Difference between revisions of "Blasphemy" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
m
 
(30 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Started}}{{Contracted}}
+
{{Images OK}}{{submitted}}{{approved}}{{Paid}}{{copyedited}}
 +
 
 +
[[Image:BlasphemyDurer.jpg|thumb|200px|Of Blasphemy, from the ''[[Narrenschiff]]'' (The Ship of Fools); [[woodcut]] attributed to [[Albrecht Dürer]]]]
  
 
'''Blasphemy''' is the [[defamation]] of the name of one or more [[Deity|gods]]. In a broader sense, blasphemy is irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable. Many cultures disapprove of speech or writing which defames the deity or deities of their [[State religion|established]] [[religion]]s, and these restrictions have the force of [[law]] in some countries.  
 
'''Blasphemy''' is the [[defamation]] of the name of one or more [[Deity|gods]]. In a broader sense, blasphemy is irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable. Many cultures disapprove of speech or writing which defames the deity or deities of their [[State religion|established]] [[religion]]s, and these restrictions have the force of [[law]] in some countries.  
  
The word is derived from the [[Middle English]] ''blasfemen'', which in turn is related through French and Latin to the [[Greek language|Greek]] ''blasphemein'', from ''blaptein'' ("to injure") and ''pheme'' ("reputation").
+
The word blasphemy is derived from the [[Middle English]] ''blasfemen,'' which in turn is related to the [[Greek language|Greek]] ''blasphemein,'' from ''blaptein'' ("to injure") and ''pheme'' ("reputation").
 
 
In Judaism, blasphemy is the uttering of God's name and/or speaking evil of Him. In the Christian [[New Testament]], blaspheming the [[Holy Spirit]] is considered unforgivable. In [[Islam]], blasphemy constitutes speaking ill of the Qur'an itself, [[Muhammad]], or any other prophet mentioned in the [[Qur'an]].
 
 
 
In modern times with the advent of freedom of speech and religion, blasphemy laws in Western nations are no longer enforced. However in Muslim nations harsh laws against blasphemy are still in effect. In [[Pakistan]] for example the Section 295C to the Pakistan Penal Code mandates the [[death penalty]] for "use of derogatory remarks in respect of the Holy Prophet." In [[Buddhism]] and [[Hinduism]] there is no formal concept of blasphemy, while [[Jainism]] calls the teaching of what is false blasphemous. 
 
 
 
In [[Western countries]], there has been recent movement toward the repeal or reform of blasphemy laws, with these laws only being infrequently enforced. However, on June 29, 2007, the [[Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe]] in Strasbourg adopted a rule on blasphemy, religious insults, and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion.
 
 
 
Some American states still have blasphemy laws on the books from the founding days, such as those in the [[Massachusetts]] General Laws. The last person to be jailed in the United States for blasphemy was in Massachusetts, in 1838. In England, the blasphemy laws have never been repealed, with the last person in Britain to being sent to prison in 1921 for the crime.
 
 
 
  
 +
In Judaism, blasphemy is the uttering of God's name and/or speaking evil of Him. In the [[New Testament]], blaspheming the [[Holy Spirit]] is considered unforgivable, and denying the Trinity has also been defined as blasphemous. In [[Islam]], blasphemy constitutes speaking ill of God, [[Muhammad]], any other prophet mentioned in the [[Qur'an]], or the Qur'an itself. In [[Buddhism]] and [[Hinduism]] there is no formal concept of blasphemy, while [[Jainism]] calls the teaching of what is false blasphemous.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
In modern times with the advent of [[freedom of speech]] and [[freedom of religion|religion]], blasphemy laws in Western nations are no longer enforced. However, in Muslim nations harsh laws against blasphemy are still in effect.
  
 
==History==
 
==History==
 
===Blasphemy in Judaism===
 
===Blasphemy in Judaism===
In the third book of the [[Old Testament]], [[Leviticus]] [[s:Bible (World English)/Leviticus#24:16|24:16]] states that those who speak blasphemy "shall surely be put to death."  
+
The commandment against blasphemy is given in Exodus 22:28: "Do not blaspheme God or curse the ruler of your people." Leviticus 24:16 states that those who speak blasphemy "shall surely be put to death" by stoning. The blasphemer was to be taken outside the camp, and all who heard him should lay their hands upon his head; then all the congregation should stone him. Leviticus also provides an example of an Israelite mixed blood (having an Egyptian father) being stoned to death after getting into a fight with a Hebrew and cursing the Name of the Hebrew God.
 
 
The use of God's name constituted blasphemy according to [[Judaism]]. Yet blasphemy cannot be limited to the utterance of God's name. People were also guilty of blasphemy if they were [[idolators]], manifested disrespect towards God, and insulted his chosen leaders. Other offenses could also count as blasphemy, especially comparing oneself to God.
 
 
 
The origin of the Jewish blasphemy law stems from one of the multitude during the [[Exodus]]  ([[Leviticus]] 24:10-23) who cursed in the name of the Lord. The blasphemer was sentenced to be taken outside the camp, and that all who heard him should lay their hands upon his head, and that all the congregation should stone him. The general law was formulated in verses 15 and 16.
 
 
 
The lawgiver and prophets state that reviling the [[king]], who acts as God's representative, is considered a form of blasphemy ([[Exodus]] 22, 27; [[Isaiah]] 8.21). It is further shown indicated in the case of [[Naboth]], who was indicted: "Thou didst blaspheme God and the king" ([[I Kings]] 21:10). 
 
 
 
The [[Mishnah]] states that term ''nokeb'' declares that the blasphemer is not guilty unless he pronounces the name of God (Mishnah Sanh. 7.5). The ''Gemara'' extends the definition of the crime to a disrespectful use of any words which describe the sacred [[attributes of God]], such as "The Holy One" or "The Merciful One." When the Jewish courts exercised criminal jurisdiction, the death penalty was applied to the blasphemer who used the Ineffable Name; but the blasphemer of God's attributes was subjected to [[corporal punishment]] (Sanh. 56a). According to Talmudic tradition, the Sacred Name was in early times known to all; but later its use was restricted.
 
 
 
When taking testimony during a blasphemy [[trial]], witnesses who heard the blasphemy were not permitted to repeat the very words, with an arbitrary phrase replacing the offending [[language]]. The excommunication of the blasphemer could be substituted as a punishment for the [[death penalty]], rendering it unnecessary for the witnesses to repeat the identical blasphemous words ([[Pithe Teshubah]] to [[Yoreh De'ah]], 340, 37). In addition to the court's punishment, according to [[Abba Saul]], the blasphemer is also excluded from the [[life]] in the [[world]] to come ('Ab. Zarah 18a).
 
  
====Jesus and blasphemy====
+
Later the use of God's proper name ([[Yahweh|YHWH]]) came to constitute blasphemy according to normative [[Judaism]], although it is allowed to mystics of the [[kabbala|kabbalistic]] and some [[Hasidism|hasidic]] traditions. In ancient times, people were also guilty of blasphemy if they were [[idolaters]], manifested disrespect towards God, or insulted his chosen leaders. For example, reviling the [[king]], who acts as God's representative, was considered a form of blasphemy ([[Exodus]] 22, 27; [[Isaiah]] 8.21). Equating oneself to God was also considered blasphemous.
[[Jesus]] would have challenged the Jewish people’s concept of blasphemy, including his claim that he would sit at God's right hand and return with glory on the clouds would occur in the future. Yet in the [[Old Testament]], a few honored men do sit in God's presence, including [[Moses]], [[David]], and [[Enoch]]; [[Adam]] and [[Abraham]] sit to witness the final judgment; and [[Abel]] sits when the [[Last Judgment]] commences. The most exalted figure is Enoch in 1 [[Enoch]] 37-71, since he is honored as the [[Son of Man]] who will conduct the End Time judgment. [[Angels]] on the whole do not share the exalted position of the few [[human beings]] bestowed with honor. Only [[Gabriel]] among the angels sits in God's presence and in this instance he serves merely as Enoch's escort. This high honor bestowed on Enoch and [[Enoch-Metatron]] led to criticism of his stature in some circles, showing that some Jewish [[writers]] feared that the uniqueness of God was threatened.
 
  
Jesus' claim to be the End Time [[judge]] was not blasphemy per se to the Jewish leaders (given the tradition of Enoch as Son of Man), but what they objected to was Jesus' arrogation of this role. The startling directness with which the earthly Jesus claims such authority would scandalize the religious leaders. Those honored in the past might have been considered worthy of such a role, though even here, some Jews were nervous about Enoch's reputed status. Assigning [[divine authority]] to Jesus, as a [[teacher]] from [[Galilee]], was, however, unthinkable.  What was objectionable to the Jewish leaders was that they found it difficult to believe that Jesus of Nazareth could have divine authority, contravene the [[Sabbath]], hold suspicious views on the [[Torah]], associate with tax collectors and sinners, promise the destruction of the [[temple]], and engage in a fierce critique of the religious leaders. Jesus also implicitly claimed to be the future judge of the religious leaders, which, they believed, violated [[Exodus 22:27]].
+
The [[Mishnah]] states the rabbinical opinion that the blasphemer is not guilty unless he pronounces the name of God in his insult or curse (Mishnah Sanh. 7.5). An opinion in the ''[[Gemara]],'' however, extends the definition of the crime to a disrespectful use of any words which describe the sacred [[attributes of God]], such as "The Holy One" or "The Merciful One." When the Jewish courts exercised criminal jurisdiction, the death penalty was sometimes applied to the blasphemer who used the [[Yahweh|Name]]; but the blasphemer of God's attributes was subjected to [[corporal punishment]] (Sanh. 56a).
  
When Jesus is charged with blasphemy before the [[Sanhedrin]] ([[Mark]] 14:61-64), it may not have been intended to be a [[capital trial]], and hence the fact that the trial does not comply with the rules of the [[Mishnah]] is irrelevant. It may have been intended to be a [[preliminary hearing]], at which the Jews were attempting to find grounds to hand Jesus over to the [[Romans]]. Indeed, in claiming to ride on the clouds of [[heaven]], Jesus claims for himself something that was true only of God ([[Exodus]] 14:20; [[Numbers]] 10:34; [[Psalms]] 104:3; [[Isaiah 19:1]]), which would have been blasphemous to the Ancient Jews.
+
When taking testimony during a blasphemy [[trial]], witnesses who heard the blasphemy were not permitted to repeat the very words in question. The [[excommunication]] of the blasphemer could be substituted as a punishment for the [[death penalty]] (Pithe Teshubah to Yoreh De'ah, 340, 37). In addition to the court's punishment, the blasphemer is also excluded from the [[life]] in the [[world]] to come ('Ab. Zarah 18a).
  
 
===Blasphemy in Christianity===
 
===Blasphemy in Christianity===
[[Image:BlasphemyDurer.jpg|thumb|200px|Of Blasphemy, from the ''[[Narrenschiff]]'' (The Ship of Fools); [[woodcut]] attributed to [[Albrecht Dürer]]]]
+
The [[New Testament]] teaching on blasphemy is often related to [[Luke]] 12:10: "Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." The author of [[Ephesians]] commands that blasphemers be expelled from Christian society: "Blasphemy be put away from you, with all malice" (Ephesians 4:31).
[[Christian theology]] may condemn blasphemy, as in the [[bible]], [[Luke]] 12:10, where blaspheming the [[Holy Spirit]] is spoken of as unforgivable. However, within the context of the reading, this may be more of a denying of the Holy Spirit (not believing, not accepting the Holy Spirit is blaspheming against it, since that is the unforgivable sin), rather then the more common blaspheming sin which is in [[Chrsitianity].  
 
 
 
Yet in the simpler message of the time of [[Jesus]], when Christian ideas relied upon the influence of [[natural authority]] against the then-secular religious power of the Second Jewish Temple period (positions exchanged in the centuries that followed), this admonishment may be interpreted as warning against an actual reaction from the Holy Spirit in the form of a curse that can irreparably harm a person (and thus be unforgivable, but not by dictate). This statement in effect establishes the importance of this aspect of the [[Godhead]], rather than setting an arbitrary law.  
 
  
A careful reading of the [[Gospel of Mark]] shows this: "But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin." (Mark 3:29).
+
When Christians came to control the power of the state, blasphemy became a crime punishable by law. [[Thomas Aquinas]] saw blasphemy as a form of unbelief, stating in ''Summa Theologica'' (13:3) that blasphemy, being a crime directly against God is "more grave than murder." Moreover, later Christian society was not as forgiving as Luke, insisting on harsh punishments for blasphemy against the Father and the Son as well as the Holy Spirit, and sometimes equating the public denial of Christian doctrine as blasphemy. For example, a seventeenth century Act Concerning Religion in [[Maryland]] stated that whoever shall "Blaspheme GOD, that is curse him, or deny that JESUS CHRIST our Savior to be the Son of God, or deny the Holy Trinity… shall be punished with death, and forfeiture of all of his or her Lands and Goods…."<ref>Hall, 1910.</ref>
  
Christian [[theology]] may condemn blasphemy, as in the [[Gospel of Luke|Luke]], where blaspheming the Holy Spirit is spoken of as unforgivable (Luke 12:10).
+
The advent of religious toleration in the late seventeenth century witnessed a graduation relaxation in blasphemy laws in Christian societies.
  
 
===Blasphemy in Islam===
 
===Blasphemy in Islam===
Blasphemy in [[Islam]] constitutes speaking ill of [[Muhammad]], of any other prophet mentioned in the [[Qur'an]], or of any Biblical prophets. The Qu'ran also states that it is blasphemy to claim that Jesus Christ (the son of [[Mary]]) is the son of God (5.017). Speaking ill of God is also blasphemy. In Islam, blasphemy is considered a [[sin]]. The Qur'an says "He forgives all sins, except disbelieving in God [blasphemy]." In Islam, if a person dies while in blasphemy, they will not enter [[heaven]], except if said person repented before [[death]].
+
[[Image:Salman Rushdie.jpg|thumb|120px|left|Salman Rushdie, author of ''The Satanic Verses''.]]
 
+
Blasphemy in [[Islam]] constitutes speaking ill God, of the prophet [[Muhammad]], any other prophet mentioned in the [[Qur'an]], or of any biblical prophets. The Qu'ran also states—in direct opposition to traditional Christian tradition—that it is blasphemy to claim that Jesus Christ is the son of God (5.017).
In Muslim countries, blasphemy is considered a very serious offense and may be punishable by death if charges are proven. British author [[Salman Rushdie]]'s novel, ''The Satanic Verses'', was seen by many Muslims to contain blasphemies against Islam, and Iranian clerical leader [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] issued a [[fatwa]] in 1989 calling for Rushdie's death. More recently, the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons were criticised in part on the basis that they were blasphemous against Muhammad. The Egyptian government under pressure by the parliament banned the film ''The Da Vinci Code'', and is to confiscate the [[novel]] for containing blasphemy.
 
 
 
In Pakistan, Christians continue to bear the brunt of the [[country]]’s blasphemy laws. In March 2007, a Christian man was booked for allegedly tearing and setting ablaze pages of the Qur'an, the Muslim holy book. Qaisar Mehmood, the complainant, charged Amanat Masih, 45, a resident of [[village]] of Nabi Pur Virkan in the district of Sheikhupura, with desecrating and setting on [[fire]] pages of the Quran, as part of an [[occult]] practice to win over a lady named Shamim at the insistence of a Muslim man, Liaqat Ali.
 
 
 
The rule is: any [[belief]], action, or saying which belittles [[Allah]] (God), his [[books]], his [[messengers]], his [[angels]], his [[rites]], the well-known practices of his religion (such as [[prayer]]), his rules, his promise (such as [[paradise]]), or his threat (such as hellfire) is blasphemy. Hence, the human being must use caution with the utmost effort to avoid blasphemy.
 
 
 
So it is clear that in Islam, blasphemy is a matter that must be studied well in order to avoid it at any cost, for the one who dies as a blasphemer will be sentenced to hellfire without end. Also, it should be noted that in Islam, it is not a condition for the one to be judged as a blasphemer that he must have liked or believed in the blasphemous saying, action, or belief. This is confirmed by the saying of Muhammad, "A person may utter a word he thinks harmless, which results in his falling the depth of seventy years into Hellfire."
 
 
 
This is opposed to [[Christianity]], for example, in which teachings differ as to what constitutes blasphemy. The terms of blasphemy, as labeled by the Christians, is much less inclusive then that in [[Islamic Law]].
 
  
About blasphemy and [[apostacy]], the Qur'an says;
+
For those who blaspheme by attacking the Qur'an or the Prophet, the Qur'an says that the punishment shall be "execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: That is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter" (Surah Al-Maidah 5:33).
  
{{cquote|1=The punishment of those who wage [[war]] against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; [[Surah Al-Maidah 5:33]]}}
+
In Muslim countries, blasphemy is still considered a very serious offense and may in some cases be punishable by death. British author [[Salman Rushdie]]'s novel ''The Satanic Verses'' was seen by many Muslims to contain blasphemies against Islam, and Iranian leader [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] issued a [[fatwa]] in 1989, calling for Rushdie's death. More recently, cartoons published in the Danish newspaper ''Jyllands-Posten'' were criticized on the basis that they were blasphemous against [[Muhammad]]. The Egyptian government, under pressure by the parliament, banned the film, ''The Da Vinci Code,'' and is to confiscate the [[novel]] for containing blasphemy. In Pakistan and other Islamic nations, Christians often bear the brunt of the [[country]]’s blasphemy laws.
  
 
===Blasphemy in other religions===
 
===Blasphemy in other religions===
 
====Buddhism====
 
====Buddhism====
Many religions present a set of [[dogma]] and then insist that people believe them, even when such dogmas appear strange or have been explained by [[science]] to be false or without basis. [[Buddhism]] has no place for such doctrines. It does not require [[blind faith]] but actually suggests its adherents to think, to question and to develop acceptance based on understanding.
+
[[Buddhism]] has no formal concept of blasphemy. The tenets of Buddhism permit that sincere followers of other beliefs are also rewarded in the [[afterlife]]. According to Buddhist [[teachings]], this theological perspective is based on [[natural law]], which is in accordance with scientific principles and applies to everyone regardless of their religious affiliation. Buddhism teaches that what is done in the present determines what happens to us in the [[future]], and for this reason one does not find Buddhists condemning others for their beliefs.
 
 
Being self-confident, Buddhism opens itself to query and scrutiny. There is no concept of blasphemy in Buddhism. Questions on Buddhism are often answered with [[rationality]], [[respect]], and [[honesty]]. The religion claims that says sincere followers of other beliefs are also rewarded in the afterlife. Buddhism is not like a [[football team]] or a [[political party]]. One does not become a Buddhist for the purpose of condemning others. Buddhism teaches that what is done now determines what happens to us in the [[future]]. This is a [[natural law]] in accordance with scientific principles and applies to everyone regardless of their religious label.
 
  
====Hindusim====
+
However, the Buddhist [[Eightfold Path]] requires a practitioner to cultivate "right speech," which includes no abusive [[language]], [[gossip]], [[lying]], or [[slander]]. Thus, if Buddhists slander the Buddhist saints or are blasphemous towards the followers of other [[traditions]], then they are violating their own ethical concept. Buddhist [[monks]] and [[nuns]] are sometimes disciplined for such unacceptable [[speech]], even if their sin is not called by the word blasphemy.
Islam/Christianity offer one simplified set of [[morals]] and [[values]] contained in single book. Hinduism offers a rich variety of [[texts]] and encourages [[debate]], which is better for a securely established [[culture]] that can devote time to the pursuit of [[knowledge]].
 
  
Both Islam/Christianity regard human beings as far superior [[species]] on the [[planet]], and believe that God made the rest of the world for human consumption. Hinduism and other Eastern religions believe humans are part of environment and put stress on respecting all creatures. According to Hinduism, no religion or holy book transcends [[reality]]; no prophet owns reality. Reality plays with people and their [[beliefs]], caresses them for a while, and tosses them in a bin to send them in oblivion for centuries. The earlier people realize this, the better it is for their religion.
+
====Hinduism====
 +
There is also no word for blasphemy in [[Hinduism]], and the religion's concepts of "utmost [[freedom]] of [[thought]] and [[action]]" attracts many followers. Hinduism does not prohibit anyone to question its fundamental [[beliefs]], and it has never banished anyone if they wrote a differing scripture or failed to observe a particular [[ritual]]. As [[Mahatma Gandhi]] wrote, "even atheists can call themselves as Hindus."
  
There is no word blasphemy in Hinduism. The concepts of "utmost [[freedom]] of [[thought]] and [[action]]" attracts many to Hinduism. Hinduism never forbids any one to question its fundamentals. Hinduism has never banished anyone, since he or she wrote a wrong scripture or did not observe a particular ritual. [[Mahathma Gandhi]] wrote, "even atheists can call themselves as Hindus." In fact, both the [[Charvaka]] and [[Nastika]] philosophies which existed during the Vedic period, rejected the existence of God and considered religion as an aberration.
+
Yet despite the general tolerance and pluralism of the Hindu religion, the attitude of some Hindus toward people of [[Vedas|Veda]]-rejecting faiths, such as [[Jains]] and [[Buddhists]], is similar to those who condemn blasphemy. These faiths, having grown out of Hinduism, fall into a different category from those such as [[Judaism]] and [[Christianity]], which never received the Vedas. Those considered heretical or blasphemous are deemed as [[Nastika]]. Certain Hindu sects are also considered Nastika, such as the practitioners of some Hindu [[Tantric traditions]], as well as materialists.
  
 
====Jainism====
 
====Jainism====
In Jainism, blasphemy is the teaching of the false; the hindrance of the true religion; the denegration of the [[saints]], of the images of gods, and of the community, of the [[canon]]; and the rape of sacred objects, all of which cause the state of ''darsana-mohaniya-k'' (a disturbance of the knowledge of the religious truth inherent in one's natural disposition).
+
In [[Jainism]], blasphemy is the teaching of the false; the hindrance of the true religion; the denigration of the [[saints]], of the images of gods, and of the community, of the [[canon]]; and the rape of sacred objects, all of which cause the state of ''darsana-mohaniya-k'' (a disturbance of the knowledge of the religious truth inherent in one's natural disposition).
 
 
An example of the Jain legal view on blasphemy occurred in [[Mangalore]], [[India]], where the police arrested B. V. Seetharam. editor of ''Kannada'', the evening daily newspaper of ''Karavali Ale'', along with his wife, Rohini. They were taken to the Panambur [[police]] station for the "blasphemous reporting and personal abuses" against the spiritual leader of Jainism, [[Munishree Tarunsagar]].
 
  
The [[arrest]] was done following complaints filed by Jain organizations against Seetharam. The [[organizations]] had alleged that the articles had hurt their religious sentiments. The complaint also alleged that several reports and articles on the visit of Tarunsagar and the ''Digambaras'' (followers of one of the two mani sects of Jainism), which were published in the newspaper, had hurt the Jain community.
+
An example of the Jain legal view on blasphemy occurred in [[Mangalore]], [[India]], where the police arrested B. V. Seetharam, editor of ''Kannada,'' the evening daily newspaper of ''Karavali Ale,'' along with his wife, Rohini. They were taken to the Panambur [[police]] station for the "blasphemous reporting and personal abuses" against the spiritual leader of Jainism, [[Munishree Tarunsagar]].
  
 
==Blasphemy laws==
 
==Blasphemy laws==
 
===European initiatives===
 
===European initiatives===
The [[Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe]] in Strasbourg adopted on June 29, 2007 Recommendation 1805 (2007) on blasphemy, religious insults, and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion. This Recommendation set a number of guidelines for member states of the [[Council of Europe]] in view of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) of the [[European Convention on Human Rights]]. In this area, there is also considerable case-law by the [[European Court of Human Rights]] in Strasbourg.
+
In January 2007, the [[Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe]] in [[Strasbourg]] adopted Recommendation 1805 on blasphemy, religious insults, and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion. This recommendation set a number of guidelines for member states of the [[Council of Europe]] in view of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion) of the [[European Convention on Human Rights]]. In this area, there is also considerable case-law by the [[European Court of Human Rights]] in Strasbourg.
 +
 
 +
The recommendation deals with blasphemy in terms of "religious insults and hate speech against persons on the grounds of their religion." It stipulates that individual states are responsible for "determining what should count as criminal offenses within the limits imposed by the case law of the [[European Court of Human Rights.]]" However, it recommends that blasphemy "should not be deemed a criminal offense" in itself, since in a pluralistic society one person may express in good conscience a theological view (such as denying or affirming the [[Trinity]]) which another person may consider blasphemous. However, when blasphemy is used intentionally as "hate speech," the recommendation implies that it may be rightfully prosecuted.
 +
 
 +
===The United States===
 +
Some states still have blasphemy laws on the books from the founding days, although they are no longer enforced. For example, chapter 272 of the [[Massachusetts]] General Laws states:
  
===The United States of America===
+
<blockquote>Whoever willfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching God, His creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.<ref>State of Massachusetts, [http://mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm Section 36 Massachusetts General Laws.] Retrieved October 24, 2007.</ref></blockquote>
Some states still have blasphemy laws on the books from the founding days. Chapter 272 of the [[Massachusetts]] General Laws states, for example:
 
  
:[http://mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm Section 36]. Whoever willfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, His creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.
+
However, the last person to be jailed in the United States for blasphemy was [[Abner Kneeland]] in 1838, as decided by the Massachusetts case [[Commonwealth v. Kneeland]]. This was prior to the ratification of the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]] [[Incorporation (Bill of Rights)|incorporating]] the Bill of Rights to apply to the states and not just the federal government.
  
The history of Maryland's blasphemy statutes suggests that even into the 1930s, the [[First Amendment]] was not recognized as preventing states from passing such laws. An 1879 codification of Maryland statutes prohibited blasphemy:
+
The [[United States Supreme Court]] in ''Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson'' 1952, held that a [[New York State]] blasphemy law was an unconstitutional prior restraint on freedom of speech. The court stated that "It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine, whether they appear in publications, speeches, or motion pictures."
  
:[http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/000001/000388/html/am388—824.html Art. 72, sec. 189]. If any person, by writing or speaking, shall blaspheme or curse God, or shall write or utter any profane words of and concerning our Saviour, Jesus Christ, or of and concerning the Trinity, or any of the persons thereof, he shall, on conviction, be fined not more than one hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both fined and imprisoned as aforesaid, at the discretion of the court.  
+
===United Kingdom===
 +
Although blasphemy laws in England have not been repealed, the last person in Britain to be sent to prison for blasphemy was [[John William Gott]] on December 9, 1921. He had three previous convictions for blasphemy when he was prosecuted for publishing two pamphlets which satirized the biblical story of Jesus entering Jerusalem (Matthew 21:2-7), comparing Jesus to a circus clown. He was sentenced to nine months' hard labor.  
  
According to the marginalia, this statute was adopted in 1819, and a similar law dates back to 1723. In 1904, the statute was still on the books at
+
In 1977, Denis Lemon, the editor of [[Gay News]] was found guilty of [[blasphemous libel]] for publishing [[James Kirkup]]'s poem "[[The Love that Dares to Speak its Name]]," which vilified [[Christ]] and his life ([[Whitehouse v. Lemon]]). Lemon was fined £500 and given a [[suspended sentence]] of nine months imprisonment.
Art. 27, sec. 20, unaltered in text.[http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/000001/000393/html/am393—782.html]. As late as 1939, this statute was still the law of Maryland.[http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/000001/000379/html/am379—1100.html] It is unclear from the statutes and notes when Maryland's blasphemy statute was last prosecuted.
 
  
The last person to be jailed in the United States for blasphemy was [[Abner Kneeland]] in 1838, as decided by the Massachusetts case [[Commonwealth v. Kneeland]]. However, this was prior to the ratification of the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]] [[Incorporation (Bill of Rights)|incorporating]] the Bill of Rights to apply to the states and not just the federal government.
+
In 2002, a deliberate and well-publicized public repeat reading of the poem "The Love that Dares to Speak its Name" took place on the steps of [[St. Martin-in-the-Fields]] church in [[Trafalgar Square]] and failed to lead to any prosecution.  
  
The United States Supreme Court in ''Joseph Burstyn, Inc v. Wilson'' 1952 held that the New York State blasphemy law was an unconstitutional prior restraint on freedom of speech. The court stated that "It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine, whether they appear in publications, speeches or motion pictures."
+
The last prosecution for blasphemy in Scotland was in 1843.
  
 
===Australia===
 
===Australia===
In the state of [[Victoria, Australia]], [[legislation]] outlawing any "religious vilification" was introduced in 2004. This law, the Racial & Religious Tolerance Act, has caused [[chaos]]. A Christian Ministry called Catch the Fire was singled out for legal [[persecution]] by the Islamic Council of Victoria. The ministry's two pastors, Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot, fought their case since it began in December 2004. In June 2005, they refused to acknowledge the court's order for them to apologize and pay a [[fine]]. Outside the [[court]], Nalliah claimed he would not submit "freedom of speech to a law which is [[sharia]] law by stealth. We will not bow down to pressure, and if it means we go to [[prison]] we will go to prison."
+
In the state of [[Victoria, Australia]], [[legislation]] outlawing any "religious vilification" was introduced in 2004. This law, the Racial & Religious Tolerance Act, has caused [[chaos]]. A Christian Ministry called ''Catch the Fire'' was singled out for legal [[persecution]] by the Islamic Council of Victoria. The ministry's two pastors, Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot, fought their case since it began, in December 2004. In June 2005, they refused to acknowledge the court's order for them to apologize and pay a [[fine]]. Outside the [[court]], Nalliah claimed he would not submit "freedom of speech to a law which is [[sharia]] law by stealth. We will not bow down to pressure, and if it means we go to [[prison]] we will go to prison."
  
 
===Pakistan===
 
===Pakistan===
Line 111: Line 84:
 
In 1990, the Federal Shari’ah Court ruled that the penalty should be a mandatory death sentence, with no right to reprieve or pardon. This is binding, but the government is yet to formally amend the law, which means that the provision for life sentence still formally exists, and is used by the government as a concession to critics of the death penalty. In 2004, the Pakistani parliament approved a law to reduce the scope of the blasphemy laws. The amendment to the law means that police officials will have to investigate accusations of blasphemy to ensure that they are well founded, before presenting criminal charges.
 
In 1990, the Federal Shari’ah Court ruled that the penalty should be a mandatory death sentence, with no right to reprieve or pardon. This is binding, but the government is yet to formally amend the law, which means that the provision for life sentence still formally exists, and is used by the government as a concession to critics of the death penalty. In 2004, the Pakistani parliament approved a law to reduce the scope of the blasphemy laws. The amendment to the law means that police officials will have to investigate accusations of blasphemy to ensure that they are well founded, before presenting criminal charges.
  
However, the law is used against political adversaries or personal enemies, by Muslim fundamentalists against Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs, or for personal revenge. Especially [[Ahmadi]] Muslims are victims of the blasphemy law. They claim to be Muslims themselves, but under the blasphemy law, they are not allowed to use Islamic vocabulary or rituals.
+
However, the law is allegedly used against political adversaries or personal enemies, by Muslim fundamentalists against Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs, or for personal revenge. Especially [[Ahmadi]] Muslims are victims of the blasphemy law. They claim to be Muslims themselves, but under the blasphemy law, they are not allowed to use Islamic vocabulary or rituals.
 
 
The Pakistani [[Catholic]] bishops' Justice and Peace Commission complained in July 2005 that since 1988, some 650 people had been falsely accused and arrested under the blasphemy law. Moreover, over the same period, some 20 people accused of the same offense had been killed. As of July 2005, 80 Christians were in prison accused of blasphemy.
 
  
Christians in Pakistan protested [[Dan Brown]]'s novel ''[[The Da Vinci Code]]'' as blasphemous, with support of Muslims as well. On June 3, 2006, Pakistan banned the [[The Da Vinci Code (film)|film]]. Culture Minister Gulab Jamal said: "Islam teaches us to respect all the prophets of God Almighty and degradation of any prophet is tantamount to defamation of the rest."<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/south_asia/5045672.stm Pakistan bans Da Vinci Code film, June 4, 2006.]. ''news.bbc.co.uk''. Retrieved August 20, 2007.</ref>
+
The Pakistani [[Catholic]] bishops' Justice and Peace Commission complained in July 2005, that since 1988, some 650 people had been falsely accused and arrested under the blasphemy law. Moreover, over the same period, some 20 people accused of the same offense had been killed. As of July 2005, 80 Christians were in prison accused of blasphemy.
  
===Israel===
+
Christians in Pakistan protested [[Dan Brown]]'s novel ''[[The Da Vinci Code]]'' as blasphemous, with the support of Muslims as well. On June 3, 2006, Pakistan banned the [[The Da Vinci Code (film)|film]]. Culture Minister Gulab Jamal said: "Islam teaches us to respect all the prophets of God Almighty and degradation of any prophet is tantamount to defamation of the rest."<ref>BBC, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/south_asia/5045672.stm Pakistan bans Da Vinci Code film, June 4, 2006.] Retrieved August 20, 2007.</ref>
In Israel, blasphemy against the Jewish nation's religious beliefs is interpreted through state policy towards citizens and would-be citizens. Israel’s Supreme Court has ruled that [[foreigners]] who convert to [[Judaism]] in Israel are eligible for [[citizenship]] under the [[Law of Return]]. However, it sidestepped the key issue of whether the eligibility extends to conversions officiated by non-[[Orthodox rabbis]]. The case has been closely watched by the Reform and Conservative movements, the two largest in the United States, which have been denied recognition in Israel. Currently, non-orthodox conversions are recognized only if they occur outside of Israel. Meanwhile, [[Catholic]] press reports complain that [[priests]] and [[nuns]] living in Israel and in the [[Occupied Territories]], some of whom have been there for more than a decade, are facing a hard time because of the authorities’ refusal to renew their [[visa]]s.
 
  
 
===Indonesia===
 
===Indonesia===
[[Indonesia]] is said to be "moderate," but the blasphemy laws allow a person to be jailed for up to five years. In July 2006, an eccentric leader, Lia Aminddin, a woman, of the [[Kingdom of Eden]] sect, was jailed for two years. This sect was neither Christian nor Muslim, and was based in [[Jakarta]]. Aminuddin had preached her beliefs with impunity for a decade, until she declared that she was the spirit of the [[Archangel Gabriel]]. [[Islamists]] from the Indonesian Council of Ulemas surrounded her compund in Jakarta for two days, in December 2005, until Aminuddin and 48 others were arrested and charged. The prosecution sought the five-year penalty against Aminuddin, and launched an [[appeal]] against her "lenient" sentence. Article 29, b, of Indonesia's constitution states: "The State guarantees all persons the freedom of worship, each according to his/her own religion or belief." Unless one offends Islam.
+
Although considered one of the more moderate Muslim nations, [[Indonesia]]n blasphemy laws allow a person to be jailed for up to five years. Yet Article 29, b, of Indonesia's constitution states: "The State guarantees all persons the freedom of worship, each according to his/her own religion or belief." In July 2006, Lia Aminddin, the female leader of the [[Kingdom of Eden]] sect, was jailed for two years. This sect was neither Christian nor Muslim, and was based in [[Jakarta]]. Aminuddin had preached her beliefs with impunity for a decade, until she declared that she was the spirit of the [[Archangel Gabriel]]. [[Islamists]] from the Indonesian Council of Ulemas surrounded her compound in Jakarta for two days, in December 2005, until Aminuddin and 48 others were arrested and charged. The prosecution sought the five-year penalty against Aminuddin, and launched an [[appeal]] against her "lenient" sentence.
 
 
===United Kingdom===
 
Blasphemy laws in England have never been repealed. The last person in Britain to be sent to prison for blasphemy was [[John William Gott]] on December 9, 1921. He had three previous convictions for blasphemy when he was prosecuted for publishing two pamphlets which satirised the biblical story of Jesus entering Jerusalem (Matthew 21:2-7), comparing Jesus to a circus clown. He was sentenced to nine months' hard labor.
 
 
 
In 1977, Denis Lemon, the editor of [[Gay News]] was found guilty of [[blasphemous libel]] for publishing [[James Kirkup]]'s poem [["The Love that Dares to Speak its Name"]] which allegedly vilified [[Christ]] and his life ([[Whitehouse v. Lemon]]). Lemon was fined £500 and sentenced to a [[suspended sentence]] of nine months imprisonment. It had been "touch and go," said the judge, whether he would actually send Lemon to jail.
 
 
 
In 2002, a deliberate and well-publicised public repeat reading of the poem "The Love that Dares to Speak its Name" took place on the steps of [[St Martin-in-the-Fields]] church in [[Trafalgar Square]] and failed to lead to any prosecution.
 
 
 
The last prosecution for blasphemy in Scotland was in 1843.
 
  
 
===Saudi Arabia===
 
===Saudi Arabia===
In [[Saudi Arabia]], the death sentence has been applied for [[apostasy]], though in Saudi Arabia, the last known [[execution]] for apostasy happened in 1992. More generally, such cases are charged as blasphemy. In Saudi Arabia, blasphemy has been punished with sentences of [[decapitation]] or [[imprisonment]] for up to eight years. The latter sentence was imposed in 2002 on a man who had said he found the [[Qur'an]] "boring." On January 7, 2003, Hail Al Masri, a [[Yemeni]] [[fruit]] seller living in [[Jeddah]] was sentenced to death by decapitation. His "crime" had been to refuse his roommate's entreaties to engage in morning [[prayer]]s. Masri had been sentenced to two years' jail and 600 lashes, but this had been overturned by a Jeddah court, which had imposed the [[death penalty]].
+
In [[Saudi Arabia]], the death sentence has been applied for [[apostasy]], though in Saudi Arabia, the last known [[execution]] for apostasy happened in 1992. More generally, such cases are charged as blasphemy. In Saudi Arabia, blasphemy has been punished with sentences of [[decapitation]] or [[imprisonment]] for up to eight years. The latter sentence was imposed in 2002, on a man who had said he found the [[Qur'an]] "boring." On January 7, 2003, Hail Al Masri, a [[Yemeni]] [[fruit]] seller living in [[Jeddah]] was sentenced to death by decapitation. His "crime" had been to refuse his roommate's entreaties to engage in morning [[prayer]]s. Masri had been sentenced to two years' jail and 600 lashes, but this had been overturned by a Jeddah court, which had imposed the [[death penalty]].
  
 
===Other nations===
 
===Other nations===
There has been a recent tendency in [[Western countries]] towards the repeal or reform of blasphemy laws, and these laws are only infrequently enforced where they exist. Blasphemy laws—nowadays often altered to include blasphemy regardless of religion—exist in several countries, such as in: [[Austria]] (Articles 188, 189 of the penal code); [[Denmark]] (Paragraph 140 of the penal code) (It was up to revision in 2004, but failed to gain majority, and has been discussed since, and especially after the [[Mohammed cartoons]] crisis); [[Finland]] (Section 10 of chapter 17 of the penal code. Unsuccessful attempts were made to rescind the law in 1914, 1917, 1965, 1970 and 1998); [[Germany]] (Article 166 of the [[Strafgesetzbuch|penal code]]); [[Greece]]; [[Islamic Republic of Iran]], [[Ireland]]; [[Iceland]]; [[Italy]];*[[The Netherlands]] (Article 147 of the penal code); [[New Zealand]][[http://www.legislation.govt.nz/libraries/contents/om_isapi.dll?clientID=197516672&hitsperheading=on&infobase=pal_statutes.nfo&jump=a1961-043%2fs.123&softpage=DOC#JUMPDEST_a1961-043/s.123 Section 123] of the Crimes Act 1961); [[Norway]] (section 142 of the the [[Norwegian Penal Code]] never applied); [[Spain]] (Article 525 of the penal code); and [[Switzerland]] ([http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/311_0/a261.html Article 261] of the penal code).
+
There has been a recent tendency in [[Western countries]] toward the repeal or reform of blasphemy laws, and these laws are only infrequently enforced where they exist. Blasphemy laws exist in several countries, such as in: [[Austria]] (Articles 188, 189 of the penal code); [[Denmark]] (Paragraph 140); [[Finland]] (Section 10 of chapter 17); [[Germany]] (Article 166); [[Greece]]; [[Ireland]]; [[Iceland]]; [[Italy]]; [[The Netherlands]] (Article 147 of the penal code); [[New Zealand]] Section 123 of the Crimes Act 1961); [[Norway]] (section 142 of the the [[Norwegian Penal Code]] never applied); [[Spain]] (Article 525 of the penal code); and [[Switzerland]] (Article 261 of the penal code).
  
 
==Notes==
 
==Notes==
Line 142: Line 103:
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
*Heins, Majorie. ''Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars'', New Press, 1998. ISBN 978-1565840485
+
* Hall Clayton Coleman. ''Narratives of Early Maryland 1633-1684 (Original Narratives of Early American History)''. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1910.
*Levy, Leonard. ''Blasphemy: Verbal Offense Against the Sacred, from Moses to Salmon Rushdie'', University of North Carolina Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0807845158
+
* Heins, Marjorie. ''Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars''. New Press, 1998. ISBN 978-1565840485
*Levy, Leonard. ''Blasphemy in Massachusetts'', Da Capo Press, 1973. ISBN 978-0306702211   
+
* Levy, Leonard W. ''Blasphemy: Verbal Offense Against the Sacred, from Moses to Salman Rushdie''. University of North Carolina Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0807845158
*Marsh, Joss. ''Word Crimes: Blasphemy, Culture, and Literature in Nineteenth-Century England'', University of Chicago Press, 1998. ISBN 978-0226506906
+
* . ''Blasphemy in Massachusetts''. Da Capo Press, 1973. ISBN 978-0306702211   
*Plate, S. Brent. ''Blasphemy: Art that Offends'', Black Dog Publishing, 2006. ISBN 978-1904772536
+
* Marsh, Joss. ''Word Crimes: Blasphemy, Culture, and Literature in Nineteenth-Century England''. University of Chicago Press, 1998. ISBN 978-0226506906
*Villa-flores, Javier. ''Dangerous Speech: A Social History of Blasphemy in Colonial Mexico'', University of Arizona Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0816525638
+
* Plate, S. Brent. ''Blasphemy: Art that Offends''. Black Dog Publishing, 2006. ISBN 978-1904772536
 +
* Villa-flores, Javier. ''Dangerous Speech: A Social History of Blasphemy in Colonial Mexico''. University of Arizona Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0816525638
  
==External links and references==
 
* ''[[Maledicta]]: The International Journal of Verbal Aggression''  (ISSN US 0363-3659)
 
* [http://www.brentonpriestley.com/writing/blasphemy.htm Comprehensive academic study comparing
 
  
  
 
[[Category:philosophy and religion]]
 
[[Category:philosophy and religion]]
 
{{Credit|152320457}}
 
{{Credit|152320457}}

Latest revision as of 14:33, 8 February 2022


Of Blasphemy, from the Narrenschiff (The Ship of Fools); woodcut attributed to Albrecht Dürer

Blasphemy is the defamation of the name of one or more gods. In a broader sense, blasphemy is irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable. Many cultures disapprove of speech or writing which defames the deity or deities of their established religions, and these restrictions have the force of law in some countries.

The word blasphemy is derived from the Middle English blasfemen, which in turn is related to the Greek blasphemein, from blaptein ("to injure") and pheme ("reputation").

In Judaism, blasphemy is the uttering of God's name and/or speaking evil of Him. In the New Testament, blaspheming the Holy Spirit is considered unforgivable, and denying the Trinity has also been defined as blasphemous. In Islam, blasphemy constitutes speaking ill of God, Muhammad, any other prophet mentioned in the Qur'an, or the Qur'an itself. In Buddhism and Hinduism there is no formal concept of blasphemy, while Jainism calls the teaching of what is false blasphemous.

In modern times with the advent of freedom of speech and religion, blasphemy laws in Western nations are no longer enforced. However, in Muslim nations harsh laws against blasphemy are still in effect.

History

Blasphemy in Judaism

The commandment against blasphemy is given in Exodus 22:28: "Do not blaspheme God or curse the ruler of your people." Leviticus 24:16 states that those who speak blasphemy "shall surely be put to death" by stoning. The blasphemer was to be taken outside the camp, and all who heard him should lay their hands upon his head; then all the congregation should stone him. Leviticus also provides an example of an Israelite mixed blood (having an Egyptian father) being stoned to death after getting into a fight with a Hebrew and cursing the Name of the Hebrew God.

Later the use of God's proper name (YHWH) came to constitute blasphemy according to normative Judaism, although it is allowed to mystics of the kabbalistic and some hasidic traditions. In ancient times, people were also guilty of blasphemy if they were idolaters, manifested disrespect towards God, or insulted his chosen leaders. For example, reviling the king, who acts as God's representative, was considered a form of blasphemy (Exodus 22, 27; Isaiah 8.21). Equating oneself to God was also considered blasphemous.

The Mishnah states the rabbinical opinion that the blasphemer is not guilty unless he pronounces the name of God in his insult or curse (Mishnah Sanh. 7.5). An opinion in the Gemara, however, extends the definition of the crime to a disrespectful use of any words which describe the sacred attributes of God, such as "The Holy One" or "The Merciful One." When the Jewish courts exercised criminal jurisdiction, the death penalty was sometimes applied to the blasphemer who used the Name; but the blasphemer of God's attributes was subjected to corporal punishment (Sanh. 56a).

When taking testimony during a blasphemy trial, witnesses who heard the blasphemy were not permitted to repeat the very words in question. The excommunication of the blasphemer could be substituted as a punishment for the death penalty (Pithe Teshubah to Yoreh De'ah, 340, 37). In addition to the court's punishment, the blasphemer is also excluded from the life in the world to come ('Ab. Zarah 18a).

Blasphemy in Christianity

The New Testament teaching on blasphemy is often related to Luke 12:10: "Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." The author of Ephesians commands that blasphemers be expelled from Christian society: "Blasphemy be put away from you, with all malice" (Ephesians 4:31).

When Christians came to control the power of the state, blasphemy became a crime punishable by law. Thomas Aquinas saw blasphemy as a form of unbelief, stating in Summa Theologica (13:3) that blasphemy, being a crime directly against God is "more grave than murder." Moreover, later Christian society was not as forgiving as Luke, insisting on harsh punishments for blasphemy against the Father and the Son as well as the Holy Spirit, and sometimes equating the public denial of Christian doctrine as blasphemy. For example, a seventeenth century Act Concerning Religion in Maryland stated that whoever shall "Blaspheme GOD, that is curse him, or deny that JESUS CHRIST our Savior to be the Son of God, or deny the Holy Trinity… shall be punished with death, and forfeiture of all of his or her Lands and Goods…."[1]

The advent of religious toleration in the late seventeenth century witnessed a graduation relaxation in blasphemy laws in Christian societies.

Blasphemy in Islam

Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses.

Blasphemy in Islam constitutes speaking ill God, of the prophet Muhammad, any other prophet mentioned in the Qur'an, or of any biblical prophets. The Qu'ran also states—in direct opposition to traditional Christian tradition—that it is blasphemy to claim that Jesus Christ is the son of God (5.017).

For those who blaspheme by attacking the Qur'an or the Prophet, the Qur'an says that the punishment shall be "execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: That is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter" (Surah Al-Maidah 5:33).

In Muslim countries, blasphemy is still considered a very serious offense and may in some cases be punishable by death. British author Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses was seen by many Muslims to contain blasphemies against Islam, and Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa in 1989, calling for Rushdie's death. More recently, cartoons published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten were criticized on the basis that they were blasphemous against Muhammad. The Egyptian government, under pressure by the parliament, banned the film, The Da Vinci Code, and is to confiscate the novel for containing blasphemy. In Pakistan and other Islamic nations, Christians often bear the brunt of the country’s blasphemy laws.

Blasphemy in other religions

Buddhism

Buddhism has no formal concept of blasphemy. The tenets of Buddhism permit that sincere followers of other beliefs are also rewarded in the afterlife. According to Buddhist teachings, this theological perspective is based on natural law, which is in accordance with scientific principles and applies to everyone regardless of their religious affiliation. Buddhism teaches that what is done in the present determines what happens to us in the future, and for this reason one does not find Buddhists condemning others for their beliefs.

However, the Buddhist Eightfold Path requires a practitioner to cultivate "right speech," which includes no abusive language, gossip, lying, or slander. Thus, if Buddhists slander the Buddhist saints or are blasphemous towards the followers of other traditions, then they are violating their own ethical concept. Buddhist monks and nuns are sometimes disciplined for such unacceptable speech, even if their sin is not called by the word blasphemy.

Hinduism

There is also no word for blasphemy in Hinduism, and the religion's concepts of "utmost freedom of thought and action" attracts many followers. Hinduism does not prohibit anyone to question its fundamental beliefs, and it has never banished anyone if they wrote a differing scripture or failed to observe a particular ritual. As Mahatma Gandhi wrote, "even atheists can call themselves as Hindus."

Yet despite the general tolerance and pluralism of the Hindu religion, the attitude of some Hindus toward people of Veda-rejecting faiths, such as Jains and Buddhists, is similar to those who condemn blasphemy. These faiths, having grown out of Hinduism, fall into a different category from those such as Judaism and Christianity, which never received the Vedas. Those considered heretical or blasphemous are deemed as Nastika. Certain Hindu sects are also considered Nastika, such as the practitioners of some Hindu Tantric traditions, as well as materialists.

Jainism

In Jainism, blasphemy is the teaching of the false; the hindrance of the true religion; the denigration of the saints, of the images of gods, and of the community, of the canon; and the rape of sacred objects, all of which cause the state of darsana-mohaniya-k (a disturbance of the knowledge of the religious truth inherent in one's natural disposition).

An example of the Jain legal view on blasphemy occurred in Mangalore, India, where the police arrested B. V. Seetharam, editor of Kannada, the evening daily newspaper of Karavali Ale, along with his wife, Rohini. They were taken to the Panambur police station for the "blasphemous reporting and personal abuses" against the spiritual leader of Jainism, Munishree Tarunsagar.

Blasphemy laws

European initiatives

In January 2007, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg adopted Recommendation 1805 on blasphemy, religious insults, and hate speech against persons on grounds of their religion. This recommendation set a number of guidelines for member states of the Council of Europe in view of Articles 10 (freedom of expression) and 9 (freedom of thought, conscience, and religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights. In this area, there is also considerable case-law by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The recommendation deals with blasphemy in terms of "religious insults and hate speech against persons on the grounds of their religion." It stipulates that individual states are responsible for "determining what should count as criminal offenses within the limits imposed by the case law of the European Court of Human Rights." However, it recommends that blasphemy "should not be deemed a criminal offense" in itself, since in a pluralistic society one person may express in good conscience a theological view (such as denying or affirming the Trinity) which another person may consider blasphemous. However, when blasphemy is used intentionally as "hate speech," the recommendation implies that it may be rightfully prosecuted.

The United States

Some states still have blasphemy laws on the books from the founding days, although they are no longer enforced. For example, chapter 272 of the Massachusetts General Laws states:

Whoever willfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching God, His creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.[2]

However, the last person to be jailed in the United States for blasphemy was Abner Kneeland in 1838, as decided by the Massachusetts case Commonwealth v. Kneeland. This was prior to the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporating the Bill of Rights to apply to the states and not just the federal government.

The United States Supreme Court in Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson 1952, held that a New York State blasphemy law was an unconstitutional prior restraint on freedom of speech. The court stated that "It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine, whether they appear in publications, speeches, or motion pictures."

United Kingdom

Although blasphemy laws in England have not been repealed, the last person in Britain to be sent to prison for blasphemy was John William Gott on December 9, 1921. He had three previous convictions for blasphemy when he was prosecuted for publishing two pamphlets which satirized the biblical story of Jesus entering Jerusalem (Matthew 21:2-7), comparing Jesus to a circus clown. He was sentenced to nine months' hard labor.

In 1977, Denis Lemon, the editor of Gay News was found guilty of blasphemous libel for publishing James Kirkup's poem "The Love that Dares to Speak its Name," which vilified Christ and his life (Whitehouse v. Lemon). Lemon was fined £500 and given a suspended sentence of nine months imprisonment.

In 2002, a deliberate and well-publicized public repeat reading of the poem "The Love that Dares to Speak its Name" took place on the steps of St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square and failed to lead to any prosecution.

The last prosecution for blasphemy in Scotland was in 1843.

Australia

In the state of Victoria, Australia, legislation outlawing any "religious vilification" was introduced in 2004. This law, the Racial & Religious Tolerance Act, has caused chaos. A Christian Ministry called Catch the Fire was singled out for legal persecution by the Islamic Council of Victoria. The ministry's two pastors, Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot, fought their case since it began, in December 2004. In June 2005, they refused to acknowledge the court's order for them to apologize and pay a fine. Outside the court, Nalliah claimed he would not submit "freedom of speech to a law which is sharia law by stealth. We will not bow down to pressure, and if it means we go to prison we will go to prison."

Pakistan

Among Muslim-majority countries, Pakistan has the strictest anti-blasphemy laws. In 1982, President Zia ul-Haq introduced Section 295B to the Pakistan Penal Code punishing "defiling the Holy Qur'an" with life imprisonment. In 1986, Section 295C was introduced, mandating the death penalty for "use of derogatory remarks in respect of the Holy Prophet."

In 1990, the Federal Shari’ah Court ruled that the penalty should be a mandatory death sentence, with no right to reprieve or pardon. This is binding, but the government is yet to formally amend the law, which means that the provision for life sentence still formally exists, and is used by the government as a concession to critics of the death penalty. In 2004, the Pakistani parliament approved a law to reduce the scope of the blasphemy laws. The amendment to the law means that police officials will have to investigate accusations of blasphemy to ensure that they are well founded, before presenting criminal charges.

However, the law is allegedly used against political adversaries or personal enemies, by Muslim fundamentalists against Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs, or for personal revenge. Especially Ahmadi Muslims are victims of the blasphemy law. They claim to be Muslims themselves, but under the blasphemy law, they are not allowed to use Islamic vocabulary or rituals.

The Pakistani Catholic bishops' Justice and Peace Commission complained in July 2005, that since 1988, some 650 people had been falsely accused and arrested under the blasphemy law. Moreover, over the same period, some 20 people accused of the same offense had been killed. As of July 2005, 80 Christians were in prison accused of blasphemy.

Christians in Pakistan protested Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code as blasphemous, with the support of Muslims as well. On June 3, 2006, Pakistan banned the film. Culture Minister Gulab Jamal said: "Islam teaches us to respect all the prophets of God Almighty and degradation of any prophet is tantamount to defamation of the rest."[3]

Indonesia

Although considered one of the more moderate Muslim nations, Indonesian blasphemy laws allow a person to be jailed for up to five years. Yet Article 29, b, of Indonesia's constitution states: "The State guarantees all persons the freedom of worship, each according to his/her own religion or belief." In July 2006, Lia Aminddin, the female leader of the Kingdom of Eden sect, was jailed for two years. This sect was neither Christian nor Muslim, and was based in Jakarta. Aminuddin had preached her beliefs with impunity for a decade, until she declared that she was the spirit of the Archangel Gabriel. Islamists from the Indonesian Council of Ulemas surrounded her compound in Jakarta for two days, in December 2005, until Aminuddin and 48 others were arrested and charged. The prosecution sought the five-year penalty against Aminuddin, and launched an appeal against her "lenient" sentence.

Saudi Arabia

In Saudi Arabia, the death sentence has been applied for apostasy, though in Saudi Arabia, the last known execution for apostasy happened in 1992. More generally, such cases are charged as blasphemy. In Saudi Arabia, blasphemy has been punished with sentences of decapitation or imprisonment for up to eight years. The latter sentence was imposed in 2002, on a man who had said he found the Qur'an "boring." On January 7, 2003, Hail Al Masri, a Yemeni fruit seller living in Jeddah was sentenced to death by decapitation. His "crime" had been to refuse his roommate's entreaties to engage in morning prayers. Masri had been sentenced to two years' jail and 600 lashes, but this had been overturned by a Jeddah court, which had imposed the death penalty.

Other nations

There has been a recent tendency in Western countries toward the repeal or reform of blasphemy laws, and these laws are only infrequently enforced where they exist. Blasphemy laws exist in several countries, such as in: Austria (Articles 188, 189 of the penal code); Denmark (Paragraph 140); Finland (Section 10 of chapter 17); Germany (Article 166); Greece; Ireland; Iceland; Italy; The Netherlands (Article 147 of the penal code); New Zealand Section 123 of the Crimes Act 1961); Norway (section 142 of the the Norwegian Penal Code never applied); Spain (Article 525 of the penal code); and Switzerland (Article 261 of the penal code).

Notes

  1. Hall, 1910.
  2. State of Massachusetts, Section 36 Massachusetts General Laws. Retrieved October 24, 2007.
  3. BBC, Pakistan bans Da Vinci Code film, June 4, 2006. Retrieved August 20, 2007.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Hall Clayton Coleman. Narratives of Early Maryland 1633-1684 (Original Narratives of Early American History). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1910.
  • Heins, Marjorie. Sex, Sin, and Blasphemy: A Guide to America's Censorship Wars. New Press, 1998. ISBN 978-1565840485
  • Levy, Leonard W. Blasphemy: Verbal Offense Against the Sacred, from Moses to Salman Rushdie. University of North Carolina Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0807845158
  • —. Blasphemy in Massachusetts. Da Capo Press, 1973. ISBN 978-0306702211
  • Marsh, Joss. Word Crimes: Blasphemy, Culture, and Literature in Nineteenth-Century England. University of Chicago Press, 1998. ISBN 978-0226506906
  • Plate, S. Brent. Blasphemy: Art that Offends. Black Dog Publishing, 2006. ISBN 978-1904772536
  • Villa-flores, Javier. Dangerous Speech: A Social History of Blasphemy in Colonial Mexico. University of Arizona Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0816525638

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.