A study of

the Views and Opinions

of Doctor Zakir Naik
By
Mufti Muhammad Ubaidullah Al'asadi
Lecturer of Hadith, Jaamia Arabiyya Bhanda

Translation edited by
Mufti A.H.Elias
(May Allaah protect him)




Inviting towards Islaam and the responsibilities
that accompany doing so
(By Mufti Azeez ur Rahman of Maharashtra)
Inviting towards the Deen of Allaah is the collective duty of all Muslims.
The Qur'aan and hadith bear ample testimony to the fact that the
Ummah of Muhammad (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) is tasked with
conveying the message of the oneness of Allaah, Risaalah and in truth,
the entire Deen to those who have not received it. One distinct message
of guidance rendered by Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) was for those
present at his final sermon to convey his message to those absent.
Together with this, one major branch of propagation is the inviting of
non-muslims towards Islaam. This, apart from a group continuously
fulfilling the duty of calling towards good and preventing from evil. This
is indeed an integral aspect, as the Qur'aan itself explains. The answers
to the objections raised in that era against Islaam and its principles are
provided in the Qur'aan and Sunnah. Thus, when it comes to the
propagation of Deen, the following three aspects and branches may be
understood ;
(1) Inviting towards belief in the oneness of Allaah, Risaalah and
towards the true Deen of Islaam.
(2) Calling to good and preventing from evil
(3) Standing firm in the defense against the onslaught on the
teachings of Islaam and removing doubts and uncertainties
created in this regard.
The first and foremost duty of the Ambiyaa (Alayhis salaam) was that of
calling toward the oneness of Allaah. With regards to all the Ambiyaa
that were sent, apart from encouraging people to submit to the Nabi of
the time, they also invited towards the oneness of Allaah, belief in the
Aakhiraat-hereafter and living a life in accordance with the injunctions of
Shar'iah. As long as they remained amongst man, this was primarily their
effort and endeavour. The Noble Qur'aan has in a very distinct manner
described the praiseworthy quality of Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam)
in respect to inviting towards the oneness of Allaah, - _' ',= " "
(persistent in inviting towards Allaah) .
Commanding good and preventing from evil were also integral aspects in
the propagation of the Ambiyaa. They would encourage their people to
adopt piety and refrain from evil. The objections that were raised in
their respected eras were responded to in the most simplest and
emphatic of manners through the aid of divine revelation. At times,
these responses would be detailed and on other occasions "Ilzaami"
(basic and direct). In accordance to the demand, the required method
would be adopted, but at no stage did they (Ambiyaa) turn away from
the basic principles of propagation nor go contrary to the guidance and
pleasure of Allaah in order to refute the mischief of their time. They
were never guilty of this let alone this being a distinguished trait of their
manner of propagation.
After the advent of Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), the cycle of
Ambiyaa was terminated, but the need (to refute these objections) still
arose. In light of the hadith, this responsibility then shifted on to the
Ulama of the Ummah.
Throughout the pages of history, we read of many arduous individuals
who till their final breaths endeavoured to fulfil this task. They carried
out such worthy achievements in this regard that splendidly stand out in
history.
We do not by any means intend on making mention of these entire
episodes nor can this be done in a brief write up of this nature. For this,
not even an entire library would suffice, thus only a mere brief overview
study may be possible.
Throughout history, we read of countless personalities who made the
objective of their lives the propagation of Islaam. Within all these
personalities, the common factor was, apart from being firm and
steadfast on their fundamental beliefs, they were ahead of the rest in
implementing the injunctions of Shari'ah. In all this perseverance and
striving, at no time did they ever contemplate moving off the set
principles of Qur'aan and hadith.
The efforts of the "Soofis" (ascetics) (Rahimahumullah) in the
propagation of Deen cannot be overlooked. They abstained from
decorated stages and from demanding any perks or monetary gain from
the Ummah, rather they silently and steadfastly went about calling
people toward the grandeur and greatness of Allaah. The effects of this
steadfastness and firmness on the teachings of Qur'aan and Sunnah was
that droves and droves of Muslims would approach them and in their
presence bear testimony to the message of the "Kalimah", thereby
embracing Islaam. Presently, in the sub-continent, there are very few
who may lay claim to being Muslim by way of being descendants of
Arabs who migrated. Most are Muslim as a result of the propagation of
the "Soofis" and their ardent followers. With the grace of Allaah, they
have maintained and remained steadfast on their Islaam.
The Illustrious "Soofiyya" and other Noble Ulama took the responsibility
of guiding the Ummah. Those who connected themselves with these
personalities were rid of all spiritual maladies, they were taught to adopt
Islaamic etiquettes, partake of the lawful and abstain from the unlawful
and whilst adhering to the injunctions of Shari'ah, they were to ensure
not to discard any Sunnah along the way. In other words, they (Soofis
and Ulama) made such a concerted effort upon those affiliated to them
that each one was made to adopt the true teachings of Islaam and
thereby become the criterion for being a sincere Muslim. In this manner,
they would adopt good and abstain from evil.
By "Soofiyya", we refer to those who were propagators of the true and
genuine teachings of the Qur'aan and Sunnah. There is no reference to
those who diverted from the enlightened path of Islaam. It is far-fetched
to assume that they would rectify the Ummah, for they themselves were
in need of seeing to their own deficiencies in respect to the injunctions
of Shari'ah.
From the very initial era of Islaam, we read of the different objections
and doubts raised against its teachings, but it is also a historic fact that in
every era, the Ummah made the necessary effort to combat these in the
defense of Islaam. The Noble Jurists (Fuqahaa) and Scholars of hadith
(Muhaditheen) worked side by side, apart from the efforts of those well
versed in Aqeedah (Mutakilimeen), to defend against the objections
raised by the deviant groups or to present the truth in places where in
impure efforts were made to deviate people from the straight path by
creating doubts. These luminaries, after apprising themselves
adequately, gave comprehensive responses within the dictates of the
Qur'aan and Sunnah. It should also be said that they were significantly
successful in this regard.
These personalities did not at any time tire in responding adequately,
whether it was in respect to the objections raised against the Qur'aan
and Sunnah by the philosophers and modern minded or against
attempts to obliterate the belief structure and injunctions of Shari'ah.
Furthermore, that which they had written served as guidance for those
to follow. The significant aspect worth noting is that at no time did they
refute nor deny distinct matters and realities related to Islaam nor
make baseless interpretations. They pointed out towards the erroneous
and incorrect views of those objecting and appropriately refuted them.
Whilst researching, we have also come across many individuals, who in
panic at these objections, themselves began denying several
unanimously accepted views related to Islaam or otherwise made
useless interpretations. This (their actions) would obviously not be
termed service rendered to Islaam nor being firm in the defense of
Islaam. This would only be primarily described as that when there is no
denial of the unanimous view points of Islaam nor is there any turning
away from history and reality.
It is also a fact that in every era, the Ummah looked in positive light at
the propagators of Islaam, who stood firmly in its defense. They even
assisted them, regarding doing so to be a responsibility, in fact,
whenever such a need arose, they were always there to lend a helping
hand.
With the coming of the British to India, many trials and tribulations came
with. The first major one was the objections raised against Islaamic
beliefs and its teachings in an effort to deviate Muslims. From amongst
those who successfully sprung to the defense of Islaam were, Hadhrat
Moulana Rahmatullah Kiranwi, Doctor Wazeer Ali and the founder of
Darul Uloom Deoband, Moulana Qaasim Nanotwi (Rahimahumullah).
At the time, there were several individuals who had rejected
unanimously accepted teachings or otherwise made useless
interpretations, which could obviously not be termed service to Islaam
nor we could say that was at all a meritorious act.
There were many individuals, who apparently acting in the defense of
Islaam, began altering the teachings of Islaam, but until their hidden
agendas did not come before us, they remained accepted in the Ummah.
In fact, people continued assisting and praising them. Mirza Ghulam
Ahmed Qadiyani was one such individual from that era. In the beginning,
he also stood up as a propagator of Islaam and he gained fame as a
scholar known for refuting the objections against Islaam, but later, he
began incorrectly interpreting aspects related to "Mahdi", the descent of
Isa and the finality of Nabi. He later himself claimed to be "Mahdi",
"Maseeh" and even a Nabi. He was thus excluded from amongst the
accepted group of bondsmen and included amongst those who were
rejected.
There were many who got caught up in his treachery, but it is otherwise
the unanimous verdict (fatwa) of the Ummah that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed
Qadiyani has no relation with Islaam whatsoever. He and his entire
group of followers are out of the fold of Islaam. The "Qadiyaaniyat" sect
also discarded their representatives with whom they possessed a deep
relation, though apparently it seemed as though they held aloft the
banner of Islaam. This is not the occasion for such detail. We were busy
discussing propagation to Islaam, but in this regard, occasionally, we are
required to point out towards deficiencies or to apprise readers with
regards to individuals who hold incorrect notions yet use "Deen" as a
cover to spread their poisonous views in order to lead the Ummah
astray. Thus, whilst busy in this, occasionally, these aspects come before
us which are never bereft of benefit.
Before us, we have Doctor Zakir Naik, who is a propagator of Islaam and
is world famous in the field of inviting towards Deen, even hosting
television shows in this regard. There exist no doubt as to the fact that
the work he has undertaken is extremely beneficial, praiseworthy and
worth appreciating.
In Africa, the famous debater, Ahmed Deedat rendered extremely
beneficial service to the Ummah in his works against the Christians and
he was highly successful in that regard too. Through listening to his
"Cds" and "audios", many individuals gained a fond desire to enter the
same field, one of whom was Zakir Naik. In the initial stages, he had
confined his efforts to refuting Christianity, later delving into refuting
the objections made by individuals of other religions. Until that stage, his
efforts were appreciated and within the dictates of Shari'ah. At a later
stage, he began delving into the explanations and commentaries of
several Islaamic subject matter and Aayaat of the Qur'aan. Let it be
clearly understood, in respect to commentaries of the Qur'aan and other
Islaamic subject matter, the boundary and limit of discussion has already
being well marked out.
If any scholar or learned figure was to step over these boundaries in any
aspect, then such an opinion would be deemed to be his own (not the
stance of Shari'ah). For "Tafsir" (commentary of the Qur'aan), the
necessary qualifications are incumbent and necessary. One who is not
qualified and well versed in these sciences would say and write many
things, with the great danger existing of him including his own opinion,
whereas such commentary and opinions are unanimously rejected by
the Ummah. One who intentionally does so has been promised entry
into the fire of hell (Jahannam). This precisely applies to all other
matters related to Deen, that is to drift away from all unanimously
agreed upon injunctions is to deviate from the straight path. We possess
a positive feeling with regards to Zakir Naik in that he desired to remain
distant from making his own commentaries or turning away from the
unanimous verdicts of the Ummah. We have hope in the fact that Zakir
Naik does not deem altering the understanding of Deen which the entire
Ummah have understood and inherited to be permissible.
The devastating effect of the "so called propagator" of Islaam, Mirza
Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani, who later made claims to being "Maseeh" and
a Nabi, are before him (Zakir Naik) and he should certainly be well
informed of this. We therefore cannot contemplate, (Allaah forbid) that
Doctor Zakir Naik will ever tread this path. Yes, we are compelled to
conclude that due to him crossing the limits in as far as his duty towards
propagating Islaam is concerned, he has now undertaken a task of
spreading a notion, which rather than elevating his status, has
diminished his respect. We, being impressed by his achievements in the
initial periods had a positive outlook of him, but today we have retracted
from such an opinion.
In the hadith, we are informed that the Ummah will never unite on
deviation. It is also acknowledged that there exists two categories of
people, one being those who possess the qualifications for "Ijtihad"
(deducing Masaail) whilst the other being those who are deprived of
such rank. In the case of the latter, it is the unanimous verdict of the
Ummah that they are compelled to follow (Taqlid) a "Mujtahid", with
failure to doing so eventually leading toward deviation from Islaam. The
manner in which Zakir Naik has targeted the Illustrious Jurists is, firstly,
against the recognised principals and hadith of Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi
Wasallam), wherein it is stated that the Ummah will never unite on
deviation. Furthermore, by adopting this method, he had restricted
himself significantly. Initially, he was a propagator and inviter to Islaam,
but now he spreads a notion that throws the entire Ummah into
deviation and polytheism. As far we know, he does not at all possess
the qualifications for "Ijtihad". We also do not suggest that he has made
such claims, but despite this, the deductions that he has made in many
academic discussions are truly surprising and baffling.
Occasionally, he even trespasses the boundaries in scholarly discussions
whilst responding to objections. He may feel he is not answerable in this
world, but he should well know that he will certainly be in the Aakhiraat-
hereafter.
It is a now some time back that he added "Rahmatullah Alayhi" after
the name of Yazeed and in touching on a useless topic of this nature,
he made himself even more controversial. This, despite him being fully
aware that none will be questioned in the Aakhiraat-hereafter on
whether he regarded Yazeed to be from amongst those forgiven or
rejected. This was never such a topic that needed clarity and thus be
made a topic of discussion. Being a propagator and inviter to Islaam, he
ought to understand that a great deal of precaution is required in the
way he approaches matters. At times, whilst discussing academic issues,
he overlooks and sidesteps clear aspects mentioned in the Qur'aan and
Sunnah.
Moulana Mufti Abdullah Al'asadi has in this book turned our attention
by highlighting several blatant errors of Zakir Naik and in providing
several Qur'aanic references, he has pointed out to his errors in
responding to objections raised against these Aayaat. Whilst pointing
out to these, he has adopted a simple and affirmative approach. May
Allaah Ta'ala increase him in his efficient service to writing.
It is strongly hoped that this brief write up of our distinguished Mufti
Saheb will prove sufficient to understand the agendas of Zakir Naik. We
would request Zakir Naik to adopt the true qualities of being a
propagator and fully implement them. We would also request him to
avoid holding on to distant opinions and useless deductions devoid of
any depth. He should also not discard the accepted opinions of the
Ummah and avoid discussing topics for which he will not be
questioned for in the hereafter. We possess strong hope that this
request will not go in vein.






Introductory Words
By Saeed Rahman Faruqi
Mufti, Imdaadul Uloom, Imdaadiya, Mumbai
,=' -=' - --
There is absolutely no regards and status for the "Ijtihad" of any
intellectual in respect to the explanations of Islaamic law (Shari'ah) as
long as it contradicts that which reached us via our pious predecessors.
In the entire collection of Islaamic literature, just as that which has been
reported by our pious predecessors acts as ample proof and we are
indebted to it, similarly, their understanding of Deeni related matters is
also a substantiated proof and link. In other religions, let alone
defficiency, the great fear exists of alteration in many aspects related to
their religions. The spread of it, as we know follows after.
We implore Doctor Zakir Naik to submit to the explanations,
commentaries and understanding of those great scholars by means of
which he has reached this stage of intelligence today, for indeed, he has
benefitted from their huge collection of knowledge.
In this booklet, the distinguished and reliable Sheikhul hadith of "Jaamia
Hatora" has comprehensively refuted these incorrect notions in the
most logical and substantiative manner. He is also the secretary of the
"Fiqh Academy" and has authored many other books too. It is strongly
hoped that this book will serve as an ample reproach and serve as advice
for Zakir Naik and others too.






The Importance of propagating Deen and its
boundaries and limits
,=' -=' - --
,' '- _'= _'-- -=-
Allaah Ta'ala declare :
- --- '- +' =
The crux of this Aayat is that let alone it being permissible to stand in the
defense of Islaam and its spread through all possible means, it is
extremely meritorious and even necessary at times. This, on condition
that the methods adopted do not conflict with the clear teachings and
objectives of Qur'aan and hadith.
This explains why, on account of the developments and changes in
warfare, we have never rejected the permissibility of using the latest
weaponry. Furthermore, we have never refuted the usage of all possible
means for the protection and spread of Deen and Islaamic knowledge.
Based on this, a large group of Ulama possessing deep foresight have
adopted the opinion that it is permissible to take assistance from
modern instruments that are currently available for religious,
propagational as well as reformational purposes, in fact, this may even
be deemed necessary. Yes, truly speaking, if the genuine need arises,
then that too could be said, regardless of whether this be through
"radios"," U tube", the "television", the "computer" or "internet".
Considering the fact that the proponents of falsehood tirelessly use
these instruments to propagate their wrong agendas and notions, this
would signal its even greater importance.
If the "Ahle-Haq" (rightly guided) turn a total blind eye to the usage of
these generally accepted instruments available, then there is the fear of
detrimental effects today as is been presently witnessed. This is, after all
not surprising for a large number of people merely suffice on these
means nowadays.
We also hold the same opinion as some of our senior Ulama in this
matter, though practically, we have never gone on television nor
purchased one for that matter. We have also never attached importance
nor developed the habit of watching television. Yes, occasionally, on
account of necessity or by chance, we may view certain programs. As for
internet, well, that is extremely distant, which explains why we are
unaware of what is directly presented to viewers on the internet in
respect to Islaam. At most, we do occasionally hear of this and even read
such information of this nature.
In this part of the world, for years now, a renowned propagator, Doctor
Zakir Naik, who is also a household name, has had broadcasted
programs on television. He has a wide coverage and a huge fan base
especially viewers on the Pakistani Channel, "QTV" and currently "TV
Peace". With regards to his views, many questions have being asked and
we have even held discussion on certain aspects related to this, but
never did we directly meet him, for after all we aver:
"The language of my friend is Turkish, but I do not understand Turkish."
Whilst in Saudi Arabia, I happened to meet some of his acquaintances
but I did not have the opportunity of holding any discussion, although
his name was taken in our conversation.
In our city Lukhnow, he did conduct a program for which I did hear a
recording of and even read some literature related to this. At a later
date, I did hear a "CD" of his, especially the portion on "questions and
answers", which was delivered in the urdu language. What I noticed was
that apart from the true Shari' stance, he had many other incorrect
notions and views.
On a journey to Mumbai, I happened to travel to his centre of learning
hoping to see his school, unfortunately, it happened to be the holiday
period. I therefore visited his office and all this, I should say, was not
bereft of some form of benefit.
It was after the recent Eid, where, on account of certain commitments, I
travelled to Delhi. When passing by certain bookshops in the locality
wherein "Jaami Masjid" is located, it is then that I came into some form
of contact with Doctor Zakir Naik. This allowed me the opportunity of
delving into and understanding his opinions and views. This, I seen
having read literature of his in the urdu language which I found in the
book shelves. I had searched extensively and was successful in my
endeavour. I thought to myself that this information is ready available,
so let me purchase it, read and then draw conclusions.
There was a large collection of info available at my disposal together
with many other brief write ups and articles. I purchased the entire
collection and thus, I benefitted directly. I will now in the pages ahead
provide the results of my study.
There were primarily two reasons for my study on this individual. The
first of these is that Allaah Ta'ala has involved me in the service of Deen
and thus, several individuals have asked the question, "What do we
make of the statements and information of Doctor Zakir Naik"? The
second motivating factor is the hadith, =,--' ,' (Deen is well wishing)
At this juncture, I feel it imperative that I suffice on highlighting aspects
that are blatantly questionable and after citing the texts as they are, I
should then comment by focusing on certain portions specifically.
The delicate nature of the effort of Deen and the
recognition of a true propagator
The effort of Deen is extremely delicate and a great responsibility. It is
also very vast and comprises of many scenarios. In this temporary world
of cause and result, Allaah takes work from mankind and after
undergoing hardship, tests and tribulation, the fruits of all that toil is
achieved.
Generally, such work is taken from individuals who are true believers,
trustworthy and religiously conscious. They are able to back up their
words with a good practical lifestyle, in fact, rather than mere
statements, their practical lives and ability to submit are traits firmly
embedded. This creates spirituality and life in their propagation. They
then, apart from propagating, also become leaders in this regard, which
obviously has a positive effect on the masses. People regard such
personalities to be reliable and to be genuine leaders. In other words,
the masses reflect over the degree of practice prevalent in the speaker
apart from his speaking exploits.
This explains why the Ambiyaa, the Rusul and their ardent followers and
representatives from amongst the Ulama and pious lay more emphasis
on their practical lives, rather than mere words and instead of inviting
towards statements, they call toward good deeds.
But, having said this, let it be well understood that Allaah is extremely
independent and in works of this nature, there are many benefits and
wisdoms, regardless of whether these be understood to us immediately
or not. At times, he takes the work of Deen and that of inviting towards,
spreading and protecting the truth from those who are deficient in both,
knowledge and practice. In fact, occasionally, these are individuals, who,
when it comes to religion and beliefs are rebellious against the
injunctions of Allaah. They are even known to be the bitter enemies of
Deen or known to deny its truthfulness altogether.
For instance, there are many individuals whose religion is totally in
conflict with the Deen of Allaah and tantamount to denying the being
and qualities of Allaah, but their practical lives are exemplary to say the
least. They are even known to make statements in conformity to the
truth, whilst there is little by way of deficiency in their character. They
are in this, rightly guided and pure, in fact, even very cautionate and
abstinent in matters pertaining to the lawful (Halaal) and the unlawful
(haraam). Judging by their words and actions, one would never
understand them to be Kaafir (non-Muslim). Only upon discussing their
beliefs, will one realise that they are followers of a religion other than
Islaam. By this, we realise that one may not be regarded to be a Muslim
unless his beliefs are taken into perspective.
Similarly, it does not suffice one to be deemed a true propagator of
Islaam by merely speaking on Islaam or by him reciting the Qur'aan and
hadith to people or even by noticing the masses being affected by his
words. It is imperative that we reflect over whether his statements and
views are, apart from being present in the Qur'aan and hadith, in
accordance to their teachings? In other words, to what extent are his
words in conformity to the Qur'aan and hadith?
Is the message he is conveying tantamount to the recognised and
accepted facts that have reached us through a continuous channel for
centuries now via the Sahabah and Salaf (pious predecessors) which
have been accepted by not only the general masses but by the learned,
especially. Furthermore, are the details and clarification of this present
in the Noble Qur'aan and authentic Ahadith. To what extent does the
information he reads out conform to these?
Besides submitting to the words of Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam),
what status is being accorded to the words and actions of the Sahabah
and Taabieen and to the explanations and commentaries of those that
followed from amongst the Ulama fraternity? What status is being
accorded to the famous and well renowned books of belief of the "Ahle
Haq" such as "Aqeedah Tahaawiya" and others? In clarifying Qur'aan and
hadith, is the intellect being regarded as an aid or is it deemed to be the
ultimate decision maker?
The truth of the matter is all those individuals, groups and movements
who affiliate themselves with Islaam from amongst the Sahabah and the
first generation link all their opinions to the Qur'aan and Sunnah. Taking
into regard the demand, they would accordingly derive benefit from the
two. We are well aware of the deviate sects such as the "Khawaarij",
"Rawaafidh" and "Mu'tazila", who were from the "Qarn Ula" (initial era)
and those of that nature who followed later, which point out to the fact
that merely citing Qur'aan and hadith and associating oneself with these
may not be used as the criterion.
Similarly, it does not suffice to make decisions based on the apparent
results before us even though positive results are realised. The famous
hadith of Bukhari clearly informs us of this:
='-' =''- ,' ,,' -
Translation At times, Allaah Ta'ala strengthens the Deen by means of
sinful individuals.(Through this, He assists the Deen)
Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) stated these words on the occasion of a
battle in respect to a man who had fought gallantly. When mention was
made of his bravery to Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), he replied that
this man is from amongst the dwellers of Jahannam. The Sahabah were
truly perturbed at this remark for they felt how could such an apparently
sincere individual be a dweller of Jahannam! Several individuals began
pursuing him in order to investigate the matter. What then happened,
was that this person, who had gotten severely injured in battle and due
to excessive pain, he used his weapon on himself and committed suicide.
Upon seeing this, certain individuals hurriedly approached Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) and exclaimed, "You are the true Nabi of
Allaah and your words are indeed true". This is when Nabi (Salallahu
Alayhi Wasallam) stated these words.
Who is not aware of the great efforts undertaken by the uncle of Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), Abu Taalib, in the upbringing of this true
Nabi and in assisting Deen, yet he remained firm on the religion of his
forefather, at which Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) would tremble
(out of extreme sadness). On the other hand, the merciful uncle of Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), Hadhrat Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) was
favoured with Islaam, but before "Hijrah" (migration to Madinah), when
discussions were being held with the "Ansaar" to migrate, he was with
Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) and advising the Ansaar to ponder over
the great responsibility they were about to undertake. This was the very
same Hadhrat Abbaas who was amongst the captives of Badr. He had
overheard the Muslims say that the army of the Kuffaar have already
been defeated, why should we not now chase down the caravan which
was the very reason for us leaving our homes. Upon hearing this, he
replied whilst still captive, "Do not do that for the promise of Allaah's
assistance and victory was only against one group, either the army or
caravan and this has already come to be". In this manner, he assisted the
Muslims in averting danger.
Nonetheless, the apparent condition does not suffice for making any
major decision. For one to be deemed a true propagator such that his
statements and research are relied upon, whilst his words and actions be
deemed exemplary, it is necessary that we carefully reflect and take into
perspective all the aforementioned aspects that we have discussed.
Today, there are many individuals who have sprung up as being
propagators of the Deen. They have become increasingly famous with
many people being affected by their words. Some have developed a
huge fan base who even travel with them and gather for their talks. The
question is, how do we recognise if one is rightly guided and on the
straight path?
In one hadith, we are taught that if you want to know of the character of
a person, then inquire from his neighbours. The hadith is also well
known to most wherein it is stated that the best of you is he who is good
to his family members. There are many other words of similar guidance.
In light of these, in our case, it would be imperative to ascertain as to
how many from amongst those affected and those gathering possess
true religious (Deeni) perception and feeling and to what extent are they
connected with the genuine service of Deen? Is the ongoing propagation
in accordance to the views and opinions of these people? If there are a
number of upright and reliable individuals closely connected, then we
need to inquire as to what type of individuals these are and why have
they drawn close? It should not be that this is on account of some
misunderstanding, lack of knowledge or mere assumption.
The qualities of a true propagator
A few major aspects to consider when deciding on who is a true
propagator of Deen
(1) Together with submitting to the Noble Qur'aan in order to
understand Deen, does he possess reliance on the Sunnah or not?
Or is it a case of him merely relying on the Qur'aan without
granting the required status to the Sunnah?
(2) Furthermore, in comprehending Qur'aan, does he rely on his own
understanding and intellect, or does he give due regard to
detailed research found in the Arabic dictionaries and to the
explanations and commentaries of Qur'aan that are protected in
the reliable books of hadith, irrespective of these being linked to
Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) or to the learned from amongst
the Sahabah.

(3) Not merely relying on Ahadith that are "Mutawaatir" (the highest
degree of authenticity in Ahadith) or "Saheeh" (authentic) or only
on those that are mentioned in the "Saheehein" (Bukhari, Muslim)
but on all those Ahadith that are part of a considerable collection
(regardless of them not being included amongst the " Mutawaatir"
or "Saheeh", nor in the two famous books of hadith (Saheehein))
but in others.

(4) What are their opinions with regards to the Sahabah, who were
undoubtedly the intermediary between the Ummah and Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) just as the Ambiyaa were the medium
between Allaah and His slaves. Do they grant due importance to
the rank, status and the words and actions of the Sahabah? Or do
they regard them to be merely from amongst the general masses
and the criterion of, "'= =- '= " (They are men and so are
we)?

(5) What are their opinions of our "Salaf" (pious predecessors) from
the era of the Taabieen up until this day, especially those from the
"Qarn Ula" (initial era), who served and protected Deen in every
way possible before it eventually reached us? What are their
opinions about specifically the four distinguished Imaams of
jurisprudence?


(6) Do they regard their intellects and logic to be an aid or the
primary factor and basis. In other words, are all matters of Deen
subject to their understanding or do they regard the Qur'aan and
hadith, which are well substantiated, to be the basis, with the
intellect being a mere aid. As we well know, despite ones logic
being able to correctly comprehend matters, many aspects are
not understood or simply misunderstood.
Moment of reflection
Presently, the propagator, Doctor Zakir Naik is a household name in this
country. There are many people out there who are not only listening to
him but also inclining to his opinions. The truth of the matter is that not
all that he says is in conflict with Shari'ah and against the Qur'aan and
Sunnah. But there are many aspects that have been noticed and
continue being noticed in his talks and research that are genuinely
questionable. These, will then need to be studied in light of the
aforementioned details we have already discussed. We will now present
to the readers much of the information he has spread and each one may
then take turn to study and conclude directly.
(1) In understanding Deen, Doctor Zakir Naik does possess regard
for the Sunnah apart from the Glorious Qur'aan. He thus,
together with citing Aayaat, cites many Ahadith to verify his
stance and views.
(2) But one major viewpoint of his in respect to understanding
hadith and Sunnah is not the same adopted by our great Ulama.
This specifically has to do with his opinion that, "Hadith Hasan"
(an accepted and authentic category of hadith) is not a significant
proof, whereas the famous commentator of Bukhari, Ibni Hajr
Asqalaani (Rahmatullah Alayhi) and many others such as Ibni
Salaah and Imaam Nawawi have accepted Ahadith other then
"Saheeh" to be substantial proof. In fact, in certain cases, even
"Dwaeef hadith" are considered. Imaam Bukhari (Rahmatullah
Alayhi), who, on the one hand, has written a book named,
"Saheeh Bukhari", which is a collection of the most authentic
Ahadith, he has also written a book called, " Al Adabul Mufrad",
which comprises of many "Dwaeef Ahadith". This is similarly the
case with regards to books of hadith such as, Tirmidhi, wherein
many Ahadith of this nature have been included, in fact, even
those related to practical injunctions.
(3) As far as his understanding of Qur'aan and hadith is concerned,
he relies solely on his intelligence and personal understanding
and to a much lesser degree on the "lughat" (Arabic
dictionaries). In his discussions, we did not come across any
mention of Ahadith even in recognised and famous junctures. Let
alone the statements of Sahabah, there is no mention of "Marfoo"
(hadith with chains linked directly to Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi
Wasallam) nor well known Ahadith in these discussions. As for his
usage of the arabic dictionaries (grammar), judging from what he
has presented, his level of knowledge and know that it is so
deficient, not even comparable with average students of a
Madrasah.
(4) From what we have perceived, it is clear that he has no regard
whatsoever for the Sahabah, Taabieen and the four illustrious
Imaams. In the over five hundred pages we have read and seen,
he has seldom mentioned anything concerning the former
(Mutaqadimeen) and latter scholars (Mutaikhireen) nor of their
books. He does certainly speak of and cite a host of lecturers and
intellectuals, but seldom does he mention anything concerning
any Aalim. When he does do so, he merely makes reference to
"Ulama", but the question is, "Who"? He makes no mention of
this.
(5) From his speeches and his responses to questions asked, it is
clear that he does not take the intellect to be a mere aid, but the
complete basis. He relies wholeheartedly on his logic and
understanding and thereby responds to any question regardless of
its nature. In fact, he cites Aayaat in response to questions
without applying the slightest bit of caution, whilst even being
known to forcefully fit these in.
All these facts are being mentioned after having carefully
examined and studied the writings of Doctor Zakir Naik. I have
also noted subject matter of this nature in his writings and
compiled these as write ups before presenting them to Ulama,
who have supported my findings. After having chosen such
subject matter, I hereby present some excerpts of these to the
readers;

(1) His incorrect stance with regards to the Four
Illustrious Imaams of Jurisprudence
In response to a question, Doctor Zakir Naik states (Pg 660-661):
We are required to honour the Illustrious Imaams of Islaam, who
include Imaam Abu Hanifa (Rahmatullah Alayhi), Imaam Abu Yusuf
(Rahmatullah Alayhi), Imaam Shaafiee' (Rahmatullah Alayhi),
Imaam Ahmed bin Hanbal (Rahmatullah Alayhi), Imaam Malik
(Rahmatullah Alayhi) and others. They were certainly great Ulama
and Jurists. May Allaah Ta'ala grant them reward for their
research and efforts. If anyone agrees with the beliefs and
opinions of Imaam Abu Hanifa (Rahmatullah Alayhi) and Imaam
Shaafi' (Rahmatullah Alayhi), then none should object to this. But
later in response to the very same question, it clearly seems that
Doctor Zakir Naik deems the four schools of thought (Mazaahib)
to be a cause for disunity. He writes;
(Pg 439) " When a Muslim is asked, who he is, he generally
replies that he is a "Sunni" or "Shia". Similarly, some people
refer to themselves as "Hanafi", "Shaafiee", "Maliki" or
"Hanbali". Some are even known to say that they are
"Deobandi" or "Barelwi". If we may ask these individuals, what
was our Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam)? Was he a "Hanbali",
"Shaafiee", "Hanafi" or a "Maliki"? Never, he was a Muslim just
as the previous Ambiyaa were also Muslim".

Consider the following statement of Doctor Zakir Naik
(Pg 441) "From the hadith, we understand that Nabi (Salallahu
Alayhi Wasallam) had granted glad tidings to seventy seven
groups, but he did not state that Muslims should make an
effort to divide themselves into separate groups. Those who
practice on the teachings of the Qur'aan and hadith and do not
create groups nor divisions between people are indeed on the
straight path".

This apparently implies that the four Mazaahib (four schools of
thought) are guilty of causing divisions and thereby not on the
straight path.

In response to this very same question, consider the last
paragraph:
(Pg 442) "There are many Aayaat wherein we are instructed to obey
Allaah and His Rasool. It is imperative upon a Muslim to submit to the
Qur'aan and authentic Ahadith. He may only conform to the views of an
Aalim or Imaam as long as the latter's beliefs and opinions are in
conformity to Qur'aan and authentic Ahadith. If his beliefs and opinions
are contrary to the injunctions of Allaah and the Sunnah of Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), then it should not be given any due
importance regardless of the great status of the Aalim. If all Muslims
read the Qur'aan with proper understanding whilst practicing on
authentic hadith, then Allaah willing, all differences will come to an end
and thus a united Ummah would be created."
The manner in which Doctor Zakir Naik has linked these statements with
his previous discussion makes one understand that he regards the
followers of the four "Mazhabs" to be besides those who obey Allaah
and His Rasool.
The criterion for practicing on hadith
In the same discussion, whilst encouraging people to practice on Qur'aan
and hadith, instead of saying "hadith", he twice uses the word "Saheeh
Hadith". This implies that only those Ahadith that are "Saheeh" may be
acted upon and other Ahadith, despite them being accepted and
considered, may not, whereas the Ulama of the Ummah differ with
holding such a view as has already passed. It is not only difficult to
present "Saheeh Ahadith" for every "masla", it is virtually impossible
to do so. Whosoever wishes to research this matter, let him go forth and
do so.
Ibnul Qayyim (Rahmatullah Alayhi), who was a well versed scholar had
written that a number of "Masaail" of all the four illustrious Imaams are
based on "Dwaeef Ahadith". In fact, if you were to read the books
written by the "Ahle hadith"(those who do not adhere to any school of
thought) on Salaah, then you would come across a substantial number
of Ahadith that are "Dwaeef". One may take a look at the most well
known book of theirs called, "Salaat ur Rasool" (The Salaat of Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam)) and you will notice many narrations of this
sort.
Selected quotes from the lecture of Doctor Zakir Naik
in respect to,"Qur'aan and Modern Science" at the
service of Ulama
I have before me the largest collection of the lectures of Doctor Zakir
Naik which were published by "Farid Book Depot, Delhi". His very first
sermon is well detailed and comprises of interesting subject matter
which I am hereby discussing. The entire sermon includes Qur'aanic
Aayaat with their translations and many of his scientific deductions with
references, occasionally, without. He has also corroborated the Aayaat
with modern scientific study. He makes no mention or even reference
to any Ahadith in his understanding and commentary of Qur'aan. In
other words, he has not delved into or listed the commentaries of
Aayaat expounded by Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), the Sahabah and
the Ulama of the Ummah. He occasionally takes the literal meaning of
words but that too, in accordance to his own comprehension, which is in
clear contrast to those preferred and recognised meanings and even
against those understood from the commentaries and Ahadith.
We hereby forward some excerpts from his lectures on the
aforementioned subject matter (Qur'aan and modern science);
(2) Incorrect deduction in researching the shape
of the earth, (Pg 72-73)
1 The earth is not round like a ball, rather it is egg shaped. In
other words, it is flat and stuck on the two axis. The following
Aayat sheds clarity on the shape of the earth,
'+= ' - `
Translation Thereafter, Allaah spread out the earth. (Surah
Naazi'aat, Aayat 30)

The word used in the arabic language to denote an egg is,
"'+=", which actually refers to an ostrich egg. Therefore, an
ostrich egg bears similarity with the shape of the earth. Thus,
the Noble Qur'aan most perfectly clarifies the shape of the
earth, whereas, when the Qur'aan was initially being revealed,
it was thought that the earth was flat.

A Critical Review of his opinion

Doctor Zakir Naik avers that the word, " " '+= refers to an egg
and that too an ostrich egg. The "Ahle Ilm" (Ulama) are well
aware that the word, "Dahaw" and its root word both refer to
"to spreading a thing out". According to this, the commentary
and translation of " " '+= would be, "to spread (expanding) the
earth and the things present in it", just as is famous. (Tafsir Ibni
Kathir, Surah Naazi'aat, Vol 8 Pg 339). This word by no means
refers to an egg. After studying the book, "Lisaanul Arab", I did
not any find any mention of this word referring to an egg. Yes,
Raaghib Asfahaani (Rahmatullah Alayhi) was of the opinion
that its root word is derived from, ",=", which refers to that
portion of the land wherein an ostrich lays eggs and then sits
on them. It therefore spreads out on that piece of land or on
the egg.
(3) In order to conform with scientific findings, his
incorrect commentary of the Qur'aan with regards to
the light of the sun and moon, (Pg 73-74).

'+, = '=- '--' _ = ' -- ,-- - '=-

Translation Blessed is the Being who created gigantic stars in
the sky and (among the more prominent sources of light that He created in
the sky, He has) placed the sun and the luminous moon in it.
(Surah Furqaan, Aayat 61, 19 th Para)

The sun is referred to in the arabic language as, "Shams". It is
also referred to as "Siraaj", which literally means a torch.
Occasionally, the word , "Wahaaj", is used for it, which means
a "burning lamp". These all appropriate words used to denote
the "sun" on account of its action of burning, which leads to it
giving off light and creating heat. On the other hand, the moon
is referred to as, "Qamr" in the arabic language. In the Qur'aan,
the word "Muneer" has also been used for it, that is a body
that reflects off light.

At this juncture, there is some form of harmony in the actual
nature of the moon, which does not itself give off light but
merely reflects the light of the sun. Nowhere in the Noble
Qur'aan has the moon being referred to as "Siraaj" or
"Wahaaj" nor has the "sun' been referred to as a "Noor" (light)
or "Munawwir" (giver of light). From this, it is established that
the nature of the light of the sun and moon differ as is
described in the Qur'aan. Therefore, there is absolute
conformity in respect to the difference in the light of the sun
and moon as far the Qur'aanic description and that of modern
scientific study is concerned.



A Critical Review of his opinion

The sun and the moon are two different entities which are
clearly understood considering that one is a "light" and the
other the "giver of the light". From this, the difference in the
nature of the light given off by the two may be clearly
understood. Any intelligent person can clearly perceive that
there exists a difference in the light given off by each, in fact, in
the effects of them too. There is no harm in accepting what
modern day scientists aver, but why the need to insist on the
words and explanations of the Qur'aan and Sunnah being
forcibly fitted onto their study. For after all, in support of such
a claim, one which is confined and specified, arabic dictionaries
and Ahadith should suffice or merely one of the two.

The academic deficiencies of Doctor Zakir Naik

According to the knowledge of this humble slave (the author),
in relation to this, there exists no narration. As far as arabic
dictionaries are concerned, they too, do not denote the
meaning of "Shams" and "Siraaj" (sun) to mean "burning on its
own" with "Qamr" and "Noor" merely referring to a light
produced from other than itself and merely for adornment. In
actual fact, in the Noble Qur'aan, the word "Noor" has been
used in many instances in several contexts. In fact, Allaah
Ta'ala uses it for himself:

: - -) ` --' - - 35 (

And in one place, the word "Muneer", which Doctor Zakir Naik
has taken as a significant basis is actually used with the word
"Siraaj" as a "Sifat" (describing word).

'=- -'- - _' ',= ,- --- '- -'- '- _--' '+,', ,--
: = -) 45 - 46 (
This Aayat is in respect to the description and traits of Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam). He has been referred to as, "Siraaj
Muneer" (an illuminating lantern). According to Doctor Zakir
Naik, the word "Siraaj" relates to the "Shams (sun)", and it has
never been used for the word "Qamr" (moon) nor has the word
"Muneer" been used for the "sun". In the aforementioned
Aayat, the word "Muneer" has been used with "Siraaj" and the
commentators take it to mean an,
"illuminating lantern", in the meaning of a "guiding and radiant
light". (Tafsir Ibni Kathir, Vol 5 Pg 431)

(4)Incorrect specification of an Aayat (Pg 79),(The
Plasma, that is the matter in between the stars)
In the initial periods, it was common perception that on the
outside of the "orderly system of the planets" was a great open
vacuum. The astronomers referred to this vacuum as "the bridge
of matter". This is also referred to as the "Plasma". In the
following Aayat of the Qur'aan, indication is made to this matter
between the stars,
'-+-,- '- ` --' '= '
Translation It was He who created the heavens, the earth and
whatever is between them in six days. (Surah Furqaan, Aayat 59)
A Critical review of his opinion
It is absolutely baffling and truly startling to read of the claim
made by Doctor Zakir Naik or the manner in which he has linked
the aforementioned Aayat. There is absolutely no mention of the
stars and planets in this Aayat and then too, he discards the last
portion of the Aayat. The entire Aayat is as follows,
', -- _ '-+-,- '- ` --' '= '
The objective of this Aayat is to show that the entire universe was
created within a span of six days, that is from the earth to the sky
and vice-versa. Therefore, the clear understanding of, " " '-+-,- '- is
specifically that which is in between the sky and the earth. The
creation of the sun, the moon, the stars, the vacuum in between
and all things connected to the earth were created within a span
of six days just as is mentioned in many other Aayaat of the
Qur'aan.
5 ( ) An absolutely ridiculous commentary of an Aayat to
substantiate the scientific study that the universe is
rotating (Pg 80)
In 1925, the famous American astronomer, "Edwin Hubble"
prepared substantial evidence to prove that the planets are
moving further apart from each other, which shows that the
universe is expanding. It is now a recognised scientific fact that the
universe does rotate and this is the very same aspect that has
been explained in the Qur'aan,
: ',') --' '- ,'- '+-,-- '--' 47 (
Translation We created the sky with might and We certainly
possess vast powers.
The correct translation of the word, "--" in the arabic
language is "to spread", which clearly indicates to the "ever
spreading and expanding universe".
A Critical review of his opinion
In the arabic language, the word, "-" refers to "strength",
"power" and to being "spread out". The meaning in any given
scenario would depend on its usage. In this Aayat, it refers to
sheer power. Doctor Zakir Naik himself has translated it as,
"strength expanding far and wide". Despite this, Doctor Zakir Naik
associates this Aayat to a scientific study for which no mention
has been made in the Qur'aan and Sunnah nor has any
commentator made mention of such a meaning. (Before me, I
have "Tafsir Haawi", wherein all the commentaries of the
Sahabah, Taabieen and others are gathered). In the 4th volume on
page 106, under the commentary of "Surah Dhaariyaat", several
opinions have been included with the common one in all these
being "power and strength, equally large or larger or a sky similar
to the present one".
Raaghib Asfahaani is of the very same opinion. In Tafsir Ibni Kathir,
Vol 8 Pg 401,402,( Misr), it is written that we have spread the
earth out significantly and raised it without the support of pillars.
The standpoint of Doctor Zakir Naik with regards
to "Fiqhi" (Juristic) Masaail and injunctions
Before me, I have a booklet of Doctor Zakir Naik concerning, " The
rights of women". It is numbered as the third in his compilation of
speeches. I will hereby note the portion of questions and answers
he had on this topic whilst including an entire separate session of
the same conducted by him. Prior to that, I would like the Ulama
to read over a few excerpts of his booklet named, "The Rights of
women".
(6)Lending support to the Western opinion in respect
to equality (between the genders)and his self given
commentary of the Aayat of the Qur'aan, (Pg 295,
Line 4-11)
: -, ) '--' _'= - '=' 34 (
Some aver that the word, "Qawaam" implies being "ranked one stage
above another", but in actual fact, the word, "Qawaam" is derived
from the root word "Iqaamah". "Iqaamah" refers to getting up when
the Iqaamah for Salaah is being called out. In other words, it simply
means "to stand". In context, it would mean "to possess one added
rank of responsibility but not virtue."
A Critical review of his opinion
Let readers reflect over the text, his objective is that man has some
added responsibility but is not better. This is what he has averred in
an attempt to support the western notion of equality. But, one
should reflect over the manner in which he has attempted to
substantiate this from the word, "Qawaam" and "Iqaamah for
salaah".
Note On the one hand, the text of Doctor Zakir Naik is as follows,
"He possesses greater rank in responsibility" which establishes some
form of preference and virtue, whereas on the other hand, he
negates such preference and virtue. There are many statements in
the texts and statements of Doctor Zakir Naik that are in direct
conflict with each other.

(6) For the wife to possess the right of issuing
divorce and her requesting divorce (Pg 360).
The fundamental question is that if a man is permitted to issue
divorce, can a woman also do the same?
Answer A woman cannot issue divorce due to the fact that "Talaaq"
is an arabic word and it is only used when a man uses it on a woman,
but still too, a woman can give divorce.
The five types of divorce in Islaam
(1) The first of these is by agreement of both parties. This occurs with
the consent of both, the man and woman. They both agree that
they are no longer compatible with each other and thus, they opt
out of the marriage by separating.
(2) The second is where only one party is content on separating and
this is termed divorce (talaaq). The man would be forced to hand
over the dowry (mehr) amount. If he has not, then he will be
forced to do so together with all the grants and gifts granted to
him.
(3) The third type is in a case whereby the woman is content on
separating as long as this (agreement of issuing divorce when she
wills) was made mention of in her marriage certificate. If it was,
then she has the right to issue divorce. This is normally known to
be a "rasman" (customary) act, but I have never seen anyone refer
the woman issuing divorce in this case as being being customary.
(4) The fourth type is where the husband is known to oppress (hit)
the woman or known not to fulfil her rights, in which case she has
the right to approach a judge who will in turn annul the marriage.
This is referred to as an "annulment of the marriage". The judge
may force him to hand over to her the dowry or a part of it. This is
at the discretion of the judge.
(5) The final type is that which is termed "Khula". This would be in a
case whereby, despite the husband being well mannered and the
wife not possessing any complaints against him, yet naturally, she
is disinclined to him for personal reasons. She may request the
husband to issue her a divorce in this case. This is termed "Khula".

But there are very few people who speak about the wife having
the right to issue divorce. The Ulama have listed these five types.
Some divide these into one, two and three parts, but practically,
all in all, these categories of divorce amount to five. I now feel
that the response to your question is complete.

A Critical review of his opinion

The five categories of divorce mentioned by Doctor Zakir Naik
have been numbered and separated by us. The rest of what is
written are his very own words. If we were to delve into the detail
he has forwarded, then truly speaking, it is extremely painful. We
will suffice on being concise and comprehensive.
(1) He avers that there are five types of divorce Where did
Doctor Zakir Naik get this from and from who? This he has
failed to mention. He merely says "Ulama", but fails to specify.
As far as the knowledge we possess is concerned, there exists
absolutely no such detail in Shari'ah as furnished by Doctor
Zakir Naik. Presently, the most detailed book on jurisprudence
comprising of the most accepted and trusted opinions of the
four Mazaahib is, "Al Mawsooatul Fiqhiyya", which has been
published in 45 volumes by "Wizaaratul Awqaaf" of Kuwait.
The 29th Vol is before me, wherein the details of divorce are
well elucidated. In the beginning, the author discusses divorce
and the words used in this regard (Pg 5 8) and similarly, the
details of the various types of divorce (pg 26), but there is no
mention whatsoever of the five types explained by Doctor Zakir
Naik.

Presently, another famous, detailed and reliable book on
jurisprudence (fiqh) is, "Fiqhul Islaam Wa Adillatuhu", the
author of which is "Wahabiyya Zuhaili". It is a book that
contains Masaail on the four Mazhabs (schools of thought) and
the opinions of others too, but there is absolutely no mention
of the types forwarded by Doctor Zakir Naik.
(3)Divorce may only be given after the enactment of a Nikah to a
woman in one's marriage. A woman is not permitted to remarry
unless she is divorced or an annulment of her marriage takes
place, regardless of her position and dilemma. The solution in all
specific scenarios have been well explained and these are present
in the books of jurisprudence (fiqh).
(4)The right of divorce This is solely the right of a man who has a
woman in his marriage. In fact, even if a father gets his immature
(non-baaligh) child married, the right of issuing divorce is not
entrusted to the father, but is solely at the discretion of the
husband, who is the child in this instance. This will remain the
case even after he matures.
(5)Apart from the husband himself, a third party adult, who is
sane and mature has the right to issue divorce on his behalf or
even to separate between the two, regardless of whether this
permission was granted or taken from the former or even if
Shari'ah had permitted it. Shari'ah has only permitted a judge to
do so and not even a mediator, unless he has been granted
permission by the husband.
(6) The wife does not possess the right to issue divorce or to end
the relation. Yes, at most, she may request the husband to issue
her a divorce.
(7)The wife would only be permitted to issue divorce when this
right was granted to her by the husband. This would either
materialise by the husband himself having formally granted this
right to her or by the woman acquiring this right from him,
regardless of whether this occurred at the time of enacting the
marriage or later. In any case, when the wife gets this right from
the man, then she may on her own accord make use of it and end
the relation.
(8) There are many scenarios written in the books of jurisprudence
(fiqh) and hadith whereby the wife may acquire the right to annul the
marriage with the consent of the husband. There is most probably no
detailed book in jurisprudence wherein discussion on this "right and
its detail" have not been expounded. In fact, some scenarios have
even been clearly stated in the Noble Qur'aan. "Aayat 28 of Surah
Ahzaab" is related to this very aspect, wherein specific mention is
made of the incident pertaining to the chaste and pure wives of Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam).
(9) Several of the five categories furnished by Doctor Zakir Naik are
in total conflict to the unanimously accepted injunctions and details
provided by Shari'ah. Firstly, he makes mention of giving dowry only
in the second scenario whilst in the fourth, he discusses the amount
to be given. This, he said was dependent on the decision of the judge
but this matter needs to be carefully scrutinised for the following
reasons;
(a) In the enactment of a marriage, dowry (mehr) is a necessary
aspect which goes hand in hand with the marriage. In fact, if the
marriage was enacted with no amount being agreed upon and they
were yet to consummate it, before which the relation was annulled,
then too, he would be forced to pay dowry. In this case, he would be
obliged to give the equivalent of half of the "Mehr Mithl" or "Mata".
If it (dowry) was decided, then half of it would need to be handed
over. The only case where, despite separating after Nikah, the
husband is not obliged to pay anything is in a case where the woman
forgives her right to the dowry. There are one or two other cases but
these are extremely rare. In any case, dowry is a right of Shari'ah and
is closely linked with the standing and validity of Nikah with the
husband generally being forced to pay it in some way or the other.
Therefore, for Doctor Zakir Naik to specify this with the second and
fourth type is tantamount to "renewing the Shari'ah" or "altering
it".
(b) As for the amount of dowry (in separation), this is not based on
the decision or agreement of anyone, but rather specifically allocated
by the Shari'ah itself. If the amount of dowry was stipulated at the
time of Nikah, then the entire amount or half of it must be paid. If
nothing was decided, then the amount the couple later decide would
need to be paid out or merely "mehr mithl" or "half of it". If anyone
has the right to alter the amount, this is at the sole discretion of the
couple for after all the woman is the one who accepts the sum, whilst
the man is the one who pays it out. When the Nikah is enacted, then
there exist no right for the respected guardians in the matter. The
judge may still possess the right to annul the marriage or to see that
this is done, but he does not have the right to tamper and alter with
the amount of dowry nor decide for himself.
(10) Furthermore, the details of the five types or categories
mentioned by Zakir Naik are truly questionable for there are not only
those specific reasons for "Khula" and "Faskh" (annulment of the
Nikah) which he has listed nor does an annulment or divorce take
place by mere agreement or talk in the manner that he has
described. Shari'ah has stipulated a set of rules and specific wording
to be taken into consideration upon which the injunctions are
dependent.
Note We require answers from Doctor Zakir Naik on where he has
acquired these new set of rules pertaining to dowry and divorce.
(8)Is there a difference between the testimony of a
male and female or are the two equal,(Pg 409,
Question 9)
Ques Why is it that in Islaam the testimony of two females equal
to that of one male?
Answer In Islaam, it is not always such that the testimony of two
women equal that of a single male. In the Noble Qur'aan, there
are three such places whereby the testimony of a man and
woman are referred to without any difference in number.

In respect to the injunctions of inheritance, that is when one is
bequeathing, it is a requirement that there be two just witnesses
as is clear from Surah Maa'idah, Aayat 107..

Similarly, concerning divorce, we are instructed to appoint two
witnesses. This is clear from Surah Talaaq, Aayat 2.

And with regards to chaste women, there must be four witnesses
to testify, Surah Noor, Aayat 4

It is therefore not true to aver that the testimony of two females
is always equal to that of one male. This is only specific with
certain cases. In the Noble Qur'aan, there are five instances
mentioned whereby there is no difference in the testimony of a
male and female, whereas, there is only one Aayat that tells us of
the testimony of two women being equal to one man. This is in
"Surah Al Baqara, Aayat 282" and it is in fact, the longest Aayat of
the Qur'aan which contains injunctions pertaining to business.

This specific Aayat of the Qur'aan is business related and in
dealings of this nature, the two parties involved are instructed to
write the terms of the agreement in the presence of two
witnesses. An effort should be made to find males to act as
witnesses, but if this is not possible, then one man and two
women would suffice. In Islaam, when it comes to business
related matters, preference is given to the witness of two men for
after all, the duty of looking after the family falls on the shoulder
of the man.

Due to the fact that responsibilities related to earning are the sole
duty of the man, he is understood to be better informed then a
woman in these matters. In the second case, it would be
necessary to appoint one man and two women to testify. If one
woman was to err, then the other may remind her. In the Qur'aan,
the word, "-- " refers to erring or to committing a mistake. It is
only in business related matters that the testimony of one man is
equal to two women.

On the contrary, some people aver that in the testimony of a
woman in a murder case, there too, two witnesses are required,
that is, two females equal one male in this regard. To equate a
single woman with a man in this case is incorrect for the natural
trait of a female is one of panic and thus, according to some, the
testimony of two women is equal to one man. According to some
Ulama, the testimony of two women and one man apply in all
cases, but we do not agree with this, as is evident from "Surah
Noor, Aayat 6-9", wherein it is clear that decisions have been
made on the testimony of a single man and woman.

Hadhrat Aysha (Radiallahu Anha), who was the wife of Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) is reported to have narrated
approximately "222" Ahadith, which are all accepted by her single
testimony. This also goes to show that the testimony of one
woman is accepted.

There are many Ulama who aver that the testimony of one
woman suffices in respect to the sighting of the moon. You may
yourself decide on the matter, for after all, in such an important
pillar as fasting, the testimony of one woman is accepted and on it
all Muslims fast. Some Ulama are of the opinion that for the
commencement of fasting, the testimony of one suffices whilst for
the end of it, two are required, irrespective of whether they be
males or females.

There are certain "Masaail" wherein the testimony of one woman
is in fact necessary. For instance, when it comes to "Masaail" related
specifically to women, such as washing the body of a deceased female,
there, the testimony of a man is of no regards. In business related
matters, the difference is not based on inequality between male and
female, but solely for the reason that their responsibilities and duties
differ, which have been clearly stipulated in Islaam.

(We have intentionally omitted the translation of the Aayaat made by
Doctor Zakir Naik)

A Critical review of his opinion

If we were to delve into detail to explain the way that Doctor Zakir
Naik has, apart from providing very little in conformity to the true
Shari' stance, jumbled and mixed up all his information, then this
would become an extremely lengthy task.
(1) Very briefly, understand that the fundamental laws and system
in Islaam pertaining to giving testimony have been outlined in
the Noble Qur'aan, whilst all their respective details are
present in the books of hadith and jurisprudence (fiqh). The
Ulama are well aware of these and the books are readily
available in a host of languages. Each one may then pick up
valuable literature on the subject and read before presiding on
the matter. The decision of those who are just and those
possessing insight in these matters will definitely be, "From
where are the bricks and from where is the sand" (his makes
claims, yet fails to back these up with substantial proof).
(2) Furthermore, for reliable information on the Shari' stance in
many aspects, I have in my possession a book by the name of,
"Fiqhul Islaam Wa Adillatuhu" which is written by an eminent
jurist today, Wahabi Zuhaili. Apart from it comprising of
"Masaail" on the four Mazaahib, it also covers the opinions of
many others. This explains why it is also appealing to the sect
known as, "the Ahle Hadith"(ghair muqallideen).
(3) In the 8
th
volume of this book, in respect to "Masaail" related
to "Qadhaa" (the decision of a judge), there is ample detail on
"Shahaadah" (giving testimony), which is in significant contrast
with that forwarded by Doctor Zakir Naik.

The second book I have with me is called, "Al Mawsooatul
Fiqhiyya" which is published by the Kuwait Government. The
"Masaail" in it are strictly confined to the four Mazaahib. In the
26
th
volume, the details on "Shahaadah" (giving testimony) are
noted and these do not in any way conform with that
presented by Doctor Zakir Naik. We will hereby present certain
excerpts from this book;
(3) In Mawsooatul Fiqhiyya Vol 26, Pg 226-230, there is
discussion on the number of witnesses required in giving
testimony. By way of introduction, the author writes that the
number of witnesses differ in the chapter of, "Shahaadah"
(giving testimony). (He then writes);

(a) In some cases, the testimony of less than four men is not
accepted and in such cases never may a woman be included.
This is in a case of adultery.
(b) If a "wealthy man" claims to be poor and thereby worthy of
receiving Zakaat, the "Hanbalis" are of the opinion that he will
need to present three witnesses.

(c) In some "Masaail", two witness are sufficient, but these too,
must be male. This would apply in all other "hudood" (crimes
in Shari'ah) besides adultery. All the Jurists are unanimous on
this.

The majority of Ulama also aver that in matters wherein men
generally possess the knowhow, despite these being cases not
related to wealth, there must still be two male witnesses, such
as in, "Nikah" (marriage), "Talaaq" (divorce), "Rajat" (retracting
the divorce), "Iylaa" (when a man takes an oath that he will not
have relations with his wife), "Izhaar" (whereby the man draws
a comparison of the private organ of his wife with that of his
mother), "Nasab" (proving one's lineage), "Islaam", "Irtidaad"
(apostasy), "Jarh and Tadeel" (the field of criticizing and
authenticating narrators), death, bankruptcy, "Wakaalat"
(appointing a deputy), "Wasiyyah" (bequeathing), "Shahaadah
on Shahaadah" (giving testimony on the testimony of another)
and others.

(d) The "Hanafiyya" are of the opinion that in besides "Hudood
and Qisas", in all other matters, whether these be related to
wealth or not, the testimony of two males or that of one male
and two females would suffice. The majority of Ulama aver
that the testimony of one man and two women would only be
considered in matters that are strictly related to wealth.

(e) In some cases, only the testimony of women is accepted,
such as "birth" (that so and so is the mother of the child),
"breastfeeding"(has the child drunk from the milk of a woman)
and all those aspects regarding which a strange man is
generally unaware.
The question that arises is, "What will be the required number
of women"? "Will a single woman suffice or will there be the
need for more"? "Will the ruling be general or will there be
detail to it"? There exists difference amongst the Jurists. There
is as we have already read, mention of one, two, three and
even four women.

(f) In some cases, the testimony of a single individual is
sufficient on condition that the person is just and reliable, even
if it be a female, such as the testimony for the moon sighting of
Ramadhan.

(4) These are details accepted by the four illustrious Imaams of
jurisprudence. According to this, one portion of these
"masaail" are such that the testimony of a female is of no
regards. As for those wherein it is accepted, apart from one
case, wherein the testimony of a single woman is accepted,
she will require another woman to testify with her. In matters
related to murder and others, leave alone one or two women,
the testimony of a female is totally not accepted. As for those
aspects wherein Doctor Zakir Naik has created or understood
scope for leeway, according to the Ulama of the Ummah, these
are clearly against the intended meaning of the Aayaat and
injunctions of Shari'ah. Apart from adultery, the "Zaahiriyya"
aver that in other "Hudood" (crimes), the testimony of one
man and two women is acceptable. (Al Fiqhul Islaami, Vol 8 Pg
6045)

(9)What does the "father being the guardian" imply?
(An excerpt from the chapter concerning the rights of
women, Pg 367)
Question In "Islaamic Personal law", why is it that only the
father may be the guardian of the child?
Answer The sister has asked that does only the father possess
the right of being the natural guardian of the child. In response,
this is incorrect, dear sister. According to Shari'ah, in the initial
stages of the child's upbringing, which is till the age of seven, the
mother is the guardian, for after all, at this stage, the
responsibility in as far as looking after the child is concerned falls
on the woman. After this stage, the father becomes the guardian.
When the child matures, then he is at his own discretion and is
free to reside with whomsoever he wills. The Shari'ah also avers
that he may meet any of the two at any given time. I now feel that
the response to your question is complete.

A Critical review of his opinion

According to Doctor Zakir Naik, he assumes that he has completed
the response to the question and thus satisfied the woman. The
truth of the matter is that the question and its response do not
conform.
(2) In light of the Qur'aan and Sunnah, there are two categories of
rights that fall on the parent, one is the right of being the guardian
and the other is termed "Haq Hidwaanat". These are two separate
rights. "Haq Hidwaanat" is related to the upbringing of the child.
In other words, this refers to rights in respect to serving the child
from this age and similarly, the responsibilities in as far as acting
as a guardian of the child and taking care of his expenses and
other responsibilities.
The father is the rightful guardian and this is the unanimously
accepted verdict. This applies in a case where the father is alive. If
he is not, then this right will transfer to the grandfather. This is
applicable from birth until the child reaches the age of puberty.
After he matures, the child himself possesses the right on
condition that he is sane and understanding. This is with regards
to the male child. As far as the female child is concerned, after
attaining puberty, then too in some matters (for instance
marriage) the father remains the guardian, (although in this, there
exists difference), despite the presence of the mother.
It may also be said that this right may be apportioned into two,
one is "Haq Kifaalat", that is the right relating to all expenses of
the child with the other being "the right of overseeing", which
refers to studying the nature of the issue and solving it.
As for "Haq Hidwaanat", this is not related to the expenses nor to
overseeing business related matters, marriage and others. This
actually concerns the physical upkeep of the child. This right will
remain the woman's until the age of seven. This right materialises
when a separation occurs between the couple or the mother
passes away. For instance, this right belongs to the mother, if she
is not there, then this right is transferred to the mother's sister
and grandmother. The child, regardless of whether it be male or
female would reside with the mother, mother's sister or
grandmother until the age of seven. It would be necessary upon
these women to see to the needs of the child. As far as monetary
expenses are concerned in this period, this would fall on the
shoulder of the father, who is the guardian. If the need arises,
then the father or guardian would need to spend to cater for a
third woman who would see to the needs of the child. As for what
occurs after the age of seven, there exists detail and difference in
the matter.
(3) What we have written is mentioned in clear light of Qur'aan
and Sunnah and is found in all the books of hadith and
jurisprudence (fiqh). There are also many Aayaat and Ahadith to
substantiate this, together with the commentaries of Ulama, that
of the Sahabah and Taabieen. What does Islaam say? Only when
this is put into perspective, will it be possible to explain
adequately. What has been averred to in the books? What do the
Ulama of the Ummah have to say? If a lack of importance is
attached to the above and only value for that which we assume is
given, then this is truly another matter!
(4)The question is, "What occurred with regards to serving as a
guardian". In response to this, Doctor Zakir Naik wrote on "Haq
Hidwaanat", but even on that, he provided no detail. There is also
no detail and explanation whatsoever on being a guardian. Ulama
may understand this form his works.
(5) We are forced to conclude, that in most cases, Doctor Zakir
Naik interprets Deen and Shari'ah by way of his own logic and
understanding. He suffices on his self drawn opinions from
Qur'aan and then sits back content. He even makes a concerted
effort that people digest (accept) what he says.
What do the Aayaat of the Qur'aan say and in light of this, what is
in the Ahadith? Or independently, what is found in the Ahadith?
What is found in the "Aathaar" (statements) of the Sahabah and
Taabieen? This would include the four illustrious Imaams. This is
certainly not before Doctor Zakir Naik. He either does not have
the relevant knowledge or he simply does not attach value for
such authorities of Deen. And Allaah Ta'ala knows best.
Furthermore, according to whose school of thought do his
opinions conform with? Only Doctor Zakir can explain this to us,
for he has left this matter unclear. What are the opinions of the
entire Ummah including the Sahabah and Taabieen in respect to
this? Considering this, the question needs to be asked, along
what path is his propagation moving? And in future, what will it
further become? Let him himself explain.
From his collection of lectures, the fifth subject matter that was
discussed was regarding, "The forty objections made on Islaam
and their lengthy responses". In the coming lines, I intend on
highlighting the questions and answers discussed which are worth
reflecting over and truly questionable.


(10) His incorrect interpretation of the Aayat, " = ',
'"
Question (Question 39) In the Qur'aan, it is stated that Maryam
(Alayhis Salaam) is the sister of Haaroon (Alayhis Salaam). Did Hadhrat
Muhammad, who authored the Qur'aan (Allaah forbid) not know that
the sister of Haaroon, Maryam was not the mother of Yasoo' but
another woman for between the two there was a difference of
approximately one thousand years?
Answer In the Noble Qur'aan, in "Surah Maryam, Aayat 27-28", the
following appears;
"She brought the child to her people. They exclaimed, "O Maryam! You
have surely perpetrated a grave act." "O sister of Haaroon! Your father
was never an evil person, neither was your mother an adulterous."
Christian missionaries claim that Hadhrat Muhammad (Salallahu Alayhi
Wasallam) was not aware of the difference between "Mary", the mother
of Yasoo and the sister of Haaroon, "Maryam", whereas in the arabic
language, the word "sister" is also used to denote children. Therefore,
when the people exclaimed to Maryam, "Oh children of Haaroon", by
this, they implied the children of Hadhrat Haaroon (Alayhis Salaam).
In the bible, the word "son" has also been used for "children". For
instance, in the very first statement of the opening chapter of the Injeel,
the following is written, "Yasoo, the son of Dawud". In the 23
rd
sentence
of the "Loqa Injeel", in chapter three, the following appears, "When
Yasoo began imparting knowledge, he was thirty years of age and he
was also the son of Yusuf (Alayhis Salaam)". One man can never have
two fathers, this is why when it is said that Yasoo was the son of Dawud,
by this is meant that Yasoo was from the progeny of Dawud. By "son", is
meant the "progeny" or "descendants".
Based on this, any objection on "Aayat 28 of Surah Maryam" is baseless,
for by, "The sister of Haaroon" is meant the mother of Hadhrat Maryam,
who was from the "children" or "progeny" of Hadhrat Haaroon (Alayhis
Salaam).

Research of "' = '," in light of the hadith
In the aforementioned question, the objection they have raised is
nothing new. In fact, objections of this nature were common in the era
of Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) with responses being given to them
at the very time.
In Tafsir Ibni Kathir (Cairo), Vol 5, Pg 222, the following narration
appears;
Hadhrat Mughira bin Shu'ba (Radiallahu Anhu) reports that Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) once deputed him to "Najran". The
christians of that place asked, "Why is it that you people read,
' = ', " " in the Qur'aan, yet Musa (Alayhis Salaam) was well before
Isa (Alayhis Salaam)". Mughira says that upon returning to Madinah, he
informed Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) of what transpired. Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) replied, "Why did you not tell them that the
people of before would also keep names of the previous Ambiyaa and
pious".
This response is well protected and correctly reported from Nabi
(Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), in fact, it is also a famous response of his for
apart from Ibni Kathir and Tabari, it is found in the following books of
hadith, "Saheeh Muslim",(Vol 14, Pg 116, Kitaabul Aadaab, Darul Fikr),
"Tirmidhi",(Vol 8, hadith 509, hadith number,3155,Beirut), "Nasai
Sughra" and "Musnad Ahmed" just as is found in "Ibni Kathir". It is
clearly a "Saheeh hadith" (authentic hadith) found in "Muslim" and also
accepted as such by "Tirmidhi".
The crux of the response given by Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) was
that the brother of Maryam, (the mother of Isa), is not meant Haaroon,
the brother of Musa, but specifically the brother of Maryam. It is merely
a case of their names being the same as the practice of the Bani Israeel
was to give their children the names of the seniors and pious of before
as is still presently the case.
In "Tafsir Ibni Kathir" and other books, many other aspects have been
written, but the correct and reliable response is that which has been
reported with a strong and direct link to Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi
Wasallam).
Doctor Zakir Naik opposing the Qur'aan and hadith and an
incorrect deduction of his from the bible.
Doctor Zakir Naik apparently claims to be a bearer and propagator of the
same nature (in conformity with Qur'aan and Sunnah), then too, rather
than responding accordingly, he relies on his personal opinions. Is it a
case of merely reading through these narrations or total ignorance? This,
despite these being extremely well known as is clear from their
references.
Then in his response, Doctor Zakir Naik makes a whole hearted attempt
to prove that the word, "Ukhta" (sister) may also refer to "children". He
then gives reference to the bible and Injeel, but let alone reference of
an Aayat, he does not make reference to any narration nor any reliable
dictionary or any book whatsoever, for that matter. How does this then
fit in as the stance of a propagator and scholar of Islaam?
I even referred back to the most fundamental and relied upon
dictionaries in the arabic language, "Lisaanul Arab", in fact, I even
studied many other books for that matter, but I did not find the word,
"Akh and Ukht" (brother and sister) used to denote "children" or
"progeny". On the occasion of Me'raj, in the journey to the heavens
where there is mention of meeting with the Ambiyaa, in certain places,
the words, "Akh", and "Ab" are also made mention of. For those
Ambiyaa who hold the same lineage as Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam),
the word "Ab" is used, as for those who do not, the word "Akh" is used.
If the meaning explained by Doctor Zakir Naik was used in the arabic
context, then there would no reason for such a difference. The
narrations pertaining to Me'raj are found in many books.
Similarly, I studied the book of Raaghib Asfahaani, "Al Mufradatul
Qur'aan" which explains the meanings and purport of many words in the
Qur'aan. It is a renowned and accepted book, but nowhere did I find the
word, "Akh" or "Ukht" to mean "children". Yes, its usage is explained in
other contexts and terms. For instance, with regards to, " " ' = , this
word is used to denote resemblance in as far as "noble traits and
perfection" is concerned. This is similarly the case here too. Thus, in
Tafsir Ibni Kathir (Vol 5 Pg 221), as part of the first commentary of this
Aayat, this very meaning has been reported by several Ulama.
Nonetheless, in the books of Tafsir and in recognised arabic
dictionaries, the usage he lays claim to, let alone being famous, is not
even mentioned.
(3) In the text Doctor Zakir Naik cited of the "Loqa Injeel" pertaining to
Hadhrat Isa, the following also appears, "the son of Yusuf". The Ulama
are well aware that by some affiliating the lineage of Hadhrat Isa to
Hadhrat Yusuf, they have continued contradicting the Qur'aan and
hadith. Is there not something similar to this in the references posed by
Doctor Zakir Naik?
Doctor Zakir Naik writes after the names of the Ambiyaa, "Alayhis
Salaam", which should certainly be done, but after the name of Hadhrat
Maryam (Alayhas Salaam), he wrote "Alayhis Salaam". If this is not a
clear proof of error and defficiency in his text and writing, then let a
genuine propagator of knowledge explain to us why he brings a male
"Dwameer" (compunction) for a female.
(11) His reliance on science in respect to the womb and his
openly criticising the Commentators of the Qur'aan (Pg 492 -
494, Vol 15)
Question 28 - In the Qur'aan, it is clearly stated that Allaah alone is
aware of the 'sex' of the child in the womb of the mother, but now
science has made significant advances. We are easily able to identify the
"sex" of the child through ultrasonography. Is this Aayat of the Qur'aan
then against the research of medical science?
Answer - Allaah is All Powerful and All Knowing. He has granted the
knowledge of certain things to man, but it is only Allaah who has the
knowledge of all things, both apparent (visible) and hidden.
Some assume that Allaah alone is aware of the "sex" of the child inside
the womb of the mother based on the following Aayat of "Surah
Luqmaan" in the Qur'aan, Aayat 34;
Translation "Verily the knowledge of Qiyaamah is only with Allaah. He
sends the rains and He has the knowledge of what is in the wombs."
Similarly, in "Surah Ra'ad Aayat 8", the following appears;
Translation "Allaah knows what every female bears and the shortages
and excesses in the womb. Everything is perfectly stipulated with Him."
Nowadays scientific study has made significant advances and the "sex"
of the child in the womb may easily be determined through ultra sound".
It is certainly true that in respect to this Aayat, many translations and
commentaries have been made with most writing that Allaah alone
knows of the "sex" of the child in the womb of the mother. But, take a
look at the English equivalent of "jins", that is "sex", it has no equivalent
in the arabic language. In the Noble Qur'aan, it is merely stated that
Allaah knows of "that' which is hidden in the womb of the mother. Many
commentators have erred in this regard and understood this to imply
that Allaah alone is aware of the "sex" of the child in the womb. This is
incorrect. This Aayat does not indicate towards the "sex" of the child,
rather, Allaah is aware of the "nature" of the child whilst in the womb
and whether it will be a means of blessing or difficulty for the parent?
From a social perspective, will this child turn out to be a means of mercy
or punishment? Will the child turn out to be pious or disobedient to
Allaah? Will the child eventually enter Jahannam or Jannah? All these
matters and aspects are known only to Allaah.
Any scientist, regardless of the nature of the technology at his disposal,
is unable to tell of these things.

Research of the "foetus" in light of the Qur'aan and hadith
(1) In order to understand the words and statements of a speaker,
the well known and accepted principal is to reflect over that which
he has made mention of "prior" and "after", in the same manner
as other matters are taken into regard at times. The Ulama of the
Ummah have also discussed this principal at length in respect to
comprehending the Qur'aan, in fact, they have placed this as
"number one" in rank of order. It is commonly accepted that,
" '-- -- --, -' " . (Part of the Qur'aan explains the other)

In order to understand whether in these two Aayaat, there exists
specification in respect to the knowledge of the "sex" of the child
in the womb or not, we need to study these Aayaat thoroughly
and keep them before us.

In "Surah Luqmaan, Aayat 34", which is at the very end of the
Surah, the knowledge of five aspects have been made specific
with Allaah, i.e. when Qiyaamah will take place, the time and
volume of rain, the sex of the child, the actions of man and the
result thereof and finally his place of death.

In this Aayat, there is merely a brief mention of the knowledge
concerning the womb, but in "Surah Ra'ad, Aayat 8" which Doctor
Zakir Naik has also made mention of, more detail has been shed
on the subject. This gives us a clear understanding on the
intended meaning, but still too, Doctor Zakir Naik has blatantly
denied it. In "Surah Ra'ad" after the Aayat, "_`- -=- '- ', -"
(Allaah knows what every female bears), the Aayat,
- '- '=` ,- '- " " appears, which only Doctor Zakir Naik
can explain what he implies and how he has translated it. The
second part of the Aayat is connected to, -=- '- " " and the
translation will thus be, "And Allaah knows the "sex" of what is in
the womb and the excesses and shortages in it". Who would know
what, "The excesses and shortages" refer to better then the
Sahabah for they themselves heard the Qur'aan and its intended
meaning directly from Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam).

In Tafsir "Ibni Kathir (Vol 5 Pg 357)", the commentary of Ibni
Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) is reported, that by shortages and
excesses in the womb "the body of the child is referred to and the
duration of pregnancy".

With regards to the Aayat of "Surah Luqmaan" and that of "Surah
An'aam, Aayat 59", the famous narration of Ibni Umar (Radiallahu
Anhu) is reported in "Saheeh Bukhari (Kitaab ut Tafsir)" under the
commentaries of both, "Surah An'aam and Surah Ra'ad", in fact, it
is mentioned in other places also. Under the aforementioned
Aayat of "Surah Ra'ad", Imaam Bukhari has reported the narration
of Ibni Umar in some detail. He says that the doors to the unseen
are five, which are not known to anyone apart from Allaah;
" " - ` '=` ,- '- ', ` (And the excesses and shortages of
the womb are not known but to Allaah). The Aayat,
"'=` _ '- ',`" is not that of "Surah Luqmaan", but that of
"Surah Ra'ad", which obviously implies that in both places, the
intended meaning is one and the same with only one narrator
reporting.
(2) The second well known and accepted principal in commenting on
Qur'aan is to study closely all the narrations connected to the
Aayat. In relation to the Aayaat of both, "Surah Ra'ad and Surah
Luqmaan", there are narrations present in the well known books
of commentary such as Tafsir "Ibni Kathir" and others, similarly, in
"Kitaab ut Tafsir of Bukhari" too.
In Tafsir "Ibni Kathir (Vol 6 Pg 356, Misr)", on the authority of Ibni Abi
Haatim and Ibni Jareer, the narration of Mujahid (who was the Imaam of
Tafsir amongst the group of Taabieen) is reported, wherein a villager
asked Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), what will his pregnant wife give
birth to? (It is obvious that here the question concerns the "sex" of the
child). He also asked questions related to rainfall and time of his death.
On this occasion, the Aayat of "Surah Luqmaan" was revealed.
In Tafsir "Ibni Kathir (Vol 6 Pg 356-357)" the commentary of another well
known "Mufassir" of the Qur'aan, Qataada (Rahmatullah Alayhi) is
reported. He says that Allaah Ta'ala has kept the knowledge of certain
aspects specific with himself. In fact, not even a Nabi has the knowledge
of these. He then separates all five portions of this Aayat of "Surah
Luqmaan" and clarifies them. Under, " '=` _'- ', " , he states that
none is aware of what is hidden in the wombs? Is it a boy or a girl, is it
red or black or what is it?
In Tafsir "Durre Manthur Vol 6 Pg 530, Darul Fikr", on the authority of
Hadhrat Ikrima, the aforementioned narration of Mujahid is reported.
These narrations also clarify the Aayat of "Surah Luqmaan".
Furthermore, in "Durre Manthur Vol 2 Pg 531-532", the narrations of
Hadhrat Abu Umamah and Abu Salama are reported wherein two
persons inquired as to "what" the babies (in the wombs) of their camel
and horse would be (male or female)? In response, Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi
Wasallam) read this Aayat of "Surah Luqmaan".
"Naqli" and "Aqli" errors (Errors in as far as citing Aayat and
Ahadith is concerned and logical errors too)
3) In attempting to substantiate his stance and reject a well known
aspect, Doctor Zakir Naik has not even presented any narration. He
relies solely on scientific study and merely states that in the Noble
Qur'aan, there exist no such word to denote the meaning of "sex". It is
true that the word "jins" (sex) does not appear, but we need to reflect
over whether there is negation of this word as Doctor Zakir Naik avers.
In the Noble Qur'aan, in the Aayat, " , " _ '- ', '=` "'-" appears
which could convey the meaning cited by Doctor Zakir Naik, but it
certainly does not reject and refute the meaning we cite. The Aayat
states that Allaah is aware of "that" which is hidden in the wombs which,
in indicating to the "sex" of the child takes precedence as opposed to it
referring to the "Sifat" (quality) of the child, which he claims it is
confined to. The commentaries of the Sahabah and Taabieen clearly
state that the "sex" of the child is meant. The letter, "Maa" in the arabic
language is "Isme Mawsool", which conveys a "general meaning" as is
clear from the books of "Nahw" (arabic grammar), Usool Fiqh (principals
of jurisprudence) and others.
When it comes to deriving information from science and modern
technology, it is indeed surprising to see that he relies whole heartedly
on the results of ultrasonography, whereas time and time again, we
notice the results of such instruments being proven wrong. On the basis
of these "tests", many people abort (due to tests showing that a girl
would be born yet the parents expect a boy) and later they come to
know that the child in the womb was indeed a boy. In some cases, many
are known to divide gifts amongst themselves thinking that a boy would
be born, yet a girl is then born.
Apparently, Doctor Zakir Naik stands firm on the teachings of Qur'aan
and Sunnah, but let us ask him, that taking these two (Qur'aan and
Sunnah) into perspective or even from information derived from the
organs (eyes, ears), is there any other knowledge apart from these that
is absolutely certain? The simplest response, which Islaamically
speaking, is most complete and perfect is that the Aayat is in contrast
to scientific study. The knowledge of Allaah is absolutely certain without
the slightest bit of doubt. As for that which is derived from scientific
study, it is by no means certain, nor is it all encompassing, in fact, it is
dependent on worldy means. This is the response of those present day
Ulama who are reputable in the field of commentary and who possess
deep insight and firm belief in the Qur'aan and Sunnah.
4) At this juncture, it is also appropriate that we say that the intended
meaning of Doctor Zakir Naik is not negated by the Aayat. Every word of
the Noble Qur'aan is eloquent and comprehensive. The word "Maa" also
contains scope for this meaning. Thus, reliable commentators have also
made mention of this, but they have not confined the meaning in the
manner Doctor Zakir Naik has. They first speak of the "sex" and then
they delve into other meanings. For instance, this has been mentioned in
"Tafsir Ibni Kathir, Vol 6 Pg 355", under the commentary of the Aayat of
"Surah Luqmaan". Similarly, in Vol 6 Pg 358, the same is reported by
Qataada, the famous Taabiee.
5) In the text of Doctor Zakir Naik, which is laden with errors, the
following aspects are worth reflecting over;
"Many commentators have erred in this regard and they suggest that
only Allaah knows that which is in the wombs of the mothers, which is
incorrect." In other words, he is saying that that which the
"Mufassireen" have mentioned despite perfection in arabic grammar
and despite supporting their commentaries with Ahadith, is incorrect,
whereas, that which he (Zakir Naik) avers, despite not being supported
by any of the two is correct. Look at the way he has presented his words,
is there is no stench of tribalism in this, then, what else!
(12) In Jannat the presence of male "hurs" (damsels)
(Pg 513-515)
(Ques 37) The Qur'aan states that upon entering Jannat, a man will be
bestowed with "hurs", that is "beautiful damsels", the question is what
will women get upon entering enter Jannat?
Answer The word "Hur" has been used at least four times in the
Qur'aan.
(1) In "Surah Dukhaan, Aayat 45";
Translation "This is how it will be. We will marry them to fair,
large eyed damsels."
(2) In "Surah Toor, Aayat 20" ;
Translation "We shall marry them to fair maidens with large
eyes."
(3) In "Surah Rahman, Aayat 72" ;
Translation "Fair damsels sheltered in tents.
(4) In "Surah Waaqia, Aayat 22-23" ;
Translation "And fair large eyed damsels who are like preserved
pearls."

The translators of the Qur'aan, especially the urdu translators
have translated the word "hur", to mean "pretty damsels". In that
case, these will be specifically for men, then what about women?

The word "=" (Hur) is actually the plural "seegha" for = " "
and " " = which refers to a person whose eyes seem like a
"damsel", which will be specifically granted to the pious men and
women upon entering Jannat. It makes apparent the extreme
brightest white portion of the spiritual eye. In many Aayaat, it is
stated that in Jannat, there will be spouses and your spouse will
be purified indeed. In "Surah Baqara, Aayat 25", Allaah Ta'ala
announces:
Translation "And give good news to those who have Imaan and who
do good acts that for them shall be gardens beneath which rivers
flow. Whenever they are given any fruit to eat there, they will say,
This is what we were fed with before. However, the fruit given to
them shall only look the same. There they shall have spouses who
have been purified and they will live there forever. "
In "Surah Nisaa, Aayat 57", the following appears:
Translation "As for those who have Imaan and do righteous acts,
We shall enter them into Jannaat beneath which rivers flow to live
there forever and ever. There they shall have purified spouses, and
We shall enter them into abundant shade."
Therefore, the word "hur" is not specific for "sex" or "type". Allama
Muhammad As'ad translates the word "hur" as spouse or wife,
whereas Abdullah Yusuf Ali translates it as "companion". This
explains why according to many Ulama in Jannat the "damsel" that
the male will receive will have large shiny eyes, whereas, the woman
will be favoured with spouses possessing large radiant eyes.
Many Ulama aver that by the word "hur" in the Qur'aan only
"women" are meant, for after all men are being addressed.
However, the response that is most accepted has been provided in
the hadith. When Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) was asked, "If
men will be granted damsels in Jannat, what will the women get?"
Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) replied, "Women will be granted all
that their hearts desire, that which their ears have not heard of nor
their eyes seen". In other words, women will also be given a special
bounty in Jannat.
A Critical review of his opinion
Read the response and derive pleasure! Doctor Zakir Naik has
expounded in a very strange and extremely unique manner. My opinion
is that the Ulama will not at all be impressed at the response he has
presented. His response is entirely based on his own very philosophy
and logic. At most, he inclines to several "literal meanings" and if at all
he does give reference, then he relies on the knowhow of English
translators of the Noble Qur'aan just as he is and then adds "Allama"
before such names. He then has the naivety to attribute such words to
Ulama. He does not even mention an Aayat to substantiate his claim,
even if this be by virtue of mere indication. As for the two Aayaat cited
in the general context which form the basis of Doctor Zakir Naik, the
word "Azwaaj" has been translated as "spouse", which obviously implies
that these will be for men only.
He fails to present any narration, in fact, even the opinions of a Sahabi
or Taabiee for that matter. He does not even cite references for the
hadith he brings at the end. I checked extensively for this narration in
"Ibni Kathir", "Tabari", "Durre Manthur" and many other books at
their appropriate places but could not find this narration. Furthermore,
by him citing this narration and by suggesting that woman will get
something "special", is this meant to be substantiation for his claim or
something else? This could not be ascertained.
He even fails to list the names of distinguished "commentators" and
"research scholars" with the exception of very few and yes, two English
translators of the Noble Qur'aan. As is, in normal circumstances, Doctor
Zakir Naik does not mention the names of any Ulama of the Ummah
nor does he furnish any references used by them. Do the Ulama of the
Ummah not even take the names of Sahabah and Taabieen in their
study!
Nonetheless, what is "Hur" literally and what does its root word imply?
In fact, even if we were to ignore the literal meaning, nowhere in the
Qur'aan and hadith has this been discussed under any topic or subject
matter as suggested by Doctor Zakir Naik. If there is mention of "special
men" apart from the men of the world, then this is as "slaves" and not
in any other sense.
With the word "Hur", the word, "Maqsooraat" has been used as a "Sifat"
(description), which is feminine just as is the case in the Aayaat of "Surah
Baqara" and "Surah Nisaa" whereby," Mutwahara", which is feminine
has been used with, "Azwaaj" as a 'Sifat' (quality). As for the word,
"Zawj, Azwaaj" it is merely in the meaning of "spouse" which may also
refer to a "man" and "husband". This also occurs in the Qur'aan but
when used in conjunction with a "descriptive quality" it confines and
specifies such words.
Apart from the four Aayaat related to "hur" and the aforementioned two
Aayaat, the word "Ein" also appears in other Aayaat which is a word
used specifically for females. (Reference - "Surah Saaffaat" Aayat 137)
This is just as the word, ' -' " " appears in many Aayaat but
without the words "Hur" and "Ein". (Ref "Surah Saad Aayat 52"," Surah
Rahman, Aayat 56")
Doctor Zakir Naik avers that the urdu translators have confined the
meaning of "hur", but apart from some English translators, no
recognised Arab commentator or research scholar has reported any
other meaning. For fourteen centuries, has any well versed and expert
"Aalim" and "Mufassir" reported such a meaning? The true bearers of
Islaam are indeed the Ulama of the first era, has anybody from amongst
them said something of this nature?
3) Read the following narration found in "Ibni Kathir (Vol 8 Pg 10)" in the
Tafsir of "Surah Waaqia" which is reported by "Tabraani". It is narrated
by Hadhrat Umme Salma (Radiallahu Anha) and is specifically found in
"Tabrani Mu'jam Sagheer (Vol 1 Pg 110)".
Hadhrat Umme Salma (Radiallahu Anha) states that she inquired the
following from the Rasool of Allaah! Allaah Ta'ala says, "Hur Ein", what
does this refer to? Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam) replied, "Hur"
means white and "Ein" refers to a large eyed women, the eye brows of
whom are similar to the wings of a vulture. I asked, what do the words
of Allaah Ta'ala, --' ''' '`-' " " mean? He said that this meant that
their purity (glitter and beauty) will be like that of a pearl in its shell,
which no hand has ever touched. I asked, Allaah Ta'ala says,
" " '-= ,= +, ,what does this refer to? He replied that it referred to
good character and an indication towards the beauty of their faces. I
asked, what does, "-- ,- +-'" refer to? He replied that it meant
that their delicate nature would be just like the fine inner skin of an egg
that is directly connected to the shell. I asked what does the statement
of Allaah, "'-- '-=" refer to? He replied that this refers to women who
had died at old age with weak eye sight and disheveled hair. Allaah will
revive them after death in a condition that they would be virgins,
beloved and all of one age. I asked, Oh Rasool of Allaah! Tell me are the
women of the world better or the "Hur Ein"? He replied that the women
of the world are preferred just as the top portion of a cloth which
conceals one is preferred. I asked Oh Rasool of Allaah! Why is that so
(that the women of the world are preferred)?
This is so because they perform Salaah, fast and worship Allaah. Allaah
will illuminate their faces and decorate their bodies with white colored
silk, green cloth, yellow jewellery, whilst their utensils for washing would
be made of pearls and their combs would be made from gold. (Ahead
there is mention of several poems which they would read). I asked, Oh
Rasool of Allaah! Each woman marries one, two, three, or four
husbands, (that is when one dies, she marries another), (the question is)
that when that woman and all her previous husbands enter Jannah, who
will she be with? He replied, Oh Abu Salama! She will be offered the
choice and will thus choose the one with the best character with the
words, Oh my Rabb! He conducted himself to me with good character,
therefore, make me his partner. Oh Abu Salama! Good character
encompasses the good of both this world as well as the next.
There is further mention and clarity of the hidden bounties pertaining to
the different damsels that one will receive, in the books," Tafsir Ibni
Kathir" (Vol 6 Pg 369, Surah Sajda) "Durr Manthur",(Vol 6 Pg 550, Surah
Sajdah).
Addition: For now, we will suffice on the aforementioned. This should
prove sufficient for those with understanding to grasp the truth,
otherwise in each of his booklets he has lot questionable material.
The lectures of Doctor Zakir Naik are now being transferred to writing in
both the Urdu and English language. The Ulama and all those possessing
insight may themselves source these books and study. They may, in this
manner gain the necessary knowhow in respect to this person.
One gifted with the best of abilities may only do good work when he is
subject to limits and he perseveres or else he may be able to create a
name for himself but not necessarily do efficient work. Doctor Zakir Naik
does possess the intellectual capacity which is required in debates to
respond and silence detractors or even face up to one before him but
this does not necessarily mean that his responses are always true.
From the details furnished in his writings, we may conclude that Doctor
Zakir Naik does not possess the necessary and required know how to
stand as a propagator of this true Deen as taught to us by the Qur'aan
and Sunnah. His study mainly comprises of English books. He certainly
does not possess the required qualifications is as far as studies in the
arabic language is concerned. Whosoever desires to understand this
fact should carefully study his book, "Qur'aan and Modern Science.
May Allaah Ta'ala keep us all on the straight path. The "straight path" is
indeed the path of those bondsmen whom Allaah has described in
"Surah Fatiha". Therefore, for one who possesses the desire to be on
this righteous path, it is necessary that he adopts the lifestyle of those
whose beliefs and opinions meet the criterion.
Translation edited by
A.H.Elias (Mufti)
May Allaah be with him.
About the Book
As we draw closer to Qiyaamah, we will begin to notice an increase in
impostors as foretold by Nabi (Salallahu Alayhi Wasallam), who in
apparently promoting Deen will have ulterior motives. Countless
examples of such "so called scholars" have spread throughout the globe
with many even gaining a significant following.
For us to judge any propagator of Islaam, it is imperative that we put
before us the Islaamic principals of propagation as was adhered to by
our great scholars of the past. Accordingly, we would be able to gauge
on whether one has treaded the path of righteousness in this regard, or
on the contrary, gone astray.
Before us, we have Doctor Zakir Naik, who began as a cross religious
debater, but then began delving into many other Islaamic subject matter
for which he clearly did not possess the necessary qualifications.
In an earnest attempt to highlight major discrepancies and blatant
errors in the works of Doctor Zakir Naik, our distinguished author has
most emphatically laid bare many extremely detrimental opinions and
views of his. This will certainly open our eyes to the incorrect stance he
adopts in as far his beliefs, juristic views, and his incorrect
interpretations of Qur'aan and hadith is concerned.
Let each one therefore study this book carefully with an open heart
putting Deen before us. It certainly is a must read and one that will
clarify many aspects pertaining to the nature of the aforementioned
personality.