Esam Al-Fetori/Reuters
Demonstrators hold a message aimed at the US during a rally to condemn the killers of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other staffers during an attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, Sept. 12.

Anti-Muslim video: What Muslim teachings say about retribution for blasphemy

Protests and riots broke out across the Middle East and Asia over the past week, rejecting an anti-Muslim video's portrayal of the prophet Muhammad. What does Islamic theory condone?

The recent protests across the Middle East have revived a debate about blasphemy in Islam – how it is defined, and how devout Muslims should respond.

While some Muslims cite the Quran or hadiths – sayings or actions attributed to the prophet Muhammad – as justification for violent retribution, Muslim scholars and analysts alike say there is no clear mandate in Islamic theology for such a response.

Instead, they say, the recent violence reflects societies roiled by power struggles and competing ideologies, in which Muslims are used as pawns for political gain.

"The punishment for blasphemy and even the definition for blasphemy is not in the Quran. There are some hadiths that address it, but it's ambiguous," says Nina Shea, director of the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom in Washington. "So it's very vague and … it's manipulated by those who want to raise a mob and wield power within a society."

In this case, the offending material appears to be an amateurish 14-minute YouTube clip that portrays Muhammad as a bumbling philanderer and child molester who makes up his religion on the fly and incites his followers to unrestrained violence.

The movie clearly was meant to incite a response.

"Sadly, we had idiots on our side take the bait – hook, line, and sinker," says Arsalan Iftikhar, a Muslim commentator and author of "Islamic Pacifism: Global Muslims in the Post-Osama Era."

"Of course there are going to be a lot of [non-Muslim] right-wingers who are saying Islam is a religion of violence," he adds. He attributes the violence to decades of dictatorial rule with little freedom of speech.

Mustafa Abu Sway, a professor of philosophy and Islamic studies at Al Quds University in Jerusalem, says that in Islam it is not up to individual Muslims to seek retribution.

"Their role is to send out the correct information about the life and teachings of the prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him," he says.

Nor is it correct according to Islam to take action against any individual for the trespasses of their fellow citizens, says Professor Abu Sway. "Muslims should not blame innocent people and make them pay for the actions of others," he says.

A statement from the Quran, quoted in a 2011 article in the Review of Religions, says, "Let not a people's enmity incite you to act otherwise than with justice."

But in some instances, hadiths have been used to justify murder as a punishment for blasphemy, the article continues. One such hadith quotes the prophet Muhammad as saying, "Kill the person who abuses the Prophet and whip the one who abuses his companions."

In Islam, the primary authority is considered to be the Quran, which Muslims believe the prophet Muhammad received from Allah. But hadiths also carry weight in Islamic jurisprudence, and translations and interpretations of both sources can vary widely.

New laws are needed to prevent materials such as the offending YouTube clip from being disseminated, says Abu Sway of Al Quds University.

"It's a moral imperative for Muslims and non-Muslims alike to enact laws that would prevent such actions," he says.

But Ms. Shea, coauthor of the book "Silenced: How Apostasy & Blasphemy Codes are Choking Freedom Worldwide," argues that trying to protect all citizens' religious sentiments from offense negates freedom of speech.

Such restrictions also often fail to deliver on promises that they will bring social harmony, she adds, and instead create resentments that people "didn't even know they had."

"It just feeds the sense of outrage," she says. "The societies are constantly roiled by extremists."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Anti-Muslim video: What Muslim teachings say about retribution for blasphemy
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today