If the Supreme Court considered the petition “frivolous” because it is not within the power of any court anywhere to alter the scriptures of any religion, that would be perfectly reasonable. Note, however, that senior BJP leader and spokesperson Syed Shahnawaz Hussain said: “It is my party’s stand that saying absurd things about any religious text, including Quran, is a highly condemnable act.”
What is absurd about saying that the Qur’an contains passages that promote hatred and terror? Here are a few of them:
“Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah and your enemies…” (8:60)
“When your Lord was revealing to the angels, ‘I am with you; so confirm the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers; so strike the necks, and strike every finger of them!” (Qur’an 8:12)
“We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve for what they have associated with Allah of which He had not sent down authority. And their refuge will be the Fire, and wretched is the residence of the wrongdoers.” (Qur’an 3:151)
“And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from where they drove you out; persecution is worse than slaughter. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, kill them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is all-forgiving, all-compassionate. Fight them until there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.” (Qur’an 2:191-193)
“They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore do not take friends from among them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah; then, if they turn their backs, seize them and kill them wherever you find them; do not take for yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.” (Qur’an 4:89)
“This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth to do corruption there: they shall be killed, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall be struck off on opposite sides; or they shall be exiled from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.” (Qur’an 5:33)
“Fight them, till there is no persecution and religion is all for Allah; then if they give over, surely Allah sees the things they do.” (Qur’an 8:39)
“Then, when the sacred months are over, kill the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.” (Qur’an 9:5)
“Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not practice the religion of truth, even if they are of the People of the Book — until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” (Qur’an 9:29)
“Allah has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill, and are killed; that is a promise binding upon Allah in the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than Allah? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph.” (Qur’an 9:111)
“O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you; and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing.” (Qur’an 9:123)
“When you meet the unbelievers, strike their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads. So it shall be; and if Allah had willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them; but that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will not send their works astray.” (Qur’an 47:4)
“SC Quashes Plea to Scrap 26 Verses From Quran, Slaps Rs 50k Fine,” The Quint, April 12, 2021:
The Supreme Court on Monday, 12 April, slapped a fine of Rs 50,000 [$667] on former Uttar Pradesh Shia Waqf Board Chairperson Syed Waseem Rizvi seeking removal of certain verses from the holy book of Quran on the ground that they allegedly promote hatred and terror.
Calling the petition “absolutely frivolous,” the apex court asked Rizvi’s counsel if he was actually serious about the matter and keen on pressing the petition, according to IANS.
After hearing the arguments, the court dismissed the petition with a fine of Rs 50,000, to be paid to legal service authorities.
What Rizvi’s Counsel Argued
Rizvi’s counsel argued that teaching in the holy book is not protected under Article 25 or 30 of the Constitution and cited issues with the interpretation of the verses.
The counsel further urged the top court to issue guidelines on the issue, so that students, studying in the madrasas under the government, are not indoctrinated….
Rizvi had moved the Supreme Court on 13 March alleging that the Holy Quran had 26 verses, which promoted Jihad and insurgency among the Muslim youth, and asked for them to be removed.
The petition alleged that “these verses were added at a later stage by the first three Caliphates to aid the expansion of Islam by war.”
The Condemnation of the Petition
The petition led to protests in several cities last month including Lucknow and Hyderabad, with many demanding Rizvi’s arrest.
Shia and Sunni clerics had reacted saying that not a word has been altered in the Holy Quran in 1,400 years.
Shia cleric Maulana Kalbe Jawad in a protest held in Lucknow on 15 March called Rizvi an “enemy of Islam and Quran” and called for a social boycott of him.
Senior BJP leader and spokesperson Syed Shahnawaz Hussain also criticised Rizvi asking him not to “vitilate the atmosphere of the country,” as it “hurts people’s sentiments.”
“It is my party’s stand that saying absurd things about any religious text, including Quran, is a highly condemnable act,” Hussain had told PTI….
An FIR has been lodged against lawyer Amirul Hasan Zaidi, a former district bar association president, after his speech announcing a Rs 11 lakh reward for beheading Rizvi went viral on social media.
AdaptivelyEmergent . says
Simply more denial in the face of the threat.
sheik yer mami says
Syed Shahnawaz Hussain is a Moslem, of course.
He has no business being on the Supreme Court.
No Mohammedan should be sitting in judgement over infidel matters.
gravenimage says
Of course a Muslim would consider concerns about violent Jihad to be “frivolous”.
shekar raghavan says
Syed Shahnawaz Hussain is not a judge in the Supreme Court. He is the spokesperson of the ruling political party.
Infidel says
I laud Waseem Rizvi for bringing this to the court. The court should have said what RS suggested above – that it didn’t have the powers to alter the texts of any religion, and left it at that
I don’t get the point behind Shahnawaz Hussein’s statement, given that his party is not gonna get muslim votes anywhere anyway
mortimer says
Basically, the Koran doesn’t pass India’s laws against incitement to violence and incitement to hatred. About two-thirds of the Koran is a rant that Allah hates kafirs and wants Muslims to hurt them.
Hindus have been hurt more by Muslims than any other group.
sheik yer mami says
Syed Shahnawaz Hussain is a Moslem.
No Moslem should be sitting on the Supreme Court of any country.
No Moslem should be allowed to rule over infidel matters.
rubiconcrest says
He certainly has a conflict of interest and should have recused himself.
Infidel says
He’s not a Supreme Court judge: he’s a spokesman of the ruling party. Reason the party has him is to virtue signal that it’s not all anti-muslim
PRCS says
I was reminded by your post to reacquaint myself with your site.
Thanks.
Bikinis not Burkas says
I would say it does, it violates all human dignity!
Quran (9:5) – “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them.”
Indians are idolators as stated above and the Quran commands Muslims to slay them, if that is not against at least one of India’s Laws then I’m a monkeys uncle!
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Your quotation of Quran 8:12 has mismatched quote marks, so I checked
https://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=8&verse=12 , which says:
Sahih International: [Remember] when your Lord inspired to [sic] the angels, “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.”
So Allah gave a pep-talk to the angels, telling them to strike disbelievers in the neck and lop all their fingertips off. I thought angels were spiritual beings unable to wield bladed weapons. Don’t keep us in suspense. Did the angels ever actually lop disbelievers’ fingertips off? When and where? What is the historical record on this fingertip-lopping event? Or did the angels disobey Allah?
Wellington says
Removal of what Islam avers is no more necessary than what Nazism, Marxism or Western Leftism have asserted.
Proper and accurate exposure is enough. Evil properly characterized is sufficient unless man is a complete idiot (which he might be though I think otherwise).
Not there yet with Islam. Not there yet also with either Marxism or Western Leftism. And getting only one out of four malevolent ideologies correct is simply not enough for the preservation of liberty. Not even close.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Wellington.
PRCS says
Rizwi’s Quran Row: What Happened and Why Has It Caused Outrage?
The petition noted that these verses were added at a later stage.
“These verses were added to the Quran, by the first three Caliphates to aid the expansion of Islam by war,” said the petition, as quoted by Times of India.
HOW HAVE MUSLIM CLERICS REACTED TO THIS?
Shia and Sunni clerics have said that not a word has been altered in the Holy Quran in 1,400 years
The highest muck-a-mucks surely heard the narrative has a hole in it. But they’ll never admit that as doing so would destroy the power they hold over others.
https://www.thequint.com/news/hot-news/rizwi-quran-row-what-happened-and-why-has-it-caused-outrage#read-more
David says
I believe that the ‘popular’ version of the Koran dates from 1924. Also there are around 30 different versions in print. Take you pick.
PRCS says
Yes, the whole issue is complicated.
Bottom line for Muslim “scholars” who insist Qur’an remains–unchanged for the past 1400 years–you’re wrong.
gravenimage says
The Qur’an is not “unchanging” as pious Muslims claim–but it has *always* been violent.
James Sang says
How the fuck did a Muslim get on the Supreme Court of India? He should not be ruling on this issue because he is partial on this issue and a terrorist!
Singh T. Junior says
Syed Shahnawaz Hussain is NOT on supreme court. He is BJP Spokesperson and a jihadi moselm. BJP is predominantly Hindu party and keeps a jihadi as spokesperson to look secular. The Supreme Court has no moslems, but it has secular inclinations. The secularism in India means “let moslem do terrorism, rape, murder, child-molestation, looting, burning, rioting, kidnapping and animal-sex and look the other way, and blame Hindus for hurting their feelings.”
Singh T. Junior says
Wasim Rizvi is a courageous hero who has taken a bold stance against the murderous cult of islam. His family and friends have left him. The Supreme Court has washed its hands taken a low level position. I am puzzled why Wasim Rizvi has not yet left islam and embraced Hinduism or any other normal religion. Jihadis will try to kill him, no doubt. The only good thing going for Rizvi is that there are tons of Hindus Sadhus (holy men) who are openly speaking against Mohammad (may police be upon him) and Rizvi’s number is not on the top of the list. Yati Narasingham Sarasvati is on top of the jihadi list this month because he called Mohammad a thug, thief or something like that.
Infidel says
Waseem Rizvi is a shi’a and is trying to get his sect to recognize how anti-shi’a the sunnis are and to get the shi’a to the Hindu side. It’s not gonna work, and that’s what he’s finding out
However, he has made me curious about one thing: if it was the Umayyad caliphs that put together the quran, then why do shi’a accept its authenticity, particularly given that it was the Umayyads who got Ali and Husayn ‘martyred’?
Halaku says
That would have led to perpetual strife. This commonality also allows the benefit of Koranic fanaticism to be reaped by rulers of both persuasions against the Kafir.
OTTER says
Gratuitous groveling by the Indian Supreme Court and the BJP, the so-called party of the Hindus.
Since when did religious texts become exempt from examination even though they lead to the death of millions of people?
The answer is simple: THERE IS WORLDWIDE FEAR OF ISLAM. CAN’T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT MO AND THEIR WAR MANUAL.
GET READY FOR THE NEW MUSLIM MEDIEVAL AGES.
Infidel says
The same Supreme Court that years ago ruled that marital rape was okay, shocking much of Indian society
Halaku says
And has no problem ruling quite arbitrarily on Hindu religious issues like Sabarimala. Everyone knows Hindus don’t kill.
David says
Okay, if the woman approves?
Which side is the SC on? Do they live in fear, like the SC in the USA?
Infidel says
Then it’s not rape, is it? Unless one is Katherine McKinnon, who once wrote a book where she claimed that all sex, including consensual sex within a marriage, is rape
John Timmermans says
The quran must be forbidden in Canada.
PRCS says
What’s your plan?
gravenimage says
Everyone should *read* the Qur’an.
Halaku says
Years ago a similar petition was filed in the Calcutta High Court, in communist ruled West Bengal state. It met a similar fate. even worse, the Judge who admitted the petition had to run for cover, with the Congress and the Communist ruling parties at the center and the state, respectively, condemning the petition.
https://www.opindia.com/2021/03/calcutta-quran-petition-a-plea-to-ban-the-holy-book-36-years-ago/amp/
Frank Anderson says
Robert Spencer’s introduction to the article is a perfect more or less 1 page statement that would support a Declaratory Judgment action in a US court, in my opinion. Sooner or later, the issue will be brought and heard or we will face death and slavery. When “believers” sue kafir infidels for false claims, one of the responses from the defendants or intervenors should include this introduction to get the judge’s attention, not to mention the media’s attention, if that will ever happen. I praise RS for all his work, but especially so for this concise summary introduction of 1400 years of war, slavery and death.
Please consult a currently licensed attorney practicing in your jurisdiction for any legal advice.
Michael Gallie says
Islam has contributed nothing of value since it’s birth. What it has contributed is rape, torture, war and death. It is a cancer. There is only one cure for cancer. It must be destroyed.
David says
“It is my party’s stand that saying absurd things about any religious text, including Quran, is a highly condemnable act.” This should have read: “Commendable”
Without the verses of Hate, what is the point of islam?
PRCS says
Saying absurd things about religious texts isn’t “commendable”. It’s absurd.
Pointing out their absurdities is.
Giacomo Latta says
”senior BJP leader and spokesperson Syed Shahnawaz Hussain”
I assume he must be a Holocaust deniers as well as he certainly can’t see what is in front of his own face at this very moment.
OLD GUY says
But be careful of the pro-noun you use, because he, she, might land you in jail in some woke country.
Kepha says
Yes, we have surrendered our sensibilities to a small claque of provincial neurotics.
Kepha says
JAI HIND!!!!!
Even if I see the Qur’an as an evil and misleading book, I agree with the basic ruling of the Indian court.
Here in the USA, we have surrendered our sensibilities to a coterie of neurotic, easily offended people with hair-trigger emotions who, while supposedly educated, remain very provincial. Because of this, they would ban much of the world’s literary and historical heritage at worst, or bowdlerize it at best. If a judge in the US were to fail to follow this Indian precedent and accept a suit to alter the Qur’an (or any piece of literature) due to its “offensive” character, I would call for his impeachment, removal, and disbarrment for life. The world needs as accurate, warts-and-all a record as it can get, and the lawyers and judges need to keep their hands off. Moreover, the over-sensitive activists need to be hissed into hiding.
If they come for the QUr’an today, they’ll come for the Bible, the Rig Veda, and Upanishads, and the Sutta Pasa Pali tomorrow. Lao Zi and Kong Zi aren’t safe. They may even go after old Bushybeard Marx and the exerable Herbert Marcuse, too. They’ve already been bowdlerizing Shakespeare, Matk Twain, and Kipling. If e must teach, and come across something offensive, by all means express disapproval, but explain your reasons, and seek to give some understanding of why the offensive wording was written. But keep the record.
David Foot says
Stands to reason that if the Moslems don’t want us to make cartoons of the insulting and aggressive messenger who says terrible things against everybody else, really against the rest of the world which is not part of the evil cult, then it becomes necessary that the Islamic offensive texts should be removed as well.
We can’t have the Moslems with freedom of speech to insult us in our countries with their publications and us not to have freedom of speech in our own countries to reply to the offensive publications with a simple political cartoon of the derranged messenger with a bomb in his turban which is so reasonable as a reply to the instigator of the suicide bombers.
By rights the offensive texts of this cult should be removed also on the count that they are being used for education which becomes politically subversive and an instigating crime.
gravenimage says
India: Supreme Court dismisses as ‘frivolous’ petition calling for removal of Qur’an verses that promote hatred and terror
…………….
I’m not sure that preventing us from reading about the intrinsic violence of Islam would be the best way to go, but the issue of the violent verses of the Qur’an is *anything* but frivolous.
Infidel says
That wasn’t the argument. What the petitioner Waseem Rizvi wanted to do was delete the verses in question from what muslims are taught, and that is huge!
He had the right idea, but the wrong timing. While fighting an election in a state that could turn out to be a watershed in Indian electoral history, the last thing the BJP wants to do is bring back the perception of being ‘communal’. Had he brought it up after the elections were done, there might have been a more sensible response from the Indian government
gravenimage says
Infidel, the idea that it would be possible to destroy every Qur’an in existance is not practical (among other things).
So this would just affect new publications–Muslims would just use old Qur’ans, or illegally print their own intact ones. It would just be Infidels stuck with the new, whitewashed Qur’ans–and they would be unable to learn what Islam has in store for us.
Infidel says
No, it would just have affected qurans in India. Although India would have had to block all foreign sites that contain the original qurans, such as quranbrowser, and pull from the market any books that had the originals. And this is a country not unafraid to censor: any book that contains a map of Kashmir that isn’t depicted as a part of India (including the part actually occupied by Pakistan) is stamped w/ a disclaimer
Infidel says
Not afraid – typo above
shekar raghavan says
What this dhimmi Quint article omits to mention is the fact that Syed Waseem Rizvi has been declared a ‘gustakh -e-rasool’ (disobedient and rude to muhammad) by influential shia as well as sunni clerics who have called for Rizvi’s beheading. Even as I write this, there are processions and demonstrations demanding that Rizvi be decapitated.
Proud Islamophobe says
How stupid an attempt, what a colossal waste of time, as if removing the words is going to change the ideology. Besides, how will “we” infidels ever prove to libturds what the quran says if the words aren’t there?