Refutation of Dr. Zakir Naik

Bharatiya God's Blessings and peace be upon you,

After reading your refutation I totally agree with your presentation and how you assrted yourself. I am guilty in saying that I'm unfamiliar with Zakir and I will make more of an effort to read and understand him through his website (if it is intellectually possible). I also want to note that as a Philosophy/Philosopher student  have been blessed enough to experience the diversity in religion and to be exposed to religious institutions. I just want to point out that the foundation of what Hinduism stands for is widely misunderstood by all people not just Muslims. Of course from the outside looking in many Muslims as well as other adherents of faiths would certainly misundertood Hinduism and overlook its monotheistic core.

I have read certain books that briefly talked about Hinduism and read some hymns based on some of the sacred text. Even though Hinduism has its monotheistic roots you have to understand that in the Muslim mind when looking at various spiritual figures apart from God (i.e. idols) people will interpret that as a form of polytheistic worship. In conclusion you definitely have a good response and I hope we can bring to light the relationship between Muslims and Hindus...

Hello Dear Bharatiya

I have been very regularly listening to Mr. Zakir Naik. At least 3 of his debates were covering the Hinduism in detail. These were:-

1. Concept of God in major religions.

2. Universal Brotherhood.

3. Similarities between Islam and Hinduism.

So if you had an opportunity to listen to these you must have observed that a great numbers of Hindus were present at that time as well. At least a few hundred in the first two debates and a few thousand in the third one. So once he was quoting from Hindu scriptures he quoted the verses in Sanskrit and its translation in English. None of the Hindu sitting there contradicted him. Why?

There can be only two possibilities that he was quoting right (as these translations were of the Hindu pundits and not of his own team) or if he was wrong all the Hindus sitting there were ignorant of the Sanskrit and believed in what he said.

So if none of the Hindu can understand the Sanskrit or the Hindu scriptures why to accuse Zakir of not knowing Sanskrit. Of course he has no mastery over Sanskrit but he knows of it at least to deduce sense out of it, which most Hindus even don't know.

Regarding your saying that all religions lead to one objective this is totally wrong. All religions mostly preach good things but they don't lead to one objective. It's just like two sons of a father given equal status of which one is obedient while other refuses to accept his father as father. How can they be equal? Similarly one who worships one God can't be of like those who worship hundreds. One for sure is grossly wrong and will have to suffer for his deeds.

Hinduism is not classically a RELIGION like of any other religion. Whether you believe in one God or thousand or even do not believe in God you still remain a Hindu. You go to temple or simply refute all the forms of worship you still are Hindu. You whether draw figures / make idols of the Hindu gods or simply refuse to accept them you remain a Hindu.

What is really essential for a man to be a Hindu? Just to be born in Hindu family? So its more of a cultural dress having multiple and diverse paths of superstitious myths, whit no real religious codes to follow. Caste system, animal worship, considering their waste as sacred etc are the most humiliating and un-hygienic rituals established in the Hinduism, and once you find no justification for that you simply have to refute a person who is calling you to the truth and challenges you to bring forth any logic or proof for denial. 

Shams Zaman     Pakistan.

Dear Kumar

I am simply asking you that once you know a lot is wrong in the Hindu Philosphy then why you follow it?

And what  "truth"  is it?  You  believe  in submission  to Allah.  So be it.  We believe in  realisation .  We believe in reason.  Our ancestors have asked us not to believe blindly(which few follow in modern India).  They asked us to reason out everything.

What reason is this once you know there is some thing terribly wrong with Hinduism and it also lacks religious dimension why to follow it? Which is this logic. And what is the purpose of live you have no concept of divine punishment so how does one get one. Only by becoming a lower specie animal no one has claimed to be one yet? And neither the population of the animals has grown as so many dead humans change their form to animals but rather most species are at the verge of extint. And once you yourself has not read the Hindu scriptures how can you say the other one qouting is wrong?

I will certainly agree that you must meet Zakir and if he is quoting wrong you must tell him to stop. Because no one has the right to quote wrong but if he is not wrong I will certainly like to listen to your view point. 

Lets suppose if I am wrong then should I continue like this or if you are wrong should you continue like this? Surely I am not responsible for deeds of anyone else but as as a fellow human I must try to save others from suffering a huge loss.    

Shams Zaman   Pakistan.