Naik’s divisive comments come at a time when Pakistan is grappling with significant social, political, and economic challenges. His rhetoric—particularly against women and those raising concerns about child abuse—has been widely condemned as regressive, dangerous, and reflective of an ideology that marginalises vulnerable communities. His actions, whether it be walking out of an event for orphaned girls or making sexist comparisons between unmarried women and sex workers, and using sex workers as a slur, have sparked outrage across the country. Women’s rights activists, journalists, and everyday citizens have expressed disgust at how Naik’s words seek to reinforce patriarchal norms that strip women of their autonomy and dignity.

One of the most contentious remarks was made during a public lecture, where Naik claimed that unmarried women cannot be respected in society unless they marry men, even if the men are already married. His comparison of single women to “public property” or “bazaari aurat” has drawn sharp criticism, with many accusing him of dehumanising women and promoting misogynistic views that have no place in a modern society. Such comments, according to critics, not only reinforce harmful gender stereotypes but also encourage societal control over women’s bodies and choices, a hallmark of extremist ideology. These comments have broader implications, especially in a country like Pakistan, where women already face significant barriers in terms of rights and freedoms.

Further adding to his inflammatory rhetoric, Naik recently engaged in a troubling exchange with a Pashtun girl during a lecture at the Governor House in Karachi. The young woman bravely raised concerns about rising drug addiction, adultery, and paedophilia in her area. Rather than addressing these pressing issues, Naik dismissed her entirely, stating that paedophilia could not exist in an Islamic society and demanding that the girl apologise for even raising the question. His defensive and dismissive attitude angered many, with critics accusing him of gas lighting the young woman and ignoring the critical social problems she was trying to highlight. Paedophilia, child abuse, and drug addiction are serious concerns in parts of Pakistan, yet Naik’s refusal to engage with them reflects a dangerous disregard for the realities on the ground. By silencing those who speak up, he perpetuated a culture of denial and inaction.

What makes Naik’s rhetoric particularly dangerous is its capacity to act as religious dog-whistling—appealing to hard-line religious sentiments while subtly promoting misogyny, patriarchy, and an anti-progressive agenda. His comments are framed in religious language, making it harder for critics to challenge them without being accused of opposing Islamic values. This tactic, often used by religious extremists, plays on the sensitivities of devout communities, pushing them to accept regressive ideologies disguised as religious truth. In countries like Pakistan, where religious leaders hold significant sway, this kind of dog-whistling can have real-world consequences. It can fuel gender inequality, increase intolerance, and silence those who seek to address critical social issues.

Moreover, Naik’s controversial statements are not isolated incidents; they are part of a broader pattern of using religious rhetoric to reinforce conservative and patriarchal values. His dismissal of critical issues like paedophilia or drug addiction undermines efforts to tackle these problems within Pakistani society. Instead of addressing the legitimate concerns of the people, Naik’s responses seek to silence dissent, protect the status quo, and invalidate the experiences of those who suffer the consequences of social ills. This is not just harmful rhetoric; it actively discourages progress and reform, putting vulnerable populations at greater risk.

In a time when Pakistan is already struggling with deep socio-political divides, Naik’s presence and his hate-filled speeches are pouring fuel on an already volatile situation. His views provide justification for those who wish to maintain societal control over women, further marginalise already vulnerable communities, and dismiss important social issues as mere fabrications. The decision to invite him as a state guest has backfired, with growing frustration across the country and even among his supporters. Many feel that Naik’s brand of religious extremism has no place in a country striving for progress, equality, and justice.

Ultimately, Zakir Naik’s lecture tour in Pakistan has raised serious questions about the dangers of religious dog-whistling and its potential to inflame divisions, promote regressive ideologies, and silence the voices of those calling for reform. His words are not just offensive; they are dangerous, as they sow seeds of intolerance and misogyny, leaving lasting damage in their wake. By providing him with a platform, Pakistan risks legitimising an ideology that is at odds with the nation’s aspirations for a more just and equitable society.

Details of the derogatory speeches by Naik:

1. Refusal to present awards to young orphan girls (Islamabad)

One of the most shocking incidents occurred during an event for orphaned children in Islamabad. Naik was invited to present awards, but when it was time to give shields to the young girls, he abruptly left the stage, citing religious reasons. He stated that the girls were Na-Mahram, meaning they were unrelated to him by blood, and under his interpretation of Islamic law, it was inappropriate for him to interact with them. This act led to widespread outrage, with many accusing Naik of objectifying women and reducing young girls to mere symbols of sexual propriety, even in a context that should have been about honouring their achievements.

Sindh-based writer Zubair Soomro voiced the frustration of many critics, saying, “How could such clerics objectify women sexually? Why couldn’t he see these girls as daughters, with father-like love?” His actions were seen as not just an insult to the girls but also as a reflection of his regressive and patriarchal mind-set. This incident set the tone for the rest of Naik’s controversial tour and became a focal point for criticism on how he treats women and girls in his speeches and actions.

2. Misogynistic remarks about unmarried women (Lahore)

Naik further incited outrage during a large public gathering when he made demeaning comments about unmarried women, comparing them to “public property” if they do not marry. He argued that in society, an unmarried woman cannot be respected and that if there are no single men available, her only choice for respectability is to marry a man who already has a wife. Otherwise, he implied, she would become a “bazaari aurat” (public woman, implying a sex worker). His exact words, “There is no way an unmarried woman can be respected… any respectable woman would opt for marrying a married man over being public property,” drew condemnation from across Pakistan and beyond.

Either marry a married man or become a “bazaari aurat”. Zakir Naik is continuously coming up with problematic statements. Who invited him? Please don’t invite such illiterate people next time! pic.twitter.com/XmiXiKMgpS

— Saad Kaiser (@TheSaadKaiser) October 7, 2024

This comparison of unmarried women to sex workers, especially by talking about sex workers in a derogatory way, was seen as not only deeply offensive but also a dangerous endorsement of patriarchal control over women’s choices. Women’s rights activists, civil society groups, and many others denounced the statement for reducing women’s value to their marital status and suggesting that single women have no dignity unless they are attached to men. Naik’s statement reinforced a regressive and sexist narrative that places the blame on women for their status, reflecting a worldview that deeply disrespects and diminishes women’s autonomy.

3. Dismissal of concerns about paedophilia and drug addiction (Karachi)

In another disturbing incident during his lecture at the Governor House in Karachi, a young Pashtun girl raised concerns about growing issues like drug addiction, adultery, and paedophilia in her region. Naik’s response was dismissive and defensive. He claimed that her question was invalid because, according to him, in a truly Islamic society, paedophilia could not exist. When the girl attempted to elaborate on her concerns, particularly about the normalisation of paedophilia in her area, Naik interrupted her and demanded an apology for bringing up such a topic. He stated, “A Muslim can never commit sexual abuse against children,” and insisted that her concerns were unfounded, implying that either her claim of living in an Islamic society was false or the issue of paedophilia was fabricated.

Naik’s refusal to acknowledge the girl’s concerns, coupled with his demand for an apology, was met with sharp criticism online. Many accused him of gas lighting the girl and ignoring serious social issues, especially in regions like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa where concerns about child abuse and other crimes have been raised repeatedly. His tone was seen as condescending, and his refusal to engage in meaningful dialogue on such a critical issue highlighted his lack of empathy and understanding.

Zakir Naik, the most famous Muslim scholar in South Asia, gaslights a Pashtun girl when she questions the collapse of society caused by religious extremism.

pic.twitter.com/zxEoPeTeZE

— Habib Khan (@HabibKhanT) October 6, 2024

This incident worsened Naik’s already controversial standing in Pakistan, as many were angered by his disregard for the real and pressing issues faced by people, particularly women and children. His dismissive attitude towards a young woman brave enough to speak about such concerns added fuel to the fire of his growing unpopularity during the tour.

Zakir Naik’s inflammatory comments during his tour of Pakistan have sparked significant backlash, with each of the three instances representing different facets of his problematic worldview. From objectifying women to dismissing genuine societal concerns, Naik’s rhetoric continues to alienate not only his critics but also his followers, many of whom feel embarrassed by his actions. Despite being invited as a state guest, his reception in Pakistan has been marred by widespread discontent, particularly over the harmful and regressive views he espouses in his speeches. His tour, instead of fostering dialogue or religious understanding, has served to expose the deep-seated misogyny and disregard for critical social issues that underpin his ideology.

As news surfaced of Zakir Naik receiving a warm welcome in Pakistan, India condemned the gesture, while also noting that it was unsurprising. “We have seen reports of Zakir Naik being feted in Pakistan, where he was given a warm reception,” said External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal during his weekly press briefing. “It is not unexpected for us that an Indian fugitive has been received with high-level honours in Pakistan. While it is disappointing and condemnable, it doesn’t come as a surprise,” he had added. 

Outrage on social media

Pakistani actor and singer Ali Zafar, known for his roles in Bollywood films like Mere Brother Ki Dulhan, Dear Zindagi, and Chashme Baddoor, has strongly criticised Islamic preacher Zakir Naik for his controversial remarks about unmarried women. Naik’s recent comments, where he compared single women to “public property,” have sparked widespread outrage across Pakistan, with many condemning his statements.

Ali Zafar also voiced his disapproval, using social media to share his thoughts. In a post on X, he respectfully challenged Naik’s views, offering an alternative perspective. “With all due respect, Dr. Sahab, there is always a third option. A woman can lead a respectful and independent life, whether as a working professional, a mother, or both. She can choose her own path, just like millions of women around the world do, and they are equally respected by millions of men. The problem lies with those men who view them as ‘bazaari’,” Ali wrote.

The actor-singer further emphasised that the Quran teaches men to respect women, and that purity starts with one’s own actions. “Respect is always mutual, and that’s what the Quran teaches. On a personal note, I feel we (men, in general) have suppressed women for centuries, making them feel guilty for nothing. It’s time we correct ourselves first and let them flourish, allowing them to pursue their dreams as we do. I hope you won’t take offense to this healthy criticism. May peace be upon you,” Ali concluded.

With all due respect Dr. Sahab. There is always a third option.
A woman can live a respectful and independent life, being a working woman or a mother, or both together, or the life she chooses for herself, just like millions of women around the world do and are equally respected… https://t.co/cAISOeDxS6

— Ali Zafar (@AliZafarsays) October 9, 2024

There were more social media users who came out with their criticism against the comments made by Naik. One user remarked, “Stop inviting people like this to our country.” Another voiced their frustration, saying, “It’s baffling that the Pakistani state would invite Zakir Naik, given his track record of spreading intolerance and dogmatism. While India had the courage to ban him, we seem to roll out the red carpet. What does this say about our commitment to inclusivity and moderation?”

Another comment highlighted the irony: “If Zakir Naik hadn’t come to Pakistan, we might never have realized that India was right to ban both him and his Peace TV channel. We are always quick to label India as Islamophobic without considering their perspective on this issue.”

If Zakir Naik had not visited Pakistan, how would we have realized that India was right to ban both his entry & his Peace TV channel?

We are always quick to label India as Islamophobic without taking the time to understand/consider India’s perspective on their matters. pic.twitter.com/g2lNnGJXoF

— Hafsa Akram (@Hafsa_RG) October 7, 2024

One other user criticised Naik’s inflated ego: “Zakir Naik is a textbook case of power corrupting someone. He’s so full of himself that he can’t see beyond his own ego. It’s absurd that he’s given any honour when all he does is bask in undeserved praise, further feeding his misguided sense of greatness.”

One more user added: “Naik was clearly pandering to the extreme right-wing clerics in Pakistan, and in doing so, he made a fool of himself. His being invited as a state guest speaks volumes about the priorities of our government. It’s a sad state of affairs.”

Zakir Naik’s backward remarks like “Either marry a married man or become a ‘bazaari aurat’” are not only demeaning to women but reveal a mindset stuck in patriarchal thinking. Such individuals should not be given platforms. Let’s stop inviting figures who spread harmful ideas. pic.twitter.com/JfNOkqnNBH

— Daily_Dose_News (@DdnDose) October 8, 2024

The widespread backlash Naik has faced for his remarks is not surprising, as his statements not only reveal deep-seated misogyny but also promote an extremist interpretation of religion that should have no place in modern society. His comparison of unmarried women to “public property” is not just demeaning but dangerous, as it reinforces harmful stereotypes and justifies oppressive attitudes towards women. Such religious dog-whistling, where intolerance is disguised as piety, fosters extremism and divisiveness, undermining efforts to build an inclusive, respectful society. Naik’s rhetoric fans the flames of misogyny and intolerance, and allowing him a platform sends the wrong message—that such regressive views are acceptable.

It’s crucial to reject figures like Zakir Naik and to not offer them a space to spread their extremist ideas. Religious extremism, whether it comes in the form of hate speech or discriminatory ideologies, cannot be tolerated, as it poses a threat to both social cohesion and human rights. Naik’s views should be condemned unequivocally, and countries should be mindful of the message they send when they welcome figures known for spreading hate and division.

Related:

Suspended again: Deepak Sharma’s relentless cycle of hate across multiple social media accounts

Hate Speech by Zakir Naik: Painful punishment awaits those who abuse the Prophet

Zakir Naik Showcases the Rot within Islamic Theology

Why social media giants must identify and remove Zakir Naik’s hate speech

The post Zakir Naik’s lecture tour sparks outrage in Pakistan: Misogyny and extremism in the spotlight appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Zakir Naik, controversial cleric to preach during FIFA World Cup? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Islamic preacher Dr Zakir Naik posted an excerpt on Facebook of the Al Quran 9:61 phrase, “But those who abuse the Messenger of Allaah will have a painful punishment,” alluding to the recent beheading of a teacher in France for showing caricatures of the Prophet. This is nothing but a threat of violent reprisals against those who show images or cartoons of  Prophet Mohammed.

The post was subsequently taken down, although it is not known whether this was done by authorities or Naik himself. Regardless, Naik has persisted in his virtual attack on French President Emmanuel Macron for the latter’s decision not to “give up” cartoons.

On October 29, 2020, Naik put out a Facebook post that said “The endorsement of offensive speech does nothing to advance freedom of expression. A right to offend does not imply a duty to offend.”

To his credit, Naik also posted another poster on October 31 that condemned the beheading of teacher Samuel Paty as well as Macron’s comments. However, this does not negate the fact that Naik is among the many extremist elements in India that denounced the French President simply for upholding the freedom of speech.

His comments further widen the gap of communalism between Hindus and Muslims especially considering his huge fanbase of over 22 million followers. By decrying Macron, Naik seems to be indirectly supporting terrorist actions which, coupled with the insistence to boycott French products and dubious quoting of the Quran, damages public’s already skewed view of Islam.

Moreover, his comment about a “painful punishment” gives right-wing Hindutva groups another excuse to denounce the community. This is especially beneficial to them during election season in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Even so, Naik has continued to focus on the French President rather than the criminal act that resulted in Macron’s statement.

The controversial preacher’s influence has been noted in recent years when a terrorist group in Dhaka, capital of Bangladesh, said they took to the path of terrorism after listening to Naik’s videos in 2016. At the time, 29 people including an Indian woman were killed.

It is important to remember that at a time when extreme forces choose to condemn Macron, over 100 Indians including Muslims deplore the beheading in France and outrageous comments by religio-political leaders

Related:

Why social media giants must identify and remove Zakir Naik’s hate speech

Indian Muslim groups must show maturity and restraint while protesting Islamophobia in Paris

Slain teacher martyr for Freedom of Expression: French Imam

Zakir Naik Showcases the Rot within Islamic Theology

The post Hate Speech by Zakir Naik: Painful punishment awaits those who abuse the Prophet appeared first on SabrangIndia.

With friends in high places, Editor-in-Chief Suresh Chavhanke aired his controversial show ‘Bindas Bol’ alleging Muslims were ‘infiltrating’ the central services in great numbers. This is the first of the nine episode series, where he claims to bring ‘proof’ to show that the educated Muslim community was joining the civil services in ‘massive’ numbers. However, the first episode did not have any concrete evidence to back his allegations. Moreover, why is the presence of Muslims in civil services being seen as a problem in the first place? Don’t Muslims have the right to serve the country?

Instead of proof of a ‘conspiracy’, what we got was an almost breathless Chavhanke, buttoned up in a tight saffron coloured vest, seeking blessings from computer generated imagery (CGI) of those he says he reveres. He prayed to a CGI of the god Ganesh and sought blessing for the programme which he says has “the attention of the Prime Minister, the Supreme Courts, and the entire state machinery”. He also invoked a CGI of Dr BR Ambedkar, and addressed him as if he was talking to an idol and sought blessings as he was speaking on matters concerning the Constitution. Another CGI of Chatrapati Shivaji, was invoked. This is where the polite part of the show ended, in the first few minutes.

Soon enough Chavhanke began inviting his viewers, over 36,000 on Youtube at the time of writing this review, apart from reminding his detractors that though many opposed him, the show was being aired. According to Chavhanke neither the courts, nor the complaints filed to police, nor the government was able to stop him. He added that there were ‘demonstrators’ outside his studio doors even that day and to visuals of three-four men, a couple with beards and skull cap, ‘protesting’, as his crew filmed them. That the men held a sheet of paper addressing him as ‘Suresh Chauhan’, in a hurried scribble puts a question mark on the genuineness of this ‘protest’ itself. Was it staged? It was so tiny that it did not really matter. Chahvanke continued his build up to the anti-Muslim narration and the ‘massive expose’ he promised his fans. He said the maximum complaints have been made against his channel. However he is jubilant that no action has been taken against him ever. 

He aired clips of politician Akbaruddin Owaisi addressing a gathering where he is seen saying that Muslims should join police and other union services. Chavhanke called Owaisi a ‘Hyderabad ka gaddar’ (traitor from Hyderabad) and a ‘n***k h***m’ (an abusive term for a disloyal person). According to Chavhanke, Owaisi should have invited condemnation from the IPS and other organisations for asking Muslims to join civil services too.

Chavhanke has promised his fans eight more episodes in his series against Muslims and said it was like “a feature film”. The plot moved on expected lines when he quickly invoked the terror organisation ISIS. The shocker was when using a crude graphic he ‘linked’ ISIS to former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, via the Zakhat Foundation and Hamas, and Syed Zafar Mahmood. Bureaucrat Syed Zafar Mahmood, was once an Officer on Special Duty (OSD) to then Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh. And because he is Founder President, Zakat Foundation of India Chavhanke alleged he was a ‘direct/indirect link’ to ISIS and hamas.

He goes on with vile graphics, including “calculations” on a sheet of paper, scrawled in a similar manner to the ones those ‘protesters’ were holding outside his gate. These calculations and graphics were Chavhanke’s ‘proof’ of how Muslim candidates were allegedly getting ‘unfair’ advantages and support to clear the Union Public Service Commission entrance exams. He called for the interviews of the successful UPSC candidates to be banned, as he alleged it was in interviews where even those who scored well do not get through. All hinting at how Muslim candidates were successfull even here. He shows a clip of some mock interview where a ‘candidate’ is told ‘community’ plays a role in the success. No one knows where that clip is from, seems to be of some pre exam coaching class at first glance. 

Of course Chavhanke invoked Jawaharlal Nehru, who he said was the “second PM of India”, because Chavhanke only recognises Subhash Chandra Bose as the “first PM of the government in exile”. According to Chavhanke his anti-Muslim aspirant show is asking ‘essential questions’ as bureacurats stay in service for 30-40 years, longer than any PM ever will. Hence the bureaucracy should be questioned, or in Chavhanke’s case, the religions of those wanting to join India’s bureaucratic service should be questioned.

His over an hour long show was aired on Friday night, with a promise of eight more episodes as soon as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led Union Government permitted the broadcast. The telecast of the controversial show ‘Bindas Bol’ had been stayed by the High Court earlier. Chavhanke had shared the communal toned promotional clip before the broadcast as well asking, “How has there been a sudden rise in the number of Muslims in IAS and IPS? What is the secret behind scoring high marks in such a difficult exam? If Jihadis of Jamia become your Collectors and Chief Secretaries, what will happen then? The big reveal on the Executive being infiltrated.”

The Delhi High Court, on August 29, had directed the Centre to decide on the complaints received against the proposed show. The Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting  directed Sudarshan NewsTV to broadcast the programme #BindasBol by ensuring that the programme does not violate any of the programme Codes. In an order issued on Thursday, the Information & Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry said it cannot pre-censor a programme, or stop it from being telecast. The Print had reported the order as stating, “If only, when the programme is telecast and any violation of law is found, action can be taken”. The channel in its written submission had stated before the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting that its show was “not violative of the law” and added that if at all the programme was found to be violative, action as per law could be taken. 

However, Chavhanke’s offensive against Indian Muslims has already violated the Cable Television Networks Rules at multiple points. Some of those listed in the Programme Code are:

• Offends against good taste or decency
• Contains attack on religions or communities or visuals or words contemptuous of religious groups or which promote communal attitudes
• Contains anything obscene, defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half truths
• Is likely to encourage or incite violence or contains anything against maintenance of law and order or which promote-anti-national attitudes;
• Contains anything affecting the integrity of the Nation;
• Criticises, maligns or slanders any individual in person or certain groups, segments of social, public and moral life of the country
• Contains visuals or words which reflect a slandering, ironical and snobbish attitude in the portrayal of certain ethnic, linguistic and regional groups
   

The entire list can be accessed here:
https://www.trai.gov.in/sites/default/files/CableTelevisionNetworksRules1994.pdf

Chavhanke has delivered what he advertised; a show for his fans, his version of an alleged “conspiracy to infiltrate the civil service by Muslims”. Now it is the responsibility of the I&B Ministry to study the episode aired, and take cognisance of complaints filed by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) in connection with the communally inflammatory promotional video for a show on the presence of minorities in public service. 

Chavhanke is known to have published such derogatory and venomous comments targeting the religious minorities in the past as well. He has also been previously arrested by the Lucknow police for inciting communal hatred. Among the many criminal charges him, also include charges of rape, attempt to murder and fraud, as per FIR filed by a former employee of Sudarshan news channel, in 2016.

As stated earlier in the CJP complaint, the show may have already violated the code of ethics and standards on reportage as set out by NBSA, as well as laws under the Indian Penal Code such as promoting enmity, causing disharmony, outraging religious feelings and so on.

Related: 

CJP calls out Sudarshan News’ hate agenda; moves NBSA
Promoting fraternity: Courts to the rescue
Delhi HC stays broadcast of Suresh Chavhanke’s ‘UPSC Jihad’ show

The post Prime Minister is paying attention: Suresh Chavhanke on ‘UPSC_Jihad’ show appeared first on SabrangIndia.

For the Rwala Bedouins of Northern Arabia, heaven was a place below the earth, with abundant rain and lush greenery. Hell was above the ground with a scorching sun, making life miserable. Heaven was reserved for the Rwala; all non-Rwalas were to be consigned to hell. The Rwala had no regard for the dominant religion of the area, Islam. Like all non-Rwala, Muslims also were destined for a ‘life of hell’ above the ground.

The peculiar Rwala belief can surprise many but it is certainly not uncommon. Most religions and faith systems have a way of announcing to the wider world that they are the chosen people of God. Especially within the Semitic traditions, this leads to the division of the world between believers and non-believers. The theology that develops consequently also divides the afterlife into heaven and hell. Heaven is where believers will rejoice and hell is where non-believers will rot. Most of us progressive Muslims tend to think that such primitive ways of thinking is characteristic of simple or tribal societies. But we are wrong. Dominant religions of the world today hold a view which is not very different from the Rwala.

In order that we see this clearly, we need someone like Zakir Naik to remind us that our religions, including Islam, still define themselves in opposition to others. Notion of reward and punishment, heaven and hell continue to be the most important features of religions.

 
Zakir Naik arriving during the opening ceremony of the Kuala Lumpur Summit 2019 on 19 December, 2019. (AFP Photo)

Recently, Zakir Naik was asked whether ‘good non-Muslims’ would find a place in heaven. The context of question was Ravish Kumar, the popular news presenter on Indian television and one of the few journalists who still believes in speaking truth to power. Zakir Naik showered abundant praise on the likes of Ravish Kumar who are dutiful in their profession and even acknowledged that they will be rewarded in this world, but certainly they will not find a place in heaven. Naik argued, and perhaps rightly so, that in the eyes of Allah, shirk (associating partners to Allah) was the gravest crime. So even if a person is of good character but does not believe in the oneness of Allah (Tauheed), then all his good deeds will be cancelled and he will be consigned to hellfire after death. 
 

Progressive Muslims were aghast at his statement. It was as if Zakir Naik was articulating something which was not part of Islamic theology or which contradicted the verses of the Quran. On the contrary, what he said is part of Islamic theology, taught to Muslims since generations with mild variations. In popular Muslim understanding, heaven is reserved for them while hell is for those who do not believe in Allah. Such confidence comes from the Quran itself which calls Islam as the perfection of all religions:

“This day I have perfected your religion for you and completed my favour upon you and have chosen for you Islam as religion” (5: 3).

The implication is very clear: since Islam is chosen by God, everyone should follow this religion. Islamic supremacy derives from such clear verses of the Quran which forbid Muslims to reflect on any other path to salvation. This understanding of Islam is the reason why in another video, Zakir Naik criticises the Pakistani government’s efforts to construct a Hindu temple in Islamabad. After all, if Islam is the perfect religion, then what is the need of other religions in the world? [See the video here  

For Muslims, no one can match the character of Abu Talib, the paternal uncle of Muhammad. He loved Muhammad more than his own progeny, and protected him from the rage of Quraysh till the time he was alive. It was only after Abu Talib’s death, that the prophet migrated to Medina, completely divested of any support within Mecca. Abu Talib was a polytheist and he died as one despite Muhammad entreating him to accept Islam.

For Muslims, if there is any non-Muslim who should find a place in heaven, then it should ideally be Abu Talib. And yet the Sunni theology is completely convinced that because he did not die a Muslim, he cannot be in heaven. Even after his death, Muhamad pleaded with Allah to forgive the sins of Abu Talib only to be reprimanded by the verse:

“It is not for the prophet and those who believe, to pray for the forgiveness of polytheists even if they were their relatives, after it has become clear to them that they are the people of hell” (9:113).

The Shias have laboured hard to prove that Abu Talib had in fact recited the shahada but the intent behind this has been to rescue the family of Ali rather than being a search for salvation of non-Muslims within the Islamic doctrine. Certainly, there have been attempts to differentiate between non-Muslims and Kafirs; and some have argued that Kafirs refer to only those who are ungrateful of God’s mercy. Stressing that Allah is al-Rahman (the Merciful), some theologians have also argued that only God, in his divine wisdom, knows who will eventually go to heaven and who to hell. This however, remains a minority opinion within both Shia and Sunni theology. 

Theologians like Ghazali have argued that true to His nature, God will eventually rescue all of humanity, including those non-Muslims who never heard of Islam. Nearly two centuries later, Ibn Taimiyya would spend much of his life arguing for the subjugation and humiliation of non-Muslims so that they accept Islam. Towards the end of his life, locked up in a prison in Damascus, he would write that God will save everyone from hell and indeed hellfire itself will be extinguished. However, neither Ghazali nor ibn Taimiyya could ever argue against the very idea of a ‘good non-Muslim’ going to hell.  

This is certainly not a problem which is unique to Islam. Judaism and Christianity suffer from the same problem. If the Quran itself is making it abundantly clear that those who do not believe in Allah are ‘people of hell’, then why are we surprised when Zakir Naik is saying the same thing? People like him are only the reflection of a deep rot within Islamic theology. Till the time we do not understand that there can be multiple paths to the same truth and that Islam is just one of those paths, we will keep condemning ‘good non-Muslims’ like Ravish Kumar to hell. 

Arshad Alam is a NewAgeIslam.com columnist.     

Courtesy:newageislam.com

The post Zakir Naik Showcases the Rot within Islamic Theology appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Hate speech has been spreading steadily across the world in recent years. Fanaticism is at an all-time high, and one doesn’t realise that for hate speech to make inroads into a secular civilization, one doesn’t need to verbally abuse anybody or shout to make themselves heard. Indoctrination can happen through propagating sectarianism by cherry-picking religious references with an intention to spread hatred among people of different religions.

An example of this is self-appointed radical Islamist Zakir Naik, who hosts an online show ‘Weekly Live Q&A Session’ with his son Fariq, where he tries to overthrow all progressive ideas necessary for a civilization to survive and instead preach divisive ideas. Naik is one of the most followed preachers on social media with 2.01 million subscribers on YouTube and a following of 22,570,594 on Facebook.

Not only does this show the reach he has throughout the world, but also the damning effects this reach could have in the future. An MBBS by education, it is ironic that Naik has shed all scientific temper when it comes to his incendiary teachings.

In one of his old videos, he supported Osama Bin Laden by saying, “If Laden terrorized the biggest terrorist, America, I’m with him,” further adding that “every Muslim should be a terrorist for if he (Laden) is terrorizing a terrorist, he’s following Islam”.

Recently, answering a query about whether good non-Muslims would get a place in heaven, he said they would not find a place in heaven as they were still non-Muslims committing the sin of ‘shirk’ or idol worship. He added that good non-Muslims could get place in a milder version of hell but would not end up in heaven until they embraced Islam.

This statement was extremely controversial as it went against India’s Ganga-Jamuni tehzeeb 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.

Dressed in a suit, tie and skull-cap, Naik has taken to propagating his self-styled hardline brand of Islam to millions of people through social media. While painting an air of modernity through his attire, fluent English and claims of western education in the former schools he operated, Naik yet slyly promotes fundamentalist ideas through his preaching. Banned from India, Bangladesh and the UK, his television channel Peace TV has also been barred from promoting Islamist extremism.

In the Indian subcontinent, there have been many recorded instances of atrocities on the minorities by the right-wing. With continuous ostracisation, minorities are constantly being pushed to the sidelines and they are finding solace in fanatics like Naik who relentlessly promotes radical ideas going against what Islam really stands for.

As civilizations have emerged through the times, progressive individuals have adapted to the rule of law, recasting some religious edicts which can’t be used in a modern world that works on the principle of civil rights and respecting people’s faiths.

For example, a conference in Mardin in southeastern Turkey declared the fatwa by 14th century scholar Ibn Taymiyya rules out militant violence and the medieval Muslim division of the world into a “house of Islam” and “house of unbelief” no longer applies, Reuters had reported in 2010.

Naik has quoted regularly from such controversial medieval sources, which in today’s day and age, doesn’t bode well for communal harmony.

If one observes, people like Zakir Naik seem to know everything about everything. His contentious ideas about people leaving Islam deserving a death penalty or how it is ok for a man to beat his wife ‘gently’ or how it is ok for a man to marry a slave woman and set her free.

Even if Naik quotes from religious scriptures, it must be over and over told to the people who follow him that these ideologies are not suitable for modern progressive society. In a world that is governed by laws, mutual respect, secularism and democracy, Naik’s ideologies cannot hold true as all they go against the values of humanism.

In a country that reveres the principles of Sant Kabir, Guru Nanak, Amir Khusro, Maulana Azad and Nehru, Naik’s words spread like slow poison weakening the foundation of secularism. Indian Muslims and many others around the world have increasingly embraced these values, thus preserving art, culture and monuments, which go to show their respect for different faiths.

For centuries now, different religious communities from India and other countries have worked together to promote and maintain brotherhood. One such example is of the Kartarpur Corridor which enabled thousands of Sikhs in India to visit the Kartarpur Sahib Gurdwara in Pakistan.

Now, when the construction of the first Hindu temple for the city’s minority residents has been backed by secular individuals, Naik through his videos is supporting all those religious fanatics who have been opposing it by saying that Muslims cannot contribute towards the construction of a house of worship of the non-Muslims as it is considered a sin in Islam. His words not only spread hatred but also make stronger the hateful propaganda against the Muslims that is spread by the right wing fascists.

In India, there have been hundreds of examples where people from different religions have worked together to either build or restore houses of worship. For example, the famous Shringeri Math was supported and rebuilt by the support of Tipu Sultan, the first church in north India was built with the help of Akbar in Agra, Guru Arjan Ji, the fifth Guru of Sikhism, requested his friend Sai Mir Mian Mohammed, a Muslim Pir of Lahore, to lay its foundation stone of Golden Temple in 1589. Throughout his speeches, Naik avoids all these examples of secularism and is only seen promoting divisive and intolerant views to further the communal divide.

Hence, social media giants like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and others which host his videos, should categorise Naik’s content as hate speech and take it down at the earliest.

Related:

Even good non-Muslims won’t get place in Jannah unless they convert: Zakir Naik
Endgame for Zakir Naik?
TV Channels Funded by Billions of Saudi Petro-Dollars Radicalize Muslim Youth

The post Why social media giants must identify and remove Zakir Naik’s hate speech appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Zakir Naik

It is almost as if Zakir Naik has no control over his inner urge to denigrate religions other than Islam. After getting refuge in Malaysia, a Muslim majority country, he is again at his acerbic best trying to insinuate that Malaysian Hindus are not loyal to that country. Earlier, he also called Malay Chinese as ‘old guests’ of the country implying that they should now return to China. This time, he told a congregation that Hindus living in Malaysia were more loyal to Prime Minister Modi than to the Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad. His comments have not been taken lightly. He has been thoroughly criticised for his bigoted views by many Muslim religious organizations and now even the prime minister has sought a report on his ‘political’ anti-pluralistic utterances. Already, Zakir Naik has been banned from speaking in some of the states in Malaysia and it looks very likely that he will be banned from preaching throughout Malaysia.
—–
Ridiculing minorities and constantly testing them in the name of nationalism has been the hallmark of right wing politics the world over. Zakir Naik was forced to leave India due to his terror inspiring lectures but then argued that he was hounded out because of his Muslim identity. Today, Zakir Naik seems to be vomiting the same hatred that he accused the Hindu right wing in India of. But more importantly perhaps, the Malaysian authorities have realised that people like Zakir Naik and his version of Islam are unfit for the plural mosaic of their country. Zakir Naik and his Salafi brand of Islam can only survive in the arid landscape of Saudi Arabia where the very ideological superstructure is anti-plural. Societies in South and South East Asia have been religiously plural for centuries and hence Zakir Naik variety of Islam is wholly unsuited for these regions.

There are many in India who think that Zakir Naik was a victim due to his identity. There is some truth in this assertion. There are many god-men in other religious traditions who have been accused of money laundering and other more grievous charges. And yet the prosecution against them have moved at snail’s pace or in some cases not started at all. But the alacrity at which Zakir Naik’s case was taken up the by government did point to the fact that there were other considerations at play. However, for those Indian Muslims supporting Zakir Naik, this should not become an excuse to absolve him of the very content and implications of preaching. The fact that he might be the victim because of his identity does not mean that we should support the content of his preaching.

He had regressive views about people of alternative sexualities, other religious traditions and certainly women. Naik’s Islam was about supremacy over all other religions and certainly he did not mince his words. He argued that this is the correct position because the Quran had ordained it to be so. He exhorted that Islam is the final and perfect religion and that Muslims will one day rule over the planet. It is due to this Islamic supremacy that he wanted apostates to be killed but certainly put a gloss over its interpretation. He argued that Islam does not say that apostates should be killed. But when the person (the apostate) starts preaching his own religion or ideology (which is different from Islam), then he is liable to be killed. He might have thought that he is putting a clever gloss but then it is no brainer to understand that he is exhorting Muslims to kill any dissenter within Muslim society who has a different point of view on Islam. He similarly argued that homosexuals should not be killed right away but if they start ‘exhibiting’ this lifestyle in public, then they should be killed. Thus in his version of Islam, people (including Muslims) were not free to profess their ideas and actions in public. This kind of robotic Islam can only produce Muslims who will be happy to revel in their un-freedom.

His so called inter-religious debates was again hardly mature. Always eager to prove that other religion were ‘false’, he targeted his opponents with half-baked knowledge of other religious scriptures, mostly cherry picking lines within their holy texts without understanding the whole context. Thus, according to him, Hinduism was essentially monotheistic because a line within the Gita said so. He claimed that he defeated his opponents (mostly Hindus and Christians) and his supporters cheered for him. In reality Zakir Naik defeated centuries old practice of Islam which debated its opponent with warmth and mutual respect. Zakir Naik was singularly responsible for painting a negative image of Islam at a time when news television had not yet started making fun of this religion. Through his poor and boorish arguments, he showed the world how regressive Islam had become. The secular media which toasted him from time to time, failed to ask tough questions like the implication of his lectures on the social fabric of India.

Those who cheered for him cannot be faulted as much. Through decades of impoverishment, Indian Muslims wanted a leader and in Zakir Naik they saw someone who could speak English and trounce his opponent’s arguments. In their collective schizophrenia, it was not Zakir Naik but the victory of an embattled community over another. But Naik cannot escape the blame. Being an educated Muslim, his responsibility was to steer the community towards the path of rationalism and science rather than induce some kind of a collective hallucination within the community. That he chose to do so (and make billions out of it) tells us of a man devoid of any commitment towards the betterment of Muslim society. That he was hounded out of India has certainly done good to the Muslim society as they are away from his poisonous lectures. His only hope now is to seek refuge in Saudi Arabia. I am certain he will be amongst his own kind in the holy land.

Arshad Alam is a columnist with NewAgeIslam.com

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/islam-and-sectarianism/arshad-alam,-new-age-islam/endgame-for-zakir-naik?-zakir-naik-and-his-salafi-brand-of-islam-can-only-survive-in-the-arid-landscape-of-saudi-arabia/d/119525

Courtesy: newageislam.com
 

The post Endgame for Zakir Naik? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The charge sheet has been filed under the section 10 UA(P) Act and Sections 120B, 153A, 295A, 298 and 505(2) of Indian Penal Code.

In a press statement released regarding the same matter, NIA said, “He (Naik) has been promoting enmity and hatred between different religious groups in India through his public speeches and lectures.

51-year-old Naik, who is currently living outside of India was charged by the NIA for his alleged influence over the terrorists responsible for a shootout in Dhaka, Bangladesh last year.

NIA registered a case against Naik on November 1, 2016 in Mumbai. Zakir Naik has been residing out of India since July 1, 2016 and has offered investigative agencies to question him through Skype or digital means, but agencies have been pushing Naik to come to India.
Even Union Home ministry stepped into the matter and declared Naik’s NGO an unlawful association.

In a rather accusatory tone, NIA statement said, “During the investigation, it was found that through his public lectures/speeches, accused Zakir Naik deliberately and maliciously insulted the religious beliefs of Hindus, Christians and non-Wahabi Muslims, particularly Shia, Sufi, and Barelwis, with intentions of outraging their religious feelings,” while accusing IRF and HMPL of providing the necessary modes and resources for propagating the same.

While raising questions over funding of IRF operations, NIA charge sheet also lists the particular speeches of Zakir Naik, which could hurt the religious sentiments, the statement said.

Courtesy: Two Circles

The post NIA files chargesheet against Zakir Naik and Islamic Research Foundation appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Controversial televangelist Zakir Naik who is wanted by authorities in India for alleged terrorist offences, hate speech and money laundering has been granted Saudi citizenship, the Middle East Monitor has reported.

Saudi King Salman reportedly intervened to grant his country’s citizenship to Naik to protect him from arrest by the International Police Organisation (Interpol) on India’s request.

Last month, Indian courts issued a second arrest warrant for Dr Naik in connection with his alleged role in a terror-related case and over money laundering allegations. Naik, who was on tour at the time, decided not to return to India and remained in Malaysia where permanent residency status was granted to him five years ago by the Malaysian government, according to the Middle East Monitor.

The 51-year-old Muslim supremacist was out of India last year when the authorities began investigations against him, following the disclosure by Bangladesh security agencies that one of the terrorists who had died in the Dhaka bomb blasts in July was inspired by Naik’s preachings.

He had since then refused to come to India despite several attempts by the investigating agencies. Naik stated repeatedly that he was willing to be questioned through Skype but declined from returning to India to face the authorities.

The Enforcement Directorate had moved to get Naik’s Indian passport revoked paving the way for his arrest by Interpol.

The Union Ministry for Home Affairs which had cancelled the FCRA registration of Naik's Islamic Research Foundation last year, also cancelled the FCRA registration of his educational trust last month.

The Saudi citizenship has been granted to him even though well aware that the courts in India had issued an arrest warrant against Naik.

If not the only, it is certainly one of the rare cases where Saudi Arabia has granted citizenship to an Indian national.    
 
 

The post Saudi King grants citizenship to ‘Wanted by India’ Zakir Naik appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A special NIA court in Mumbai issued a non-bailable warrant (NBW) on Thursday against controversial televangelist Zakir Naik, who is wanted in connection with his role in a terror case.

The warrant was issued following the National Investigation Agency’s (NIA) submission before the court that Naik had failed to respond to three summons in cases filed under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act against him last year.

The NBW will enable the NIA to seek the help of Interpol in bringing Naik back to India.

Only last week, the Special Prevention of Money Laundering Act Court had issued an NBW against the controversial preacher in a money-laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate, after he failed to appear before it.

The NIA had filed a case against Naik and other members of his Islamic Research Foundation (IRF) after the Dhaka bomb blasts in July last year. Intelligence agencies in Bangladesh had alleged that some of the youth responsible for the blasts were inspired by Naik’s teaching.

In recent months, the Union Home Ministry has cancelled the FCRA registration of IRF and Naik’s educational trust, barring the organizations from receiving any foreign funds.
 
 

The post A second non-bailable warrant within a week issued against Televangelist Zakir Naik appeared first on SabrangIndia.