Asif 1

Muhammad Talha Asif

2018-11-0322

SS: 100

Dr. Aamna Khalid

The Salman Rushdie Case: An Islamic View- Dr. Khalid Zaheer

Whenever any attempt is made to tabulate the act of blasphemy against the Holy Prophet,

the name of Salman Rushdie comes to the forefront. Salman Rushdie, a British Indian essayist and

novelist, is accused of blaspheming against the Prophet and committing apostasy by writing a book

Satanic Verses in 1988. The book resulted in vehement protests all across the world especially in

Muslim countries; this situation further worsened when Ayatollah Khomeini, Supreme Leader of

Iran, issued a fatwa ordering the Muslims to demand the head of Salman Rushdie. Considering the

situation a modern day scholar and the author, Dr. Zaheer who has devoted his life towards the

promotion of true Islamic teachings and currently a scholar at Understanding Islam UK (UIUK)

which is a non-political organization established in the UK wrote an article The Salman Rushdie

Case: An Islamic View in July 2007. Dr. Zaheer believes that death penalty is not the punishment

for blasphemy and apostasy in Islam, and he mainly presented his argument in the light of Koran.

The text certainly have influenced the perception of Muslims, who believe in death punishment

for Rushdie or are indifferent at this stance but it also provides the clear picture of Islam to non-

Muslims. Dr. Zaheer aptly uses uncomplicated words and scholarly tone complimented by

effective usage of Koranic verses to present his logically organized arguments in The Salman
 Asif 2

Rushdie Case: An Islamic View. However, his incapability to develop certain claims sufficiently

questions his ability to make readers entirely satisfied.

Dr. Zaheer attempts to justify how the demand for Salman Rushdies head, based on the

charges of apostasy and blasphemy, is unjust as there is not a prescribed punishment for both

crimes mentioned by Allah or the Prophet himself. He believes that the case is just an emotionally

charged and by accepting it lives of many will be at stake and Islam will be projected as a barbaric

religion.

The classic use of simple words and scholarly tone increases the effectiveness of Dr. Zaheer

arguments by letting the audience understand a complicated and sensitive issue in an easy way. He

uses very easy and simple words that enable the audience to effortlessly understand his claims.

Considering the fact that Islamic jurisprudence is quite complicated and complex to understand

and then using Islamic teachings to find the solution to a particular problem is the real milestone,

but by using unembellished and plain language, the writer is easily able to convey his stance but

also able to convince his audience. Dr. Zaheer used words such as vast majority or mainly

held, certainly does represent the bigger population but not the entire population of Muslim

community, in this way he effectively able to exclude those who not hold the same belief, thus

increasing the integrity and trust worthiness of his work and also able to prevent himself from

logical fallacy known as sweeping generalization (3). Similarly to aid understanding of Quranic

verses to target audience, i.e. both Muslims and non-Muslims in a better way, Dr. Zaheer has

incorporated some supplementary words in the brackets such as So repel (bad behaviour) with an

attitude (5). Besides the use of easily understandable words, the writer presents his

claims in a scholarly tone that helps him in persuading the audience. The mastery over scholarly
 Asif 3

tone helps him by getting his message on board without invoking any emotional outrage. For

instance when Dr. Zaheer was rebutting the opponent claims, it was quite visible that instead of

attacking to personalities or ridiculing other way, he based his arguments on Islamic Jurisprudence

and rationality. Even when mentioning about hardships and torture Prophet faced, instead of

exaggerating or bringing personal emotions into the context, the focus was on logic, and his tone

remain the same as of when mentioning about opponents claim. This not just shows his

professionalism toward work, but it also increases the credibility and effectiveness of his case.

Furthermore, the direct approach taken by him i.e. by asking questions and answering in the article

also able readers to identify the problem and get an immediate solution. For instance, he said .

Is the punishment for a murtad death? My clear answer. (2).This will able reader to understand

the situation effectually and well without deviating from the main focus. Scholarly tone and simple

words aid him in his mission of conveying his words and convincing his audience.

Apart from presenting his ideas in simple words and scholarly tone, Dr. Zaheers effective

use of Koran and Holy Prophet behavior against blasphemy facilitated him in conveying his

message. Koran and the behavior of Holy Prophet is always held in high esteem by Muslims and

Muslims rigorously believe in following these, further there are no contradictions among Muslims

in these two. Considering this fact, he used Koranic verses and reference at many occasions to

present his argument adequately and to increase his arguments credibility. Not just that the use of

Koranic verses also demonstrates the use of ethos by making his argument more ethical and logos

by making it more logical. It is here interesting to note that Islamic law also includes Ijma and

Qiyas, but he refrains from using these two since these two sources are usually ambiguous, and

many people have concerns regarding their authenticity. So by using only two most authentic

sources i.e. Koran and Sunnah, author ensures that the arguments presented, are backed by solid
 Asif 4

facts and clear statements. Further he also strengthens his argument by taking back us to Prophet

times and informs the reader how the Prophet was insulted, and it was even mentioned in the Koran

but neither Allah nor the Prophet himself designated any particular punishment for the

blasphemers. This sway readers towards his vision that death is not the punishment of blasphemy.

Also he cites this verse Believers, don't make disbelievers your friends who tease and make fun

of your religionWhen you are called for prayers, they make it an object of ridicule.", the writer

is able to tell the audience that people used to ridicule Islam (the religion of the Prophet) even

when the Prophet was alive but Allah did not order in the Quran to kill those who made fun of

religion of the Prophet instead, believers were only asked not to make such people their friends

(4). The mentioning of the Quranic verses and Prophet Response to blasphemy makes Dr. Zaheers

argument very strong and assists him accomplishing the purpose of his article.

Similarly, Dr. Zaheer also strengthened his argument that death is not the punishment of

blasphemy and apostasy with a logical progression and good organization of ideas, which allows

readers to absorb all facets of the controversy without deviating from the main focus. He first

identified the reason behind the new wave of protests among Muslims, followed by the fully

developed explanations by the opponents, to ensure that readers are not left unaware of the subject

in the first place hence inducing them to read the article, but it also improves his credibility that he

respects the opposing stance by giving it full consideration. After setting up the stage for the

discussion, Dr. Zaheer not just simply comes towards the solution, but before that he brings in the

factors that are important for discussion by saying I would like to emphasize two important issues

Muslims must not ignore in this debate, hence showing that he is fully aware of the situation and

have enough knowledge that play a pivotal role in bringing the reader in agreement to the writers

point of view (1). He then presented a stance from the Koran under which person can be killed,
 Asif 5

hence effectively comparing situations under which person can be or cannot be killed, hence

enabling readers to analyze the situation in a broader context by giving them the whole picture.

After discussing apostasy in the light of Koran and Hadith, he discussed the blasphemy cases

highlighted in the Koran, showing the smooth progression from one topic to another able readers

to digest all information easily. He brings in new ideas to the text in each paragraph by

guaranteeing no repetition so that audience arent bored. In the last, after coming up with the main

claim, he also discussed some what if conditions like he said If we assume that .., for

discussing these type of the situation its not just the most appropriate place since readers till now

have the complete picture of the whole case, but by bringing these type of statements Dr. Zaheer

was also able to discuss different facets of the situation enabling readers to think even out of the

certain boundaries hence giving them comprehensive review. The well-organized ideas and logical

flow allow readers to remain well informed and make article coherent by not making them bored.

The article portrays Dr. Zaheers thorough ability to ground his logically organized

arguments, but it also highlights his inability to provide sufficient development for certain claims

making it challenging to convince the readers entirely. This can be clearly seen from his lack of

ability to differentiate between blasphemy and mischief. He quoted from the Koran that Islamic

state has the authority to kill a person who kill other person and create mischief on earth. In the

same paragraph, he described mischief as causing the life, property, or honour of the common

people to be at the stake. which clearly indicates that mischief also includes dishonouring

anyone and for which punishment is death (3). This is certainly a logically flawed argument as the

honor of the Holy Prophet is at stake in the offence of blasphemy then how can it not be attributed

as a mischief. In this argument, Dr. Zaheer couldnt maintain the coherence between his definition

of mischief and Qurans stance on killing people who did mischief, thus making the readers
 Asif 6

confused and project him as inconsiderate and impertinent and readers are unable to come up with

the ultimate decision since one of the most important argument contradicts which also effects

overall credibility of the article. The use of such insufficiently developed and contradictory claims

makes it perplexing for the writer to convince the reader and achieve his purpose.

Even though Dr. Zaheer fails to accomplish entirely his purpose of convincing the audience

that killing is not the penalty of blasphemy and apostasy but he does bring to light several critical

issues concerning to blasphemy. For example, he terms the demand for Rushdies head to be anti-

Islamic and dangerous and his argument seems valid since it will otherwise cause large scale

murders and killings and even deciding whether a person committed blasphemy would be another

chaos, considering everyone has different intensity of faith. For example in Pakistan the

punishment of blasphemy is killing, and these laws have made the situation worse. It not only

increased the killing of civilians to quote one, ex-Governor Punjab Dr. Salman Taseer, where one

of his body guards accused him of blasphemy and shot him, but Islamic Jihadist also have so far

killed masses of innocents for the sake of religion in Pakistan based on a very similar ideology.

Now very interesting question arouse in all Pakistanis mind if God nor Prophet himself

recommended any punishment than on what grounds have the Muslim scholars of Pakistan

constructed blasphemy laws and set death as its punishment?. Also considering the fact that

respecting the Prophet and defending his honour is part of Muslims faith but then the question

arises what as a Muslim we should do? Should we punish who commits blasphemy? Or wait till

the Day of Judgment? If we are responsible for punishing then what should be punishment? Should

the fair trial be given before punishment? Certainly Muslims scholar from all over the world should

get on the same page and come up with some decisive solution certainly under the lights of Koran

and Hadith.
 Asif 7

Dr. Zaheer with the reference from Koran aided by unembellished words and scholarly

tone able him to present his ideas in a logically organized way but fail to convince his readers

fully due inadequate development of certain claims. With cohesive and coherent development of

these claims he could have had a more significant impact on his audience and would have been

able to convey his purpose in a better way, but still through the effective use of Koranic verses and

logical flow of ideas stir readers to find the core issue and come up with the solution. Overall this

article is the need of time since even now many people are being arrested, harassed, tortured or

even murdered if they commit blasphemy by Muslims whereas Islam real message is of peace

and tolerance. Muslims scholars such as Dr. Zaheer certainly needs to increase awareness among

Muslims by writing more articles, holding sessions, seminars and giving sermons.

Words Count: 2022

Works Cited

Zaheer, Khalid. "The Salman Rushdie Case: An Islamic View." Khalid Zaheer. July 2007. Web.

19 Apr. 2015.

<http://www.khalidzaheer.com/essays/kzaheer/criticism/the_salman_rushdie_case.html>.