Not a Matter of Individual Rights

IBN TAYMIYYAH’S BOOK The reality is that an attack on the Prophet of Islam extends beyond a personal affront to his character; it is a direct assault on Islam itself. Consequently, it becomes a matter of defence rather than one solely pertaining to human rights. When someone claims that the Prophet of Islam lacked justice, it is not merely a personal attack on him but a challenge to the credibility of the Quran and Islam as a whole. In such cases, the Prophet’s forgiveness cannot be seen as condoning such a grave offence. Even after being forgiven by the Prophet, the underlying problem persists. The Prophet’s approach was to challenge such individuals ideologically rather than resorting to physical violence. Physical death does not absolve the blasphemer of the false allegations made against Islam or the Prophet of Islam. Ideological Response, Not Punishment The main error made by Ibn Taymiyyah and thinkers like him in this matter lies in their perception of ‘shatm’ (blasphemy) solely as a matter of enforcing legal punishment. However, in reality, blasphemy is a matter of defence. When someone engages in ‘shatm,’ they launch an ideological attack on the truth of Islam, and such an attack can only be effectively addressed through a counter-ideological response. Thus, killing the blasphemer is not a solution to this problem. As mentioned earlier, Ibn Taymiyyah wrote in his book that when the polytheists used to mock the Prophet of Islam, Hasan bin Thabit defended him by responding to these insults through his poetic compositions. This demonstrates