Adil 1

Adil Sattar
19090053
Section 2
Amna Khalid

The Salman Rushdie Case: An

Islamic View
Khalid Zaheer is a Scholar, who works in a nonpolitical organization named UIUK .This
organization works to spread a non-sectarian, peace-promoting, and moderate message of Islam
based on the two authentic sources: Qur'an and Sunnah. He has joined UIUK to realize his
dream to promote the cause of the true Islamic message, which is neither extremist nor liberal.
Prior to this, he taught at the Lahore University of Management Sciences and before
joining LUMS, he taught at the Institute of Business Administration, University of the Punjab

(1986 to 1990) as a Lecturer and later (1994 to 1998) as an Assistant Professor. He wrote this
essay to contribute to a debate about a controversial writer Salman Rushdie who wrote a book
Satanic verses in which he insulted the Prophet (PBUH) and his wives which resulted in
protests from Muslim because it really hurt their religious sentiments. They asked for his head
and claimed that he should be punished because of blaspheming against the Prophet (PBUH).
The writer believes that this demand of Muslims is un-Islamic and gives arguments to prove his
point of view. Khalid Zaheer presents his arguments effectively through simple language,

Adil 2

appropriate technique of questioning and amplification. However, his contradictory and

fallacious support undermines his claim which ultimately lessens the credibility of his arguments.
In this article the writer claims that demand for the death of Rushdie is un-Islamic and Muslims
should reconsider their arguments on which they are demanding his (Rushdies) head. He
mentions that capital punishment for Rushdie is demanded on the basis of two arguments. Firstly
as he is an apostate so punishment for it in Islam is death and secondly he has been found guilty
of blaspheming against the Prophets so he should be killed. He says that although Rushdie is a
born Muslim however he is not a Muslim by choice and the born Muslim who do not turn
Muslim by choice is not an apostate. He argues the correction of their claims and defends it
through his findings from Quran. Then he raises questions associated with these arguments on
which Muslims are demanding death for Salman Rushdie and answer those questions.
Appropriate use of simple language has worked for the writer because it is easy to understand
and thus reader friendly. He does not confuse the reader with complicated words and jargon. He
writes multiple arguments with the help of colons which make his writing coherent and simple.
He gives references and translations from Quran which shows the reader that he has not written
anything vague and unclear. Thorough analysis of article reveals the formal and simple
vocabulary used by the author so that reader faces no difficulty while reading it. At various
instances he used Arabic terminology like fasaad fi lard and irtidad at the same time he explains
the meanings too in such a way that it becomes easy for the readers to understand that
terminology. Along with this he uses calm and formal tone which results in less conflicts and
create better communication between readers and writer. Because of using this tone the readers
consider him a credible person and pay more attentions to his article. He has avoided heated

Adil 3

arguments by realizing the sensitivity of the matter so that the readers might not get offended. So
these techniques helped him in presenting his arguments effectively.

He makes the best use of questioning technique which develops the interest of the reader
because it urge the readers to follow his arguments. For example he raises question that: Is the
punishment for an apostate death? He gives his own answer no. It clarifies his stance in the
minds of readers. Then he answers the possible question which might arise in the minds of
readers after reading the article. For example after saying no to the above mentioned question he
says one might ask as then why were a vast majority of Muslims confidently advocating the law
that whoever was guilty of the crime of apostasy in Islam must face capital punishment?After
this possible question he answers it. This seems a bit tactical to readers because it limits the
readers to his own analysis.
Technique of amplification shows beauty of his writing style. It is a technique related to style in
which the writer amplify the sentence by adding more information to it. Because it increases the
importance of sentence and the reader understands it well. For instance he writes that blasphemy
against the prophet (PBUH) did not amount to creating mischief on earth and then quotes verse
from the Quran Those who fight against Allah and His messenger and create mischief on earth.
In another place he writes that it was recurring theme in the Quran that the nations of God like
Nuh,Hud,Saleh,Lut and Musa.He has decorated the statements by adding examples of it previous
nations.
Contradictory and fallacious support undermines his claim which ultimately lessens the
credibility of his arguments. E.g. he writes that those who received the messengers message

Adil 4

directly had no choice but to believe in it or else they were to get punished in this very life. This
is contradictory to a verse of Quran which says There is no compulsion in religion. (Al-Baqara
2:256). The religious scholars of Islam elaborate the meaning of this verse as one should not
force anyone to become Muslim because Islam is plain and clear and its proofs and evidences are
also plain and clear. So even during the life of Prophet (PBUH) there was no such thing as either
to believe the prophet or get punished. In another occasion he quotes a hadith on the basis of
which it is normally believed that an apostate deserves capital punishment and he says that
hadiths are contextualized by Quran to clarify meanings. It is contradictory because hadith are
not only contextualized only by Quran. Sometimes they are contextualized from the occasion
when they were said. Different schools of thoughts have different criteria to derive any meaning
from hadith. Most of the Sunni school of thought confirm the credibility of the source and chain
of narrators while others even deny the hadith. Such statements ruin his credibility in some of the
Muslim audience. He would have avoided this statement to show himself a neutral person. He
has also committed some logical errors in his article which has crippled his argument like he says
that either expunge the material that caused to be source of Rushdies information or do not
blame Rushdie. He is in a black and white condition and misses grey area in between black and
white. It also gives a strong emotional thrust to readers. Hence
Although Khalid Zaheer fails to fully achieve his aim of convincing of the Muslim audience of
the un-Islamic capital punishment for Rushdie yet he does bring in to view some important
issues regarding the punishment of blasphemy in Islam. He has rightly said that even for
Muslims blasphemy is a pardonable offence in Islam unlike most of the people believes that it is
not a pardonable offence. The view point of Imam Abu Hanifa ,the founder of Hanafi school of
thought, for blasphemers has already been entrenched that blasphemers who ask for an amnesty

Adil 5

would be freed from death penalty, and according to the principles of the Hanafi precedent , a
consensus of Iman Abu Hanifa and his students cannot be challenged . In fact this is one the
basic principle of taqlid in classic Islamic juridical reflection. This consensus is accepted by all
four major Sunni school of thoughts including Maliki, Hanabali and Shafi. The vast majority of
Muslims believes that such pardon cannot be lengthened to non-Muslim perpetrators such as
Rushdie. This is generally a meditative of the prevailing public fictive on blasphemy. In
agreement to the leadings of the all the founders of Muslims school of thoughts, non-Muslims
blasphemers should be given absolution. They clearly mention that non-Muslims blasphemers
cannot be executed except that they repeatedly commit the offence. As for as Salman Rushdie is
concerned he has not repeated this offence so he cannot be executed because there is not a single
case where a non-Muslim was ever executed for doing an odd breach of blasphemy in classic
Islam. The findings of these Imams are crucial for the development in narrative about blasphemy
law, in constructing resilience, for admiring the original findings of those who have devoted their
lives to examine these stands.
While the writer truly points out that Muslims should not protest violently by demanding capital
punishment for the blasphemers because it creates barbarian image of Islamic amongst the
western people. Islam is a very peace loving religion and propagates love and harmony among
the people. Prophets (PBUH) life is a true code of conduct for a Muslim. He has set examples
for Muslims by loving children, companions and even his worst enemies. There is a famous
saying of our beloved prophet that religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his
religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremist, but try to be
near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded. Sahih Bukhari,
Volume 1, Book 2, Number 38. These Hadith clarifies Prophets position in religious matters.

Adil 6

Khalid Zaheer convinces his readers to some extent with Richard convinces his readers to
a certain extent with his simple language, appropriate technique of questioning and amplification
but fails to completely persuade them with his fallacious and contradictory support for his
arguments. Along with some more logical and credible support for his arguments he could have
had a better influence on his Muslim audience. Thus, the text Salman Rushdie Case: An Islamic
view though not completely credible in terms of its arguments, is impactful and influencing the
ideas of most of his readers.