NOW ZAKIR NAIK IS IN THE RAT-HOLE

Can the fellow dare to or can he reply!
NOW ZAKIR NAIK IS IN THE RAT- HOLE
Author : Dr Radhasyam Brahmac on Jun 23, 2008 - 01:46 AM


By Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari


When my article THE WORLD COMMUNITY OF MUSLIMS: Shackled People enslaved by the Koran appeared in the FFI website on December 11, 2007, a Muslim, in the nickname of “a believer”, commented that I was a rat and shouting from a rat-hole. He asked me to come out of the rat-hole and face Dr Zakir Naik, so that I may refresh my knowledge of Islam and get myself enlightened. He also said that Zakir Naik is capable of tackling a billion kafirs like me. I therefore decided to come out of my rat-hole and put ten questions to Zakir Naik on Islam in my article “A Few Questions to Dr Zakir Naik on Islam” which was posted in the FFI website on February 17, 2008. But till today, Zakir Naik has not come up to give replies to my queries. It is really amazing that a wise pundit like Zakir Naik, who can tackle billions of kafirs like me, is taking so much time to give reply to my very simple questions. This has led me to apprehend that he has no reply to offer.

Furthermore, in two subsequent articles, “Allah in the Vedas: Treachery of Dr Zakir Naik” and “Muhammad in the Vedas: Asinine Arguments of Dr zakir Naik” , I have denounced his claims that the Vedas mention Allah and Muhammad. But till today, there has been no indication that he would come forward to establish that his claims were genuine and my arguments were baseless. Every intelligent reader might have understood that Zakir Naik will never show his face again as it is not possible for a liar to withstand the heat of truth and he has, perhaps, taken shelter in a rat-hole. I therefore ask that learned reader ”a believer” , who advised me to face Zakir Naik, to request him to come out of his rat-hole and give replies to my questions.

But this author is more or less confident that Zakir Naik will not be able to find replies to my questions in his glorious Koran and in other Islamic scriptures as those books are stockpiles of lies, falsehood and contradictions. The creed of Islam, as I have understood after studying the creed for last 30 yrs, is an extremely brittle glassware hanging from the ceiling with the help of a delicate thread called the Kalima Taib that says “La Ilaha Illallah, Muhammadur Rasulullah” ( Allah is the only God to be worshipped and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah). If the thread breaks, the entire creed of Islam will be broken into pieces. Or in other words, Islam will evaporate if the belief in Kalima Taib weakens. One should notice that the first part of the said Kalima Taib, i.e. La Ilaha Illallah does not pose a serious threat to Islam, but the seond part, i.e. Muhammadur Rasulullah, does. If the belief in the Prophet-hood of Muhammad weakens, Islam would collapse within seconds.

So Muhammad should always be projected as the greatest man on earth. He should be projected as an apostle of peace by concealing his violent and most cruel deeds like massacring the Koreiza and Najir Jews. Divinity must be be sought in his marrying so many wives in his declining years, including his marrying Ayesha at the age of 52, when Ayesha was a child of 6. And his marrying Zeinab, the wife of his adopted son Zeid. Any rational comment on his life and deeds is to be declared a blasphemy and the commentator must be punished with death because the image of Muhammad is to be protected at any cost. This is the reason why Muslims are ready to tolerate even a criticism of Allah, but not of Muhammad. To every Muslim, he should be projected as ideal of Muslim behaviour or usha-in-hashna. What Muhammad said is to be followed strickly word by word and each and every Muslim should copy what he used to do without any question whatsoever.

Muhammad used to lick his fingers after having meals, so every Muslim is to do the same in a likewise manner. Muhammad disliked dogs and hence it not permissible for a Muslim to keep a dog as a pet. Muhammad disliked playing of chess and hence playing chess is forbidden for Muslims. Muhammad asked his followers to keep their beards and shave their mustaches so that they could be easily identified, and hence every Muslim has to keep beard and shave mustache. Every Muslim around the world should perform ablution before prayer exactly in the same way as Muhammad used to do 1400 years ago, and so on and so forth.

But difficulty arises if the believers try to copy all his deeds. Muhammad married his daughter in law Zeinab and if all the Muslims decide to imitate that holy sunnah of their Prophet, the situation will be extremely chaotic. Muhammad married 6 year-old Ayesha at 52, and if the believers proceed to follow this holy Sunnah of the Prophet today, they will be convicted, in any civilized country, of raping a child and put behind bars. Muhammad married Maimuna when he was in the state of muhrim (clad in the special pilgrimage garb called ihram). If all the pilgrims today, who proceed to Mecca to perform Hajj pilgrimage, want to marry a wife following the holy Sunnah of the Prophet, one can imagine how chaotic it would be. Muhammad kept 12 (or 22 according to the Shias) wives and if his followers try to imitate the Prophet in this aspect, they would be victims of Allah’s wrath, as He has not permitted them to increase their number wives beyond four at a time.

Though it is more or less certain that Zakir Naik would never come out of his rat-hole to give reply to my questions, I would like to place before him a few more questions on Islam.

Question No. 1

In one of my earlier writings, I have shown that Allah is not circumcised. According to the Hadith (Muslim-2872), Allah created Adam in His own image and hence simple commonsense says that, had Allah been circumcised he would have created Adam circumcised. And as a consequence all the believers would have born with natural circumcision and they would not need to undergo artificial circumcision after birth. The argument proves that Islamic God Allah is not circumcised. But the question remains – Was Prophet circumcised?

In fact, circumcision was a Jewish practice and Sir W Muir, in this regard says, “The practice is incumbent on Muslims as a part of the Sunna (custom or example of the Prophet), but it is curious that we have no authentic account of Mohammad’s own circumcision.” (The Life of Mahomet, Voice of India, New Delhi 1992, p- 191). When the Prophet died, attendants were prevented from making the body naked or looking at his naked dead body either, during the ritual bath before burial. To narrate the incident, Sir W Muir writes, “A heavenly voice was heard ordering not to bare the Prophet’s body, for the eyes of any one that looked upon his nakedness would forthwith be destroyed.” (ibid, p-191).

So my humble question to Zakir Naik is – Was the Prophet circumcised? Did any one of his wives, who only had the opportunity to see or feel Prophet’s private part, narrated any hadith in this regard?

Question No. 2

During Meraj, the Prophet saw that all the earlier Prophets were living in heaven. So it seems that, Prophets were allowed to enter Allah’s paradise just after their death and it was not necessary for them to wait in their graves till Qiyamah. So, one may conclude that Prophet Muhammad has already entered Allah’s paradise after his death and having good times there with houris and gelemans. Contrastingly, scriptures also say that, on the Day of Last Judgment (Qiyamah), the Prophet Muhammad would be the first man to enter Allah’s paradise with 70,000 followers. So, it becomes difficult for a kafir like me to ascertain where the Prophet is now staying. Has he gone to paradise, or is he lying in his grave and waiting for the Qiyamah? Hope that the wisdom of Zakir Naik will be able to remove my confusion in this regard.

Question No. 3

Allah sent Prophet Muhammad on this earth to establish Insaaf or justice that calls for equality of every individual, irrespective of his social, political or economic status, before law. Islam stands on five pillars, namely, Kalima, Namaz, Roja, Zaqat and Hajj. During Prophet’s life time, Allah ordained Zaqat, or spending a portion of the income of a believer for Allah’s cause by reveling several verses of the Koran, e.g. “You shall never be truly righteous until you give in alms what you dearly cherish. The alms you give are known to Allah”.(3,92) . “Those who give alms, be they men or women, and those who give a generous loan to Allah, shall be repaid twofold. They shall receive a noble recompense.” (57,18). “Who giveth his wealth that he may grow (in goodness),and none hath with him any favour for reward, except as seeking (to fulfil) the purpose of his Lord Most High” (92 : 18-20).

At that time, the Muslims who migrated from Mecca to Medina, were very poor and hence Muhammad asked his followers in Medina to spend a portion of their income, called Sadqa, for helping those immigrants. Later on Allah approved Sadqa (or alms) by reveling the verse of the Holy Koran that says “The alms (sadqa) are only for the poor and the needy, and those who collect them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to free the captive and the debtors, and for the cause of Allah (jihad), and (for) the wayfarers; a duty imposed by Allah. Allah is knower, Wise.” (9 : 60).

Later on, this Sadqa turned into Zaqat and Allah said, “Whatever alms you give shall rebound to your own advantage, provided that you give them for the love of Allah. And whatever alms you give shall be paid back to you in full: you shall not be wronged. As for those needy men who, being wholly preoccupied with fighting for the cause of Allah, cannot travel in land in quest of trading ventures : the ignorant take them for men of wealth on account of their modest behaviour . But you can recognise them by their look - they never importune men for alms. Whatever alms you give are known to Allah. Those who give alms by day and by night, in private and in public, shall be rewarded by their Lord. They have nothing to fear or regret.” (2,272-274)

It is really strange that, Zaqat, which Allah ordained as a compulsory practice for every believer, Muhammad refused to pay it. He used to say, there is no Zaqat for my family and the families of my kin (Muslim: 2340). My humble question is – Was this act of the Prophet justified? The well known proverb says – Charity should begin at home and Muhammad, as he was the prophet to establish Insaaf, should have been the first person to offer Zaqat. But his refusal to pay Zaqat was grossly unfair and by such an act he terribly violated the command of Allah. I therefore ask Zakir Naik to throw light on this misconduct of the Prophet and could he still be called a flawless man?

Question No. 4

Whatever Almighty Allah ordained, He ordained that for the benefit or wellbeing of the human race or in narrower sense, for the benefit of the believers. From this viewpoint it is more than certain that Allah ordained polygamy for the benefit of the believers. Simple commonsense tells us that, it is better if more and more people practice a good thing (like altruism, kindness, forgiveness etc) as much as possible. And there is no doubt that on this ground Allah permitted the Prophet to keep any number of wives he pleased (Koran: 33 :50). My humble question to Zakir Naik is – Why the all knowing and all observing Allah deprived the ordinary believers from practicing that good thing (polygamy) as much as they like by restricting their number of wives only to four?

Question No. 5

In Islam, only the husband possesses the legal right to divorce his wife or wives and if he utters the Arabic word Talaq thrice, the divorce becomes operative at once, irrespective of time and place. It does not matter whether he pronounces Talaq on the point of rage or in an abnormal condition (like drunk). Divorce becomes operative even if the husband utters the word Talaq thrice over telephone or in dream. Present advancement in technology has made the process still easier. Write the word Talaq thrice on a post-card, send it to your wife and divorce will be operative. Recently, nearly a couple of weeks ago, a Malaysian has divorced his two wives within 3 minutes by sending SMS. Now many Muslims are divorcing their wives through e-mail.

In this regard, Mr M Hidayatullah, a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, writes, *As soon as the husband utters the word Talaq thrice, the divorce becomes operative and the marriage gets dissolved from that very moment” (Principles of Mehamedan Law, Tripathy, 1980, p-324). So it is needless to say that Nikah (Marriage) and Talaq (divorce) in Muslim society is like using a toilet paper and throwing it away. Or more pointedly, like dogs’ marriage during their mating season. In this context, it should be pointed out here that Hajrat Hasan, son of Ali and the grand son of the Prophet Muhammad, used to bring new wives through the front door and divorce same number of wives and drive them out of the house through the back door. Many believe that Hasan, in this way, married more than hundred wives. And he never crossed Allah’s limit by keeping more than 4 wives at a time. It is really strange that the Shia Muslims around the world observe the death anniversary of such a man on the day of Muharram.

But a hadith by Abu Daud, narrated by Ibn Umar, says, “Talaq, though made legal, is the most detestable thing to Allah.” Another hadith by Sagir says, “Marry the women but divorce them not, because divorce (is so detestable to Allah that it) trembles Allah’s throne (Arsh).” (These two ahadith have been quoted from Hadis Sharif by Rafiqullah, Haraf Prakashani, Kolkata, 1979, p- 122).

My humble question to Zakir Naik is – Why Allah, Who detests Talaq most, has made Talaq so easy?

At present, I would like to restrain myself with these five questions alone and hope that Dr Naik will come out of his rat-hole to answer my questions.

*************************
Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari is Professor, Department of Applied Physics, University of Calcutta




(c) 2008 by Faith Freedom International
All opinions expressed in the articles belong to their respective authors, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Faith Freedom International.

All articles are (c)2008 by Faith Freedom International, unless stated otherwise. Permission is hereby granted to translate and reproduce the articles in this site which are copyright by FFI. For all others, please contact the copyright holder. Please provide a link to the original article.

All views expressed in the comments are the opinions of the persons posting them, and do not represent the opinions of Faith Freedom International.