Fatwa About D. Zakir Naik
| Born | Zakir Abdul Karim Naik October 18, 1965 Mumbai, Maharashtra, India |
|---|---|
| Nationality | Indian, British |
| Education | Medicine Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery |
| Alma mater | Kishinchand Chellaram College Topiwala National Medical College and Nair Hospital University of Mumbai |
| Occupation | President of Islamic Research Foundation, public speaker |
| Years active | 1991–present |
| Known for | Dawah |
| Influenced by | Ahmad Deedat |
| Board member of | Islamic Research Foundation |
| Religion | Islam, Salafi |
| Spouse | Farhat Naik |
| Website | |
| IRF.net PeaceTV.tv |
|
Zakir Abdul Karim Naik (Urdu: ذاکر عبدالکریم نائیک; born 18 October 1965) is an Indian public speaker on the subject of Islam and comparative religion. He is the founder and president of the Islamic Research Foundation (IRF),[1] a non-profit organization that owns the Peace TV channel based in Dubai, UAE. He is sometimes referred to as a televangelist.[2][3] Before becoming a public speaker, he trained as a doctor.[3] He has written booklets on Islam and comparative religion.
- ^ a b "Dr. Zakir Naik". Islamic Research Foundation. Accessed 16 April 2011.
- ^ Hope, Christopher. "Home secretary Theresa May bans radical preacher Zakir Naik from entering UK". The Daily Telegraph. 18 June 2010. Accessed 7 August 2011. Archived 7 August 2011.
- ^ a b Shukla, Ashutosh. "Muslim group welcomes ban on preacher". Daily News and Analysis. 22 June 2010. Accessed 16 April 2011. Archived 7 August 2011.
[From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]
Is the Logic of Zakir Naik Reliable?
Darul Ifta of the Darul Uloom Deoband, India's foremost Islamic
centre of theological learning, issed a formal fatwa against Zakir Abdul
Karim Naik saying that he is:
"Ghair Muqallid and his knowledge is not deep. Therefore, he is not reliable and Muslims should avoid listening to him."1
Another fatwa says:
"we know that he is an agent of Ghair Muqallideen,
away from knowledge and wisdom, spreading mischievous things and
misguiding simple Muslims to wrong path."2
Many other prominent ulama, scientists and Muslim leaders have issued similar statements against Zakir Naik.4
To many educated Muslims, Wahhabism is seen as the biggest cancer, the
biggest virus within Muslim society. Maulana Mehmood Daryabadi,
general-secretary of the All India Ulema Council say of Naik:
"He
is neither an `aalim' (scholar) nor a `mufti' (one who gives fatwa). He
is free to practice Islam as he wishes. But he should not issue fatwas
from public platforms''5
4 The Times of India writes:
"A day after a Lucknow-based mufti issued a fatwa against Naik, a group
of Sunni ulema from Mumbai, on Saturday, accused him of working at the
behest of Saudi Arabia-backed Wahabis and Deobandis. The group also
called for Naik's immediate arrest and a ban on his conference scheduled
to be held at the Somaiya ground in Sion from November 14 to 23. The
group has also threatened to disrupt Naik's Islamic conference if the
state government did not cancel it." (Mohammed Wajihuddin, Times of India, 8 November, 2008)
To avoid Dr Zakir Naik in Fiqh issues!
Verdict of Mufti Ibraheem Desai on Dr Zakir Naik
Question: Could you please comment about Dr. Zakir Naik. Is he preaching according to Suunah? He has views which do not agree with schools of thoughts. Should we learn from his scholarship?
Answer: In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh Zakir Naik is known for discussions on comparative religions. He is not a qualified Aalim of deen. His comments on fiqh have not merit. If it is true that he condemned the fiqh of the Imams, then that in itself is a clear indication of his lack of fiqh and understanding of Shairah. We have come across a fatwa from Darul Ifta Jamia Binnoria, regarding Zakir Naik not being a certified Aalim of Deen. Zakir Naik should consult with Ulama in his endeavor of propagating deen. And Allah knows best Wassalam Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah
Question:
We run the web-site called
http://www.central-mosque.com/ and we
have several articles from Dr Zakir Naik about comparative religion.
We have NEVER put any of his opinions of Fiqh as it is clear that he is not a scholar. Mufti Nawal-ur-Rahman Saheb (http://www.shariahboard.org/) has recently issued many Fatawa about the misguidence of Dr Zakir Naik and as an example; please see below on his site. Download Audio Answer : 6329 In the light of these Fataws what should be done? Should we remove the articles which are about Hindu'ism etc?
Answer: In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh Zakir Naik is known for discussions on comparative religions. He is not a qualified Aalim of deen. His comments on fiqh have no merit. If it is true that he condemned the fiqh of the Imams, then that in itself is a clear indication of his lack of fiqh and understanding of Shairah. We have come across a fatwa from Darul Ifta Jamia Binnoria, Pakistan regarding Zakir Naik not being a certified Aalim of Deen. He should consult with Ulama in his endeavor of propagating deen. Dr Zakir Naik is an MBBS by profession, comparative religion orator and Da'ii by choice. Knowledge is not merely information that one may acquire from books, rather it is the chain of Nûr that flows from teacher to student. Anyone who deems knowledge to be mere information then he should know that Abu Jahal (Allah’s curse be upon him) was also knowledgeable, and if one thinks knowledge is in oration/khitaab then one should know that Adölf Hitler led the whole Germany with his oration into annihilation of a whole race. Dr Zakir Naik is a Da'ii and we give him his due respect for that. He knows himself that he is not an Alim in Deen. Thus Ulema have given their decree that he, not being an Alim in deen, should focus his da'wah to what he is good at (i.e comparative religion), and leave religious answering to the Fuqaha. Many times, our youth get impressed by contemporary comparative religious orators, because of their affluent speeches and abilities in deductive logic. This may be true to some extent in debates with a counterpart but Knowledge of Deen is much beyond this. Conclusively, May Allah accept Dr Zakir Naik's efforts in deen and give him taufiq to take guidance from the Ulema in matter of Shariah and Aqeeda. Ameen. And Allah knows best Wassalam Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah
Verdict of Darul-uloom Deoband on Dr Zakir Naik
http://darulifta-deoband.org/viewfatwa.jsp?ID=7077 Question: Asalamu Alikum wb our respected scholars of Islam, My question is regarding the famous daee of Islam Dr.Zakir Naik whether the method & way of his preaching,debating, studing different religons' scriptures are valid in the light of Quran & Hadith or not, and should Muslims learn his Dawah techniques or not? what are the particular things in his work that are against Islam? please send me a private email. Answer: (Fatwa: 1541/1322=B/1429) The statements made by Dr Zakir Naik indicate that he is a preacher of Ghair Muqallidin, he is of free mind and does not wear Islamic dress. One should not rely upon his speeches. And Allah (Subhana Wa Ta'ala) Knows Best Darul Ifta, Darul Uloom Deoband Verdict of Darul-uloom Karachi (Mufti Taqi Usmani's Institution) on Dr Zakir Naik http://ahlehaq.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=349&p=1810&hilit=zakir+naik#p1810
…According to information
provided by people Dr Zakir Naik is an expert on comparative religion and he
is known as a good orator, however he is not a qualified Islamic scholar or
a Mufti. Furthermore he not only doesn’t do Taqleed (himself) of any of the
four Imams of Fiqh but criticises the ones who do Taqleed (of these four
Imams).
Therefore the opinions of Dr Zakir Naik in Shariah
matters and injunctions will not be deemed acceptable unless they are
endorsed by a trusted scholar or a Mufti and general public are advised not
to heed his opinions in Shariah matters…
Allah (SWT) knows best.
Humble servant,
Khalid Jameel
Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi
This answer is correct!
Humble servant,
Mahmood Ashraf
Assistant Mufti
Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi
This answer is correct!
Humble servant,
Abdur-Rauf
Assistant Mufti
Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi
This answer is correct!
Humble servant,
Mohammed Abdul-Manaan
Assistant Mufti
Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi
Verdict of Jamia Binoria (Karachi, Pakistan) on Dr Zakir Naik http://www.jamiabinoria.net/efatawa/fatawa/27189.html …The above-mentioned Dr (Saheb) is not an Authentic scholar of Islam and from his external appearance doesn’t appear to be “strictly religious” therefore following him in matters of religion could be detrimental. However, if the intention of respected Dr (Saheb) is to propagate the Deen then it is advised that he should fulfil this noble obligation (of Islamic propagation) under the guidance and with consultation with Authentic and trusted scholars (of Islam) so that it may become a means of great benefit for all parties involved.
Humble servant,
Saifullah Jameel
Darul-Iftaa, Jamia Binnoria Karachi
Verdict of Mufti Shah Mohammed Naval-ur Rahman Miftahi (Shariah Institute, USA) on Dr Zakir Naik http://www.shariahboard.org/viewfatwa.aspx?Question_ID=1341 Question: Is Dr. Zakir Naik's material on 'Islam and comparative religion' reliable? I know that he is not an Alim but can we listen to his lectures on 'Islam and comparative religion' without paying attention to matters of Fiqh which, I agree, he is not qualified to discuss and elaborate? Is Harun Yahya's literature (not videos) reliable? Is one allowed to listen to his lectures on topics other than the ones he is not qualified for? For e.g. his books on Darwinism and nature deserve appreciation. [United States]
Answer: The answer is within your question, itself. Those
who are not authentically qualified and have learned through “Self-study”
are not trustable, therefore we should be cautious and such people should be
avoided.
http://www.shariahboard.org/viewfatwa.aspx?Question_ID=6329 Question: I have a question about Zakir Naik. I heard your fatwa to one of the questions posted earlier that Zakir Naik is Going Astray (gumrah hain). I just want to know on what basis is he gumrah according to you? I myself totally believe in what you have said, I don't need any Daleel but I told this to one of my friend and he was asking me for the reason. [Canada]
Answer:
The injunction of him (Dr Zakir Naik) being on error was passed because
on some occasions he was asked about “Sunnah” and “Dress code” etc. and in
his response he denied these matters and stated that they have no importance
in Islam.
Furthermore, he is not an authentic scholar of Islam
and for obvious reasons to enquire from someone who is not a qualified,
trusted and authentic scholar of Islam can’t be deemed appropriate because a
laymen would be unable to judge between the right and wrong being uttered
from an unqualified person.
The times which we live in has given rise to groups and
individuals who are free-thinking and he (Dr Zakir Naik) agrees with them
and is one of them.
These are the reasons why we felt the need to disagree
with him and point out his error.
An answer to Dr. Zakir Naik's answer regarding Schools of
thought
Composed by M. Yasin Achhodi
In a question posed to Dr.
Zakir Naik regarding which school of thought a Muslim should follow, he
answered in the following manipulating manner in which a layman can easily
be affected with lack of knowledge. His answer will be quoted first followed
by the reply. To read his entire article first,
click here.
Taqleed and following of an
Imam has not broken unity. In the Haramayn, it is the Muqallideen who read
together and coexist peacefully whereas the ones who are strictly against it
decide to make their own gatherings, Jamaa’ah and also groups.
My question: who has broken
unity? A Muqallid or a person with his own views of Deen?
Why is the remaining verse of the Holy Qur’aan
forgotten?
“O you who believe! Follow
Allah; follow the Messenger and those of authority (Amr) amongst you.” (Surah
al-Nisaa Verse 59)
Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) says that in this verse,
‘Amr’ refers to the jurists. This explanation is narrated from Mu’aawiyah
ibn Salah from Ali ibn Talhah which is a sound chain, Al-Itqaan)
The verse continues,
“And if you dispute, then refer to Allah and the Messenger if you really do
believe in Allah and in the last day. (Surah al-Nisaa Verse 59)
Allah’s statement
subsequently “if you dispute…” proves that those of Amr are indeed jurists
because He has ordered everyone else to follow them and then proceed to say
that “if you dispute..” Hence Allah has ordered those of Amr to refer the
disputed issue to the Book of Allah the traditions of the Prophet. The lay
person would be unaware of how to refer the disputed issue to the Book of
Allah and to the Sunnah and how their proofs would apply to the situations
and events. Thus, it is established that the second command, is for the
scholars. (Ahkaamul Qur’aan, vol 2, pg 257)
My question: Why state
quarter of the verse as proof for not following scholars when the remainder
of the verse denies your claim?
When a non-Muslim asks,
“who are you?” the common answer is “I am a Muslim”
When a Muslim asks, “who are you?” the common answer is, “son of so n so” or “I am a Gujrati/Pakistani/Malaysian” etc. Does this mean that to be a Pakistani is being guilty of the people mentioned in this verse?
I, till today, have not heard “I am a Hanafi” or
“Shaafi’ee” being the answer to “who are you?”
Furthermore, Taqleed has not created divisions.
This is grave misconception. Ahlus Sunaah Wal Jamaa’ah are proud to follow
the Sahaabah. The Islam of the Sahabaah was the complete Islam. They saw
Nabi (s) and they saw the Qur’aan in him. The understandings of the Sahaabah
is our understanding.
There were differences of opinion in the Sahaabah
too. Ibn Abbas (ra) narrates that ‘Umar ibn Khattab gave a sermon at Jabiyah
and said, “O people! If you want to know about the Qur’aan, go to ‘Ubaid ibn
Ka’b. If you want to know about inheritance, go to Zaid ib Thaabit. If you
want to about Fiqh, go to Mu’aadh ibn Jabal. If you want to know about
wealth, then come to me for Allah has made me a guardian and a distributor.
“ (Tabarani)
We hear it all the time, “oh you follow them, but
we follow Qur’aan & Sunnah.” Those who claim to follow the Qur’aan & Sunnah
as understood by themselves, please take a moment to observe the following.
Salim ibn Abdullah narrates that Abdullah ibn ‘Umar
was asked about a person who owed another person some money and had to pay
the load at a fixed time. The creditor then agrees to forgive a portion of
the load if the debtor pays before the deadline. Ibn ‘Umar disliked this
agreement and forbade it. (Muwatta Imam Malik)
There is no explicit Hadith of the Prophet which
has been offered as proof nor was any proof sought from Ibn ‘Umar (ra). It
is evident that this ruling was a personal judgement of Ibn ‘Umar.
Abdur Rahmaan narrated that he asked Ibn Sireen
about entering public baths. Ibn Sireen said that ‘Umar used to dislike the
idea. (Mataalibul ‘Aaliyah by Hafiz Ibn Hajar)
Ibn Sireen, who was one of the most learned
followers of the Companions, did not mention any proof except to say that ‘Umar
used to dislike the idea.
This is despite the
fact that there are several Ahadeeth regarding the issue of public baths.
There are plenty more
examples available. Now my question: Who is causing the division? The one
who follows a jurist like the Sahaabah and those who followed them did? Or
the ones who are breaking all bonds and ties from the people of authority,
the people of knowledge and telling everyone not to follow those of
authority and to follow only Qur’aan & Sunnah no matter how you understand
it? Who is this verse more likely to refer to?
‘Umar Ibn Khattab (ra)’s
sermon at Jabiyah in which mentioned who to go to for which subjects is also
not mentioned in the Qur’aan. It is very easy to say “it is a
misconception,” maybe if the conception was mentioned, the misconception
would not remain. To avoid the possibility of contradictions amongst the
scholars of differing Ijtihad over a primary source, the laity were
encouraged to follow only one Madhhab and Mujtahideen instead of referring
to several. This idea gained domination during the 3rd and 4th century AH.
One of the most important reasons for this was that a person can not take
the judgement which suits his desires best. According to some jurists for
example, Talaaq (divorce) takes place whereas according to some, it doesn’t.
Most people will no doubt follow the jurist which suits their desire best.
Following desires to the extent that they believe Halaal
to be Haraam and Haraam to Halaal is disastrous. Disobedience of this nature
is fatal and makes religion and law mere shame. For this reason, the
acceptance of following only one Madhhab has successfully continued for
around 11 centuries in the majority of Muslims. Furthermore to proudly state
its acceptance in the eyes of Allah that it is the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah
Wal Jamaa’ah, those who do follow the Qur’aan, those who do follow the
Sunnah, those who do follow the two as understood by the Sahaabah and those
who do follow an Imam are those who Allah has accepted to lead prayers in
the Haramayn Shareefayn.
My question: Is Qur’aan &
Sunnah your only source of making judgements? If yes, why did the Sahaabah
not ask for proof from Qur’aan & Sunnah? Why did some Sahaabah refer to
other Sahaabah for rulings? Were they not learned enough?
Again, please refer to following rulings which suit the
desires under number 3. I see no other reason why one would object to their
ruling.
The response to this is; This is the opinion of Ibn
'Umar and some other Sahabah. However, when the Sahabah disagree in a
matter, their statements are not a proof unless proof is brought from the
Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (s). As we stated before, Ibn 'Abbas and the
reports from 'Aa'ishah contradict the opinion of Ibn 'Umar and those with
their opinion. Thus, the opinion of Ibn Umar is not accepted unless
supported with proof from the mouth of the beloved Messenger Muhammad (s).
This topic itself is a lengthy topic in which one can not lightly accuse
Imaam Shafi’ee (Rahimahullah) of going against a Hadeeth.
Furthermore, everyone learning Ahadeeth and extracting
rulings from them in the light of Qur’aan is unreal and somewhat impossible.
Not many if not all have the ability to do so. Therefore, to say one can
follow a different ruling if they find a Hadeeth which contradicts it, is
absurd for a common person.
Bearing in mind, does a
common person have enough knowledge to know that there is no other stronger
Hadeeth that this ruling? Does the layman have enough knowledge to
understand why Imam Shafi’ee uses that Hadeeth as Hujjah and Imam Abu
Hanifah uses this?
Very easy to fall for this last statement, yet the
solution and answer is even easier. A Muslim is a person who believes in one
Allah and believes in Muhammad (s) as the final Messenger. A Hanafi,
Shafi’ee, Hanbali, Maliki does not come contradictory to MUSLIM. As the
meaning of Hanafi is not the opposite of what makes a person MUSLIM. Being a
Hanafi does not take the Shahaadah away from a MUSLIM. In fact, the
following (Number 6) helps.
We have never labelled ourselves as an entirety ‘Hanafi’
or ‘Shafi’ee’. But to use it to deny Taqleed is using false logic and
inaccurate claims. Every title or label has its position. If a person says,
“I am a MAN”, does this change the fact that he is a Human? The Qur’aan and
Hadeeth says we are ‘son of Adam’, does this mean we can’t say we are son of
our blood father? When one can claim that this logic is out of context, then
how can saying, ‘I am a Hanafi’ hence not MUSLIM as the Qur’aan labels us be
true logic?
This is enough to show the desperateness of trying to
deny Taqleed. Was Imam Abu Hanifah , Imam Shafi’ee, Imam Ahmad or Imam Malik
before our Prophet (s)? A Muslim is a person of Islam. Unless Hanafi,
Shafi’ee, Hanbali or Maliki is a religion, one can not use the above to
clarify anything which is trying to be proven. The entire context is off
track.
To clarify my above point,
I use this quote of Doctor Zakir Naik. Here he has put a MUSLIM in oppose to
Christian or Jew. Christianity and Judaism are religions, so this can be
used to prove Jesus was a Muslim. Hanafi or Shafi’ee etc is not a religion,
it is mere ignorance to use this out of such context.
InshaAllah I will not have
to use any more Qur’aan, Hadeeth, Logic or doctor Zakirs own statements to
answer the following as InshaAllah one will be able to understand his lack
of awareness by reading his following proofs.
This verse is being used once again against the
Muqallideen. This time, the Muqallideen are said to not be following the
Qur’aan & Sunnah.
Imagine giving a person the
Qur’aan, the Ahadeeth and then saying, live your life according to these
rulings. Will that person be able to understand what the Qur’aan means by
Quroo’ in the verse where Allah says, “And those women who are divorced
should wait for three Quroo’”?
And what type of (Mukhaabarah) will he know or
understand in the Hadeeth where Nabi (s) said, “Whoever does not stop the
practice of Mukhaabarah should hear the proclamation of war (against him).”?
(Mukhaabarah is a certain type of farming. There were several forms of
Mukhaabarah practiced) The Hadeeth is fairly general, how would a lay person
distinguish between the permitted ones and the forbidden one?
Then there’s one Hadeeth which says, “Whoever has
an Imaam, then the Imaam’s recitation is his recitation.” On the other hand,
another Hadeeth says, “There is no Salaah for he who does not recite the
Faatihah.” How would a common person which Qur’aan and Hadeeth be able to
choose which Hadeeth to follow, or what is the middle route, or does it
refer to something else, or was the Hadeeth for a particular event only?
Obviously one is will have to turn to a learned jurist who has mastered
himself in these issues and whom Allah (swt) has blessed unrecognizable
wisdom. So when the person asks this jurist/imam, is he now following the
Imaam or Qur’aan and Sunnah?
Obviously he is
following the Qur’aan and Sunnah as passed on by these scholars as they
compiled rulings. And it is common sense that if a person tries to follow
all the Madhaahib then he will lead to following the rulings which suit him
best.
My question is, who is
following a more reliable and sound meaning of the Qur’aan and Sunnah and
who is taking literal and incomplete perceptions of the Qur’aan and Sunnah.
The obvious answer would be the one who chooses to follow a Madhhab is safer
from making his own meaning of Deen whereas following a Madhhab is actually
following a sound understanding of Qur’aan and Hadeeth.
The answer of Nabi (s) is
so strong and true in its wisdom. He did not say, “It is the one who follows
Qur’aan & Sunnah.” He said, “It is the one to which I and my companions
belong.” Note, the Sahaabah are mentioned. The Sahaabah passed on the true
Islam to the Tabi’een. When the Tabi’een followed the Islam of the Sahaabah,
they are included in that sect. Now will you say that the Tabi’een aren’t
because they followed the Sahaabah and not the Qur’aan and Sunnah? The
Tabi’een turned to certain Sahaabah and similarly the Tab’ Tabi’een turned
to certain Tabi’een for certain issues. Why did they not look directly into
Qur’aan and Hadeeth?
A Madhhab is a compilation
of rulings, an understanding of Fiqh related issues. The Islaam we follow is
the Islaam of the Sahaabah. Do we have a better understanding of Hadeeth and
Qur’aan than these great scholars? If one does, they can feel free to be a
Mujtahid and have their own Fiqh. As for those who follow a Madhhab, they
are following the Islaam of the Sahaabah.
By saying the only school of thought you should
follow is Prophet Muhammad, you have clearly showed that you do not
understand the meaning of “school of thought.” A school of thought is a
doctrine, The point of view held by a particular group (dictionary) a set of
ideas or opinions which a group of people share about a matter (Cambridge).
The Islaam of Nabi (s) was
not a ‘point of view.’ It was the true Islaam in its state. When the
narrations varied after the Sahaabah, that is when the need for school of
thoughts emerged. That is when a strong opinion was required. A common
person can not conclude the Deen with his own understandings.
[END OF ARTICLE AND
ANSWERS]
The following
questions were posed very nicely upon the above reply:
On the basis that the
Muslims of early years were more knowledgeable, more pious and less affected
by Shaytaan than us. If you have the ability to extract rulings from Qur'aan
in the light of Ahadeeth so it does not contradict other Ahadeeth being
aware of the chains of narrations making sure that when you take one Hadeeth
for the ruling, the other Hadeeth is not rejected and a valid reason is
available, if you are able to distinguish between different terms used for
the same ruling or the same word used in different context for multiple
rulings, if you are able to distinguish between a weak chain and a sound
chain of narrations, if you are able to distinguish between rulings which
were permitted for a certain period of time, if you are able to do all this
and more then by all means, Taqleed is not for you.
Now ask yourself, are we capable of even 1% that they
spent their entire lives on? If everyone becomes this, what will happen to
Muslims? The entire Muslim world will differ in rulings and the entire
Muslim population will be stuck in books their entire lives.
Now you tell me, on what
basis should we not follow a Madhhab and on what basis should we reject what
has been a successful way of life from the time of Sahaabah. Like i said
above in reply to Dr Zakir Naik, even the Sahaabah (ra) followed other
Sahaabah in Fiqh matters and did not look into Qur'aan & Hadeeth as the
Sahaabah they followed in the matter knew the ruling better than them. They
did not ask for proof in differences of opinions like we do.
Following a Madhhab is securing oneself to following a
steadfast Fiqh instead of a purpose driven misunderstood perception of what
a person makes of Ayaat and Ahaadeeth.
Ironic that you used the word honorable. In your honor
for him, you have forgotten that he dishonored all the verses I mentioned,
the Ahadeeth and events of the Sahaabah i mentioned above and also the ways
of the Muslims since the 3rd century AH. I'm afraid he lost all his honor
upon this one article. This doesn't change the fact the he speaks very good
intellectual things. But once he talks about 'Aqaaid or Taqleed, I can't but
help feel sorry for him as do many scholars and highly respected and learned
Ulamaa-e-Kiraam.
What I said is not to approve Madhhabs, to approve
Madhhabs, there are much stronger and evident literature available. What I
said was a simple answer to everything Dr Zakir Naik has said. Any person
attacking Taqleed with Qur'aan and Hadeeth can be answered with their own
statements because all their statements are incomplete and very easy to be
blinded to a simple minded person.
"The Legal Status of Following a Madhab" by Chief Justice
Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani is a book i recommend. If any, read this
inshaAllah at the least. If you still do not agree then Innallaha Yahdee
Man-Yashaau Wa Yudhillu Man-Yashaa.
And Allah knows best.
Note from Central-Mosque Admin:
Legal Status of following a Madhab can be read here:
|
visit : http://darulifta-deoband.org/viewfatwa.jsp?ID=9421,ID=7077, ID=110,
http://www.central-mosque.com/fiqh/zakirnaik.htm ,
http://jamia binoria fatwa againest zaid hamid,
http:// to avoid dr zkir naik in fiqhissues! -central mosque.com,
http:// shaykh yahya al-hajooree refutes zakirnaik,
http:// www.asliahlesunnet.com/files/..f_dr_zakir.pdf,
http://www.archive.org/details/haqeeqatdrzakirnaik,
http://ownislam.com .
http://jamia binoria fatwa againest zaid hamid,
http:// to avoid dr zkir naik in fiqhissues! -central mosque.com,
http:// shaykh yahya al-hajooree refutes zakirnaik,
http:// www.asliahlesunnet.com/files/..f_dr_zakir.pdf,
http://www.archive.org/details/haqeeqatdrzakirnaik,
http://ownislam.com .
