Radical Islamist Zakir Naik, on his online show ‘Weekly Live Q&A Session’ which he hosts with his son Fariq, last month said that even good non-Muslims like journalist Ravish Kumar will not find a place in ‘Jannah’ (heaven) despite him advocating the causes of the minorities and exposing oppressors unless they convert to Islam.
Naik’s answer was uploaded on his YouTube channel with the title ‘Will Good Non-Muslims like Ravish Kumar Deserve same Punishment like Evil non-Muslims’ in response to a question by a person called Furqan from Delhi, India who asked, “What will happen to good non-Muslims? We have seen some very good-hearted journalists like Ravish Kumar etc. who speak the truth, take the side of Muslims and show the ugly truth of the oppressors. It is not just him, there are many others from different professions who are like him. So what will Allah do to them if they don‘t die as Muslims as they don’t deserve punishment like other big wrongdoers?”
To the question, Naik responded saying, “The questioner is asking that non-Muslims are of different types. Some are good non-Muslims, some are bad, some extremely bad. So will all of them get the same punishment? And the answer is no.”
He says people like journalist Ravish Kumar will not find a place in heaven as they are still non-Muslims who are committing the major sin of ‘shirk’ or idolatry. He goes on to say that there is a hierarchy in heaven and hell and non-Muslims who do good deeds, won’t get a good place in heaven, even though they may get a place in a lower /milder version of hell. He adds that those non-Muslims who do good deeds, will get rewarded in this life itself – maybe through wealth or fame, saying that anyone who is a ‘mushrik’ (idolater) will not be forgiven by Allah and will end up in heaven until they embrace Islam.
Why is this problematic?
This video was uploaded on Zakir Naik’s YouTube channel on June 27 and has garnered 1,04,684 views. He has 2.01 million subscribers on YouTube and has a following of 22,570,594 on Facebook, making him one of the most followed Muslim preachers on social media.
Naik’s statements are problematic because they go against the Ganga-Jamuni Tehzeeb of India which has evolved through thousands of years of understanding and co-existence of various religions. In the Indian sub-continent, Muslims and non-Muslims have respected each other’s faiths and many Hindu saints are revered by Muslims and vice-versa.
Naik’s statement only further the agenda of communal hatred. In Chapter 103 of the Holy Quran, ‘Al-‘Asr’ (The Time), it is explained that the goals of mankind’s existence should be faith, good actions and the exhortation to truth and to patience, for these constitute true honour and wealth, which will prove for us a lasting profit. It doesn’t say Muslims or non-Muslims, but refers to mankind.
It is Islamic belief that only God can decide who is worthy of heaven or hell. It is also written in the in the 7th volume of the Hadith “Tahdib al-Ahkam, “”If you are sure about the religion and trusteeship of the suitor, approve, otherwise you’ll cause a fitna (conflict) on the face of the earth and a great corruption.”
Ravish Kumar too is not just a journalist who sides with Muslims. He condemns hate speech equally and rejects supremacist ideologies, no matter who they come from. In the past, he has questioned conservative the Islamic movement called Wahhabism for its role in the rise of ISIS.
With the advent of social media, radicals from all faiths have found a platform on Facebook and other social media websites to spread hatred. Very recently, he was also fined for hate speech in the UK for violating hate laws, reported The National. Naik was barred from the UK in 2010 but continued to operate the TV Channels Peace TV and Peace TV Urdu. The Commission of Countering Extremism (CCE) which took action saw Naik’s channel as an example of Islamist extremism.
The National reported that the CCE had said, “First, making the moral case for violence against perceived enemies of Islam. Preachers such as Haitham Al Haddad and Indian preacher Zakir Naik have characterised Muslims who leave their faith as a “threat” and committing “treason” respectively, before making the case for capital punishment.”
Naik has also been barred from India and Bangladesh and is wanted by the Indian government for money laundering and spreading extremism through hate speeches. He is now in Malaysia and the Indian government has sent a formal request to the Malaysian government for his extradition. Last year, in Malaysia, the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) commissioner Jerald Joseph said Naik had lost his right of freedom of speech as his talks contained incitement to hatred, reported Free Malaysia Today.
This was in response to Naik’s inciting remarks against Malaysian Hindus where he had said that Malaysian Hindus were more loyal to the Narendra Modi government in India than to their Malaysian prime minister.
He had earlier released a video in which he could be heard asking Islamic countries across the globe to create a data bank of non-Muslims in India who criticize Prophet Mohammed or Islam and arrest them when they land up in Gulf countries and put them behind bars.
#ZakirNaik wants Islamic countries should collect data of non-Muslims in India who “attack” #Muslims and arrest them when they land up in their countries. Zakir Naik suggests Islamic Nations To Collect Data On Indian Non-Muslims ‘Attacking’ Muslims. @mssirsa @TajinderBagga pic.twitter.com/Q06aAg45E0
— Sandeep Seth (@sandipseth) May 13, 2020
Our Take: Hate begets hate. In a country which stands on the principles of secularism, Naik’s views should be heavily condemned to preserve the right to freedom of speech and dissent without fanning communal flames.
A person’s interpretation of religious scriptures depends on what they come to it for. The intention or ‘niyat’ (niyyah) is crucial while interpreting religious texts. The same text has given the world peace icons like Rumi, Bulleh Shah and Amir Khusro and has been misused to incite trouble and suffering to humankind.
While there are extremists in all faiths, it is important that they shouldn’t be given a platform, especially on social media where they can reach thousands of people, to spread their agenda of imposing their faith on others or insulting people from other faiths. Zakir Naik’s cherry picking of Quranic references is that of a supremacist and it goes against the tradition of peaceful coexistence of religions. This is a dangerous trend as it will only end up radicalizing innocent youth and could be used as a trigger by vested interests.
Related:
TV Channels Funded by Billions of Saudi Petro-Dollars Radicalize Muslim Youth