dismantling naik

8/8/2019 Dismantling Naik

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dismantling-naik 1/45

DISMANTLING

ZAKIR NAIKBy: SIRAJ WAHJAN (LW)

JULY 2010

Siraj Wahjan’s Review Of The Dialogue In “ The Concept Of God inHinduism and Islam “ between Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Dr. Zakir Naik.



DISMANTLING ZAKIR NAIK

2

Introduction

Recently there is a new Islamic orator who has risen up to bring a common platformbetween religions , to fill the gulf between different religions all together and bringthem to Islam by showing them the true light of the “Deen” of Islam . This ne w face goesby the name of “Dr. Zakir Naik” a boisterous and a confident person who believes thatQuran is a miracle of God . The reason this article is named “Dismantling Dr. Zakir Naik”is because this is what this article does.Muslim believes that Mr. Naik is an infallible polemicist and believe he can answer anyquestion posed on the on the topic of Islam and any religion . One should know thisarticle is not to defend Hinduism or Sri Sri Ravishankar but it ’s to enlighten the reader tothe reality of the deceptions put up by Dr. Naik .

One should admit the good side of Mr. Naik he is so dexterous , confident and swift withhis speech that most of his opponents doesn’t have a chance of winning . Theproficiency of Dr. Naik is inspiring to many Muslims . Dr . Naik is so confident in hisspeech that his veneers of lies might not appear to many people and since he isdexterous and swift he also gains an upper hand on his opponents and is able to foolcrowd quite easily . I can verily state one thing that this article demarks the end of the

grandiosity complex of Mr. Naik . The reader who reads this article will see through theveneers of lies of Dr. Naik and his chicanery, ending the glory of Dr. Dr. Naik once andfor all . The reader will see how he desecrates other religions but how deceptively heinduces veneration for religion of Islam . The reader will know how much sacrosanct isIslam and how truthful is Dr. Naik . This article is intended to annihilate the deceptivecharade of a false scholar .

[The author of this article doesn’t believe in any religion or an almighty God , heknows there are some scientific errors in every single religion . He is not an atheist either , he is an Aquarian who believes in spirituality . ]




3

Dr.Naik - Let us start with the meaning of the word Islam . Islam comes from the rootArabic word “ Salam ” which means "Peace" . It is also derived from theArabic word “ silim ” which means to submit your will to almighty God , in short Islam

means peace acquired by submitting your will to almighty God and this wordIslam occurs in several places in Quran and Sahih Hadith including in the Quran in SurahAl Imran chapter number 3 Verse number 19 And Surah Ale - ImranChapter number 3 verse number 85 , Any person who acquires peace by submitting hiswill to almighty god to Allah he is called as a Muslim . And this wordMuslim also occurs in several places in the Quran and the Sahih Hadith including in theQuran in Surah Ale Imran Chapter 3 verse number 64 And Surah Fussilatchapter 41 V.33 many people have misconceptions that Islam is a new religion whichcame into existence 1400 years ago and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)was the founder of this religion , in fact islam is there since time immemorial since manset foot on the earth and prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is not the founder of this religion but he is the last and final messenger , send by almighty god the last andfinal prophet.

LW: Okay , from here we see the claims of Zakir Naik . First of all I would like to informMr. Naik that there are no proof whatsoever which says that Islam has been existingever since man set foot on earth if there are any proofs , such as , excavations ,scriptures etc which some how explains that Islam has been existing from the timeimmemorial then we somewhat may consider this but from the very beginning this manstarts to use the logical fallacy of Argumentum Ad Circulus in Demonstrando i.e. anargument in which a person uses what they are trying to prove as the part of the proof simply because Islam religious scriptures explains that it is the true religion does notmake it true . As a matter of fact Quran itself has got over 100 of errors if not thousandto say the least and several contradiction to depend upon the word of such text isfallacious and ignorance . To prove my point I will show a few contradiction in Quran :

Sura 7:54 , 10:3 , 11:17 and 25:59 clearly implies that god created “the heavens andearth in six days”

But however in Sura 41: (verse) 9- 12 there is a contradiction which states god createdheaven and earth in 8 days . To explain my point here are the Surahs.

Surah 41:9:Is it that ye deny Him Who created the earth in TWO Days

And do ye join equals with Him? He is the Lord of (all) theWorlds.




4

41:10He set on earth mountains standing firm high above it and bestowed blessings on theearth and measure therein all things to give them nourishment in due proportion , in

FOUR days , in accordance with (in the needs of) those who seek (sustenance).

41:11Moreover he comprehended in his design the sky , and it has been (as) smoke . He said to it and the earth “come ye willingly or unwillingly” . They said together “we do come(together) in willing obedience “.

41:12So he completed them as seven firmaments in TWO days and he assigned to eachheaven its duty and command and we adorned the lower heaven with lights , and

provided it with guard . Such is the decree of him the exalted in might , Full of knowledge.

So what do we get ? 2 + 4 + 2 = 8 Days .So Quran clearly contradicted itself here if compared to Surah 7:54 , 10:3 , 11:17 and 25:59 which clearly stated that Ar Rahman or Allah created the Heavens and Earth in sixdays . This error is enough to prove my point in contradiction but however the purposeof my article is not to enlighten about the errors in Quran but to put the claims of ZakirNaik under just scrutiny . To know if the greatest Islamic orator after Ahmad Deedatholds any weight in his arguments or not .

In the very start Zakir Naik commits a logical fallacy that is the of Circulus inDemonstrando , he uses what they are trying to prove as the part of the proof . Hence alogical fallacy and its not to be accepted by a logical person . He has got no prove thatIslam exists from time immemorial but instead he just says because he feels like it andhas been written in Hadith and Quran . Due to paucity of proofs in his arguments, wecan clearly see how Mr. Naik is trying to fool people into believing the Islam is the oldestreligion of th e planet earth which Islam clearly isn’t .

Dr.Naik -Let us first understand what are the sacred scriptures in these two great

religions in hinduism the sacred scriptures have been divided into two parts Shrutis andthe Smritis . Shruti in sanskrit means that which is percieved that which is understoodthat which is revealed and the shrutis are considered to be the word of god and theyare more sacred than the smritisthe shrutis are further divided into two types the vedas and the upanishads . Vedas isderived from the sanskrit word Vid which means knowledge par excellence it alsomeans sacred wisdom basically there are four vedas this is the Rigveda , we have theyajurveda , we have the samaveda and we have the atharvaveda but there is difference




5

of opinion regarding how old are these vedas , according to swami Dayanand saraswati he says "the vedas are 1310 millionyears old but the majority of the hindu scholars they say the vedas are approximately4000 years old , there is difference of opinion regarding where did these vedas come

into existence the first time , there is also difference of opinion regarding who was therishi to whom veda was given the first time , in spite of these differences regarding theage of the vedas , the part in which it came first , to whome it was given in spite of these differences yet the vedas are considered the most authentic of all the sacredscriptures of hinduism , the most sacred amongst all the scriptures of hinduism , if anyother hindu scriptures contradicts the vedas the vedas are supposed to be followed.

LW: Okay now Mr.Naik would not like to mention his authentic sources to prove thethe exact age of Vedas , but I would like to know which hindu scholars said they werewritten 4000 years ago , it’s a spec ulation not an authentic fact , and that too aspeculation of Biblical western scholars who believe in Genesis and believe earth to be6000 years old. It’s a known opinion between archeologist and scientists that they exactdate of Vedas is unknown whether they be of yesterday or over 10000 years old , theexact date is still clouded in mystery that is it is still unspecified . The Vedas weren’tgiven to any person at one time Maharishi Vyas cannot be called the author of Vedas ,the Vedas were compiled by Brahmins all together . In the very initial traditions Vedaswere taught orally there wasn’t a compilation it was the age of oral dictations andteachings . The knowledge of Vedas were provided orally , it was only later when agroup of Brahmans compiled the Vedas . Most of the old teachings of differentcivilizations were stated orally for example the “German Runic system” but later wasrepresented pictographically .

And 1310 million years being age of Vedas isn’t Dayananda’s calculation but it wasmentioned in Suya Siddhanta credited to Brahmarishi Mayan and Manusmriti written byManu , Swami Dayanand only stated what he found out in his research , he never gave abiased opinion as Mr. Naik wants to prove he did as Dayanand during his time was thearch enemy of Islam in India .

Dr.Naik- The next in authority we have Adi Upanishads these are the upanishads ,Upanishads is derived from the sanskrit word "Upa" which means near "Ni" means

down "shad" means sit , sitting down near , when the pupil sat down near the guru toacquire knowledge it was called the upanishads , its also called as knowledges whichremoves ignorance , there are more than 200 upanishads but the indian culture putsthe figure of 108 and people have picked up and compiled upanishads known as"Principal upanishads" . Radha Krishn has picked up 18 upanishads and written a book"the principal upanishads" . Next type of hindu scriptures we have Adi smritis , the wordsmriti means to remember , it means memory . Smritis are less sacred than the shrutis , they are not the word of almighty god and they have been written by rishis and by




6

human beings , they contain the creation of universe , how a lifestyle should be lead byan individual on an individual level , on a community level or on the society level , theyare also referred as the Dharamshastras , there are various types of smiritis we have thepuranas , puranas means ancient . Maha Rishi Vyas he has compiled the puranas into 18

voluminous parts , this is one of the puranas known as Bhavishya purana , then we havethe Itihas , the epics there are two epics the Ramayan and the Mahabharat. . Theramayan deals as the most of indians known with the story of Shri Ram and theMahabharat , deals with the story its the fued a fight between the cousins , thepandavas and the kauravas . It also deals with the story of Shri Krishna these are the twogreat epics , then we have the Bhagvat Gita . Bhagvat Gita is part of Mahabharat it is 18chapters of Mahabharata from the bhishma param chapter number 25 to chapternumber 42 , it is an advice given by Shri Krishna to Arjun in the battlefield , it is the mostpopular and most widely read sacred scripture amongst all the hindu scriptures . Thenwe have the manusmriti and various others . This was in brief regarding the sacredscriptures of hinduism but the most sacred , most authentic amongst all the scripturesis the veda . If anything contradicts the Vedas we have to follow the Vedas.

LW: The introduction of Upanishads have been given on shaky grounds if he mustknow that there are 10 main Upanishads , and they are only authentic as long as theyagree with Vedas , any Hindu scripture which contradicts the Vedas is rendered null andvoid or unauthentic . (I am beginning to think the thesis of Dr. Naik is based onWikipedia rather than any other source)

Dr.Naik- Lets discuss the scared Scriptures of Islam the most sacred amongst all theIslamic scriptures it is the glorious Quran . The glorious Quran is the last and finalrevelation of Allah almighty God which was revealed to the last and final messengerprophet Muhammad (pbuh) . The Quran says in Surah Al Ra'd chapter number 13 Verse38 "in every age have we sent a revelation" there are several revelations of almightyGod , sent on the face of the Earth by name the 4 are mentioned in the Quran , theTorah , the talmud the injeel and the Quran but there are various others like sufeIbrahim but all the scriptures that came , all the revelations that were sent by almightyGod before the last and final revelation the glorious Quran , they were only meant for aparticular group of people and the message which they preached was supposed to befollowed until a particular time period but because Quran is the last and the finalrevelation of almighty God it was not sent only for the Muslims or only for the Arabs . It

was sent for the whole of humanity . Allah says in the Quran in Surah Ibrahim chapternumber 14 verse number 1 " we have revealed this book to thee that thou may lead thehumankind from darkness to light" not only the muslims or the Arabs but the whole of humankind. . The same message is repeated that Quran is for the whole of humankindin several verses including surah ibrahim chapter number 14 verse number 52 , Surah AlBaqarah chapter 2 verse number 185 and Surah Al Zumar chapter number 39 verse 41that the Quran was revealed for the whole of humankind.




7

LW: Alright according to Quran there were previous revelations such as Torah , Talmud, Injeel (Gospels) . If the Almighty monotheistic God whom Arabs cal led “Allah” is perfectin all ways as they claim then , I am inclined to ask what caused the perfect god toproduce imperfect editions of his revelations ? When something in the first edition has

been omitted or there is an error then only we write a second edition in order to rectifythe mistakes which were in the first edition , if the god if perfect in every ways hecannot do mistakes but the above explanation of Zakir naik clearly makes us look intothe imperfection of Allah , he learns by trail and err method . He did some mistakes in1st Edition then he created the 2nd edition and then the 3 rd etc . Mr Naik says that theywere meant for a particular group of persons let me ask this man and the women arethe creation of God so how can God the supreme ruler of heavens and earthdiscriminate between people of one nation or group with the other? Yes , it also impliesthat all previous revelations are also fallacious , full of contradictions and absurdities butthat’s yet again not the purpose of this ar ticle the purpose of this article is not to refuteBible (new and old testament) , Torah or El Talmud , but this article is clearly to refuteclaims of the Mr. Naik .

As for the Quran’s statement of Islam for the entire mankind it is fallacious . Quranclearly implies that it came for the Meccans alone :

Quran 006.092 And this is a Book which We have sent down, bringing blessings, andconfirming (the revelations) which camebefore it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities and all around her.(The mother of cities, Umul Qura, is Mecca. )

The same thing is confirmed in verse:

042.007 Thus have We sent by inspiration to thee an Arabic Qur’an: that thou mayestwarn the Mother of Cities and allaround her.

Quran 032.003 “Nay, it is the Truth from thy Lord, that thou mayest admonish a peopleto whom no warner has come beforethee: in order that they may receive guidance.”

Quran 036.006 In order that thou mayest admonish a people, whose fathers hadreceived no admonition, and who thereforeremain heedless (of the Signs of Allah).

It was clear by these that Muhammad had only come for Meccans and for them alone ,but of course later he grew more powerful and claimed he is now for entire mankind yetagain making a contradiction in Quran . This also proves Quran is a creation of Muhammad . Umul Qura also known as Mecca is called mother of cities because it was




8

the chief city which provided the people with hospitality ,nourished and helped themand other cities like a mother does to her child and was a rich and powerful city , henceit was called the mother of all cities .The people who believe Quran is the word of God then why do they follow what

Muhammad said when he says they should attack other countries and force them toconvert to Islam whose words are more important Muhammad or Allah ?

For Naik’s information the Arabic word “Nas” is used there . Verse 14:52 says Englishtranslation says “ Here is a Message for mankind: let them take warning therefrom, andlet them know that He is (no other than) One God: let men of understanding take heed “

Arabic words used are-“Hatha balaghun lilnnasi waliyuntharoo bihi waliyaAAlamoo annama huwa ilahun

wahidun waliyaththakkara oloo al-albab i ”

Nas is people any number of people , but it cannot mean the entire mankind forexample that word is used in verse 7.116 when talking about the magic performed bythe magicians of the pharaoh who bewitched the eyes of the people “nas” . Are wesupposed to understand that the entire mankind was bewitched ?

The same word Nas is also used in different places indicating people not the entiremankind . But if in ignorance we assume that nas means mankind then we must admitthat there is a flagrant contradiction in Quran in terms of the verse 6:92 , 42:7 , 32:3 ,36:6 which state Quran is for people of Mecca and its surrounding cities . Mr. Naik hasmade a contradictory claim of Quran , verily stating that Quran is contradictory itself.

Dr.Naik -The next scriptures in Islam are the Sahih Hadith the authentic sayings andtradition of the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) . There are many one of them is Sahih AlBukhari we also have Sahih Muslim . The Hadith of the prophet the authentic sayingsand traditions are the commentary of Quran . They are complementary to the Quran .They will never contradict the Quran . This was in brief regarding the scriptures in thesetwo great religions .

LW: Zakir Naik agrees that Hadiths are authentic sayings of Prohpet Muhammad inthat context I will like to quote some of his authentic sayings here :

Muslim:C9B1N31 "I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify to thefact that there is no god but Allah, and believe in me (that) I am the Messenger and in allthat I have brought."




9

Muslim:C9B1N29 "Command For Fighting Against People So Long As They Do NotProfess That There Is No Ilah (God) But Allah And Muhammad Is His Messenger: Whenthe Messenger breathed his last and Bakr was appointed Caliph, many Arabs chose tobecome apostates [rejected Islam]. Abu Bakr said: 'I will definitely fight against anyone

who stops paying the Zakat tax, for it is an obligation. I will fight against them even tosecure the cord used for hobbling the feet of a camel which they used to pay if theywithhold it now.' Allah had justified fighting against those who refused to pay Zakat."

Muslim:C9B1N33 "The Prophet said: 'I have been commanded to fight against people tillthey testify there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, andthey establish prostration prayer, and pay Zakat. If they do it, their blood and propertyare protected.'"

Muslim:C10B1N176 "Muhammad (may peace be upon him) sent us in a raiding party.We raided Huraqat in the morning. I caught hold of a man and he said: 'There is no godbut Allah,' but I attacked him with a spear anyway. It once occurred to me that I shouldask the Apostle about this. The Messenger said: 'Did he profess "There is no god butAllah," and even then you killed him?' I said: 'He made a profession out of the fear of theweapon I was threatening him with.' The Prophet said: 'Did you tear out his heart inorder to find out whether it had professed truly or not?'"

Muslim:C20B1N4597 "The Prophet said at the conquest of Mecca: 'There is no migrationnow, but only Jihad, fighting for the Cause of Islam. When you are asked to set out on aJihad expedition, you should readily do so.'"

Muslim:C28B20N4628 "Allah has undertaken to provide for one who leaves his home tofight for His Cause and to affirm the truth of His word; Allah will either admit him toParadise or will bring him back home with his reward and booty."

Muslim:C34B20N4652-3 "The Merit Of Jihad And Of Keeping Vigilance Over The Enemy:A man came to the Holy Prophet and said: 'Who is the best of men?' He replied: 'A manwho fights staking his life and spending his wealth in Allah's Cause.'"

Muslim:C42B20N4684 "A desert Arab came to the Prophet and said: 'Messenger, oneman fights for the spoils of war; another fights that he may be remembered, and onefights that he may see his (high) position (achieved as a result of his valor in fighting).Which of these is fighting in the Cause of Allah?' The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whofights so that the word of Allah is exalted is fighting in the Way of Allah.'"

Bukhari:V5B59N288 "I witnessed a scene that was dearer to me than anything I hadever seen. Aswad came to the Prophet while Muhammad was urging the Muslims tofight the pagans. He said, 'We shall fight on your right and on your left and in front of




10

you and behind you.' I saw the face of the Prophet getting bright with happiness, forthat saying delighted him."

Bukhari:V5B59N290 "The believers who did not join the Ghazwa [Islamic raid or

invasion] and those who fought are not equal in reward."

Bukhari:V5B59N512 "The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer [Prayer of Fear] near Khaybarwhen it was still dark. He said, 'Allahu-Akbar!' [Allah is Greatest] Khaybar is destroyed,for whenever we approach a hostile nation to fight, then evil will be the morning forthose who have been warned.' Then the inhabitants came out running on their roads.The Prophet had their men killed; their children and woman were taken as captives."

Bukhari:V9B84N59 "Allah's Apostle said, 'I have been ordered to fight the people tillthey say: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah." Whoever says this will savehis property and his life from me.'"

Qur'an 2:191 "And kill them wherever you find and catch them. Drive them out fromwhere they have turned you out; for Al-Fitnah (polytheism, disbelief, oppression) isworse than slaughter."

Qur'an:8:67 "It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a greatslaughter in the land."

Qur'an 66:4 "If you (women) turn in repentance to him, it would be better. Your heartshave been impaired, for you desired (the ban) [on how many girls Muhammad could

play with at a time]. But if you back each other up against (Muhammad), truly Allah ishis protector, and Gabriel, and everyone who believes - and furthermore, the angels willback (him) up."

Qur'an 18:83 "They ask you about Dhu'l-Qarnain [Alexander the Great]. Say, 'I will citesomething of his story. We gave him authority in the land and means of accomplishinghis goals. So he followed a path until he reached the setting place of the sun. He sawthat it set in black, muddy, hot water. Near it he found people."

Bukhari:V4B54N421 "I walked hand in hand with the Prophet when the sun was aboutto set. We did not stop looking at it. The Prophet asked, 'Do you know where the sungoes at sunset?' I replied, 'Allah and His Apostle know better.' He said, 'It travels until itfalls down and prostrates Itself underneath the Throne. The angels who are in charge of the sun prostrate themselves, also. The sun asks permission to rise again. It is permitted.Then it will prostrate itself again but this prostration will not be accepted. The sun thensays, "My Lord, where do You command me to rise, from where I set or from where Irose?" Allah will order the sun to return whence it has come and so the sun will rise inthe west. And that is the interpretation of the statement of Allah in the Qur'an.'"




11

These are a handful of a few verses and narrations out of thousands of obscure,threatening and violent ayats and narration from Quran and Sahih Bukari and SahihMuslim .This ver ily proves Islam is a religion of peace , doesn’t it ? Mr. Naik is makinghypocritical claims about Quran and Hadiths .

Dr.Naik -Now we'll discuss the main talk concept of God in Hinduism and Islam in thelight of sacred scriptures , what Dr.Zakir Naik says or what respected Sri Sri Ravishankarsays or what any other human being says is not important we have to see what thesacred scriptures says about the concept in these two great religion . If I say somethingor Sri Sri Ravishankar says something or anybody else says something if it matches withthe scriptures we have to agree . If we give any examples if it matches with thescriptures we have to take it , if i say something if it doesn't match with the scriptures , if i give an example and it doesn't match with the scripture we have to reject it . First ,we'll discuss the concept of God in Hinduism in the light of the hindu scriptures , if weask a common hindu that how many gods does he believe in ? some may say three ,some may say hundred , some may say thousand while others will say 33 crores 330million but if you asked a learned hindu who is well versed with the hindu scriptures hewill tell you in hinduism we should believe and worship only one God but the commonHindu he believes in the philosophy known as pantheism the common hindu believesthat the tree is god , the sun is god , the moon is god , the human being is god , thesnake is god .

LW: There is an identical difference between the Islamic and the Vedic god , the vedicgod Ishwar / Brahman is bound by the rules of the science , he cannot do anythingwhich breaks or surpass the rules of science while the Islamic god can do anything , hecreates heaven and hell , gets angry , has enemies et cetera . In here Dr. Naik has againcommitted a big mistake , he goes to explain Devta as God which is wrong , devatameans entity (living or dead) not God . “God” the omnipotent , all knowing , creator of everything et cetera is a concept of the Abrahminism not of the older traditions .

As in accordance to the Vedic faith and followers of it , these people do not considerthem GOD as Mr. Naik is stating they consider them as a part of creation of that Ishwarand they pay their respect to the creation as a means to respect its creator not toconsider them as incarnation of the creator deity . Mr. Naik needs to improve his

academics and thesis . De facto in order to clarify nowhere in the vedas it is stated thatHindus should worship one almighty god , it is stated that Brahmin or Ishwar is infinitepeople perceive him in different forms . Plus , vedic teachings lays more emphasis uponmeditation and advancement rather than mindless worship of Allah 5 times a dayfacing Kaba , as meditation will lead to evolution according to vedic teachings , worshipis a form of respect and thanksgiving to the Ishwar the creator of everything and also tothe devtas .




12

The vedic teach tells about both form and formless aspects of the supreme deity Ishwar/ Brahman . . The major thing in here the very Brahman/ Ishwar the cause of everythingthe infinite is that this is energy , if we look in detail at the Aryan scriptures we will

conclude that according to the Vedas , matter is formed of Atoms (kad) , Atoms of energy and energy is Brahman another is soul and consciousness is energy and thus itis Brahmin / Ishwar . In short everything is the part of Brahman , hence he isomnipresent , while Allah is not omnipresent he lives above the 7 th heaven on his throneover water .

Dr.Naik -What we Muslims believe is everything is God's , everything belongs to God ,the tree belongs to god , the sun belongs to god , the moon belongs to god , the humanbeing belongs to god , the snake belongs to God . So the major difference between thecommon hindu and common Muslim is that the common hindu says "everything is God"and we Muslim says "everything is God's" G O D with an apostrophe "s" so the majordifference is " 's " if we can solve this difference of "'s" the hindus and the muslims willbe united .

LW: Just a difference of “’s” ? De facto , the gap between Islam and Vedic religion is asmuch as the gap between Sun and Pluto . Vedic Ishwar power stays in the boundary of science as opposed to the Islamic god who says “So be it!” and it happens like he did toVirgin Mary when he wanted Isa to take birth .Before I begin just to tell you Gospel comes from old English word God speli meaninggood news it’s a writing that describes the life , death , ministry etc of Jeshua bin yusef or Jesus so to speak it mainly refers to the four gospels , the Gospel of John , Luke ,Matthew and Mark . But Muslims believe that Gospels are the message and revelationof Allah not the canonical messages of Luke , John , Matthew and Mark and believe it tobe now corrupted though the Bible tells otherwise anyways lets move on .

The Quran explains the virginal concept of Maryam , according to Quran , Maryam hadwithdrawn into a temple where she met an angel named Jibreel to give glad tidings of aholy son which will take birth through her womb , who will be a great prophet andwhom God will give Injeel or Gospels .

Isa will speak in infancy and will be the companion of the most righteous on thisMaryam asked Jibreel how can she give birth when no man has ever touched her , thereply of the angel was “Even though when god wants to create a matter he merely willits and it comes into being “ So according to this , Isa or Jeshua bin yusef Or Jesus of Nazareth took birth due to “God’s will” not through any scientific or biologicalprocedure or anything like that . While on the other hand Vedas state that the Vedicsupreme god Ishwar is bound by the rules of science he cannot do anything whichsurpass the rules of science , he cannot make a baby come out of a virgin just by willing




13

it to happen . This is just a small example , there are huge gaps between Islam and Aryanfaith as Aryan faith is mainly on “Dharama” while Islamic faith is on “Mazhab” in orderto reach Ishwar according to Aryan faith one needs no intermediary like a prophetmessenger etc , he just needs to be r ighteous and follow his path and “Dharama” is not

for a group of people but for the whole of humankind which lays emphasis over the factthat people should maintain peace and punish the evil according to their acts notaccording to their differences (be it of nation , creed , caste , color etc) but the“Mazhabic cult “ or “Deen” of Islam is different , their allah will forgive any act of evilexcept to leave his prophet or rejection of the Islam , and to reach allah you have toaccept Islam and consider Muhammad as the final prophet and also admit the existenceof heaven and hell , the existence of angels jibreel (Gabriel) and mikail (Micheal) andthere is not god but Allah while to reach Ishwar or Brahman you need not accept RishiVyas or Manu or Dayanand , you just need to follow the path of righteousness ,evolution , peace and devotion .

This is yet a minute paradigm of a far far great gulf between the two religions . Defacto,calling Aryan faith “religion ” is wrong , they never called themselves a religion butcalled themselves a way of life , giving freewill (giving choice to people to believe or notto believe) and spreading knowledge they weren’t subjected to a specific group of people like Abhraminism so as such there is a major gap between the two .

Dr.Naik -How would you do it ? As the Quran says "come to common terms as in us

and you" which is the first term that you worship none but almighty God . Let usunderstand what does sacred scriptures of Hinduism have to speak about almighty God .It is mentioned in Chandogya Upanishad chapter number 6 section number 2 versenumber verse number 1 "ikkam ividityam" "god is only one without a second" its asanskrit quotation , I know that I am speaking in front of a great scholar of vedas shrishri Ravishankar , I am just a student so if my sanskrit pronunciation is a bit poor I wouldlike to apologize he is a great scholar of the vedas and i am just a student of Islam andcomparitive religion as well as the student of the hindu scriptures and the vedas . Itsmentioned in Shvestashvatara Upanishada chapter number 6 verse number 9 "of him ,of almighty god there are no parents , he has got no lord , almighty god has no father ,

he has got no mother , he has got no superior" . Its mentioned in ShvetashvataraUpanishad chapter number 4 verse number 19 " of that god there is no "pratima (idol)"there is no likeness , there is no image , there is no picture , there is no photograph ,there is no sculpture , there is no statue . Its mentioned in Shvetashvatara Upanishadachapter number 4 verse number 20 "no one can see the almighty God " and it is furthermentioned in Bhagwad Gita chapter number 7 verse number 20 "all those whoseintelligence has been stolen by material desires , they worship demi gods" . Some of thetranslation says " all those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires , they




14

worship idols. " and this quotation is also mentioned by Sri Sri Ravi Shankar in his bookHinduism and Islam the common thread in the section of not worshipping other Godson page number 3 . He gives the quotation but does not give the reference , thereference is Bhagwad Gita chapter 7 verse number 20 , its further mentioned in

Bhagwad Gita Ch.10 Verse 3 that "they know me as the unborn not begotten thesupreme lord of the worlds"

LW: Now again Dr. Naik is engaging into Red Herring argument that is distractingaudience from truth the fact is that chandyoga Upanishad speaks not of Allah but Ishwar/ Brahmin who according to the Vedas can be perceived in both form and formlessaspects I have explained this concept earlier . Its pointless of Mr. Naik to stretch thisargument any further the Islamic God and Vedic Ishwar isn’t the same but lets movefurther . Zakir Naik states the Chandyoga Upanishad but the very Upanishad also says “Sarvam Khalu Idam Brahma” (Chandyoga Upanishad 3 .14.1) meaning everything isBrahman (the supreme lord) . If Naik places infallible trust upon Chandyoga Upanishadhe must also agree to that everything present in this entire universe is Allah and hedoesn’t lives above 7 th heaven but no , Mr. Naik cherry picks , moulds the meaning of the verse in order to suit his agenda to whatever way he likes and frantically searchesfor the words and mantras in Upanishads and Vedas whom he can correlate with Quran, Muhammad and Allah . Its almost humorous to see the non sequitur fallacy of Mr. Naikwho will pervert any mantra or scripture or make a whole new meaning of the verse justto suit his own agenda and to obfuscate the crowd .

Let me help Zakir Naik in realizing what Bhagvad Gita actually says in Chapter 7 versenumber 20 :

kamais tais tair hrta-jnanah prapadyante ’nya -devatahtam tam niyamam asthaya

prakritya niyatah svaya

"Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigodsand follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their ownnatures."

The word ‘nya -devtah’ itself means demi god , there can’t be a translation of this versewhich means “ Those whose intelligence ha s been stolen by material desires theyworship idol s” there is no word in this verse which says anything even close to idol , thismust Dr. Zakir’s team of translators of sankskrit who frantically searches for anything inany scripture to support islam who by itself is untenable .




15

To be honest none of the translation which I’ve ever heard of says “those whoseintelligence has been stolen by material desires worship idols”

Krishna mentioned this in reference to people surrendering to Demi-Gods out of greed

or a desire to obtain boon from them for selfish purpose and choose the rules andregulations which suits their own needs and nature .Aryan scriptures describes that Idol is a symbol , a tool to reach the deity who is beyondthis world , without a place for mind to focus and concentrate a devotee cannot offerthanksgiving , worship , respect etc . He must have some means or medium for his mindto concentrate for a devotee who is not advanced enough to work out his cause withoutmediums , it is agreed also in the Vedas those who obtain a high level of spiritualityneed no idols or any medium to reach out to the deity but that is for the one whoobtains an advance level of spirituality , those who are not in that state need a mediumfor the mind to co ncentrate . By this I can rightly state Zakir Naik , doesn’t know theconcept of idolatry . I agree that , Idolatry is not recommend in Aryan scriptures but itsalso not banned in Aryan scriptures in the least . In fact , idolatry is for the people whoare yet unaware of the more advanced spiritual concepts for them a medium or a tool isneeded for them to connect to their desired deity .

Dr.Naik -Amongst all the hindu scriptures the most sacred are the vedas , itsmentioned in Yajurveda chapter number 32 verse number 3 "of that god there is no"pratima (idol)" pratima as I said means , likeness , image , picture , photo , sculpture ,statue . Its further mentioned in Yajurveda chapter number 40 verse number 8"almighty god is imageless and pure" . Its mentioned in Yajurveda chapter number 40

verse number 9 "they are entering darkness those who worship the natural things" likefire , water , air etc and the verse continues "they are entering more in darkness thosewho worship the sambhooti" the sambhooti are the created things like table , chair etc ,who says that ? yajurveda chapter number 40 verse number 9 . Its further mentioned inAtharvaveda book number 20 hymn 59 verse 3 "verily great is almighty God (dev mahaasi)" and amongst the vedas the most sacred is Rigveda , its mentioned in the Rigvedabook 1 hymn number 164 mantra (or verse) number 46 "truth is one , God is one , sagescall him by various names" . God is one but saintly people call him by MANY names andthere are no less than 33 names given to almighty god in Rigveda book number 2hymn number 1 alone , one of them is Brahma , the Brahma is called as the creator . If

you translate creator to arabic it means "Khaliq" we muslims have no object thatalmighty god is "Khaliq" or Creator , but if someone says he is almighty god he has fourheads and on each head is a crown , you are giving an image to almighty God weMuslims take strong exception to it moreover you are going against Shvetashvataraupanishad chapter number 4 verse number 19 which says "natasya pratima asti" "of that God there is no image" . The other name given to almighty god in rigveda booknumber 2 hymn number 1 verse number 3 is Vishnu , Vishnu is called as the god who isthe sustainer , if you translate sustainer into Arabic it is somewhat similar to Rab .




16

LW: Dr. Naik didn’t stated anything which can go contrary to the claims of Islam thosewere the verses before and after the verse he specifically mentioned but I will surelywould like to do the honors .

Yajur veda chapter number 32 verse number 1 :

“Agni is that , Aditya is that ,Vayu is that , Chandra is that ,The bright one is that , Brahman is that ,Waters are that , the prajapati is that . ”


“He is the deity who pervades in all regionsBorn at first , he is also within the wombVerily , he is born and yet to be bornMeets his offspring facing him on all sides . ”

This verse goes against the Islamic God , cause Allah can’t be equated with anything , heis not omnipresent he lives above the 7 th heaven not on earth , according to Islamicscriptures he is beyond this universe not IN this universe as claimed by Vedas about“that” which is present everywhere .

The third verse of SYV verily states that -

“natasya pratima asti” meaning of “that” there is no symbol of idol or anything . Butagain as I said , the Vedic people are not talking about the Quranic Allah which can beeasily be understood by comparison of the verse before and after verse number 3 of chapter 32 of Yajurveda . The Islamic Allah according to Islamic scriptures is beyond thisuniverse , has absolutely no symbol in here the almighty deity is being symbolized withdifferent things further more the verse after “natasya pratima asti “ makes things evenmore clear .


He is the deity who pervades in all regionsBorn at first , he is also within the wombVerily , he is born and yet to be bornMeets his offspring facing him on all sides .




17

According to Islamic scriptures Allah is unborn and he exists , but in here we see thatVedic people are talking about something which is yet to be born and is born at thesame time and something which exists everywhere . This gives an indication of a“philos ophical view ” of G od rather than a literal or logical view of God .

If Zakir Naik is so interested in comparing the vedic view of the Almighty deity withIslamic view in practical terms then , let me ask in whose womb is Allah residing in ?

The truth is Islamic Allah and Vedic Brahman or Supreme deity are way different thaneach other , they are not the same they can never be the same !

The Islamic God creates heaven and earth the paradise filled with the physicaladornments such as rivers of wine , Houris (Virgins) , food , honey etc while the vedicview of the state of heaven is to be free from the cycle of life and death to surpass thebarriers of time to achieve evolution , the state of Godhood (which was also taken bybuddism which is an offshoot of vedic culture ) , aren’t these views way too different ?

How can the vedic supreme deity and Islamic Allah can be same according to Mr. Naikwhen these two are totally different ?Allah is a being who sits on a throne , creates paradise filled with physical objects andhell , is the lord of the Judgement day , sends messengers , decides everything beforethe child is even born by the concept of destiny , lives on the seventh heaven , has nosymbol etc while vedic supreme God who is compared symbolically to sun , water ,fire , moons , men etc , is all pervading or omnipresent etc .

Thus , again quoting the yajurveda is of no use Mr. Naik there is a major gap betweenthe Vedic Dharma and Islamic Deen .

All right it’s a well known fact that Mr. Naik states that Muslim take strong exception toattributing image to almighty God (with exception follows aggravation as well but that isbesides the point) . the Muslim believe Allah is formless and doesn’t have a form but intheir very own Islamic scriptures form has been attributed to their own Allah theinfallible God , let me show a few of those 33 verse in Quran only which attributesimage to their God :

Quran (57:04) Al Hadid : “ He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in Six Days,and is moreover firmly established on the Throne (of Authority). He knows what enterswithin the earth and what comes forth out of it, what comes down from heaven andwhat mounts up to it. And He is with you wheresoever ye may be. And Allah sees well allthat ye do. “

Now the one who creates a throne , will definitely have a throne to sit on it . Isn’t that aformed aspect to God ? this implies Islamic god has a mass ! A throne is definitely




18

created to sit on it , its not created for decoration since according to Islamic scripturesfirst Allah created his throne over water and then he made a pen who will writeeverything that will happen . Definitely Allah wanted a place to sit on that’s why thethrone was created , now the one who sits on a throne has got a mass or not ? he must

definitely have a mass and thus , he must having a form as well ! What would any saneand logical person will think of one who sits on a throne ? A man , a being must besitting on that throne !He created that for himself isn’t that true ?

Furthermore I am quite baffled to see that Allah who is beyond humans is making ahuman creations. Like Pens and Throne etc even his paradise is filled with physicalobjects of wine and honey and what not but my question is Why couldn’t he makesomething more spectacular ?

Why did he made only a throne which is something which signifies the power andauthority in human culture ( i.e. Kings) , he uses human representation of power andauthority so how couldn’t he have human thinking and features as well ? He alsoclaimed that he created Adam in his image, Allah shows human emotions of anger ,mercy etc . Muslim are proud that they don’t attribute any image to their God and theirgod is formless but the truth is that they do and furthermore in Quran they make Allahlook more like a tyrant than a God .

Plus , if he created Adam in his image , then isn’t it true that Adam looked like Allah ?We the descendants of Adam , aren’t we also supposed to look like him ? after allaccording to Quran we are the descendants of Adams are we not ?

Okay lets ignore all that for the sake of argument , lets continue further on the conceptof image according to the Quran (translation by Yusuf Ali) :

069.015Yusufali: On that Day shall the (Great) Event come to pass.

069.016Yusufali: And the sky will be rent asunder, for it will that Day be flimsy,

069.017 Yusufali: And the angels will be on its sides, and eight will, that Day, bear the Throne of thy Lord above them.

Now here when the day of judgment comes , 8 angel s will hold Allah’s throne and angelswill be on his side . Okay , now I might not be so scholarly but even I have commonsense enough to make out that throne must be having Allah sitting on it . Now if




19

something is sitting on a throne , is he formless or has a form ? I leave it up to thereader to think but the answer is really simple , he has a form for definite !

how can something formless be sitting on a throne which has a form ? if something is

sitting on a throne he must be having a form . Now d oesn’t that attributes form to aformless God Mr. Naik ? anybody can have his own personal image of Allah if givenknowledge enough and as such before desecrating other religions you must check yourown religion before trying to defend it which by itself is untenable .

Its further mentioned in Rigveda book number 8 hymn number 1 verse number 1"worship him alone, one god , praise him alone" . Its mentioned in Rigveda Booknumber 6 Hymn number 45 Verse 16 "praise him alone , worship that one god" .

What? I think you got quite lucky Mr. Naik that your audience is very gullible but thething is the verse goes something like this pardon me if I burst your bubbles aboutIslamic prophesies in Vedas :

[08-000] RIG VEDA - BOOK THE EIGHTH

[08-001] HYMN I. Indra.1. GLORIFY naught besides, O friends; so shall no sorrow trouble you.Praise only mighty Indra when the juice is shed, and say your lauds repeatedly.

This is the first verse which Mr. Naik mentioned to the crowd that what Vedas aretalking about praise him alone and worship him alone is about Allah and none other

than him .Before refuting him lets also see the second verse he mentioned :

[06-045] HYMN XLV. Indra.16 Praise him who, Matchless and Alone, was born the Lord of living men,Most active, with heroic soul.

Alright , what are you trying say Mr. Naik ? Indra is ALLAH ?!If that is your discovery well I am quite surprised cause knowing Indra’s nature , likenesswho is fond of womens (has got even cursed by a devas and even humans) , lover of songs etc .

Glory of Indra is great , I agree the God of weather , thunder and lightening . The King of Devas , the mighty and the most valiant amongst devas . But as I mentioned beforeDevas are entities / beings not God . By your very statement Mr. Naik I have concludedwhat any sane man will with enough knowledge will that according to you Indra is Allah .One must really find out is he defending Islam or just making fun of it ?




20

All the hymns Mr. Naik mentioned with due respect belongs to Devraj Indra rather thanAllah . Any average hindu will knows about Indra ..

Equating Indra with Allah is blasphemy if Mr. Naik knows , and according to his very

own Sharia law which he wants the entire world to follow he must beheaded . But thenagain Mr.Naik will get out saying that he is using the Islamic “Al taqiyah” to defend islamthat is to lie for the cause and benefit of Islam and in the view of Allah that’s a good lieand he rewards for it .

The Brahmasutra of Hinduism "there is only one god not the second one not at all , notat all not in the least bit" . So if you read the hindu scriptures you shall understand theconcept of god in hinduism in the light of the sacred scriptures .

I have already refuted this argument about what Vedas and Vedantic Brahmasutra istalking about . Brahmasutra is talking about Brahman and Zakir Naik is comparing himwith Allah of islam which is wrong . For more information scroll up to find the howBrahman has been described by the Vedas and How Islamic God is describe .Vedic Brahman is different and Islamic allah is different Zakir Naik has committed thefallacy of

Argumentum ad nauseam (argument to the point of disgust; i.e., by repitition). This isthe fallacy of trying to prove something by saying it again and again . Just saying Allahand Brahman are one and the same thing again and again doesn’t make it same .

Dr.Naik -Let us try and understand the concept of God in Islam , the best reply anyone

can give you from the scriptures is quote to you Surah Al Ikhlaas chapter 112 versenumber 1-4 "Say he is Allah one and only" , "Allah the absolute and eternal" , "hebegets not nor he is begotten" , "there is nothing like him" . This is the four linedefinition of Allah (swt) of all mighty god given in the Quran if any person says so and socandidate is God , if that candidate fits in this four line definition we Muslims have gotno objection in accepting that candidate as god , the first is "say he is allah one andonly" . "God is only one" Chandogya Upanishad chapter number 6 section number 2verse number 1 . The second is "Allah the absolute and eternal" same as Bhagwat Gitachapter 10 verse number 3 "they known me as the unborn not begotten , withoutbeginning the supreme lord of the worlds" . The third test is "he begets not nor is he

begotten"

LW: Once again a false comparison and Argumentum ad nauseam , by saying orimplying they are the same it doesn’t become true . What Upanishad , Vedas and Geetaare talking about is Brahman not Islamic Allah . De facto , what was mentioned in Geetawhat was Krishna saying that to Arjuna , now Krishna is referring to himself that he is




21

supreme lord of the worlds , unborn not begotten . Now what are we to believe Krishnais Allah ? let me give the commentary of two renowned scholars of this field but thisargument doesn’t need commentary as anyone can find that out through his owninterpretation and logic but in order to clarify I will also put those commentaries :

Sridhara Swami's Commentary

“Here Lord Krishna is revealing the result of such realization of Him. One who realizesthat the Supreme Lord Krishna is verily the origin of everything and the controller of everyone having no beginning or cause as He alone is the cause of all; is free fromdelusion and illusion and has absolved all reactions from their actions. “

The word anadim meaning without beginning contains two root words within it. Ana which means that which energises everything and adi which means that which is theorigin of everything. Therefore Lord Krishna is the energising cause of all withoutbeginning. Thus the word ajam being unborn and anadim have both been established

Now Zakir Naik let me ask if I may , is Krishna Allah ? if he is why did he took amaterialistic form which clearly Islam is again st . Islam emphasizes that Allah doesn’tneed to come down in human form to help humans .

Mr . Naik again needs to improve his researches rather than frantic searches to supportthe shaky ground of Islam . I have an idea why not use mountains as pegs to supportthe ground of Islam ?

Have We not made the earth as a bed, and the mountains as pegs?(Quran, 78:6-7)

Dr.Naik -Same as the Shvetashvatara Upanishad, chapter 6 , verse 9 “Of him there areno parents. No lords, almighty has got no mother , has got no father , he has got nosuperior” and the fourth test is (valamya kulahu kufuan ahad) “ there is nothing likehim”.

Shvetashvatara Upanishad , chapter 4, verse 19 , Yajurveda chapter 32, verse 3 “of thatgod, there is no pratima, there is no life base, there is no image, there is no picture ,there is no statue” If any person says so or so candidate is GOD, if that candidate fits inthese four line definition discussed of the Koran and the Hindu sacred scriptures, I haveno objection in accepting that candidate as god. For example, there are many humansbeings who consider Bhagwan Rajneesh to be God. While doing question answer timethe Hindu brother of ours , who told me “ Brother Zakir, we hindus don’t believebhagwan Rajneesh to be GOD” I told him “ I never said the hindus believed bhagwanRajneesh to be God, I have read the hindu scriptures. Nowhere in the hindu scriptures




22

does it say that Bhagwan Rajneesh is GOD, I said some human beings , some peoplebelieve Bhagwan Rajneesh to be God. Many people believe him to be GOD. Let’s putthis bhagwan Rajneesh to the test of sura Ikhlas and the test of the hindu sacredscriptures. Number one, (kul huallahu ahad) “see he is Allah one and only “, (ekkam

evedityum) “ god is only one without the second”Was Rajneesh only one? Was he the only human being, who has claimed to be god?There are many who have claimed , especially in this country of ours. Thousands of menhave claimed to be god, he is not the only one. Rajneesh Bhakt me say “ no, he isunique” Let’s go to the second test (allah hus samad) “ Allah , the absolute and eternal“, when we read the autobiography of Rajneesh , we find mentioned there thatRajneesh was suffering from Asthma, from chronic back ache, from Diabetic Mellitus.Imagine Almighty GOD suffering from chronic backache, asthma, diabetic mellitus.The third test is ( alam yalid valam yu lad) “he begets not nor he is begotten” we knowBhagwan Rajneesh was born in Madhya Pradesh . he had a mother and a father. He goesto America , uSA, in 1981 and takes Thousands of Americans for a ride and in a state of Oregon he starts his new village called as Rajneeshpuram. Later on the Americangovernment, they arrest him and put him behind bars and Rajneesh alleges thatAmerican government gave me slow poisoning , Imagine almighty god being slowpoisoned.And in the year 1985, the American government removes him from the country , kickshim out . he comes back to India and goes back to the city of pune, to his centre , whichis today called as OSHO commune, if you go there it is mentioned there on histombstone “ Bhagwan Rajneesh, OSHO, never born, n ever died” but visited the earthfrom 11 dec 1931 – 19 jan 1990. They did not mention on his tombstone, that he wasnot given visas to 21 different countries of the world. Imagine almighty god, coming on

this earth to visit the world and required visas. And the arch bishop, If you don’t removeRajneesh out of this country , we will burn his house and all of his disciple and the lasttest (vallamya kullahu kufuan ahad ) is so stringent that no one besides the true god willpass. The moment you compare the god to anything in this world he is not god.Vallamyakullahu kufuan ahad, we know that Bhagwan Rajneesh like normal humanbeings, had two eyes, two ears, two hands, two legs, white beard . the moment you cancompare god to anything in this world in this universe, he is not god . Suppose someonesays that almighty god is a thousand times stronger than Arnold Schwarzenegger , youmight have heard the name of Ardnold S Schwarzenegger , the person who got the titleof mr. Universe , the strongest man on this universe. The moment you can compare godto anything in this world, whether it be Arnold or Dara Singh or king kong , be itthousand times or million times, the moment you compare god to anything in thisworld, he is not god. There is nothing like him.

LW: I have explained Upanishads and Vedas speak of a different entity but what Mr .Naik said here is that there is “nothing like him” is that a fact ?Lets scrutinize this statement in respect to Quran , Hadiths and Al tabari :




23

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 553: Narrated Ibn Umar:Once Allah's Apostle stood amongst the people, glorified and praised Allah as Hedeserved and then mentioned the Dajjal saying, "l warn you against him (i.e. the Dajjal)

and there was no prophet but warned his nation against him. No doubt, Noah warnedhis nation against him but I tell you about him something of which no prophet told hisnation before me. You should know that he is one-eyed, and Allah is not one-eyed."

This statement describes that Allah is not one eyed like dajjal signifying Allah hasphysical features .

Sahih Muslim Book 035, Number 6528:Abu Musa reported that he (and his other companions) were climbing upon thehillock along with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and when anyperson climbed up, he pronounced (loudly):" There is no god but Allah, Allah isthe Greatest." Thereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Verily,you are not supplicating One Who is deaf or absent. He said: Abu Musa orAbdullah b Qais, should I not direct you to the words (which form) the treasureof Paradise? I said: Allah's Messenger, what are these? He said:" There is nomight and no power but that of Allah."

This narration describes Allah can hear Abu Musa when he was shouting at the top of his lungs , at this Allah’s apostle Muhammad bin Abdullah explained to him that Allahcan hear him and he is present , if Allah can hear him it means he has physical parts(ears) to listen to people , many may say its otherwise but further verses will strengthen

my argument .

Sunaan ibn Majah, Vol. I Hadith Nnumber 104

‘Ubayy b. Ka’b (Allah be pleased with him) reported that Allah’s Mes senger (peace andblessings of Allah be upon him said, “The first person with whom Allah will shake hands(on the Day of Judgment), will be ‘Umar and he will be the first man to whom Allah willpay salutation (say: Assalamu ‘alaika ) and he will be the first man whom he will holdwith his Hand and make him enter the Paradise.

Needs not much of a description , Allah is shaking hands with Umar and pay salutations .Shaking of hands and speaking implies Allah has both hands and a mouth .Quran Yusuf Ali’s t ranslation:

Quran 007.194Yusufali: Verily those whom ye call upon besides Allah are servants like unto you: Callupon them, and let them listen to your prayer, if ye are (indeed) truthful!




24

Quran 007.195Yusufali: Have they feet to walk with? Or hands to lay hold with? Or eyes to see with?Or ears to hear with? Say: "Call your 'god-partners', scheme (your worst) against me,

and give me no respite!

Quran 007.196Yusufali: "For my Protector is Allah, Who revealed the Book (from time to time), and Hewill choose and befriend the righteous.

Quran 007.197 Yusufali: "But those ye call upon besides Him, are unable to help you, and indeed tohelp themselves."

Quran007.198Yusufali: If thou callest them to guidance, they hear not. Thou wilt see them looking atthee, but they see not.

In these verse Allah describes that idols have no feet to walk , no eyes to see , no ears tohear etc . Allah is comparing his vast powers with false Idol Gods in here , what does thismean ? It means he has what Idols lack! that is , he has ears to hear , he has feet to walkand eyes to see otherwise it makes no sense that Allah lacks what idols lack and stillnitpicking Idols , the only reason Allah would have said that is because he has what Idolslack .So why Zakir Naik is saying there is nothing like him ? when here it has been implied

has hands , eyes , ears and physical limbs means there are things like him . We humansare like him according to terms of physical features not character .

005.064 Quran Yusufali: The Jews say: "Allah's hand is tied up." Be their hands tied up and be theyaccursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay, both His hands are widely outstretched:He giveth and spendeth (of His bounty) as He pleaseth. But the revelation that comethto thee from Allah increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy.Amongst them we have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every timethey kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loveth not those who do mischief.

Both his hands are not tied up but are widely outstretched means he has two hands andthis comes from none other than the most authentic source of Islamic scripture AlQuran .

Furthermore Allah gives another evidence that he looks like human beings and that canbe seen from the narration from Sahih Bukhari




25

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 74, Number 246: Narrated Abu Huraira:The Prophet said, "Allah created Adam in his complete shape and form (directly), sixtycubits (about 30 meters) in height. When He created him, He said (to him), "Go and

greet that group of angels sitting there, and listen what they will say in reply to you, forthat will be your greeting and the greeting of your offspring." Adam (went and) said, 'As-Salamu alaikum (Peace be upon you).' They replied, 'AsSalamu-'Alaika wa Rahmatullah(Peace and Allah's Mercy be on you). So they increased 'Wa Rahmatullah' The Prophetadded 'So whoever will enter Paradise, will be of the shape and form of Adam. Sincethen the creation of Adam's (offspring) (i.e. stature of human beings is being diminishedcontinuously) to the present time."

So Allah agrees he has a physical form , it has been confirmed from this Hadith thatAllah looked like Adam since he created Adam the first human being in his completeshape and form directly , then why Muslims and Dr. Zakir Naik go on claiming that thereis nothing like him ? Its almost humorous to see Mr. Naik’s claims are contradictory tothe very scriptures he is trying to prove as truth .

Dr.Naik- This was in short the 4 line definition of almighty god , I call it the legitimatetest for theology for the study of god, otherwise the Koran say in Surah Al Israa, chapter17, verse 110 “ seek Allah , call upon him by Allah or Rehman , by whichever name youcall upon him , to him belongs the most beautiful names, you can call allah by any name,but it should be beautiful name and the name which he has called himself and this ismentioned in no less than 4 different places in the Koran besides surah al israh chapter

17 verse 110 its also mentioned in surah taa haa chapter 20 verse number 8 and surahal hashr chapter 59 verse 24 that to Allah belong the most beautiful names and thereare no less than 99 different attributes ,names given to Allah in the Koran and thehadith . for example, Al Rahman, Al Rahim , Al Karim, most gracious, most merciful ,most wise and the crowning one is ALLAH .Why do we Muslims prefer calling Allah bythe Arabic word “ Allah “ instead of English word GOD , because a person can playmischief with English word god , which you cannot do with the Arabic word. If you add Sto god it becomes GODS the plural of GOD .. there is nothing like plural Allah . “say isAllah one and on ly “ if you add DESS to god it becomes goddess, meaning a female god,there is nothing like male Allah or female Allah in ISLAM , Allah has put no gender, if you

add a father to god , it becomes a godfather , he is my god father , he is my guardian .there is nothing like Allah father or Allah abba in Islam . If you add mother to god itbecomes god mother, there is nothing like Allah mother or Allah ammi in Islam. Allah isunique world, thats the reason we Muslims , we prefer calling Allah with the Arabicword Allah instead of the English word god , because the person can play mischief withthe English word god but when any Muslim is speaking to the non Muslim, may notunderstand the meaning of Allah and uses the English word god like what i am doingtoday .




26

LW: First of all I somehow couldn’t believe how this person graduated as a Doctorfurthermore he is a doctor who says “I don’t believe in Darwins theory of evolution , Ihavn’t came across a simple book which says facts of evolution all say theory o f evolution” , its hard to believe because he lacks the simplest knowledge of understanding that “prefix” can be added before any word , be it English or any otherlanguage .

He says with English word God you can play mischief by putting prefixes before the stemword to be honest any person with decent knowledge of Arabic can add prefixes to theword Allah for a paradigm these few will give Dr. Zakir Naik an idea that mischief withthe word Allah is possible :

1 . Hizballah / Hizbollah which literally means “Party of God” or “Party Of allah” inArabic now Dr. Zakir Naik , does Allah have a political party too ? Are people allowed tovote for this party or they just have to submit by force ?

(Hizballah (also transliterated from the Arabic as Hizbullah and Hezbollah) wasfounded and is managed by Shiite Islamic clerics in Iran —the same folks who nowcontrol Iraq. Millions of militants strong, Allah's Party is financed by OPEC. It is areligious organization whose sole purpose is to terrorize and kill non-Muslims, andmost especially, Americans and Jews.)

2. Walidullah derived from words “Walid” which means “father” and “Allah” means “God” the entire word would be translated as “Father of Allah” .

Same like the word “Abdullah” which means the “ slave of God / Allah ” . It can be thatthese words aren’t used in Muslim words but it certainly doesn’t mean it can’t beformed in Arabic . Dr . Zakir Naik holds a view just like any typical Muslim that Arabic iscame from heaven and it’s the language of Allah and Angels .

Dr.Naik -I have got no objection but I would like to mention that god is not the propertranslation of the Arabic word Allah , and this word Allah is mentioned in the scripturesof all the major world religions including Hinduism .

LW: I do agree that word “ God “ is not a proper translation of the word “ Allah “ theword “ Allah” is the name of the God of Muhammad , but the root of this word follows




27

to pagan arab’s chief moon deity who was also referred to as Hubal and was given thetitle “A l-ilah” meaning “the God” . Allah was the chief moon deity of pagan Arabs for the reason the Bedouin pagan Arabslived a nomadic life and Bedouins during those days were tribes suffering lot of troubles

due to harsh environment of the desert and travel during the day was very hard due toharsh heat from sun so most of the journeys were undertaken at night in moonlight andsky filled with glittering stars . They were marveled by the unsurpassable beauty of thenight and moon and for them appearance of the moon was appearance of “Lord of thenight” as such the nomadic Bedouin Arabs were connected with moon and its phases .To them moon was giver of life and they also based their calendar on phases and cyclesof the moon and celebrated festivals et cetera during those special phases of the moon .

Dr.Naik -Its mentioned in Rig-Veda book number 2 hymn no.1 verse no.11 “ one of thenames of god is given as Allah “ Allah is also mentioned in Rig-Veda book number 3,hymn number 30, mantra number 10 and also in Rig-Veda book number 9 , hymnnumber 67 , mantra number 30. There is a separate Upanishad by the name of Allopanishad which is also mentioned in one of the book of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar , aseparate Upanishad by the name allopanishad , this was in brief regarding the conceptof god in Islam according to the sacred scriptures of Islam. This was in brief regardingthe synopsis of the concept of god in Hinduism and Islam in the light of sacredscriptures.

LW: Allah is mentioned in these Aryan scriptures ? well if he is then that will be amiracle !Lets see :

Rigveda book number 2 hymn number 1. verse number 11:Hymns to Agni“Thou, God, art Aditi to him who offers gifts: thou, Hotri, Bharati, art strengthened bythe song.Thou art the hundred-wintered ILA to give strength, Lord of Wealth! Vrtra-slayer andSarasvati.”

The entire hymn is dedicated to Agni and the only word mentioned in here which isclose to Allah is “ILA” . Is Dr. Zakir Naik thinking Ila is Allah ? which he says if properlypronounced is Allah , I beg to differ but the truth is , that Ila is the goddess of speechand also as the chief progenitor of the lunar dynasty or Somavansha . Now if one wantsto assume Allah is a goddess of speech its upto his discretion .

Rigveda book number 3 hymn number 30 mantra number 10:Hymns to Indra :




28

10 . He who withheld the kine, in silence I yielded in fear before thy blow, O Indra.He made paths easy to drive forth the cattle. Loud-breathing praises helped the Much-invoked One.Where is the word Allah ? the enti re hymn belongs to Indra . Where exactly is “Allah” in

this verse ? Hymn belongs to Indra and him alone , Mr. Naik isn’t trying to say that Indrais Allah , right?Now that will be a blasphemy because Indra has been given images , differentfunctions and duties et cetera and there are forces even higher than Indra as well . Oneneeds to know that Dr. Zakir Naik is really defending or defaming Islam ?

Next is ,Rigveda Book number 9 hymn number 67 mantra number 30 :

“Lost is Alayya's axe. O Soma, God do thou send it back hither in thy flowEven, Soma, God, if 'twere a mole. ”

I can’t find the word Allah in here as well . Zakir Naik is again wrong in saying it has beenmentioned in Rigveda Book number 9 hymn number 76 mantra number 30 . He usingth e Islamic “Al taqiyah” that is to lie in order to defend and propagate Islamic interests .

Allo Upanishad ? Is Mr. Naik really serious ? Allo Upanishad was forged during the timesof Muslim rule in India , this text has got no origin in original Upanishads its got mix of Arabic and Sanskrit . Muslims also used to call it as a part of Vedas but when Vedasbecame easily available they now say it’s a “Separate Upanishad” , this Allo Upanishadhas no trance in Vedas or any of the other branches of Vedic literature .

A Upanishad having mix of Arabic and sanksrit should be easily recognizable to anyperson who has logic decent enough to know that it was forged by Muslims and alsoduring Muslim invasion lots of universities , texts etc were destroyed , the destructionof Nalanda university is a paradigm of such . Claims of Mr. Naik are quite abstrusebecause neither they carry any base neither they have any logic , but one thing it has islogical fallacies .

Dr.Naik -Since , to understand and let the followers of these two great religions cometogether like what we have done today. Imagine this historic event, Tens of thousands

of people here. The first time I heard Sri Sri Ravi Shankar was one week ago. When I sawhis VCD on the topic of conversation with the spiritual master. He gave a talk on 7 may2002 in Santa Monica in California and the first sentence I heard from Sri Sri RaviShankar was “spirituality demands two things, first , authenticity . how authentic areyou?. Second, intensity . and believe me when I heard this statement spiritual part, firstthing demands authenticity, I was impressed. I totally agree that spirituality demandsauthenticity. Whether first second or third , it does demands authenticity., it demands truthfulness. Without authenticity how can a person be spiritual. I totally agree with




29

respected Sri Sri Ravi Shankar. Later I was given few of his books by the organizers andread one of the books.LW: Hmm , Lets see what Mr. Naik has to say further . I can foresee a logical fallacycoming up in his statements further .

Dr.Naik -Hinduism and Islam , the common thread and when I read the book , I amsure the intention of respected Sri Sri Ravi shaker was mainly to get the Muslims andHindus together and even I have written a book “ similari ties between Hinduism andIslam ” so as far as that topic is concerned we share a common platform but there weresome thing or rather many things which i found in the book which were not authenticmainly especially concerning ISLAM and its method to present the views, its just for usto understand and come closer. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar writes in the first section, “faith inone god” on page number 2 “ Hinduism is perceived to be a religion of many gods but

contrary to this perception , it believes in one go d” I agree with him 100% .thats what ipresent in my talk. he further continues and says . it believes in advitya, non dualmonotheism. Though seven colors make up a rainbow, it comes from one ray of whitelight, similarly 30 crores of gds and goddesses are raised of one parmatama, superhuman being , intelligent. To compare seven color make up rainbow of one light with 33crores of devi devtas comes from rays of one parmatama, i find it a little bit illogical tobecause I being a medical doctor , student of science also. We know that science saysthat light is made up of 7 colors VIBGYOR, violent, indigo, blue , green , yellow, orange ,red. But each color by itself is not white light. All the seven colors in the right proportionmake up one white light. Each individual color is not white light and if any one of thecolors missing it will not constitute pure white light. To say this and give the example to33 crore of devi devtas rays of one parmatama is like saying that one almighty god hasgot 33 crores components. like how a human body has got appox 11 parts, two legs,two hands, one head, one neck , two shoulders, one chest , one abdomen, one pelvis,but each part does not make up the complete human body , all the parts put together inthe right position make up the complete human body , if anything is missing its not acomplete human body . to give this example to 33 crores equivalent to one god is sayingthat god has got 33 crores part which i disagree and if any one part is missing then thatwill not be complete one god.

LW: The Book Mr. Naik has written is not to be trusted as I refuted most of his claims

in that book right here in this article , he has stated nothing even close to truth in hisworks .

Now Dr. Naik engages in Argumentum ad hominem it is an error of attacking thecharacter or motives of the person who has started an idea . Since its natural to Mr.Naik because he holds no logical base himself so he resorts to Argumentum AdHominem and Strawman that is the fallacy of refuting a caricatured or extreme version




30

of somebody's argument, rather than the actual argument they've made , He makes ShriShri Ravishankar give explanation regarding the book rather than the actual topic of concept of God in Hinduism . As we can see Mr. Naik commits one logical fallacy afteranother .

To inform Mr. Zakir Naik the 33 Kotis (types) of Gods and Goddesses are mentioned inVedic Literature rather than 33 crore and Mr. Ravi Shankar used it as a metaphor not asan actual practical statement but instead of knowing the difference betweenmetaphorical and real statement he goes on to engage in Strawman and Ad Hominemlogical fallacy .

Dr.Naik -But he further goes and says that god has got hundred and eight names, onegod has got 108 names or 1008 names which I agree with him, this is what the Vedassays. As I mentioned in my talk in Rig-Veda, book number one, hymn no.164, mantranumber 46 “ god is one truth is one, saints call him by variety of names . and then he goes on to say this is similar in Islam, that in Islam god has got 99 names,

which I agree with him. As far as names are concerned, like in Hinduism, in Islam alsoyou can give any name which almighty god has called himself with . and there are noless than 99 names given to almighty god in the KORAN and the HADITH . giving a name, i totally agree, Islam as well as Hinduism for example, my name is Zakir Abdul KarimNaik. You can even call be Abu Farik Zakir Naik. The father of Farik Zakir Naik. You caneven call me Abu Zikra Zakir Naik, father of zikra zakir naik , or father Of Rushda ZakirNaik. Four names, four different name sbut all pointed to the same person , all areunique, only pointing to me , no one else. So giving names totally correct, as the Vedas

says , as the Koran says , as long as the name is beautiful name and is a name which thealmighty god prefers to call himself with.

LW: Which God is the Rigveda talking about ? Its not Allah , its their perception of Brahman the cause of all causes. I have explained the difference between the two in thisarticle above .

Dr.Naik- Further in the section number 3 of modes of worship on page number 3, Sri

Sri Ravi Shankar gives an example in his book “ a picture of a person is not the person ,a visiting card of a person is not the person, similarly, the idol is the symbol of chaitanya, consciousness and divinity.” I totally agree with the first part that the picture of theperson is not the person , the visiting of the person is not the person , but further sayingthat the idol is the symbol of divinity, I think with my limited knowledge its against theVedas, yajurved ch 32, verse 3, “ of that god, there is no pratima, no likeness, no image,no picture, no photo, no statue, no sculpture.




31

LW: Dr. Zakir Naik lacks the simplest understanding of concept of spirituality becausein his cult spirituality is banned .

Which “GOD” is Yajurveda speaking of ? I told this above and will repeat it again itsBrahman . And to be honest with Dr. Zakir Naik who claims to be the student of comparative religions , of Brahman there is really no idol . Of “that” there is no statueone cannot find an idol who people worship as Brahman , the idol worship is of Devatasnot of Brahman . One can find several idols of many Gods and Goddesses in Aryanismbut one cannot find the idol or picture of “Brahman” .The idol worship happens of Devas (Entity , higher beings) not of Brahman . Zakir Naikhas made a false accusation here against both Hinduism and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar .

To make it even more clear that in very Bhagwad Gita he quotes time and again to provethe existence of Allah , I will quote to explain the existence of idols :

Bhagwad Gita chapter number 7 verse 21“yo yo yam yam tanum bhakatah shraddhayarcitum icchatitasya tasyacalam sraddham tam eva vidadmay aham “

Meaning :

“Whichever demigod a particular devotee desires with faith to worship , I surely sustainfirmly that faith in him”

Sridhara Swami's Commentary (for the clarification of the verse above)

“Amongst those who worship a particular demigod which represents a potency of LordKrishna then He as paramatma the Supreme Soul within all sentient beings monitoringevery thought and action, makes such devotees faith steady and stable. Of others whoworship illusory gods, His external potency known as Maya the deluding illusory energykeeps them steadily following the illusion of their erroneous philosophies andspeculative theosophies that have no validity not being verified as bonafide in the Vedicscriptures. “

The verse in here justifies the idol practices prevalent in India which is contrary to theclaims of Zakir Naik yet again .

Idol is a form of focus for the mind of the people without a place for mind to focus upon(at initial levels of students of spirituality) their mind wanders and is unable toaccomplish the desire or task to connecting to desired deity.Vedas lay more emphasis on meditation and evolution while Idols of the Devas alsoserve as a form of thanksgiving to those “Devas” . Worship is secondary , evolution and




32

attainment of Moksha is of most importance in Vedic scriptures . Worship is uptodiscretion of the devotee its not a forceful practice which they must follow .Dr.Naik -Neither is idol the visiting card of god because visiting card gives the address

of the person , his place of work or his place of residence. To say this is a visiting card is

limiting the place or the work of almighty god to the idol even if I agree for the sake of argument , that the idol is the symbol is a picture of god or the visiting card for sake of argument , suppose a person promises me some financial assistance and after a fewdays his secretary gives me the money he had promised along with the visiting card . itwill be illogical for me to thank the visiting card of the person or to thank its photographif I see it somewhere else, the least i can do is, at least i can call him up personally andthank him on the telephone, so even if I agree for sake or argument that idol is thephoto of almighty god or visiting card which I don’t agree for sake of argument, yet it isillogical the photo or visiting card directly.

LW: All right , Mr. Naik’s is still engrossed into committing logical fallacies which helikes more than his very own religion I suppose , of course my opinion is based on theamount of times he is using a fallacy rather than anything else .He takes the metaphor of Ravi Shankar as literal , and goes on using Ad Hominem fallacyto intimidate Ravi shankar and lift the crowd’s trust from Ravi Shankar so even if he sayssomething in defense of his , the audience won’t believe in him .

Limiting the place of Almighty God ? Don’t Islamic scripture describe that Allah sits on athrone above 7 th heaven ? isn’t that limiting that place of God ?Its like the pot calling the kettle black , its way to humorous to see his arguments as theyare such non – sense it goes to the point of them being humorous .

Dr. Naik isn’t able to grab simple concept of spirituality that people who pay theirrespect to idols are not worshipping the consciousnes s “in” the idol but theconsciousness which is “represented” by the idol . The idol by itself is a piece of materials by which it has been formed but when used in form of representative of ahigher consciousness which is needed for people who are not used to higher concept of spirituality , for them it serves as a tool to connect to the consciousness which theycannot do it by themselves . But an Idol just by itself is just a formation of materials bywhich it came into shape be it clay , wood or stone .

Dr.Naik -And this is agreed upon by majority of the hindu scholars that idol worship iswrong in Hinduism.




33

LW: Wrong! Any learned scholar wouldn’t want to risk his reputation on such baselessstatement . Those Hindu scholars can be Naik’s team of pseudo -scholars because Gitarefutes that statement by the following verse from chapter 7

Bhagwad Gita chapter number 7 verse 21“yo yo yam yam tanum bhakatah shraddhayarcitum icchatitasya tasyacalam sraddham tam eva vidadmay aham “

Meaning :

“Whichever demi god a particular devotee desires with faith to worship , I surely sustainfirmly that faith in him”

Once again I will inform Zakir Naik that it’s in Hinduism there is not “Idol worship” but“Worship through idols” there is a big difference between the t wo .

Dr.Naik -What they say that at a lower level at a lower consciousness person at alower level , who does not know may require an idol to worship god, but when youreach a higher conscious, idol is not required and this is what Sri Sri Ravi Shankar hasmentioned in some of his VCDs which I saw, at a higher level of consciousness youdon’t require an idol , at a lower level you don’t require . if this is the understand, then iwould say we Muslims have already reached a higher level of consciousness , we do n’trequire an image to worship almighty god.

LW: Wrong yet again ! As the reader will know in his entire speech he had nostatements which lacked logical fallacy and furthermore neither of his statements werescholarly . People who can’t even understand th e simplest concept of spirituality andare adamant on holding the view “my religion is better than yours and you bettersubmit to it!” have consciousness level below 0 ! Muslims or Mr. Naik havn’t achieved ahigher level of consciousness if they lack the understanding of the simplest of conceptswhich even after explanations they are unable to understand just because they arebrainwashed by a monotheistic cult which goes by the name of “Islam” .

Dr.Naik -Furthermore, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar writes in his book on pg 4 that Islam strictlybelieves in the formless god but yet it acknowledges the symbol of this god in Meccaand kaba though they believe that almighty god is all pervading but they worship in thedirection of kaba and it goes on to say that means they are worshipping the formlessthrough the form. To say that the Muslims worship Allah through the form of kaba istotally wrong its not mentioned in any of the scriptures of Islam but the Quran does




34

say in hadith no Muslim ever worships the kabah neither do they worship the almightygod through the kabah, it is prohibited. Allah says it in Quran in surah bakra ch 2 verse144 that wherever you are you face in the direction of the sacred mosque. Direction of kabah. Kabah is our kibla. It is our direction and we believe in unity. If we want to offer

salah, which direction do we pray?

LW: Kaba is Kibla of Muslims I agree , but so was the grand mosque in Medina duringthe times of Muhammad for which when Kibla changed to Mecca’s Kaba the Jewstaunted Muhammad a s to “what made Muhammad change his kibla ?” Muhammadclaims his actions were driven by will of Allah but for some reasons either he or Allahcouldn’t keep his will or decision straight , the kibla changed and many a timeswhenever the prophet needed something extra more than his normal followers Allahallowed him , for example the right to keep over 9 wives but for all the other Muslimsthe number was limited to 4 .

Furthe more , Kaba was the place for pagan arabs who were engaged in idolatry . Theyworshiped their God Hubal the chief moon deity and other gods and goddesses therewere a total of 360 gods and goddesses in kaba , until Muhammad came and broke therest and kept the largest statue of Hubal the moon deity intact who was given the title“Al-ilah” meaning “the god” it is also from where Muhammad derived the word Allah aswell .

Dr.Naik -In the north, south, west or east , so in unity we pray in one direction that isdirection of the kabah, its our kiblah and when Muslims drew the world map the firstperson was Alid Rusi in 1154, he drew with the south pole on the top and north poledown and kabah was in the centre. Later on the western cartographers came and theyturn the map upside down. North pole top, south pole down, yet the kabah in thecentre, so if you are in the north, you face the south, you are in the south you face thenorth, if you are in the east , fact west and if you are in the west face towards the East.When we go to Mecca and circumnutated around the kabah in Umrah and hajj, it isbecause the commandment of almighty God but logically I can think we circumambulatebecause every circle got one center , indicating , god in only one. So to say that weworship the formless through the form, is a great error as far as Islam is concerned.

LW: As per modern science, in spherical world contrary to Islamic world which believesearth is flat , Mecca lies at 21-29 N. It is not even on Tropic of Cancer!

Sura An-Naba (78:6)

Have We not made the earth as a bed,




35

Sura 79:30 reads

Wal'arda ba'da dhalika dahaha

Translated as :

Sura An-Naziat (79:30)

And after that He spread the earth;

A new dawah was also given that regarding the translation of 79:30 that earth is eggshaped but regardless be it flat or egg shaped both of them are totally wrong .

Mecca and Kaba inside it was never the centre of the earth , had it been even near theequator maybe we could have re considered their “belief” but as per modern science itsimpossible . Kaba can never be in the middle , it is though a fact that Muslimcartographers were faith driven rather than anything else so they committed a heinouserror in the field of cartography which was rectified by the western cartographers andeven then Mecca and Kaba wasn’t in the middle .

If Mr. Naik doesn’t know kaba is called “house of Allah” and Al hajar Al aswad the blackstone in kaba is called “ Hand of Allah” . Mr Naik is willing to take metaphors of otherreligions as literal but when it comes to his religion he is ready to believe in metaphorseven to make literal things mentioned as metaphors in order to support Islam .

He can see that when Muslims circumambulate near Kaba it’s an indicator of oneness of God , but he had trouble understanding the Visiting card metaphorical explanation of Idols by Ravi Shankar . Though the fact is Zakir Naik is quite asinine to understand theconcepts of other religion .

Dr.Naik -Further Sri Sri Ravi Shankar writes on page 26 that prophet Mohammad whenhe came back to Mecca he destroyed all the idols in the Kabah except the central objectof worship , the black stone. To say that black stone was the central object of worship istotally an error, its unauthentic. You will not find any authentic record not only Islamicscriptures, any historical , authentic record that black stone , Al Hajar Al Aswad, wasever worshipped by any of the idolaters in any age of Arabia.

LW: Al Hajar Al Aswad was the black stone found by the pagan Arabs in the sands of Arabia , contrary to Muslim claim which goes to describe that stone was found byAbraham and his son Ishmael when they were trying to find the stones to build kaba iswrong the stone was found by the Pagan Arabs lying in the sands of Arabia




36

According to Edward Rice “Al'Uzza was especially worshipped at the Kaaba where shewas served by seven priestesses. Her worshippers circled the holy stone seven times -once for each of the ancient seven planets, and did so in total nudity. “

Near the Kaaba is the ever-flowing well, Zamzam, which cools the throats of thecountless millions of pilgrims. In an oasis of always-flowing water, the Black Stone in itsmount became an unmatched image of the goddess as giver of life.

As such was the importance of the Black Stone to pagan Arabs . Again Mr. Naik claimsare dubious .

Dr.Naik -The Islam greeting is peace. Islam comes from the root word Salam whichmeans peace. It ’s the duty of every Muslim and every human being that it should spreadpeace. If he does not spread peace he is not a Muslim.

LW: Yes peace , few paradigms of Islamic peace :

Bukhari:V9B84N59 "Allah's Apostle said, 'I have been ordered to fight the people tillthey say: "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah." Whoever says this will savehis property and his life from me.'"

Qur'an 8:58 "If you apprehend treachery from any group on the part of a people (withwhom you have a treaty), retaliate by breaking off (relations) with them. The infidels

should not think they can bypass (Islamic law or the punishment of Allah). Surely theycannot escape."

Qur'an 47:20 "Those who believe say, 'How is it that no surah was sent down (for us)?'But when a categorical [decisive or uncompromising] surah is revealed, and fighting and war (Jihad, holy fighting in Allah's Cause) are ordained, you will see those with diseasedhearts looking at you (Muhammad) fainting unto death. Therefore woe unto them!"

Tabari IX:69 "Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us."

Tabari VIII:141 "The battle cry of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah that nightwas: 'Kill! Kill! Kill!'"

Bukhari:V5B59N512 "The Prophet had their men killed, their woman and children takencaptive."

Ishaq:489 "Do the bastards think that we are not their equal in fighting? We are menwho think that there is no shame in killing."




37

Qur'an 2:191 "And kill them wherever you find and catch them. Drive them out fromwhere they have turned you out; for Al-Fitnah (polytheism, disbelief, oppression) isworse than slaughter."

Qur'an 33:60 "Truly, if the Hypocrites stir up sedition, if the agitators in the City do notdesist, We shall urge you to go against them and set you over them. Then they will notbe able to stay as your neighbors for any length of time. They shall have a curse onthem. Whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy - a fierceslaughter - murdered, a horrible murdering."

Qur'an:8:12 "I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate thembecause they oppose Allah and His Apostle."Qur'an:8:57 "If you gain mastery over them in battle, inflict such a defeat as wouldterrorize them, so that they would learn a lesson and be warned."

Qur'an:8:67 "It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a greatslaughter in the land."

Yes, so according to this logics peace should be among Muslims and war, murder ,slaughter to infidels .So according to this logic :

War = Slaughter = Death = Peace = IslamSo we getWar = Islam .

Dr.Naik -Sri Sri Ravi Shankar rightly said that “ love everyone” I also love Sri Sri RaviShankar. I love him. For the things which he has said which I agree. As you rightly saidin a talk “ let us come on a commonality or on a common platform” as I start my talk “come to common terms as been us and you” so what we have come here iscommonalties but today we are discussing one major commonality that we worshipone almighty god. So first let us agree on these commonalities based on the light of thesacred scriptures and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar rightly said that even if he differ he shakehands, even though I differed with some of the points of sri sri ravi Shankar ,yet i came

here because I love him and because we have to agree on at least what is common butwhen we love someone there is a saying that father is cruel to be kind. Sometime wehave to correct the person because we love him. Imagine if a child says something whichis wrong , he wants to jump from a building from 9 th floor, i can’t say i love him goahead because I love him because I love him I will stop him




38

LW: There is a difference between child jumping from a rooftop and in matters of religion . This analogy is quite ridiculous so to speak . Its an authentic fact that if a child

jumps from a rooftop he will get himself killed if and definitely injured .

But in terms of religion its different the proof of authentication has not been providedso , how are we to trust that Islam is the right religion that Mr. Zakir Naik wants toimply?

The fact is Quran was written 20- 30 years after Muhammad’s death and Caliph Uthmanibn Affan’s version of Quran is now days available to every Muslim the compilation wasfinished, sometime between 650 and 656, Uthman sent copies of it to the differentcenters of the expanding Islamic empire. From then on, thousands of Muslim scribesbegan copying the Qur'an This is a traditional view of the Islamic Scholars however ,some secular scholars differ in this regard

Other secular scholars, such as John Wansbrough , Micheal Crook and Particia Crone,were less willing to believe that Qur'an to be solely attributed to Muhammad (orUthman), they argued that there "is no hard evidence for the existence of the Quran inany form before the last decade of the seventh century the tradition which places thisrather opaque revelation in its historical context is not attested before the middle of theeighth." "There is no proof that the text of the Qur'an was collected under Uthman,since the earliest surviving copies of the complete Qur'an are centuries later thanUthman. The oldest existing copy of the full text is from the ninth century .

Regardless of historical facts Quran is filled of Scientific absurdities and contradictions :

Few of contradictions and scientific absurdities are :A day of Allah equals to how much according to the Quran ?

Quran 22:47 A day in the sight of the Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning.

Quran-32:5: To Him, on a Day, the space whereof will be a thousands years of your rekoning.

In here it says its a thousand years old

Quran 70:4 The angels and the spirit ascend unto him in a day the measurewhere of is Fifty thousands years.

In here it holds a view that it a day of Allah is of fifty thousand years .

Sun sets in a muddy spring of water

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/070.qmt.html#070.004





39

Quran 18:86 Till, when he (the traveller Zul-qarnain) reached the setting-place of the Sun, he found it going down into a muddy spring…

Allah thought Sun sets on earth in a murky spring of water . It doesn’t take whole

lot of rocket science for Allah to figure that out .

Resting place of the Sun:

Quran 36:38 And the sun runneth on unto a resting place for him. That is themeasuring of the Mighty, the Wise

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 54, Number 421

Sahih Bukhari Hadiths: Abzur Ghifari (ra) narrated: one day Prophet Mohammad(pbuh) asked me, “Abzar do you know after setting where does Sun go?” Ireplied, I do not know, only Allah’s apostle can say better. Th en Prophet (SA)replied, “After setting, the sun remains prostrated under Allah’s Aro’sh and waitsfor Allah’s command for rising again in the East. Day will come when sun will notget permission to rise again and Qeyamot will fall upon Earth”.

The great Allah who was standing in a wide desert saw bare eyed the course of the Sun from east to west everyday . Allah couldn’t even begin to imagine thatthis happened because of earth rotation not because Sun rotates round theearth .

Further Allah thought that Sun prostrates itself beneath his throne . Wow what agreat scientific statement !

The reason sky is filled of Stars:

Quran 67: 5 And We have (from of old) adorned the lowest heaven (sky) withlamps, and We have made such (Lamps as) missiles to drive away Satans…

Stars are to drive away Satans and evil spirits once again we see the science of Allah who is all knowing , and even then knows nothing !

Now how are we to trust this false scripture which contradicts itself time and again , isboring to read , incites hate among people and its against the concepts of modernscience ?It simply implies that this is not a scripture of God , its asinine to use such analogy whichclearly has no relation with that topic present at hand . When a child jumps from a


http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/054.sbt.html#004.054.421



http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/054.sbt.html#004.054.421





40

rooftop his father will stop him but in case of religions you can’t be sure if its true of ornot ! Islam for one isn’t the true religions its one thing which can be said witho utambiguity .

Dr.Naik -so because I love Sri Sri Ravi Shankar so much , it becomes my desire that idon’t doubt his intention. His intention was to get the Hindu and Muslim together butsomeone who is not like me broad minded may take offence with guruji so because Ilove guruji, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar , that’s the reason i mentioned all these points which Iknow he has taken in the right sense , he will not get angry because he is the personwho loves. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said “who says god cant been seen? Ask the mad , to himgod is everywhere” (kaun kehta hai khuda nahi nazar aata hai, deewane se poochkhuda hi sab jagah nazar aata hai” )

LW: Broadminded ? Yes Mr. Naik is broadminded . He is so broad minded that he usesloves to make fun of other religions and cannot tolerate criticism of Islam , it was seen inthe debate of William Campbell and Dr. Naik that how broadminded he was , when itwent to a point the criticism of Quran hurt he resorted to his most lovable logical fallacyof Argumentum ad hominem .

Dr.Naik -Allah says in the Koran, in Surah Fusilat ch 41 verse 53 “soon we shall showthem our signs in the further reaches of the horizons until it is clear to them that this isthe truth. Allah says he will show his signs when we see the star, we are reminded of thecreator. He is the creator. When we see the sun we are reminded of him. When we seethe moon we are reminded of him.” Sirf deewane ko nahi allah says in the Koran, everyindividual human being he will see to it that he will show them signs , not onlydeewana, every human beings Allah takes up promise that he will show them the signsin the furthest horizons until it is clear to them that this is the truth. So these are signsof all mighty god. They are not god themselves. The deewana person who sees god thatmeans he sees his signs, he cannot call star or the moon as symbol of god

LW: He just said he was broadminded but he started mocking Ravi Shankar and hisstatements ..Yeah Allah surely said one thing right in Surah Fusilat chapter number 41 verse 53 “soon we shall show them out signs in the further reaches of the horizons until it is clearto them this is the truth”




41

Yes , Allah has surely showed his signs to the humanity . He showed all of the truth of Islam , that Islam is the religion of violence , absurdities , war , terrorism , against humanrights and totally destructive and dark .Allah , his prophet and his followers really showed his signs in the farthest reaches of

the horizon the REAL truth of Islam .

Dr.Naik -Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has said that in Islam, the sun which was of scorching heatit was hostile , he writes in his book , the moon and the star it reminds the person of serenity of calmness therefore its a symbol in Islam , a symbol of god . the moon andthe star is never a symbol of god , it is symbol of Pakistan. This flag that is there is not aflag of Islam. Its a flag of Pakistan. And just so because I love guruji so much, Allah saysin the Koran in Surah Fusilat ch 41 verse 37 “amongst these signs are the night and theday. The sun and the moon , but do not adore the sun and the moon , adore the creatorwho has created the sun and the moon .” as far as science of Allah is concerned. Even asun is a sign of Allah and the Koran , even the moon .

LW: I agree that the crescent mo on and star wasn’t associated with Islam untilottoman empire who was doing an excellent job in spreading Islam used those symbolbecause of a dream its founder had about crescent moon , but Allah was a moon godHubal and it’s a fact . The reason why Muhammad didn’t need to explain much aboutAllah was because the Pagans knew their moon god “Allah” long before Muhammadwas born . Infact , Muhammad mixed up Judaism , Christianity , culture of Pagan Araband few of his own views when spreading and propagating Islam .“Al-ilah” was the moon God Hubal , it was title given to the moon god Hubal because inactual Sun gave tremendous amount of heat to the desert that it deprived pagan arabsof many resources and used to halt their journey . But when the moon used to come upthe Pagan nomadic Arabs used to undertake their journey , the moon provided withcoolness and a beautiful view of the night sky that was moon was of such importance tothe pagan arabs ,As for Surah Fusilat chapter 41 verse 37 , it just goes to show how desperate is Allah forgetting fame and love . This sort of a demanding God cannot be a god at all .

Dr.Naik -Sri Sri Ravi Shankar rightly said, “we should not criticize the idol worshippers”I agree with him unless he comes for knowledge. The Koran says in Surah Anam, ch 6verse 108 “revile not , abuse not, those god who they worship besides allah ,lest in theirignorance they will revile and abuse allah” I agree with that. But Sri Sri Ravi Shankaralso said “ but when they come for knowledge , give them knowledge” for example if someone says 2+2=3, 2+2= 4, 2+2=5 I may not say all are correct because I love you, I




42

have to say I love you that’s the reason only 2+2=4 is correct the other is wrong. Unless iwant to make a fool of him and tell him take 2 rupees and take 1 rupee and give me 4rupees., take Rs 200,000 Rs.100,000 and give me Rs.400,000 . I have to correct himbecause I love him. I appreciate him.

LW: This article initiated an effort to show how much Zakir Naik needs to correcthimself , rather than him correcting others . One should see his own follies beforenaming the faults of others .

Dr.Naik- So this is where i start my talk with a verse from Koran from Surah Israh ch 17verse 81 which says “ when truth is hurled against the falsehood, falsehoo d perishes ,for falsehood by its nature is bound to perish. “ Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said that makessmile cheap make anger expensive i say make smile free , make it absolutely free. We

have to love all the human beings we have to smile with them .

LW: History is full of examples when are Muslim happy ! Muslims are only happyaround Muslims as their Quran tells them to be :

Quran (5:51) - "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends;they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, thensurely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people."

Quran (5:80) - "You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became displeased withthem and in chastisement shall they abide." Those Muslims who befriend unbelieverswill abide in hell.

Quran (3:28) - "Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather thanbelievers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them ..." This last part means that theMuslim is allowed to feign friendship if it is of benefit. Renowned scholar Ibn Kathirstates that "believers are allowed to show friendship outwardly, but never inwardly."

Believers are allowed to show friendship outwardly as we can see by the Quranic

teachings itself . That’s what Quran tells Muslim to do , not to befriend unbelieversrather kill them and enslave them and those who befriend non-believers from insideand outside their abode will be hell! The Quranic Allah isn’t even giving his ownfollowers a choice , he is just stating what they have to do . They have to remove thenon-believers , as Wafa Sultan ri ghtly said in one of her speech against Islam “ This is aclash between the mentality of 7 th century and mentality of 21 st century , a clashbetween dictatorship and human rights …”




43

When truth is hurled against the falsehood falsehood perishes that’s tru e but itsanachronistic at the same time because this verse was revealed to Muhammad whenhe conquered Mecca at that time it was falsehood which has taken over the truththrough lies , reason and war but now truth is again taking over , like in the past critics

of Islam were made silent by murder or torture but now people are waking up , realizingthe truth and are looking straight into the real face of Islam . Soon a time will comewhen people all around the world will wake up and rise up to overthrow this wicked cultof horror.

Dr.Naik -But at the same time because we love them because they are close to usbecause they are brother of one humanity of the same creator almighty god, that’s thereason if someone makes a mistake do no rebuke him do not make fun of him butcorrect him. If my son does something wrong ., not that I will say because I love you iwill let you continue doing wrong, because I love him I will correct him so that he gainswhat is right and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said that don’t depend on logic but I find him to bea very logical person, giving examples of the driver and various examples in the talk thisis logic therefore Koran says this is a book for those who understand , spirituality itdemands authenticity , even demands logic according to me, this differentiates betweenwhat is right and what is wrong. This book the glorious Koran because it is by ourcreator and the topic is concept of god in the light of the scriptures therefore I amrestricting as much as possible to the topic and talking of the scriptures because what isay is not what you have come here to hear what Sri Sri Ravi Shankar says or somebodyelse says is not what you have come here to hear you have come here to hear what isthe concept of god in the sacred scriptures if I say something which matches the sacredscriptures that’s what i believe have come here for and this book the glorious Koran

which is the last and final revelation , I call it the best book on the art of living and itsmentioned in the scripture and I invite Sri Sri Ravi Shankar because I love him , to thisCLUB , to this organization of art of living we are 1.3 billion followers , I invite youbecause I love you to this organization of the art of living . allah says in the Koran fromSurah Al Imran ch3 verse 19 “ the only Deen , the only religion , the only way of life, theonly art of living, acceptable in the sight of almighty god is acquiring peace bysubmitting your will to GOD”

LW: Alright , we see Mr. Naik was just here to convert people so that he can secretly

reserve his abode in paradise with his virgins .He wasn’t here to talk about God , he was here to convert just convert . And say “ myreligion is better than yours “ Anyways regardless of anything I have pointed outnumerous errors in his speech so Mr Naik needs to correct his claims . He may fool thegullible audience and Muslim audience but he can’t fool people of intellectual , logicaland critical approach who can see the fabrication and veneer of lies and chicanerycrumbling his empire of lies with a single truth .Its true when truth is hurled against the falsehood , falsehood perishes.




44

CONCLUSION

Zakir Naik has shown himself to be a deceptive , lair and has been shown to twist themeaning of everything in order to suit his agenda. His dexterity is what fails hisopponent to catch what he is actually saying but who puts his statement in scrutiny willrealize the truth that he is lying all along .Zakir Naik is not to be trusted , he is not a scholar as he claims to be . He is just anotherIslamic lair like Ahmad Deedat .




REFERENCES

Sahih BukhariSahih Muslim

Al TabariSunan Ibn Majah

Sunan Abu Dawad Al Quran Rigveda By GriffithYajurveda

BrahmasutraChandoyga Upanishad Shvetashvetara Upanishad Shri Bhwad Gita

dismantling naik

Documents