So,we should declare general amnesty as well.

[/QUOTE]Obviously, it seems number of forgiven people is overwhelmingly large.[/QUOTE]

So, we are supposed to adopt the most-practised version of Islam.
It's nearer to Sunnah as well then.

[/QUOTE]Who said that Al Raheequl Makhtoom is a source of Islamic Law,let alone the
sole or unanimous source of law...?[/QUOTE]

Primary sources of laws are Quran and Sunnah (most-authentic books) and they are not clear in this regard. (I am not Questioning the authenticity of Al-Raheequl Makhtoom, but we can't rely on it while adopting a law).


[/QUOTE]Ijma' and Qiyas are secondary sources and can be applied only when we don't find some ruling in primary rulings.... and that too with certain conditions...[/QUOTE]

Yes, and as I've mentioned above Quran and Sunnah are not so loud in this case so we can adopt the options of Ijma and Qiyas in this matter and as you said there was general amnesty, we can extrapolate the thought.


[/QUOTE]Law is not implemented on the wishes of people, rather it is implemented on all subjects of the Islamic state... whether someone likes it or not... and by the way same is the case with almost all countries...
[/QUOTE]

You can apply Islamic Law to Islamic state just.

[/QUOTE]well our or certain class of Muslims's failure does not mean that we stop implementing Islam, rather Islam must be implemented and you will see that Muslims who are negligent will also become responsible... or at least majority of them. In Sha ALLAH[/QUOTE]

Not a certain class...A Major population of Pakistan comprises non-practising Muslims.



[/QUOTE]Well I dont what you mean by organised blasphemy, but for any specific answer please refer to any authentic Aalim e Deen.[/QUOTE]

These all things are related but we have to put a little thought on it.


[/QUOTE]This is your personal thoughts, and about incidents of era of Hazrat Ali R.A., we will not be asked about that... we need to act as per commandments of Shariah and implement Islam. and then we will be successful... as there is a meaning of Ayat...
You will be dominant if you are a believer.. (or as stated in the verse)[/QUOTE]

Who was supposed to act and love more according to Shariah? If Ali R.A did not punished the blasphemers (related to mis-treatment of Quran) then we, too, are not supposed to act, intolerantly in this regard.

[/QUOTE]this is a little effort for understanding.. and not for point scoring...May ALLAH SWT bless us all to the right path and make us true believers. Aameen[/QUOTE]
Nobody is point scoring here, every body speaks about his own "known" facts (knowledge we say it) and to judge where he stands in this regard (It's what I do at least)...
Allah knows everything, but few things we are supposed to know as as well..

Its strange thesis of yours.... just to clarify we Muslims and Pakistanis are do not hold false belief that we will conquer India ...
rather there is a Hadith of Holy Prohphet S.A.W.W. about Gazwa e Hind... you can easily find its reference. and as hazrat Muhammad S.A.W.W. the last Prophet of ALLAH SWT and the most truthful human, so there must not be any 'may be' rather its must that Muslims will take part in Gahzwae Hind...

in addition to this, if Muslims follow the Deen, they will rule as Allah SWT's said in the Holy Quran al Kareem that (the meaning of which is)

you will be the dominant if you are a believer...
(or as said by ALLAH SWT in the Holy Quran)

so, no doubt Muslims will dominate, but they have to become believers first...
[And ALLAH SWT knows best]

Quote:

Historically we have done nothing but siding with the hordes storming into India from central asia . And even with the British Raj, where hindus were learning and adopting features of the British we were just providing them with soldiers to help control India . As a result today's India is much more economically vibrant

Well its not that we only 'sided with the hordes' rather we were overthrown by the enemy and we fought and retaliated.... further, Muslims have to defend the Deen as well as them selves,while Hindus didn't have any deen rather they were basically following some practices of their forefathers which were also not attacked by britishers... hence, comparison of Hindus and Muslims is not appropriate....
Secondly, its really strange that you relate India's present day economic progress to their so called learning in british rule.... if its so, India would have achieved the title of economic power few years after 1947... but its not so.... because... its only after 1990s that India has changed its economic fundamentals and started to recover from its poor economic condition.... Hindus did very cunningly won the support of britishers and got certain benefits at the time of independence from their masters... but its not true that they were so 'learned' that their present day economic progress can be termed as their british era learning...

We unfortunately, are so overwhelmed by others' temporary progress, that we tend to lack faith and confidence in our own self specially being Muslims...

We will rule,In Sha ALLAH but first we have to become believers.... nothing can conquer us if we behold our DEEN firmly...... present day difficulties are due to our negligence, carelessness, and due to leaving the right path...

May ALLAH SWT forgive us all and keep us all among His beloved ones and true believers. Ameen

[And Allah SWT Knows best]

My upper statement was with regard to punishments at the time of fath e Makkah...

at the time of Fath e Mkkah there was announced general amnesty.... but some narrate that a women was among those who were killed. her name was qareeba and her crime was that she committed blasphemy....
however, Sayyed Suleman Nadvi and Allama Shibli Nomani discussed it held difference of opinion.

And ALLAH SWT KNOWS BEST

[QUOTE=RAO RAMEEZ;781445]
Well, I never intended that there was general amnesty for blasphemers at all times or as a rule... rather I mentioned the situation at the time of Fathe Makkah.... that Prophet Muhammad S.A.W.W.granted general amnesty at the time Fateh Makkah (conquest of Makkah)
I am extremely sorry if i failed to convey my meaning properly and I seek ALLAH SWT's forgiveness too...




Shariah will govern and prevail over all the subjects of Islamic State... and if at certain instances, certain relaxations are given in Shariah to non Muslims.. this does not mean that at those instances Shariah get relaxed... rather those relaxations will also derive their sanctity from Shariah... thus those relaxations will be provided to non Muslims because of Shariah.


Although there was a survey,a year or two back, in which overwhelming Muslims of Pakistan aspired that Shariah be implemented around 80% plus, however, even if your claim is true, this can not be a justification for not implementing Shariah...

[And ALLAH SWT knows best]

The punishment of blasphemy is the severest.


"Perish the two hands of Abu Lahab and perish he" Chapter 111 V. 1


Abu Lahab (Father of Flame) was the nickname of ‘Abd Al-’Uzza, the Holy Prophet’s uncle and his inveterate enemy and persecutor. He was so called either because his complexion and hair were ruddy or also because he had a fiery temper. The Surah recalls an incident during the early preaching of the Holy Prophet (abundant peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). On being commanded by Allah (abundant peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to call together his relatives and to deliver to them the Divine Message, the Holy Prophet, one day, stood on mount Safa and called the different Meccan (Makkah’s) tribes by name, the tribes of Luwayy, Murrah, Kilab and Qusayy and his near relatives, and told them that he is God’s Messenger, and that if they did not accept his Message and did not give up their evil ways, Divine punishment would overtake them. The Holy Prophet had hardly his speech, when Abu Lahab stood up and said, ‘Ruin seize thee, is it for this that thou hast called us together’ (Bukhari).

The above event certifies that the punishment of blasphemy indeed is severe and Allah Himself ordains it.

And these two authentic holy ahadith must end all the debate, whatsoever, to confuse the issue, in my view, this must:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 582:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:

On the day of the Conquest, the Prophet entered Mecca, wearing a helmet on his head. When he took it off, a man came and said, “Ibn e Khatal is clinging to the curtain of the Ka’ba.” The Prophet said, “Kill him.”

Sahih Bukahri Volume 5, Book 59, Number 369

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:

Allah’s Apostle said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). “The Prophet said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.” On that, Kab said, “By Allah, you will get tired of him!” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food.”

(Some difference between narrators about a camel load or two.) Kab said, “Yes, (I will lend you), but you should mortgage something to me.” Muhammad bin Mas-lama and his companion said, “What do you want?” Ka’b replied, “Mortgage your women to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the ‘Arabs?” Ka’b said, “Then mortgage your sons to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people’s saying that so-and-so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you. “Muhammad bin Maslama and his companion promised Kab that Muhammad would return to him. He came to Kab at night along with Kab’s foster brother, Abu Na’ila. Kab invited them to come into his fort, and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, “Where are you going at this time?” Kab replied, “None but Muhammad bin Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na’ila have come.” His wife said, “I hear a voice as if dropping blood is from him, Ka’b said. “They are none but my brother Muhammad bin Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed.” Muhammad bin Maslama went with two men. (Some narrators mention the men as ‘Abu bin Jabr. Al Harith bin Aus and Abbad bin Bishr). So Muhammad bin Maslama went in together with two men, and sail to them, “When Ka’b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. I will let you smell his head.” Kab bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Muhammad bin Maslama said. “have never smelt a better scent than this. Ka’b replied. “I have got the best Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume.” Muhammad bin Maslama requested Ka’b “Will you allow me to smell your head?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” Muhammad smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka’b again, “Will you let me (smell your head)?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions), “Get at him!” So they killed him and went to the Prophet and informed him. (Abu Rafi) was killed after Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf.”

I hate it so much when 'the only true Muslims' as they perceive themselves lie so blatantly man. A ghazwa was a war in which Holy Prophet (SAW) participated himself. It's clear Muslims didn't conquer any region south of indus river during Holy Prophet (SAW) lifetime. It suggests that these beliefs are similar to Christian beliefs, second coming of Holy Prophet (SAW). Why isn't that a blasphemy.

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.

I seek Allah SWT's forgiveness and protection from any lie and specially from conveying false Hadith....Ma'az Allah... it was never intended.....

Actually I didn't mentioned the reference due to laziness and partly because it was a famous topic, but,now i realize that I should have....


Anyhow, please read the following




1. Hazrat Abu Hurairah (R.A.) says that my intimate friend Hazrat Muhammad (P.B.U.H.) told me that:

“ In this Ummah, the troops would be headed towards Sindh & Hind”

[or as and what stated by prophet Muhammad S.A.W.W.]

Hazrat Abu Hurairah (R.A.) says that if I could find a chance to participate in any of such movement & (while participating in it) I be got martyred, then well & good; if came back as a survived warrior, then I would be a free Abu Hurairah, to whom Allah Almighty would have given freedom from the Hell.”


With these words, only Imam bin Hambal (R) narrated this Hadees in ‘Masnad’.






2. HADEES OF HADHRAT SUBAN (R.A.) the freed servant of Hadhrat Muhammad (Sall-Allaho-’Alayhe-Wasallam) :

It is being related to Hadhrat Suban (R.A.) that Hadhrat Muhammad (Sall-Allaho-’Alayhe-Wasallam) told that:

“Two groups amongst My Ummah would be such, to whom Allah has freed from fire; One group would attack India & the Second would be that who would accompany Isa Ibn-e-Maryam (A.S.).”

[or as and what stated by Prophet Muhammad S.A.W.W]

The following Hadees quoters has quoted this Hadees as it is:

Imam Ahmad (R) in ‘Masnad’.

Imam Nisai (R) in ‘As Sunan Al Mujtaba’.

Sheikh Nasir-ud-Din Albani (R) approved this Hadees.

Same as in ‘As Sunan Al Kubra’.

Ibn-e-Abi Asim (R) in ‘Kitab Al Jihad’.

Ibn-e-Adi in ‘Al Kamil Fee Zaufa Ar Rijal’.

Tibrani (R) in ‘Al Mojam Al Aust’.




And there are others too on the topic of hind....however,I am not a Muhaddis, therefore not sure about the degree of these Ahadiths or sayings. however, these are just to prove that I didn't intend to tell lie... rather... topic is present in book of Ahadith... however, if one wants to know, he must consult an Aalim e Deen to know about level or grade of their authenticity.

May ALLAH SWT Protect us all from telling and spreading lies and make us true believers. Aameen

[and ALLAH SWT knows best]

If anyone calls our parents the filthiest of names, swears at them, we are almost always willing to pull our swords out and behead the very next man, that comes naturally, but when it comes to the matter of blasphemy against the being who is held far more respectfully, lovingly than a Muslim's parents, the defense of his honor, a certain quarters must have to jump in and dirty the issue.

Allah, the Mightiest King, says:

(But no, by your Lord, they can have no faith, until they make you judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept with full submission.) (4:65) In the Sahih it says:

(By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, none of you truly believes until I am dearer to him than his own self, his wealth, his children and all the people.) It was also reported in the Sahih that `Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, said: "O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, you are dearer to me than everything except myself.'' He said:

(No, O `Umar, not until I am dearer to you than yourself.) `Umar said: "O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, now you are dearer to me than everything, even myself.'' He said,

(Now, O `Umar ﴿ you have got it right. Allah says in this Ayah

(The Prophet is closer to the believers than themselves,) Concerning this Ayah, Al-Bukhari narrated from Abu Hurayrah, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet said:


(There is no believer except I am the closest of all people to him in this world and in the Hereafter. Recite, if you wish: (The Prophet is closer to the believers than themselves.)


Selfless, endless, self-denying, incorruptible love and loyalty to the Holy Prophet (abundant peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the basic requirement of Islam, the need for a believer, thus his honor and worthiness is the inherent part of our Imaan, without the protection of which, we cannot practice Islam as are desired and willed by the mother of all laws in Pakistan, the Constitution, how there can even be a talk about altering the blasphemy law, leave alone, repealing it. Yes, for sure, the way the law is handled owing to the inefficiency of the state, not of the the individuals, can, at all times, be discussed; there is no objection to that.

The freedom of expression that the West and its puppets are seen championing and take cover in, doesn't come without limits. Blasphemy, defamation, incitement to hatred, discrimination against a person et cetera, are not permitted free play alongside the freedom of expression, even in the most reputed societies.

I quote the pertinent article from the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as amended by Protocols No. 11 and No. 14,

Article 10 – Freedom of expression

2: The exercise of these freedoms [freedom of expression], since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

"For the protection of morals", "for the protection of the reputation of others", how, in such a transparent manner with nothing left ambiguous, addresses this article of International Law the whole matter, sums all of it up literally.

Keeping the aforementioned in consideration, the Pakistani state "regulated" the freedom of speech, as it ought to have, always, been:

19 Freedom of speech, etc.
Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law "in the interest of the glory of Islam" or the integrity, security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, 30[commission of] 30 or incitement to an offence.



Following laws/sections were made part of the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), in line with the requirement of Article 19 of the Constitution:


295. Injuring or defiling place of worship, with Intent to insult the religion of any class:
Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction damage or defilement as an insult to their religion. shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

295-A. Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting Its religion or religious beliefs:
Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the 'religious feelings of any class of the citizens of Pakistan, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations insults the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both.

295-C. Use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet:
Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.



The glory of Islam is uncompromisable, the constitution authorizes the state to defend the glory of Islam, the deen of the True Sovereign (as submissively accepted by the Constitution), yes, the King Allah! I am thankful to Him alone for having been born in this land of pure, the beautiful, faithful Pakistan.

I am not doubtful of your intention brother you didn't mean to lie, it's not your fault because these kinds of things have been propagated in this country for long time . I would recommend before starting to believe in something try to do complete research in order to bring truth out first. You should be aware that in 7th century there was no such thing as India , hind was name of abu sufyan wife and the Persians used to call area south of indus as hindu or something. Moreover it wasn't in Holy Prohphet S.A.W.W nature to make predictions like that, atleast as far as I can understand it maybe I am wrong but.... I consider these hadith as baseless and locally concocted for somebody's ambition of conquest and superiority. For me Islam is not just a tool for conquest and power .

I derive such conclusion on the basis that he S.A.A.W often avoided giving clear answers to questions posed about future by saying Allah knows best. And the fact that he S.A.W.W disliked fortune telling and warned Muslims about following them

__________________
The precondition for existence of a higher humanity is not the state, but the nation possessing the necessary ability.