Charging someone with disrespect for Muhammad’s companions is essentially saying that the offender is a Shi’ite. Someone who “defiles the sacred name of any wife” of Muhammad is likely deriding Aisha, Muhammad’s child bride. Shi’ites hate Aisha, because she opposed Ali ibn Abi Talib, whom they believe was Muhammad’s rightful successor. So this law is a catch-all that allows the Pakistani authorities to persecute Shi’ites.
“Pakistan: Muslim Retired Teacher Arrested for ‘Offending the Prophet’s Companions,’” by Massimo Introvigne, Bitter Winter, July 11, 2023:
On June 26 in Battagram, in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan, a retired Muslim teacher was arrested by the police to the great surprise of himself and his family. A certain Momin Shah had filed a FIR (First Information Report) against him claiming that he and two friends had seen on social media material disrespectful to the companions of Prophet Muhammad posted by the former teacher.
The police acted promptly, although the teacher insisted that he did not post anything disrespectful to Islam, his own religion, and perhaps his profile had been hacked.
This was a comparatively rare example of enforcement of Article 298-A of the Pakistani Criminal Code, reading as follows: “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 any wife (Ummul-Mumudeen), or members of the family (Ahle-bait) of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), or any of the righteous Caliphs (Khulafa Raashideen) or companions (Sahaaba) of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.”…
Compared to provisions on blasphemy, which include the death penalty as punishment to those who offend the Prophet, Article 298-A threatens those who do not show enough respect to Muhammad’s wives, relatives, or companions with comparatively mild penalties….
The case also shows that an “Internet police” in Pakistan is continuously looking for evidence of blasphemy or similar offenses on social media. Sometimes, when they cannot find any anti-Islamic postings, activists fabricate them.
John says
so much for muslim brotherhood…
Captain Iglo says
What companions? If Mr. Robert Spencer is to be believed, Mohamed was a figment of the imagination. And he says so on good grounds (the first reliable reference to Mohamed dates from 200 years after his supposed death). Now if that’s so, how can one be a companion of a non-existent person? Good Q, I’d say.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Captain
There are 2 things at play here:
‣ What muslims believe about Muhammad;
‣ The founder of islam himself – whether he existed or not
What Mr Spencer is discussing here is the former – what sunnis believe, what shi’a believe, how the latter is offensive to the former vis a vis views about Aisha, Abu Baqr, Umar & Uthman. All that is separate from the real historic question of whether or not all these people existed in the first place
Captain Iglo says
Infidel,
Point already understood and well taken. Just trying to apply the object lesson Mr. Spencer taught.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Oh!
somehistory says
When a character is made up from the mind, or minds, of another, or others, the fictional character needs supporting characters. Sherlock Holmes had Dr. Watson.
So the nasty, scum-dragon, mass-murdering, raper of children, slave-trading thief, lying son of satan the devil, needed someone else upon which to lean and in whose ear he could whisper his feculent desires.
It’s not possible to insult these slime, but islam demands that it is, just as it demands to be respected and if not, that’s “blasphemy.”
Does another mozlum wish to have something that belongs to the former teacher?
OT
“Muslim woman who started drunken brawl at bowling alley let off wearing electronic tag”
“A Muslim woman who started a drunken brawl at a bowling alley has been let off wearing an electronic ‘‘sobriety’’ tag after she argued it would hinder her preparation for Friday prayers.
Husina Hussain, 20, faced having to wear the device on her ankle under a court order after she hit a manager at the venue and hurled racial abuse.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/muslim-woman-who-started-drunken-brawl-at-bowling-alley-let-off-wearing-electronic-tag/ar-AA1e0Pz9?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=88daa5149f1f492ab75eb460b68599cf&ei=1130
Keith O says
Such a pious musloid, drinking, wearing lipstick and using a vape pen.
somehistory says
Yes. Before they decided, they should have looked at the other islamic ‘rules of conduct’ she was breaking. She broke so many, one or two more wouldn’t make a difference. She was lying to get out of wearing the monitor.