The issue of Blasphemy in Islam

[Leonardo17]

On January 7 two terrorists entered the magazine’s offices and killed caretaker Frédéric Boisseau. They then forced cartoonist Corinne (“Coco”) Rey to enter the security code that granted access to the second floor, where an editorial meeting was being held. The attackers stormed into the newsroom, and police officer Franck Brinsolaro, who had been detailed to protect Charlie Hebdo editor Stéphane (“Charb”) Charbonnier, was shot before he had the chance to draw his weapon. The attackers then asked for Charbonnier and four other cartoonists—Jean (“Cabu”) Cabut, Georges (“Wolin”) Wolinski, Bernard (“Tignous”) Verlhac, and Philippe (“Honoré”) Honoré—by name before killing them as well. Their other victims were economist Bernard Maris and psychoanalyst Elsa Cayat, both columnists for Charlie Hebdo, copy editor Mustapha Ourrad, and journalist Michel Renaud, a guest at the meeting.
 
One of the pictures that had provoked their anger was this:


 
 
So the subject of this topic blasphemy. My first comment on this is that there is no blasphemy in this event. In fact really love French cartoons like Tintin from Herger or “Asterix the Gaul”. I also read other type of French cartoonists like Raid Sattouf. So I read Chalie Hebdo after I heard the attacks. Honestly, I didn’t like it. Don’t misunderstand me. I like critical and sometimes mocking types of humor even cartoons that include violence and strong language. But I found Charlie Hebdo too superficial. What they do is to take some popular convictions on religious issues and transform it into pictures via some personalities that they call “Muhammed” or “The Pope” or “Jesus”. Whatever. Everyone has his / her taste of humor. That is not the type of comics that brings me to tears. The comic above says “1000 whips for you if you don’t laugh to tears”. – Well, sorry, I don’t.
And I don’t see the blasphemy in it either.
In the Kuran there are stories of Jews who killed the prophet Jesus. That’s blasphemy because they betrayed the prophet who was sent by God. Also, there are many scholars who condemn the whole Arab nation. Why? Because they betrayed the legacy of the prophet. They betrayed and killed the son-in-law of the prophet and his followers, although he was supposed to be the spiritual leader of the Muslim nation after the death of the prophet. These are the two most mentioned blasphemies that are mentioned in the books that I read.
But Charlie Hebdo? In the year 2015? In France? I honestly don’t know what this guys or the attacker of Jamal Kashoggi 1 month ago were thinking. I checked the book “The Satanic Verses” on Scribd. Again, all I saw was another literary book that some people found interesting. I didn’t read it because I don’t have time to read every book that appears in the media. But many people like it and it is said to deal with issues of immigration. So again: What’s the deal?
I read about the story a certain devil whispering false Verses to the prophet, and than the prophet should have erased it etc… Again: What’s the deal? My book it right here isn’t it? And the devil didn’t write it? So where is the problem?
 
Beside all this: there are 3 orders to kill in the Kuran that I know of:
1) There is the story of the prophet Abraham who was sent a lamb by God so that he would offer the lamb to his deity and not his son. Personally I don’t even make sacrifices. I makes charity instead. But Yes, at the end of Ramadan and during the pilgrimage in Mecca offerings and made and the meat is distributed to the poor.
2) War. Contrarily to popular belief holy war is a defensive issue. My current understanding is that only when the enemy comes to your door to kill and murder you, only than you have the right to take up arm and to defend yourself and your country. Otherwise all wars are nothing but mass murder. Again, the scholars that I am reading largely seem to support my view on this.
3) Terrorism, espionage, propagandists (The word used in the Kuran is “those who come to create serious trouble). In this case the order is to “look for them from every watch tower” to find them and to make them unable to hurt anyone (to kill them). Famous terrorists like Hassan Sabah existed in medieval times also. To deal with fanatics and real trouble makers you have no other solution. You have to do exactly what the CIA did to Osama Bin Laden. No more, no less )
 
/ So these guys are maniacs. In fact they are exactly what is mentioned in the previous paragraph. And they are once again creating what we call negative Karma for their being because the Kuran also mentions divine consequences for people who kill. Basically, the “thou shalt not kill” commandment cannot be said to be absent from the Kuran either )
 
One issue to be mentioned here is that idolatry is not allowed in Islam (everybody must have heard that by now). If somebody was to worship such picture. It would be considered a serious sin for the maker of those images and for the worshiper of those images. Once again: There is no death or whipping penalty for that either.
 
In fact, I have mentioned war. See according to Islam you don’t even walk to a conquered city, murder and rape everyone, raze the city to the ground, and forcibly convert the inhabitants. There is a whole legal system on the treatment of non-Muslim population. So Mehmet II, when he conquered Constantinople, went to the Hagia Sofia and told the Greeks there that from now on, they had become his subjects and that he would be their rulers. Indeed, the Greek kept living peacefully in Constantinople until 1955, when some fanatical / fascist / political Islamist mobs plundered all their belongings and they were forced to flee to Greece.
  
So unfortunately, Islam has become like a trademark that is being used unlawfully and without authorization by almost everyone who wants to sell this or that ware to you. But I am not going to buy these things. If these things were left free of charge to my door, I wouldn’t pick them up and I would let the doorman take it to the trash for me. That’s my religious view on the issue.   
 
One thing I might add: I could personally be angry if someone overtly insulted say, a historical figure that I really admire. But, again, personally, I could physically hit that person if I am on a bad day. But, you don’t kill people. I was taught that, religiously speaking, you simply don’t kill. So, one has to know that these people are doing the exact opposite.

[The Grand Nudger]

Beside all this: there are 3 orders to kill in the Kuran that I know of:

.......seems like maybe three too many?

1) There is the story of the prophet Abraham who was sent a lamb by God so that he would offer the lamb to his deity and not his son. Personally I don’t even make sacrifices. I makes charity instead. But Yes, at the end of Ramadan and during the pilgrimage in Mecca offerings and made and the meat is distributed to the poor.

I'm a super nerd.  The charity side of the sacrificial operation is cool as fuck...but you do have to ask, why does god want you to kill an animal an offer it up?

2) War. Contrarily to popular belief holy war is a defensive issue. My current understanding is that only when the enemy comes to your door to kill and murder you, only than you have the right to take up arm and to defend yourself and your country. Otherwise all wars are nothing but mass murder. Again, the scholars that I am reading largely seem to support my view on this.

Contrary to popular practice..you must mean?  Here again, the question is why god would want you to kill another human being, too.

3) Terrorism, espionage, propagandists (The word used in the Kuran is “those who come to create serious trouble). In this case the order is to “look for them from every watch tower” to find them and to make them unable to hurt anyone (to kill them). Famous terrorists like Hassan Sabah existed in medieval times also. To deal with fanatics and real trouble makers you have no other solution. You have to do exactly what the CIA did to Osama Bin Laden. No more, no less )

Yeah..."kill the troublemakers"....aka...Just Three™ Orders to Kill.

So, according to god. Kill at least one animal as an offering, kill people who attack you, and kill people who make trouble for you. Seems like we've covered all possible killings to me, but meh. I suppose it would be too much to ask for a religion with a less bloodthirsty god. Can you imagine it? Author of creation, lord of the cosmos..just says "you know what guys? No killing, minimize the killing."

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

What is blasphemous is not determined by the Quran (or at least only tangentially). It is determined by who is in power at any given time and place.

Boru

[Jehanne]

"Blasphemy is a Victimless Crime." -- Professor Richard Dawkins

[Leonardo17]

Beside all this: there are 3 orders to kill in the Kuran that I know of:

.......seems like maybe three too many?

1) There is the story of the prophet Abraham who was sent a lamb by God so that he would offer the lamb to his deity and not his son. Personally I don’t even make sacrifices. I makes charity instead. But Yes, at the end of Ramadan and during the pilgrimage in Mecca offerings and made and the meat is distributed to the poor.

I'm a super nerd.  The charity side of the sacrificial operation is cool as fuck...but you do have to ask, why does god want you to kill an animal an offer it up?

2) War. Contrarily to popular belief holy war is a defensive issue. My current understanding is that only when the enemy comes to your door to kill and murder you, only than you have the right to take up arm and to defend yourself and your country. Otherwise all wars are nothing but mass murder. Again, the scholars that I am reading largely seem to support my view on this.

Contrary to popular practice..you must mean?  Here again, the question is why god would want you to kill another human being, too.

3) Terrorism, espionage, propagandists (The word used in the Kuran is “those who come to create serious trouble). In this case the order is to “look for them from every watch tower” to find them and to make them unable to hurt anyone (to kill them). Famous terrorists like Hassan Sabah existed in medieval times also. To deal with fanatics and real trouble makers you have no other solution. You have to do exactly what the CIA did to Osama Bin Laden. No more, no less )

Yeah..."kill the troublemakers"....aka...Just Three™ Orders to Kill.

So, according to god.  Kill at least one animal as an offering, kill people who attack you, and kill people who make trouble for you.  Seems like we've covered all possible killings to me, but meh.  I suppose it would be too much to ask for a religion with a less bloodthirsty god.  Can you imagine it?  Author of creation, lord of the cosmos..just says "you know what guys?  No killing, minimize the killing."

1) You mean the last two? - No
2) As I said. I am not a scholar. But Animal sacrifice is an old tradition. In ancient Greece there was the Hecatompedon festival in which scores of animals were butchered and the meat was simply burned. So maybe the message was “Ok just kill one or two, and give the meat to some people who can’t afford it”. But I also find the practice very bloody and useless in our days. I personally don’t consume too much animal protein either. Today we know that a plant-based diet is better for ourselves and the environment. So I chose to interpret this as a “give to the poor” order and I sort of try to follow it in my own way.
3) As I said. That was not the popular practice in the past. Ancient rulers used to follow Islamic teachings more seriously in the past (in the Middle Ages to renaissance past) and yes. Many of those rules were followed. Forced conversions did not exist. Pillaging and slavery had limits, rape (as far as I know) was forbidden. But this also has to be put in a context. Today we don’t mutilate people, raze cities to the ground, enslave entire cities, and catapult the heads of captive soldiers from above city walls. Today we have war crimes and some international rules of war. These are, in my opinion, to be interpreted as a preliminary chapter to this.
   And as far as I know. War has to be a defensive war. But again I can’t really say this was always understood in this way in ancient times. But many of today’s serious scholars (the one’s that I read the most) agree on the fact that “no war that is not defensive in nature can be approved by the Kuran”. But if your very existence is threatened. That is if you are not the aggressor. Than is becomes a divine order to go to war.
   So war is something that is not approved by God. But if your are the defending side, it becomes an order of God.
4) Yes. If your are dealing with serious terrorists or similar troublemakers. Say, fanatical / brainwashed indoctrinated people of any school. I don’t believe there’s another solution. So the book is sort of giving a license to be tough on those people.
 
- We don’t live are a beautifully ordered world now do we? So of course there can be instances in which we have to kill. That’s what they teach in martial arts too. “Stay away as much as you can. But if you can’t, than hit fast and hit them good” (That’s what my Taekwando teacher used to tell me). Do you not agree with this?

[The Grand Nudger]

1) You mean the last two? - No
2) As I said. I am not a scholar. But Animal sacrifice is an old tradition. 

Old traditions are often garbage, yet another missed opportunity for the lord of creation.  "Hey, about the whole ritual sacrifice thing - not my gig, never struck any of you as creepy?"

-but no, these are not the kinds of gods we get, are they? We get the "yes...AND!" kind of gods. Line upon line of borrowed ladders.

3) As I said. That was not the popular practice in the past. Ancient rulers used to follow Islamic teachings more seriously in the past (in the Middle Ages to renaissance past) and yes. Many of those rules were followed. Forced conversions did not exist. Pillaging and slavery had limits, rape (as far as I know) was forbidden. But this also has to be put in a context. Today we don’t mutilate people, raze cities to the ground, enslave entire cities, and catapult the heads of captive soldiers from above city walls. Today we have war crimes and some international rules of war. These are, in my opinion, to be interpreted as a preliminary chapter to this.
   And as far as I know. War has to be a defensive war. But again I can’t really say this was always understood in this way in ancient times. But many of today’s serious scholars (the one’s that I read the most) agree on the fact that “no war that is not defensive in nature can be approved by the Kuran”. But if your very existence is threatened. That is if you are not the aggressor. Than is becomes a divine order to go to war.
   So war is something that is not approved by God. But if your are the defending side, it becomes an order of God.

It has always been popular practice to use the pretense of self defense for a war of aggression.  If people back in the day were more seriously following islam...which I doubt...then it would also be true that those people, more seriously following islam, were more seriously engaged in wars of territorial expansion with defense of the umma as pretext.  War is not a bug of abrahamic religions - it's a feature.  

4) Yes. If your are dealing with serious terrorists or similar troublemakers. Say, fanatical / brainwashed indoctrinated people of any school. I don’t believe there’s another solution. So the book is sort of giving a license to be tough on those people.

Such as pagans, homosexuals, sunni/shia (check a map to see which applies),women with their hair out..and, one assumes, all of their various children.  
 

- We don’t live are a beautifully ordered world now do we? So of course there can be instances in which we have to kill. That’s what they teach in martial arts too. “Stay away as much as you can. But if you can’t, than hit fast and hit them good” (That’s what my Taekwando teacher used to tell me). Do you not agree with this?

Yet another missed opportunity for an all powerful god.  Can't keep it's toyroom in order.

[Leonardo17]

1) You mean the last two? - No
2) As I said. I am not a scholar. But Animal sacrifice is an old tradition. 

Old traditions are often garbage, yet another missed opportunity for the lord of creation.  "Hey, about the whole ritual sacrifice thing - not my gig, never struck any of you as creepy?"

-but no, these are not the kinds of gods we get, are they?  We get the "yes...AND!" kind of gods.  Line upon line of borrowed ladders.

3) As I said. That was not the popular practice in the past. Ancient rulers used to follow Islamic teachings more seriously in the past (in the Middle Ages to renaissance past) and yes. Many of those rules were followed. Forced conversions did not exist. Pillaging and slavery had limits, rape (as far as I know) was forbidden. But this also has to be put in a context. Today we don’t mutilate people, raze cities to the ground, enslave entire cities, and catapult the heads of captive soldiers from above city walls. Today we have war crimes and some international rules of war. These are, in my opinion, to be interpreted as a preliminary chapter to this.
   And as far as I know. War has to be a defensive war. But again I can’t really say this was always understood in this way in ancient times. But many of today’s serious scholars (the one’s that I read the most) agree on the fact that “no war that is not defensive in nature can be approved by the Kuran”. But if your very existence is threatened. That is if you are not the aggressor. Than is becomes a divine order to go to war.
   So war is something that is not approved by God. But if your are the defending side, it becomes an order of God.

It has always been popular practice to use the pretense of self defense for a war of aggression.  If people back in the day were more seriously following islam...which I doubt...then it would also be true that those people, more seriously following islam, were more seriously engaged in wars of territorial expansion with defense of the umma as pretext.  War is not a bug of abrahamic religions - it's a feature.  

4) Yes. If your are dealing with serious terrorists or similar troublemakers. Say, fanatical / brainwashed indoctrinated people of any school. I don’t believe there’s another solution. So the book is sort of giving a license to be tough on those people.

Such as pagans, homosexuals, sunni/shia (check a map to see which applies),women with their hair out..and, one assumes, all of their various children.  
 

- We don’t live are a beautifully ordered world now do we? So of course there can be instances in which we have to kill. That’s what they teach in martial arts too. “Stay away as much as you can. But if you can’t, than hit fast and hit them good” (That’s what my Taekwando teacher used to tell me). Do you not agree with this?

Yet another missed opportunity for an all powerful god.  Can't keep it's toyroom in order.

1) In ancient cultures blood symbolizes life energy. So when you offered this energy to the Gods / Goddesses, you could expect favors like victory in war, a healthy boy child, greater wealth and influence etc. That’s simply human evolution
2) Yes this is true. But I would say that true religion would not agree with that. I would said that only if you are truly attacked, like Ukraine is being attacked by Russia, than you have the religious duty of going to war. I think it clearly says “do not desert your nation, don’t be a coward, just fight these …., I will be there with you” (or that’s how I understand it).
3) No. As you put it there is a serious problem of interpretation. The word “Those who come to create trouble” is distortable. But pertinent religious scholars would all agree that what is meant here is terrorists, spies and propagandists. See: This is why I always say that these issues must be understood and debated by the general public. The same issue exists in many belief systems. I think there is a clear difference between the message that was given, and the message that people choose to understand and people made this mistake many many times.
4) Well, than you may choose one of the other teachings like the teachings of Jesus, or that of the Buddha which is more peaceful and more pacifist in nature . But I will grant this also. The Kuran is very practical and very down to earth in many issues. That’s simply the teaching or the message in this religious tradition.

[The Grand Nudger]

1) In ancient cultures blood symbolizes life energy. So when you offered this energy to the Gods / Goddesses, you could expect favors like victory in war, a healthy boy child, greater wealth and influence etc. That’s simply human evolution :

That's not human evolution, it's a human superstition.  We're still stuck wondering why the gods we get keep cosigning it.  It's never struck you as even remotely odd that a god wouldn't take the time at any point to dissuade us of this cruel and pointless display? Yes, yes yes yes, people have believed as much, but do you? Do you believe that the blood of some animal is currency with which you can purchase divine favor? That a god, your god, backs this industry?

2) Yes this is true. But I would say that true religion would not agree with that. I would said that only if you are truly attacked, like Ukraine is being attacked by Russia, than you have the religious duty of going to war. I think it clearly says “do not desert your nation, don’t be a coward, just fight these …., I will be there with you” (or that’s how I understand it).

3) No. As you put it there is a serious problem of interpretation. The word “Those who come to create trouble” is distortable. But pertinent religious scholars would all agree that what is meant here is terrorists, spies and propagandists. See: This is why I always say that these issues must be understood and debated by the general public. The same issue exists in many belief systems. I think there is a clear difference between the message that was given, and the message that people choose to understand and people made this mistake many many times.

I certainly agree that a great many of the worlds belief systems happen to be just interpretable enough, to justify whatever it was a person was going to do.  Also not a bug.  Another feature.  

4) Well, than you may choose one of the other teachings like the teachings of Jesus, or that of the Buddha which is more peaceful and more pacifist in nature . But I will grant this also. The Kuran is very practical and very down to earth in many issues. That’s simply the teaching or the message in this religious tradition.

Meh, pass.  I find life in the living of it, not anyone's magic books.  I think that it would be remarkable if any belief system was all lunacy all the time - but it's not the practical down to earth advice of -any- belief system that I directly reject or oppose, at any rate. Come to think of it, tha'ts another missed opportunity for a god. Could have made a religion entirely comprised of that practical down to earth advice. Didn't. Instead we get a mountain of fantasist nonsense masquerading as down to earth or practical... and we're supposed to believe it on the basis of what? Couple good diet tips also making their way into it's pages? Some god, some religion, some advice.

[Leonardo17]

1) I didn’t say that (?)
2) Well, than there is pure and simple philosophy. Jostein Gardeer’s work is a masterpiece.

Who said you had to believe anything (I didn’t) )

[Leonardo17]

Sorry for missing the point of your question. I do that a lot in internet forums. I think what you were asking was: “Why does God need any animal sacrifice?”
The answer is: He doesn’t.
I told you about this Hecatompedon festival in ancient Greece where scores of animals were sacrificed to Athena because it is in many ways similar to the sacrifice of countless animals in the pilgrimage season in Mecca. (If I go to a pilgrimage in Mecca I intend on not making any animal sacrifice if the Saudi Authorities allow me. And If they don’t, it will be the minimum number of animals. But I will tell them I prefer not to).
Also in popular culture there are people who will slaughter the animals and keep most of the meat for themselves or who will slaughter animals at events like weddings, the buying of a new car, the opening of a new business etc.
When I told you about ancient ritual offerings I was referring to something called the collective subconscious. This is a theory of Carl Gustav Jung that states that even if we don’t believe in ancient traditions today, they will still have an impact on us through our subconscious minds.
So ordinary people will tell you things like “but it is the will of God”. So what they will be saying is that God must have a reason for it since he was the one who ordered it in the first place. But in reality (just like in the issue of the Hijab) it’s the subconscious mind that is at work here. Turks also had their animist / Pagan beginnings so they still keep many traditions that come from the times prior to when they migrated to Anatolia. So in the subconscious “Blood is currency” as you put it.
But what it is in the Koran is different. Again, I am not a scholar. But you must have heard that pig meat is not allowed in Islam. So this makes animal protein even more inaccessible for the poor. So there had to be a solution for the poorest to be able to consume more meat, at least at the end of the fasting month (the Ramadan month).
So when I was a child in the 80’s, we would gather in my grandmother’s house, there was three uncles (and their families) and my mother (and us). We would slaughter 5-6 sheep (perhaps 7, I don’t remember). We would keep about 10%, perhaps even less to ourselves. Then there was a queue in front of my grandmother’s door (İt was a large house with an enclosed garden etc.). Poor people were given a sack of fresh meat. And in fact this is the way most people practice this tradition today.
But, in the last 40 years meat has become less and less expensive. Today it is the ignorant and poor people who eat an animal-protein rich diet while wealthier and educated people will be consuming a limited amount of meat with a diet that is rich in fruits, vegetables and carbon-hydrates.
So I don’t do it anymore. I give money to charities instead.