There are very few muslims in the subcontinent who hate Zakir Naik. Naik has converted 10-15 people in his speech in Dubai. He is very influential. The habit of framing each and every muslim scholar on charges of promoting terrorism is not a good way to promote religious harmony. This is an allegation, not a smoking gun that said scholar is a fanatic.
Anyway personally I do not like Zakir Naik. Just telling you he is respected, including by the older members of my entire extended family who have watched his speeches and admire his knowledge. For me he is too conservative and I prefer Ghamidi and Muhammed Farooq Khan but being conservative is not good enough excuse to declare some scholar a terror sponsor. We can call him bigoted and that may be a view but banning is a step too harsh.
Also if you don't believe me he is respected then look at his facebook page and the number of likes.
Ban
Banning does not mean that the muslim population dislikes him.
LOLZ, About his Research Work on Islam, and his knowledge, pls read this post
https://defence.pk/threads/exposed-...ermind-hafiz-saeed.438281/page-2#post-8447049
and post no. #27 for the Videos, you would like it.
And what is this Drama of Lucknow, there is no such country such as Lucknowi sultanat.
That's an idiotic step by an Hindu majority country that fears the spread of Islam at a rapid pace despite all the govt machinery trying to undermine the freedom of Muslim people in India. But we Singaporeans welcome him here and waiting for his visit. This ban will only make him more popular.
Good luck for you Singaporeans, even a Clown can impress a group of people.
And nobody is in Fear of the ISLAM, rather the Wahahism ideology, the same ideology, that gave the birth of the ISIS.
And Banning means, to check his source of Fundings, and the Peace TV, which won't be able to seen in India, where this clown Blabbering could be heard.
So you accept that your lord had 8 wives so why do you people object Muslims for 4 four wives? The discussion is over.
A little knowledge is more harmful, than the ignorrance.
1. Hinduism is not a Religion or any other SECT, rather its a Dharma, and the meaning of Dharma means Duty and for you its the way of life or the Culture of the Indian Subcontinent region.
According to Swami Sivananda, "Hinduism allows absolute freedom to the rational mind of man. It never demands any undue restraint upon the freedom of human reason, the freedom of thought, feeling and will of man. Hinduism is a religion of freedom, allowing the widest margin of freedom in matters of faith and worship. It allows absolute freedom of human reason and heart with regard to such questions as to the nature of God, soul, form of worship, creation, and the goal of life. It does not force anybody to accept particular dogmas or forms of worship. It allows everybody to reflect, investigate, enquire and cogitate.
Pls read this
http://hinduism.about.com/cs/basics/a/aa060303a.htm
2. No One could be converted to Hindu, nor, there is any rule whether you believe in any God, or any form of GOD and no one can stop, anyone to become Hindu.
3. This Clown Zakir Naik claims that Islam is the only country that have given the number of wife that could be kept by a Muslim male, and the
OBJECTION is not because of Hindu, or any other religion, but rather the LAW, which equates each citizen equal, and the law should be equal to every SECT.
4. What this Clown is doing, he is taking the credit of someone's work, Pls refer
https://defence.pk/threads/exposed-...ermind-hafiz-saeed.438281/page-2#post-8447049
5. He is the one who is trying to justify various things, with a flawed Logic, and trying to give a flawed defination of Terrorism, which is the threat.
6. And answer for your Logic, is that the religion or Sect is a personal things, but cannot be above LAW, and there is no rule even for Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, that they cannot have more than one wife, but One wife is forced by our Constitution.
For Polygamy and Zakir Naik thinkings
1.
Naik – Average life span of women is more than that of men.
By this logic, polyandry (one wife- multiple husband) should be allowed. Because, on average, one wife would require more than 1 husband to cover her entire life!
2.
Naik – World female population is more than world male population.
This contradicts previous point. If one looks at 2008 data of World Population as published by UN Statistics Division, there are 2% more males than females in the world! The same is also true for marriageable age discarding children and elders. Does he recommend Polyandry now?
3. Before we get further, let us also look at the countries with worst gender ratio. You can view the list at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sex_ratio
The table has facility to sort by fields. What we observe is that the top 9 countries with more men than women
are all Muslim countries. Stricter the Islamic Law, more adverse the gender ratio. There are 2.74 times more men in UAE and 2.46 times in Qatar. India and Pakistan are also is not far off with their significant Muslim population!
4.
Naik – Muslim women in due faith could bear a small personal loss to prevent a greater loss of letting other Muslim sisters becoming ‘public properties’.
We just saw the data above. Does Dr Naik recommend the inverse now?
5. In civilized societies like Vedic Dharma, each women apart from one’s wife is viewed as mother, by default. The basic rule is “Matrivat Paradaareshu – All except wife are like my mother”. That is why the question of someone becoming public property does not arise. In wars, legends like Shivaji would bow to imprisoned women and call them mother! And in a society that respects women, the question of adverse gender ratio does not arise as is happening in conservative Muslim countries.
6. What is important is use of word
“property” for women. Dr Naik recommends that polygamy enables women to be private property rather than “public property” at small personal loss. This small loss is a great insult to entire womanhood. If sharing of husbands is haram, why is sharing of wife merely a small personal loss? Vedas do not discriminate at all between men and women and provide them equal rights and privileges in all matters including marriage.
Next he lists 4 reasons why polygamy is permitted but polyandry is not permitted:
a. This will help identify father of the child!
(But now we have DNA testing available!)
b. Man by nature is more polygamous!
(What is the proof for this except that polyandry is stoned to death? Is this not a ploy to insult entire womanhood by justifying polygamy?)
c. It is biologically difficult for women to be polyandrous and rear children!
(This is again another shameless reason to justify keeping multiple wives and concubines, in name of religion and social service!)
d. High chance of acquiring sexual disease!
(On contrary, medical science proves that it is women who are more susceptible to contract such diseases from polygamous men than vice versa. Being a medical student sometime, Dr Naik should have verified at least this much before publication. Or perhaps he never got a chance to practice or get back to medical books!)
Wise can decide themselves the mentality of this admirer of Osama bin Laden.
In summary, Polygamy is a malpractice, quite aptly condemned by the Vedas. Hinduism guided by Vedas and its role models has always emphasized on monogamy and self-control as the only way for humans.
Efforts to justify polygamy, through whatever reasons, is an insult to entire womanhood.
May such deviant minds introspect and come into the shade of Vedas. May they inculcate feeling of respect for entire Matru-Shakti.
(and we have to take your word for it in any case, just like everything else you always claim about Lucknow and its muslims)....That too introduce sectarianism on top of it as if you lot aren't divided enough already.
