion and adherence they are answerable to that authority.

I am still saddened that every comment has not addressed the material issue that in the 21^st Century a 13-year old girl has been given in marriage to a 49 year old who is bringing Islam into disrepute in these times and can brazenly defend his actions without sanction. That is a blight on our humanity and it is unfortunate.

Nigeria: Islam strongly discourages polygamy

On the trail to Imam-ship

It is a shame that a religious organisation failed to take the opportunity [1] to deal with a situation with objectivity, fairness and a sense of proportion.

Now, I find myself flipping through the pages of their own religious tome and ready to debunk accepted assertions which have been interpreted to suit the whims of men rather than the seeming divine purpose for which the verses were offered as inspiration.

On the matter of the Senator who took for a wife a 13-year old girl, I first argued that despite the moral outrage it garnered there were enough loopholes in the Nigerian constitution, the Marriage Act and the non-adoption of the Child Rights Act to allow for the marriage to be legal and not be subject to the Criminal Code.

A man’s lust over religious law

However, when the Senator decided to hide under the cloak of religion and the protection of Sharia Law, it brought on the fact that Sharia Law or any religious law was incompatible with civil society and took away from the state the ability to think for itself whilst it impacted unduly on the expressed freedom of the people.

In what that Senator said, there was scope for him to be sanctioned by any of the religious authorities of his faith for creating a situation that could bring the religion into disrepute (Something football associations would do without flinching to participants of the game) and for comparing himself to the Prophet Mohammed in trying to justify his now in modern times reprehensible action.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Council of Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) Kaduna State chapter has advised the Senator not to honour invitations by the authorities to defend his marriage to a juvenile and put up the defence of a verse in the Qur’an that had me digging for truth.

Not what the Qur’an says

Apparently, as they say, “Islam encourages men to marry women of their choice as mentioned in Qur’an 4 verse 2 without any emphasis on age limit.”

Forgive me if I am petulant as to ask if a woman is a direct substitute for female, such that I can call a female baby a woman or a girl a woman – I sure would not call a female of 13 a woman, just as I would not call a male of 13 a man. Generally, that would be a girl or a boy, but we have been asked to stretch the limits of credulity.

The Qur’an 4 verse 2 [2] finds me bereft of the connection between the interpretation and what the verse says.

Here, I have Arabic and 4 different English translations of the verse and all pertain to the care of orphans

2	وَآتُواْ الْيَتَامَى أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَتَبَدَّلُواْ الْخَبِيثَ بِالطَّيِّبِ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُواْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَى أَمْوَالِكُمْ إِنَّهُ كَانَ حُوباً كَبِيراً

Shakir 4:2

And give to the orphans their property, and do not substitute worthless (things) for (their) good (ones), and do not devour their property (as an addition) to your own property; this is surely a great crime.

yusufali 4:2

To orphans restore their property (When they reach their age), nor substitute (your) worthless things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by mixing it up) with your own. For this is indeed a great sin.

Pickthal 4:2

Give unto orphans their wealth. Exchange not the good for the bad (in your management thereof) nor absorb their wealth into your own wealth. Lo! that would be a great sin.

Al-Hilali 4:2

And give unto orphans their property and do not exchange (your) bad things for (their) good ones; and devour not their substance (by adding it) to your substance. Surely, this is a great sin.

But if the learned members of the Supreme Council of Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) Kaduna State chapter are now saying by reason of the use of acquisitive words as property and substance a woman is of such material value – that would be unfortunate.

Polygamy is marrying the widowed mothers

The oft touted justification for polygamy comes in the next verse and it bears no similarity to the activities of those with many wives.

Still continuing on the subject of orphans it says [3]

[4:3] If you deem it best for the orphans, you may marry their mothers - you may marry two, three, or four. If you fear lest you become unfair, then you shall be content with only one, or with what you already have. Additionally, you are thus more likely to avoid financial hardship.

A detailed commentary on that verse [4] asserts historical sources to say that the Prophet Mohammed only married the aged widows of friends who had many children to help offer a fatherly setting for the upbringing of the children, the other marriages were to establish specific ties or political alliances.

And now, the same verses [5] in Arabic and 4 English translations

3	وَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تُقْسِطُواْ فِي الْيَتَامَى فَانكِحُواْ مَا طَابَ لَكُم مِّنَ النِّسَاء مَثْنَى وَثُلاَثَ وَرُبَاعَ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ تَعْدِلُواْ فَوَاحِدَةً أَوْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَلاَّ تَعُولُواْ

Shakir 4:3

And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course.

yusufali 4:3

If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

Pickthal 4:3

And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice.

Al-Hilali 4:3

And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan-girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three, or four but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one or (the captives and the slaves) that your right hands possess. That is nearer to prevent you from doing injustice.

Still, one wife is best

The greater admonition is to avoid having more than one wife than to revel in polygamous abandon and at least this is for the care of orphans which by inference appears to mean those who have just lost their fathers as opposed to those who have lost all parents.

Marrying more than one wife is a costly venture but the subject of orphans continues on to verse 6 and it is clear that the orphans are children, they are immature, they cannot inherit their substance until a particular age and are definitely not to be taken as wives.

It would appear the juxtaposition of orphans, women and marriage really only pertains to polygamy in the marriage to widowed mothers and nothing else. Even I never expected the Qu’ran to be that prescriptive and then to find that it has been misused to satisfy the proclivities of sexually perverse men – unbelievable.

You can never be a successful polygamist

The whole of Sura (Chapter) 4 Al-Nesaa, appears to deal with the subject of women, orphans, marriage and matters of the family and down at verse 129, it says without equivocation, you can never be a successful polygamist no matter how much you try and it is better you do not create the situation where you fall foul of God’s law. But no, satisfying the lust first before the law has always been the way of man.

129	وَلَن تَسْتَطِيعُواْ أَن تَعْدِلُواْ بَيْنَ النِّسَاء وَلَوْ حَرَصْتُمْ فَلاَ تَمِيلُواْ كُلَّ الْمَيْلِ فَتَذَرُوهَا كَالْمُعَلَّقَةِ وَإِن تُصْلِحُواْ وَتَتَّقُواْ فَإِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ غَفُوراً رَّحِيماً

Shakir 4:129

And you have it not in your power to do justice between wives, even though you may wish (it), but be not disinclined (from one) with total disinclination, so that you leave her as it were in suspense; and if you effect a reconciliation and guard (against evil), then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

yusufali 4:129

Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire: But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise self-restraint, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Pickthal 4:129

Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so). But turn not altogether away (from one), leaving her as in suspense. If ye do good and keep from evil, lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.

Al-Hilali 4:129

You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision) so as to leave the other hanging (i.e. neither divorced nor married). And if you do justice, and do all that is right and fear Allâh by keeping away from all that is wrong, then Allâh is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Sadly, it is the men, the leaders and representatives of the religion that are bringing their holy faiths into disrepute by their actions and where they should speak up for the truth they have succumbed to sentiment and deplorable conduct that finds no backing from the holy tomes they take their teaching from.

Surely, for such hypocrisy that can be no better reward than eternal damnation.

Sources

[1] Leadership Nigeria - For God and Country: Don’t Honour Invitations, Muslim Group Tells Yarima

[2] TheQuran.com - Read, إقرأ: 4:2

[3] The Authorized English Translation of the Quran,Qur'an, Koran- Sura - 4 , Women (Al-Nesaa'), translated from the original by Dr. Rashad Khalifa, Ph.D.  A most enlightening translation of the chapter.

[4] The Islamic Calendars and Others- Understanding, calculating Ramadan, Hajj and other Islamic events-Hilal-Crescent-new-Calendar-dates-Prophet Muhammed, Mohammed-Islam (Submission)-Hadith and Sunna in Islam (Submission)- Ahadith-Sunnah-Quran, Qur'an, Koran

[5] TheQuran.com - Read, إقرأ: 4:3

[6] TheQuran.com - Read, إقرأ: 4:129

It's Only a Book

It’s only a book

I remember a song from my childhood when I watched the children’s program the lyrics stuck in my head for days; any idle moment was occupied by that song seeping into my mental tranquillity.

The first two lines went thus:

It’s only a book
Paper bound in leather and glue

I cannot remember the other lines but this is sufficient for the purposes I have raised it.

Abusing the Quran

The newswires are now excited with the news that a US soldier in Iraq had used a Quran for target practice; it was riddled with bullet holes and scrawled through with graffiti.

In any event, I would consider this act utterly insensitive, probably outrageous but I would offer the offender the benefit of the doubt that he was not malicious.

The American Army in Iraq has apologised to the local tribal leaders and hopefully, this will not be hijacked by malevolent forces to bring people unnecessarily onto the streets in protest.

Books, words and acts

I would concur that many religions have their books of knowledge and Scripture, which adherents hold in varying degrees of reverence, but a book on its own does not constitute anything in and of itself.

It has to have words that are read, meditated upon, voiced in prayer or preaching to make any sort of impact.

I would be very sorry if a rare version of the Quran, the Bible or the Torah were destroyed in some Barbaric vandalism, such a book might be irreplaceable but the import of the words would not be all the more potent if the same words were read from a modern-day cheap reproduction.

The benefit we have beyond the days of Johannes Gutenberg is that a basic Bible or Quran can be easily replaced by going to the shops without making wanton destruction affect us so adversely.

Giving books reverence

I remember the reverence with which people picked up their Bibles when accidentally dropped them, they were overcome with a combined sense of guilt and piety as they picked up the book and bowed their heads into it in mock worship.

I would be very concerned if the book were to accidentally leave the grasp of a holder and then fail to obey the laws of gravity just as I would have been concerned that religious books had such powers as to be resistant to the impact of bullets.

A book is a reference document; the quality of the information in it is only as good as how it is used; hopefully for the benefit of mankind – if a book begins to exhibit onomatopoeic tendencies without human influence or anthropomorphic attributes, one might be persuaded to say the book is bewitched.

Yet, we ascribe without thought powers to books which they do not have as inanimate objects – because only the realisation that the content when read can influence situations has any potency.

Between reverence and survival

It is only a book, paper bound in leather and glue.

I would wonder what would happen if one were caught in a dire survival situation where a fire was an essential thing to maintain life – one would hope that the essential bits of information to maintain faith and hope would have already been committed to memory – allowing for the book to be set on fire to provide warmth.

However, appealing to a greater sense of civility, I would hope that this matter would be treated with temperance and put in perspective whilst accepting the apology offered.

Religious fervour is not well served by bringing the mob onto the streets to protest about the peacefulness of one’s religion.

It’s only a book, paper bound in leather and glue, what would happen if one smashed a computer screen where the words in the book appear?