Skip to main content

Rising Intolerance !! Moving away from rationality!

I stay in a certain area of Hyderabad which has considerable Muslim presence as the result of which I’m reasonably familiar with their way of life. Recently my brother informed me of one Dr Zakir Naik, an Islamic preacher who attracts significant following among Muslim youth.

I was informed that Naik is a super-intellectual who proved that Islam is the only true religion while others are wrong. Out of mere curiosity, I started searching for his lectures in Youtube. Most of his talks are full of mystery to me. I simply can’t understand how this man can win this much popularity .According to me even a simple graduate must be able to see through his nonsense.

Most of his talks are rhetorical; he simply announces a “fact” rather than reasoning it out. Most of his theories are quite irrelevant to me as I have no inclination to research minute details of historical texts. However there is one particular theory which gave me Goosebumps literally.

Naik was once asked by a non-Muslim on his TV show, "Why are non-Muslims not allowed to propagate their religion or construct their places of worship in Islamic nations, while Muslims expect the same right to be given to them in non-Muslim majority countries?"


Naik agrees that Islam does not allow a Non-Muslim to propagate or construct his places of worship in an Islamic country.  And kindly listen to the most fantabulous explanation ever given for such a question:

 "Would a principal hire a teacher who says that 2+2 = 3? Of course the principal would not hire that teacher because that teacher does not have the right math knowledge. Similarly, Muslims will not allow other religions because they are not right. In the Quran 3:85, it says that Islam is the only true religion. In matters of religion, we Muslims are confirmed true, while the non-Muslims are not. If they were confirmed, why would they follow the wrong religion?”

Now really!!! To make a comment such as this you require a mind that is remarkably insulated to influence of the world outside. This man closes his eyes and believes that beyond his own world there is no other world existing.

Coming from an MBBS graduate this is really inexcusable. What did Naik study in this university of life? Did he absorb nothing from the essentially secular fabric of this country?

“2+2=4” is a universal Mathematical truth; this is accepted by all not out of force but as a scientific fact that is tested by all. If only Naik can understand it better, this is an objective reality removed from the subjectivity of senses. People might temporarily consider the possibility of sun rising from the west, but “2+2=4” will hold true forever as it is a thing-in-itself. It has no connection with our perception or experience. Where did you get his Maths lessons from?

That Islam is the only true religion is not a universally accepted truth.

Naik says “In the Quran 3:85, it says that Islam is the only true religion.”

Come on sir! This is truly ridiculous!! Imagine a writer claiming that his novel is the best one ever written quoting none other than himself!!!!!! Or a filmmaker claiming that his film is the best because he says so!
Islam is a true religion only to those who practise it. It is not a self-evident truth for practitioners of any other religion. Where do you get your lessons of logic from?



Further “In matters of religion, we Muslims are confirmed true, while the non-Muslims are not.”

How do you know that it is confirmedly true? Your logic is based on the acceptance of Koran. But if you don’t accept it, in no conceivable manner is your religion confirmedly true. How do you “announce” this “fact” thus?


If they were confirmed, why would they follow the wrong religion?”

My point is how you could arrive at the conclusion that other religions are false. Have you conducted some experiments? Islam is just one of the many religions of the world, as it is no less absurd than dogmas of other religions. I’m not claiming that any particular religion is superior. All I am saying is that other religions have reformed their dogmatic assertions & traditions and progressed towards a more progressive role of religion in society. People have questioned the ills & negative aspects of religious traditions and got it rectified. They don’t blindly accept the authority of some self-appointed guardians of society & morality.

According to all non-muslims, it is Islam which is the wrong religion! But since we don’t use this to subjugate you, you people must be equally tolerant towards us.

On the final note, Dr Naik, please go ahead with all your dogmas & nonsense! I’ve nothing against them as long as they don’t infringe upon the rights of others. In the above context, you’re defending the undefendable. On one hand you appreciate the fact that other religions allow you people to build religious structures, but you won’t because others are wrong!!! Kindly understand that your religion is no exception and in the perception of others, Islam is a religion which encourages intolerance. You are infact adding fuel to their argument that Islam is basically incompatible with other religions & are fundamentalists. (having a channel ironically named Peace TV won’t work)

PS:  Prominent Indian Muslims such as Salman Khurshid and Javed Akhtar reproved what they felt were Naik's mischievous attempts to radicalize the Indian Muslim community and promote communal strife. Thank God, this is India.

Comments

  1. Seriously !!! Religion is the last thing that comes to my mind. In my opinion "There is no such thing that is absolutely right, and absolutely wrong".. What ever I say or put out into the public is only a projection of my thought. I cannot go and claim Others are wrong. I think everyone should stick thier thoughts and also accept others, "Time" will tell which is correct. Claiming any onething as "The Right One" Doesnt make any sense to others who doesnt belive in that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. @Arun Kumar:
    What ever I say or put out into the public is only a projection of my thought.
    Precisely so.. whatever we think we "know" is but sum-total of our perceptions. Thats why, while what we think might be true according to us, they needn't be true to others..

    We can of course discuss, debate and reason out..But in India rationality is generally rejected..

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is sad that beliefs are what divide us...
    When one understands that although the texts, prayers and methods are different, there is a striking similarity between all the worlds of religion and beliefs, then only peace will prevail...

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Sowjee:

    there is a striking similarity between all the worlds of religion and beliefs, then only peace will prevail...
    These days I don't think that way...Not all religions are similar. We may be forced out of political correctness to say that all religions are true and only the interpretation of it is bad....But the fact that most of the terrorists belong to Islam does give scope for skepticism on my part.. There has to be something seriously amiss in their philosophy..

    ReplyDelete
  5. 來拜訪你囉~期待你的下次文章~加油^^.........................

    ReplyDelete
  6. hi madhav

    mmmmmmmmmm, i dont understand why do people try to segment and advertise on _________domain."WE ARE RELIGION BY FORCE NOT BY CHOICE".having faith in any religion , praying god in any form, any name is good.

    and zakir naik is making hell out of religious issue,
    if he thinks he is promoting his religion by his absurd preach. HE IS WRONG , HE IS A MANIAC, NO ONE CAN DO SO BY BLAMING OTHER COMMUNITY.

    ReplyDelete
  7. if i may than i would like to say something else

    as far as i know "NO RELIGION JUSTIFIES KILLING OF INNOCENT PEOPLE" TERRORISM HAS NO RELIGION or VALUES

    ReplyDelete
  8. To the writer of this article:

    Dear everyone knows 2+2=4 but everyone doesnt know what is "CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR" [including u]......

    He just used "CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR" in his speech...

    ReplyDelete
  9. @ Hassan Saeed:

    One must be careful of the metaphor one uses....You obviously didn't get my logic when I said that while Maths is objective and for no variation of perception or experience 2+2 ceases to be 4....It is always 4 irrespective of sensory perception....

    Whereas that Islam is the ONLY true religion is NOT objective. It is subject to one's own perception and experience.....

    I have nothing against any of his other teachings as only his followers would come in the purview....however he is encouraging intolerance when he is making uninformed comments such as these...

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

All-time Hits

The Controversial Caste System of Hinduism

Imagine concepts like feudal system, slavery, capitalistic exploitation and anti-Semitism being used to define the core of Christianity! Christians will be outraged at this inappropriate mixing of the core universal values of Christians and societal & historical aspects which merely existed in a Christian world.
Now this raises the question – why is caste system defined as the core of Hinduism? Especially as “caste” itself is a western construct. Sounds irrelevant?
Okay. Now imagine concepts like slave-trade, war on infidels, brutal subjugation of masses, temple destruction, and forceful conversions marking the core of Islam.
It is considered sensible to first understand what the core scriptures speak about the religion and its universal values. The ills of the community & its societal aspects are differentiated from its core philosophy.
Now, this brings us to the most interesting question – why is Caste System (caste based on birth) propagated to be the defining feature of Hindu…

Chetan Bhagat : His Literary Style and Criticism

Chetan Bhagat’s (CB) recent column created a furore, chiefly because of his audacity to speak for Muslim community and what many people conflate with his support for Narendra Modi’s Prime Ministerial ambitions.  
But what interested me most - and what this post would focus on - is questioning of his literary merit (or lack of it). Many journalists ridicule CB’s style of writing and his oversimplistic portrayals of characters sans nuance or sophistication. But I suspect this has more to do with the fact that his readers alone far outnumber the combined readers of many journalists - a point that many don’t appear capable of digesting.
No takers for layman’s language!
When Tulsidas rewrote Ramayana in Avadhi (a local contemporary dialect then), many conservative sections of society came down heavily upon him for defiling the sanctity of a much revered epic (originally written in Sanskrit). When Quran was first translated in Urdu (by Shah Abdul Qadir in 1798), it faced intense opposition by …

The concept of Dharma in Ramayana

The concept of Dharma is not adequately understood by Hindus themselves, not to mention others. Dharma is not a set of do’s and don’t’s or a simplistic evaluation of good and bad. It requires considerable intellectual exertion to even begin understanding Dharma, let alone mastering its use.

Is Dharma Translatable?
Few words of a language cannot be faithfully translated into another without injuring its meaning, context & spirit. English translations of Dharma are blurred and yield words like religion, sense of righteousness, discrimination between good and bad, morals and ethics or that which is lawful. All these fall short of fully grasping the essence of Dharma.
Every language has an ecosystem of words, categories and grammar which allow a user to stitch words together to maximum effect such that meaning permeates the text without necessarily being explicitly explained at each point. Sanskrit words such dharma, karma, sloka, mantra, guru etc., now incorporated in English, lose thei…

Trending Now