Dr Zakir Naik
Rashid Jahangiri has submitted the following.
On ‘Pak Tea House’ blog an article on Dr. Zakir Naik is posted:
Muslims In Introspection Mode… Now a Fatwa on Dr. Zakir Naik
by Sadia Dehlvi
I wrote following comment that awaits moderation:
“Secret” of Dr. Zakir Naik’s “scholarship”.
From where Dr. Zakir Naik gets his “knowledge”?
ZN impresses Muslims and Hindus by Memorizing ONLY ONE BOOK. Actually he has TV program [on PeaceTV, UK] name based on this book.
Book name:
MUHAMMAD IN WORLD SCRIPTURES
by Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi (in 3 volumes)
You can read it online here.
Actually, if you open the above book, on line, and listen to ZN speech (i have done it online) his quotes that impress listeners come in order from the same book. It is different thing that he lacks moral courage to acknowledge his source of knowledge.
You can see the original Urdu version:
Meesaq-un-Nabiyyeen:
by Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi
From Zahid Aziz:
In a TV interview with Dr Shahid Masud of ARY TV, Dr Zakir Naik has stated that non-Muslims cannot be allowed to propagate their
religions in a Muslim country or build places of worship because their religions and their worship are false. You can watch this interview here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jYUL7eBdHg
In the clip below from the same channel with Dr Shahid Masud, Dr Naik says that a Muslim who changes his religion must be given the death penalty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMAZR8YIhxI
Just listen to his ridiculous arguments in support of this. This shows that he is just another bigoted Mulla.
From Rashid:
Yes, indeed ZK is bigoted Mulla. This is the reason i wrote:
“ZK impresses Muslims and Hindus by Memorizing ONLY ONE BOOK” i.e. MUHAMMAD IN WORLD SCRIPTURES. Otherwise he is devoid of any Islamic Scholarship and rationality.
From Rashid:
Prophecy of PM-HMGA
PM-HMGA wrote somewhere: Christianity will dissolve like salt; it will be atheism that Islam will confront.
Surfing the Internet I came across a funny article, which actually is an open latter to Dr. Laura, the famous syndicated columnist published on daily basis in many newspapers in United States. Dr. Laura answers reader’s questions on myriad topics, including Bible teachings.
Link:
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/drlaura.htm
From Rashid:
A comment on ZN’s reply in first video.
ZN gave irrational answer to question.
As i remember, it was the area around Makka (i guess Hijaz) where non muslims are prohibited to propagate their religion on build their places of worship. It was for reason that they were creating disturbance in society. Later on Muslims and now current rulers of Saudi Arabia has included whole of SA in the sacred precincts. This is the reasons when US military was stationed in SA, they were not allowed to buid their church and they worshiped in their homes etc.
Prohibiting people of other religion from building their places of worship in sacred precincts is acceptable rule in world. In Vatican City, a mosque can not be built. Neither christian denominations other than Catholics are allowed to build their churches. Please correct me if i am wrong. Thanks.
From Bashir:
Dr Zakir Naik is a genius. I have seen him answer many questions. I am impressed by his scholarship. He said once that Jihad was conditional…..
I was so impressed….
From Mansoor:
This is a just a jealousy with Dr.Zakir Naik
From shoaib cheema:
To know in depth Dr. Zakir Naik please read book “Islam Aik –Insan Aik” in Urdu language. This book consists of 110 Questions & Answers of Dr. Naik on various issues.
You may get it by post
Contact: 92-300-9555081
From Mahbubur Rahman:
Zakir Naik always quotes from the proper religious holy scriptures by heart accurately. He is an honest, modest and genious person. Ahmadiyyas (non-muslims) wrongly accused him of not quoting reference. Why didn’t the ahmadiyyas remove the curtain from their eyes and see the “full” debates/discussions delivered by Zakir Naik. I found some videos of Zakir Naiks debates posted by ahmadiyyas are intentionally edited and out of context.
From Zahid Aziz:
The first post above by Rashid Jahangiri states that Zakir Naik’s presentation on prophecies about the Holy Prophet Muhammad, especially in Hindu scriptures, is based on Lahore Ahmadiyya books published long ago.
At this link you can access the first English edition of Muhammad in World Scriptures by Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi published in 1940, almost 70 years ago. Just look at the Hindu and Zoroastrian sections of the book and compare with Zakir Naik’s lectures. If he is that honest, he should at least acknowledge this. Perhaps his supporters could ask him this question at a lecture.
Then in my comment above, I gave links to interviews with Zakir Naik on a Pakistani TV channel where he stated that Islam prohibits non-Muslims from propagating their religions or building places of worship in a Muslim country. But he himself is living in a non-Muslim country preaching Islam to its non-Muslim majority!
His argument is laughable, that it is like appointing a teacher to teach children mathematics who himself doesn’t know 2+2 correctly. This means he thinks that Muslim adults in a Muslim country are like little children who will accept whatever they are told by some non-Muslim preacher! Children in a school have to have a teacher who must teach correct facts because they believe whatever the teacher says. Adults listening to a preacher can make up their own minds.
From Mueen khan:
when prophet Muhammad preached Islam, Kufar Macca always miss qutted him.
If you are true follower of Islam and know the knowledge of Islam,then you should not write anything against Dr Zakir Naik.
Dr Zakir naik is truely genuess.
From Zahid Aziz:
Blog readers, ever since we dared post critical remarks about Dr Zakir Naik I have been receiving, now and then, comments such as the above from his admirers, many of which I did not post. My article Dr Zakir Naik and the Lahore Ahmadiyya book Muhammad in World Scriptures has also provoked the wrath of his devotees.
What this Mueen Khan has written is absolutely absurd. It means if anyone wants to go to heaven as a true Muslim he should not write anything against Dr ZN! To criticise ZN is like attacking the Holy Prophet Muhammad!
Another person wrote to me:
“If Dr. Zakir reveales the The Same Truth as Maulana Vidyarthy did many years before, he has not committed any crime against morality and ethics.”
So if someone, in some remote part of the world, publishes the teachings of the religion of Islam as if they were his own, he is revealing “the same truth” as the Holy Prophet Muhammad and has not committed any crime against morality!
There seems to be a whole industry of blind admirers of Dr ZN. There is even a website called “I love Zakir Naik”: http://www.ilovezakirnaik.com. Is this a personality cult?
From bushra:
Aoa
I personally think mr zahid u shud fistly read Quran wid proper meanings n then criticise on ZN
U know person like u who ve less knowldge missguide pepole wid there foolish logics n links..so please be a proper muslim(if u r) as islam didn’t teach us to critise on somthing v don’t know.
Thanx
From ikram:
The response by Ms. Bushra gives one the opportunity to understand a certain mindset.
Firstly, it tells us that a segment in Muslims is eager to entertain any fresh ideas and Mr. Zakir Naik is one of such source. And that’s okay.
Isn’t it sad that such a mind fails to note that Mr. Naik does not invite nor seed its audience to be critical? At the end of the day what he promulgates is his personal opinion about Islam and Quran. Whereas, Quran is a “Book” that must be read by each and every Muslim independently and critically, else they will be following this or that creed or opinion.
Secondly, Ms. Bushra noted that Mr. Zahid “ shud fistly read Quran wid proper meanings n then criticise on ZN” I would like to hear her recommendation for an appropriate “Quran wid proper meanings” i.e. the Quranic translation that she herself reads and gets “proper meanings” so that Mr. Zahid too can read and only “then criticise on ZN.” I wonder does she herself ever “criticise on ZN?” If so then what is her criticism? Has she ever questioned Mr. ZN directly about the issue at hand about Vidyarthi sahib?
Thirdly, I doubt if Mr. Zahid ever claimed to have more knowledge than anyone else. I am plain curious as to what are the standards of knowledge for Bushra when she states about Mr. Zahid “person like u who ve less knowldge missguide pepole wid there foolish logics.” It would be a great service for the readers of this blog if she can teach such standards to Mr. Zahid so that in future he should not “missguide pepole wid there foolish logics.” Additionally, she never elaborated upon “foolish logics” of Mr Zahid.
Fourthly, Ms. Bushra also seems to be quite clear of what “a proper muslim” is. Again it would be a great service to everyone if she shares her understanding of “a proper muslim” because my understanding of “a proper muslim” does not exclude Mr. Zahid nor Mr. ZN. Whereas, Ms. Bushra only wants to include ZN as “a proper muslim.” I am hanging by finger nails for her definition of a “a proper muslim.”
Fifthly, she states that “islam didn’t teach us to critise on somthing v don’t know.” I wonder if Mr. ZN can claim that he knows and what he speaks about the issue at hand are from his own research or is it mere plagiarism of Vidyarthi sahib’s works. One thing is for a fact that Mr. Zahid seems to know what he writes about in the article linked above.
From Zahid Aziz:
This might upset followers of Dr Zakir Naik even more, but my mention above (comment of 27 August 2009) regarding the website called “I love Zakir Naik” reminds me of the following verse of the Holy Quran:
“Yet there are some people who take for themselves objects of worship besides Allah, whom they love as they should love Allah. And those who believe are stronger in (their) love for Allah.” (2:165)
From Ali:
“Yet there are some people who take for themselves objects of worship besides Allah, whom they love as they should love Allah.And those who believe are stronger in (their) love for Allah.” (2:165)
It’s funny that you should mention the above verse. I have always thought that above is more applicable to ahmadis and Mirza Ghulam sahib.
From Rashid:
@Ali:
“I have always thought that above is more applicable to ahmadis and Mirza Ghulam sahib.”
Well, your thoughts are wrong!
From ikram:
2:165. (Inspite of all these evidences in support of the unity of God) there are some people who take to themselves compeers as opposed to Allâh. They love them as they should love Allâh. But those who believe are stauncher in (their) love for Allâh. And if only those who committed this wrong could but see (the time) when they shall see the punishment, (they would realize) that the complete power only belongs to Allâh and that Allâh is Severe at inflicting the punishment. [Nooruddin]
Irrespective of any school of thought the above verse fits anyone who takes a compeer besides Allah, including Muhammad, Isa, all of the imams and mujaddids; and the whole litany of saints and pirs and mullahs anywhere in the world (including those of Pakistan (see link)).
This verse does not end there on “religious side” of life, but also extends into social, political and economic side of life. In Pakistan, it starts right from a neighborhood Mullah, Thanidar, Patwari, Chaudri, Wadehra, Malik, AC, DC, MPA, MNA and goes up to the halls of power including prime minister and president.
Lahori Ahmadis express their “love and respect” for Mirza Ghulam Ahmad for his revivalist ideas and his personal character. I personally thank him for spawning a refreshed Islam that modern mind can accept. To make it all happen, he himself authored more than 80 books (besides numerous articles, debates, speeches etc.) After him we see a whole lineup of original authors and thinkers e.g. Nooruddin, Muhammad Ali, Kamaluddin, Basharat Ahmed, Abdulhaq Vidayarti, Saddaruddin etc. Objectively speaking if these high caliber people were the fruit, then just imagine the quality of the source tree.
Lahoris “love” the Mujaddid of the 14th century the way the same Mujaddid “loves” the Last Prophet. In his extensive poems, he highlights the attributes and qualities of Muhammad and never for once mentions the “khaq e madina” i.e. dirt of Mediana or the streets of Medina or similar non-sense that is heard in most of the “Naats” of the devotees.
One of the fundamental issues that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad touched upon was that of Jesus. To keep it brief, Nooruddin and others rejected his understanding about Immaculate Conception of Jesus even in his own lifetime and he welcomed the criticism.
It is this kind of criticism that is the topic at hand in the current thread.
From Zahid Aziz:
In response to Mr Ali (“I have always thought that above is more applicable to ahmadis and Mirza Ghulam sahib”), if he is alleging that the followers of Hazrat Mirza sahib, during his life, revered him blindly like an object of worship, then he should know that his followers (whether they later became Qadiani or Lahori) never gave him such veneration. Maulana Muhammad Ali said in a khutba in 1938:
“I wish they [the opponents of today] had seen the humility and modesty in the character of Hazrat Mirza sahib. I was with him for many years. I and many others saw in this great Mujaddid the utmost humility and meekness, which in this age could not be equalled by anyone else.
We sat in his company, and we talked to him. He would never interrupt anyone. People would sometimes carry on talking incessantly, and some of them would just talk senselessly, but he never interrupted anyone. Sometimes disciples would be seated on a couch and Hazrat Mirza sahib would be sitting on the floor. He was informal and unassuming in the highest degree. He would serve people, whoever they were, as if he were their servant. Just read the events of his life. There are countless examples where, if someone was even a slight acquaintance, Hazrat Mirza sahib would serve him like his servant.”
Similar testimony is provided by both Lahori and Qadiani followers, so Mr Ali’s usual argument (which he always uses) about what “majority of Ahmadis” do won’t work here.
The original issue under discussion was that Dr Zakir Naik has, in the service of Islam, used material about the Holy Prophet, directly from an Ahmadiyya source, which was researched by a leading Ahmadi scholar. Now that’s fine. Yes, that’s fine, I repeat.
But he has not mentioned his source. The only reason can be that he would incur unpopularity by mentioning it. Dr Zakir Naik knows full well that Ahmadis performed a great service to Islam, so much so that he himself uses their material. But he cannot afford to tell this truth because the general Muslim public would turn against him, as they have been mentally conditioned to believe that Ahmadis are enemies of Islam.
From Ali:
Ahmadis in the current era (and this may apply to Ahmadis of earlier eras) plaster pictures of their prophet and his khalifas all over their homes in a similar vain to idolaters keeping idols. I have yet to see people display pictures of Zakir Naik in a similar vain to the Ahmadis displaying pictures of their prophet. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad only succeeding in setting up a personally cult where people flocked to him for blessings like a peer. An example of this is some writings produced by ahmadis that I once read. One of the companions of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, I think Maulana Rajicki sahib, during the plague in Punjab exhorted the muslims to accept Mirza Sahib as a prophet so that they would be spared the plague. The reference he used in the quran to make his point was:
‘…We never punish until We have sent a Messenger.’ (17:16).
Have any of the earlier reformers of Islam ever made such a claim?Would humble god fearing people like Zakir Naik who only try and lead people to Islam and not try and set up a cult of worship around themselves ever make such a claim? I think I can safely say not.
These are the words of his descendants who now lead the Qadianis
” The Promised Messiah (on whom be peace) said had he not come, these calamities may have been slightly delayed, but with his coming the hidden will of God had been made evident, just as God has declared: ‘…We never punish until We have sent a Messenger.’ (17:16). Those who repent will be granted refuge.”
Are these the words of a man trying to show how humble he is? Or a man trying to show his own lofty position? Is he spreading Islam or setting up his own sect/religion. Humble servant of the prophet Muhammad pbuh I think not.
From Zahid Aziz:
Dear Mr Ali, you have not commented on the issue under discussion: Dr Zakir Naik directly copied Ahmadiyya material. So he knows that Ahmadis served Islam. But he doesn’t mention his source, which is only because people will oppose him.
Hazrat Mirza sahib directly forbade his followers to plaster pictures of him. He wrote:
“I am strongly opposed to this that anyone should take my picture and keep it with him like idol-worshippers, or publish it. I have most certainly never instructed anyone to do this, and none is more opposed to idol worship and picture worship than I am. … I hope that anyone who respects my instructions and follows me truly will abstain from doing this after this instruction of mine. Otherwise, he goes against my guidance and is taking a step against the Shariah.” (Barahin Ahmadiyya, Part 5, Appendix. RK., v. 21, p. 365, 367)
Regarding plague and other calamities, what Hazrat Mirza sahib said was that these come as a result of people’s misdeeds, not wrong beliefs. If they reform themselves, in whatever way it may be done, but for which they have a good opportunity through the Divinely-sent person, then they are saved.
If he had believed that by merely accepting him someone could be saved from the plague, then why did he himself publish that during that outbreak of plague: (1) his son Mirza Sharif Ahmad (grandfather of present Khalifa) was struck by it (see RK., v. 22, p. 87), and (2) his wife’s brother Mir Muhammad Ishaq also caught it (see RK, v. 22, p. 340-342)?
Mr Ali, without thinking, you have jumped to state that if someone puts forward the verse 17:16 about his own position as messenger then that person is not humble. You forgot that the Holy Prophet Muhammad put forward that verse about himself! You forgot that Allah revealed that verse and said that it applies to all messengers. So, according to your logic, the persons whom you believe to be messengers were not humble!
As a Muslim, you believe in the law stated in 17:16, and you believe that Allah punished the rejectors of each and every messenger, and you believe that each such messenger told them they would be punished. So this means you regard no prophet as humble!
As to earlier reformers, this is what Shah Waliullah wrote about himself:
“He that would be your enemy would neither partake of the blessings of the heaven nor that of the earth. The people of the East and West are all your subjects and you are their ruler, whether they know or not. Those who know it will be successful and the ignorant will be in loss” (Tafhimat Ilahiyyah).
Regarding your statement “Mirza Ghulam Ahmad only succeeding in setting up a personally cult where people flocked to him for blessings like a peer”, how was it then that many of those who flocked to him, such as Maulana Muhammad Ali, Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, and others, served Islam under his guidance, and were recognised as great servants of Islam by numerous other Muslims? One of those who flocked to him was Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi (in fact he, being my maternal grandfather, personally related to me some 35 years ago how he flocked to Mirza sahib). And today Dr Zakir Naik recognises Vidyarthi sahib’s service to Islam by copying from his book and receiving acclaim from Muslims!
From Ali:
“Mr Ali, without thinking, you have jumped to state that if someone puts forward the verse 17:16 about his own position as messenger then that person is not humble. You forgot that the Holy Prophet Muhammad put forward that verse about himself! You forgot that Allah revealed that verse and said that it applies to all messengers. So, according to your logic, the persons whom you believe to be messengers were not humble!”
Yes you are correct. In this scenario it was not a case of Mirza Sahib not being humble. It was more a case of him being an impostor prophet.
From Rashid:
@Ali:
“Ahmadis in the current era (and this may apply to Ahmadis of earlier eras) plaster pictures of their prophet and his khalifas all over their homes in a similar vain to idolaters keeping idols.”
Ali, obviously you are talking about Qadianis. Members of Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement (an organization for a peaceful propagation of Islam and NOT a sect) NEITHER have Khalifas NOR hang pictures of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib.
It appears you don’t know the difference between Qadianis and Lahori-Ahmadies. You should have written your post on Qadianis forum. Qadianis forum:
http://alislam.org/
BTW: Note, home page of their website says: “Muslims who believe in the Messiah, Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani”
Now even Qadianis are shying away from writing “Muslims who believe in the PROPHET, Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani”.
This happened because Qadianis are FORCED by Lahori-Ahmadis to accept the TRUE claims of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib, by making his true claims and position available online.
From Zahid Aziz:
When I quoted a statement from Maulana Muhammad Ali showing how much humility Hazrat Mirza sahib had in his nature, Mr Ali countered by saying that he was not humble because he said that his rejectors would be punished, citing verse 17:16. Now we know how humble were the prophets Moses, Jesus and of course the Holy Prophet Muhammad. So is their humility also annuled and reduced to naught by the very strong threats of Divine punishment they made against their rejectors?
On the photo question, I am giving another reference which is from Malfuzat at this link. (Relevant part is from foot of p. 149 to top of p. 151.)
It says that it was reported to Hazrat Mirza sahib that an Ahmadi had printed postcards with the Promised Messiah’s photo on them so that other Ahmadis would buy them. When shown such a card, Hazrat Mirza sahib declared: “This is absolutely impermissible”.
The follower said: I have had these printed at my cost to sell them as a business venture. What can I do now?
Hazrat Mirza sahib replied: “Burn them and destroy them. They are an insult to the religion and to the Shariah. Don’t keep them at home. … Instead of the photo, it would have been better to have some words propagating our message.” (see p. 151 of above pdf file).
Now here is a question for Mr Ali. When Hazrat Mirza sahib says “insult to the religion and the Shariah”, which religion and Shariah is he talking about?
From ikram:
What I read in what Ali is telling us is that:
First, he admits by his silence that Zakir Naik has used Vidyarthi Sahib’s research that Zakir Naik does not acknowledge, which is a sign of moral weakness.
Second, he is quite comfortable with smearing someone with the epithet of “imposter prophet” without any research on his part. This clearly shows that he is more of a camp follower and devoid of any scholarship of his own.
Third, what he is not telling us is that he himself might not believe in finality of prophethood of Muhammad PBUH. He might be one of those who still believe in arrival of Jesus in body, despite the finality of Muhammad PBUH. He might ask as to how I am making this judgment about him? Answer lies in his own standards when he assumes that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed prophethood.
Fourth, he does not recognize the meaning of Mujaddid or the fact that accepting a Mujaddid is not an article of faith. At least he is on a safer ground on this issue.
Fifth, he does not recognize the fact that God of Islam is a living God, who has spoken before Quran and continues to speak to mankind to this day. I am not hesitant to accept that the “messengers” (not prophets like Moses, Isa, Muhammad) will continue to come in the likes of Abdul Qadir Jilani, Moeen uddin Chisti, Shah Wali Ullah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad etc. to refresh Islamic core. It is these revivalist ideas of the last Mujaddid a.k.a. “messenger” that Zakir Naik is benefiting from and besetting Ali in awe of.
Sixth, by simple mathematics, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad influenced Abdul Haq Vidyarthi, who in turn influenced Zakir Naik, who in turn influenced Ali. Q.E.D. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad influenced Ali, but Ali is in denial and thankless.
Lastly, I beg mercy for myself when I quote the following:
2: 6. As for those who are bent upon denying (the truth), they would not believe, because it is all the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them.
2:7. (With the result that) Allâh has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing, and on their eyes is a covering…
From Rashid:
The flagship article on home page of Dr. Zakir Naik fans website ilovezakirnaik.com
Prophet Muhammad prophesized in:
& Christian’s Scripture: Old & New Testaments…
—————————————————————————–
& Hindu’s Scripture: Bhavishya, Atharvaved…
—————————————————————————–
& Jewish Scripture: Deuteronomy, Isaiah…
—————————————————————————–
& Buddhist’s Scripture: Chakavati, East, Gospel…
—————————————————————————–
& Parsi’s Scripture: Zend Avesta, Dasatir…
From Amna:
It is amazing that general mindset of ppl of subcontinent is that anyone who can ‘memorise” arabic text becomes someone who has earned enormous “reward” and hence worthy of one’s praise.
there are few who like to understand Quran for theirselves and develop an understanding of it through practice. their simple talk, which is about self progress, does not ‘impress’ many but one who can stir up their emotions about islam, whether they themselves do not know about islam more than pronouncing its name, get impress by such cos they seem to have same “mental abilities”.
I do not like the way ZN addresses his audience at all. it is like speaking to an audience which does not ABC of islam and he answers such ridiculous questions which usually has nothing to one’s own self progress.
From A:
I remember reading of a verse in early chapters of Qur’an which discourages people to ask insignificant questions or going into unnecessary details.
the content of verse (from memory) – If Allah had pleased He would have given such details but it would have increased discomfort or complexity for ppl.
If anyone is familiar with that verse could they give the exact chapter and verse number? i think that verse discourages the question and answer sessions which are becoming popular on TV.
From Zahid Aziz:
Another relevant verse is the well known:
“… Our Lord, do not lay on us a burden as Thou didst lay on those before us….” (2:286)
“Burden” results from trying to comply with all the requirements which Maulvis on TV (and elsewhere) say one has to meet for one’s prayer, fasting etc. to be accepted.
By the way, my Quran translation search program can help to find verses in Maulana Muhamamd Ali’s translation. I wrote the program for this myself in PHP about 6 years ago.
See this link
From A:
Thanks! i need this reference to back up my argument on another forum.
From ikram:
5:101 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! Do not ask unnecessary details of things (as the Israelites asked of Moses about the cow 2:68.) This attitude may bring unpleasant consequences for you. But if you ask them as the Qur’an is being revealed, the minor details of Ordinances might be given which will be hard for you to follow. God has pardoned you in this respect, for God is Forgiving, Clement. [The general rule has been given that all pure and good things are permissible to you. Your questions are very clearly answered in the Qur’an 5:15, 15:1, 22:40. The Qur’an is for all times, and while the basic laws and Principles remain immutable, minor details are intended to be flexible according to temporal and spatial requirements 11:1. This Day I have perfected your law for you, completed My favor upon you, and chosen for you Al-Islam as the way of Life. 5:3][1]
5:101a. As Islåm discouraged rigorous practices, such as monastic life, it also prohibited questions relating to details on many points which would require this or that practice to be made obligatory, and much was left to individual will or the circumstances of the time and place. The exercise of judgment occupies a very important place in Islåm and this gives ample scope to different nations and communities to frame laws for themselves to meet new and changed situations. The Hadith shows that the Prophet also discouraged questions on details in which a Muslim could choose a way for himself (Bukhari. 3:28, 29).[2]
[1] Al Maaedah – The Heavenly System of Sustenance : The Qur’an As It Explains Itself, Preface, Copyright: Shabbir Ahmed
[2] Al-Maidah – Food: English Translation of the Holy Quran by Maulana Muhammad Ali – an excerpt from footnotes.
From Rashid:
5:101
I lived in NY city and got chance to observe practicing Jews from close proximity. I must say they got themselves into trouble by asking insignificant questions. There are so many musts and don’ts in Jewish religion, that practically it paralysis their lives. So, they keep coming up with ways to circumvent them and make excuses, to such an extent that it becomes ridiculous and hilarious.
Comedian Bill Maher has made comedy movie ‘Religulous’ about religion. In one scene Jewish inventor demonstrate gadgets that Jews can use on Sabbath, and get their work done like answering phones and not pressing “on” buttons (considered “doing work”). They look so stupid.
Links to wikipedia and his movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religulous
http://www.lionsgate.com/religulous/
A piece of advice: If you are in NY city, do not get into the elevator that stops and open/close doors on EVERY level on Sabbath. If it’s one of those skyscrapers, you could be an hour late before you get to your desired floor.
From A:
I want to point out that if Mr ZN considers other religions to be entirely false and this statement discredits their scriptures too then why on earth he bothered to find prophecies about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in other scriptures? He has contradicted his self and it is obvious that he used someone else’s research, someone who believes in previous revelations and explores the common ground of all religions.
From ikram:
Truth, God’s truth, is not the accidental discovery or exclusive possession of any people or age; it is universal. Islam is religion of all the prophets who were raised by God from time to time in different parts of the world to lead human beings to the right path. Muhammad was the Last Messenger of Islam. [The Great Religions of the World by Mrs. Ulfat Aziz-us-Samad, Dar-ul-Isha’at – Kutub-e-Islamia, Bombay, 1991, page 173]
21:92. (Mankind!) surely, this your religion is the one single religion (of all the Prophets), and I am your Lord, so worship Me.
22:78. … He has chosen you and has imposed no hardship upon you in the matter of your faith, (so follow) the creed of your father Abraham. He named you Muslims (both) before this and (again) in this (Book the Qur’ân), so that the Messenger may be a guardian over you and that you may be guardians over people. Therefore, observe Prayer, keep on presenting the Zakât and hold fast to Allâh. He is your Patron, what a gracious Patron, and what a gracious Helper.
40:78. And indeed We have already sent (Our) Messengers before you. There are some of them whom We have mentioned to you and of them there are some whom We have not mentioned to you… [not mentioned = Zaiathustra, Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Tao, Confucius, Socrates etc. – Peace be upon them]
[The Holy Quran – Nooruddin]
From A:
23:51 O ye messengers, eat of the good things and do good. Surely I am Knower of what you do
23:52 And surely this your community is one community, and I am your Lord, so keep your duty to Me.
23:53 But they became divided into sects, each party rejoicing in that which was with them.
23:54 So leave them in their ignorance till a time.
“eat of the good things and do good” – here eating from good things is spoken with good deeds – it may mean food of soul from revelation which gives required strength to do good.
6:135Say: O my people, act according to your ability, I too am acting; so you will soon come to know for whom is the (good) end of the abode. Surely the wrongdoers will not succeed.
30:30 So set thy face for religion, being upright, the nature made by Allah in which He has created men. There is no altering Allah’s creation. That is the right religion — but most people know not —
this is the reply to those who do not correct their opinions and do not give precedence to Quran over their opinions.
23:71And if the Truth follow their desires, the heavens and the earth and all those who are therein would perish. Nay, We have brought them their reminder, but they turn away from their reminder.
From mehwish:
well,i think Dr ZN is a learned scholar and we do refer to him in cases that we with little knowledge can’t comprehend! he has knowledge about all the religions and their books……he points out similarities in the books and the proof of Prophet Muhaamad (S.A) it is just that people have twisted the meanings for their benefit etc! u can’t just get up n say hey …….I AM THE LAST PROPHET OR ONE AFTER MUHAMMAD! that is what the Ahmadis believe.May Allah guide u and show the right path!ameen
From A:
The only solution for ignorance (which claims to be knowledge) or deliberate distortion is to implement the punishment for wrong testimony which is 80 lashes. That may encourage research and self study in Pakistani society.
🙂
From Muhammad Ali:
Today on page 4 of urdu newspaper Nawai-Waqt there is one news. It is so that in Gujar Khan ( atown located in Punjab, Pakistan) a muslim organisation has organized a protest against Mr. Zakir Naik alleging that he gave some derogatory remarks (Tauheen Rasalat in urdu) about Prophet Muhammad saw. So his channel should be banned.
It is not mentioned what were the remarks which have offended those muslims. But the point is that unfortunatley all of these people who are protesting against Mr. Naik or Mr. Naik himself lack a quality, which is the key teaching of Islam. That is tolerance and dialog. The muslim world will be changed if the people start arguing with each other using arguments instead of calling for bans of anything to which they personally do not agree.