What's new

Dr. Zakir Naik says Partition was wrong

In my opinion, Pakistan functions as a buffer, serving to shield India from the influx of Afghan refugees. Without this buffer, India would face significant challenges in managing such a large number of refugees. It's worth noting that India already accommodates around 40 million undocumented Bangladeshi Muslim refugees, in addition to millions of Rohingya Muslim refugees from Myanmar.

India's war against Pakistan resulted in the refugee crisis. You can look at it as cost of war or war booty. Pakistan is no buffer, they literally speak language which translates to a place of gathering with military intent, Urdu.
I believe that Afghanistan has the potential to stabilize and flourish, transitioning into a more liberal, democratic, and secular entity similar to Turkey during Mustafa Kemal Pasha's era. It's important to recall that Afghanistan was not originally founded on Islamic principles, which leaves room for its potential secular development. However, considering Pakistan's foundation rooted in Islam, it appears highly unlikely for Pakistan to move towards secularism. Instead, there is a greater chance for Pakistan to undergo further Islamization, paralleling Afghanistan's state in the 1990s.

You are absolutely wrong about Afghanistan but on the mark about Pakistan. Pakistan finds herself sharing borders with India, Iran and Afghanistan, all of whom are religious societies hosting governments flirting with their respective religious sentiments.
 
.
I believe that Afghanistan has the potential to stabilize and flourish, transitioning into a more liberal, democratic, and secular entity similar to Turkey during Mustafa Kemal Pasha's era. It's important to recall that Afghanistan was not originally founded on Islamic principles, which leaves room for its potential secular development. However, considering Pakistan's foundation rooted in Islam, it appears highly unlikely for Pakistan to move towards secularism. Instead, there is a greater chance for Pakistan to undergo further Islamization, paralleling Afghanistan's state in the 1990s.

What kind of Islamization do you think ? Madinah Charter made by prophet Muhammad is a foundation of a modern political system with nationalism as its core, thus Muslim, Christian, and Jews are all seen as equal citizen ( Muslim must pay Zakat and Non Muslim must pay Jizyah, both serves as like current tax made by modern state) and Muslim also has the obligation to defense their Christian and Jews group under Madinah Charter. There are freedom of religion in Madinah Charter as well. All religious groups will get protection from the state. First 4 Chalip uses democracy ( in early form ) to rule.

Early and pure Muslim nation (Madinah as center of power) resembles current nationalist, democratic, and Republic state. Only fool who cant see the essence but seeing in Semantic thinking only (due to modern political system definition is all based on Western people language and history)

Quran prevent Muslim ruler to impose Islamic law for private life like wearing Hijab, praying, etc.

Indonesia Today is pretty Islamic and the growth rate now is the best in ASEAN and second best in G 20 after India (but our GDP percapita is twice of Indian and with better equality than most emerging economies based on OECD latest report). Alhamdulillah. We are also the largest economy in both ASEAN and Muslim world with functioning and healty democratic system (Islamic system based on Surah As Syura in Quran )
 
Last edited:
.
I believe that Afghanistan has the potential to stabilize and flourish, transitioning into a more liberal, democratic, and secular entity similar to Turkey during Mustafa Kemal Pasha's era. It's important to recall that Afghanistan was not originally founded on Islamic principles, which leaves room for its potential secular development.
You remind me of a story of a man on seeing a mountain of manure exclaimed, with so much manure everywhere, there must be a pony here somewhere.
 
.
Zakir Naik was typical gangu muslim. I remember his lectures about how hindu gods were prophets of islam or something along those lines. Despite all this appeasement he was persecuted to hell and back by hindutva Modi regime.

Look what is happening in IoK, Manipur, Indian Punjab etc Indian state brutal hindutva regime politics revolve around divide and rule. With hindu majority given free hand to do what they want. After they burn down everything in one sided riots, security forces are called in to play drama of law and order.

Even today India have less reasons to exist as 1 entity let alone in 1947. Pakistan is like USA with its divisions along political lines and how country should be governed. India divisions are more like Balkan states.
 
.
Later in 1971 it was established muslims can not accommodate muslims , even today muslims are getting asylum in non Muslim countries .
Less of a muslim issue and more of an ethnic issue. A bad issue nevertheless.

Doesn’t hide from the fact that India is not a very good place for muslims.
 
.



Personally I strongly disagree with his opinion.

I know this has already been posted and its an old video, but I want to see what other members think of this guy's stupid opinion.

Long live Pakistan.


he had to run away from india to Malaysia..lol

he has to eat his words now.
 
.
If I am not wrong, I think Zakir Naik is from the Deobandi school. The standard Deobandi position on partition was always that it was wrong.

The Darul Uloom Deoband in India is now a political tool since they issued fatwas against him lol. Afghanistan owns the Deobandi movement now.

Ahmed Deedat was probably the best preacher and scholar Pakistan produced.

Bro he is a salafi.
Brother Deedat was South African, but hailed from Surat India.
 
.
I think among the non-Arab/non-oil-exporting countries, Indonesia, Malaysia and Turkey are doing fairly well. They are not tiger economies like East Asia or Europe, but they are not miserable like Egypt or Pakistan too.

I have a lot of respect of Malaysia and Indonesia.They are truely an example of Muslim nations. I am not sure about Turkey…
 
.
The Maurya Empire of Pataliputra (Patna), Bihar, under the rule of Ashoka The Great, governed a territory much larger than that of the British Raj.
View attachment 947907
All empires in the Indian subcontinent originated from the province of Bihar in India; there is no history of empires originating from the present-day region of Pakistan.
Pakistanis were unable to fend off the Islamic invasion, and as a result, the entire country was subjugated, humiliated, and compelled to accept Islam. India's non-Muslim majority is due to the Indian people's resistance to the Islamic invasion. The majority of Pakistan's army, the Punjab Regiment, cooperated with the British government even during the British era by cowardly refusing to take part in the mutiny of 1857.

This lasted 138 years. It's legitimacy as being the "origin" of India is about pathetic as using the British colony.
 
.
people have to be separated if they dont get on that's why partition. indians moan oh it was traitor muslims jinnah the traitor etc but it was these gangu dot heads that were oppressing the muslims and today you can see it minorities lynched burned beaten etc. plus god who wants to live like a rat in the slums. yet they compare themselves with china.

But i must say the indian subcontinent has the biggest traitors who are willing to allow outsiders to come and plunder for a few gains, then get killed by the colonizer at the end as a reward.
 
.
Seriously!!!... Can you share an example where any Muslim country as of today, become a global power and provides quality of life to their citizens except Arabs?
List of Muslim countries with a higher HDI than India...

Bangladesh, Morocco, Tajikistan, Iraq (even after the war), Krgyzstan, Indonesia, Lebanon, Palestine (despite occupation and war), Libya, Jordan, Uzbekistan, Eygpt, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Algeria, Maldives, Iran, Bosnia, Albania, Malaysia, Kazakhstan, Turkey - I've ignored all the oil countries.

 
.
List of Muslim countries with a higher HDI than India...

Bangladesh, Morocco, Tajikistan, Iraq (even after the war), Krgyzstan, Indonesia, Lebanon, Palestine (despite occupation and war), Libya, Jordan, Uzbekistan, Eygpt, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Algeria, Maldives, Iran, Bosnia, Albania, Malaysia, Kazakhstan, Turkey - I've ignored all the oil countries.

Since when India is a benchmark of developed and a nation who provide quality life to citizens…
 
.
Any such repetition of history targeted at India is realistically impossible for Pakistan to do independently, purely due to size and economic constraints, it would need allied states fully on-board. It's military can only really be defence-orientated or limited offensive capabilities.

Hypothetically if there was some kind of Islamic NATO, they could theoretically form of a coalition to invade countries such as Is**el/India and have a decent chance at success.

Not possible now and unlikely to happen at all, but maybe a slim chance in the future. Arabs might have a change of heart after they achieve total technological independence, and self-reliance and the honeymoon with the west and liberalisation ends.

Yeah I’m speaking from a historical perspective.

India is too large and too strong for it to go down that path.

However India’s biggest Achilles heel is it’s own philosophy of Hindutva. The antics they pulled in Leicester showed their true light to a lot of people in the Muslim diaspora.

I expect a couple of more of Leicester-like events to happen as Indians get more emboldened.
 
.
Less of a muslim issue and more of an ethnic issue. A bad issue nevertheless.

Doesn’t hide from the fact that India is not a very good place for muslims.
India has given space to 25 crore Indian muslims and 4 crore illegal bangladesh muslims .these muslims supported a separate muslim country but did not go .
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom