...

...

Search This Website

Loading...

Sunday, December 23, 2007

Zakir Naik's comments on Battle of Karbala and Yazid


The speech of Dr Zakir Naik during the Aman Conference organised by Islamic Research Foundation in Mumbai has truly been shocking. Regarding his opinion on the battle of Karbala, as 'just another fight for attaining political clout', I am not as astonished as I am with the use of the word 'Raziallah Anhu' with the name of Yazid.

As we all know, the term 'Raziallah anhu' ie RH (or often Raziallahtala anahu) is used as suffix mostly with the name of either the companions of Prophet Muhammad or other leading figures in Islamic history as a mark of respect. It means, one whom God is pleased with.

Though some scholars of a bit of standing here and there have held these views on the battle of Karbala, it is the use of this suffix (RH) with Yazid's name which is absolutely unacceptable to majority of Muslims. I have never listened to Zakir Naik's speeches for long. But this comment will surely damage his reputation.

It is unthinkable to eulogize and glorify Yazid. Dozens of Muslim organisations and scholars have condemned the statement. Says Hafiz Syed Tahir Ali, 'the battle between Hazrat Imam Husain and Yazid was a fight between good and evil'.

Muslim leaders have questioned how a person like Yazid, who was responsible for the brutal killings of the grandson of Prophet and his family & companions, and the person who led the destruction at Medinah, could be held in such a high esteem by Naik.

Such thinking has nothing to do with Shia-Sunni difference as non-Muslims also take inspiration from the sacrifice of Hazrat Imam Husain. I remember once a guy was expressing similar sentiments about Yazid in a drawing room conversation and all of us were outraged(of course, everybody was a Sunni there).

He was trying to justify the tyrant's conduct, when Comrade Khalid Saifuddin, who wanted to end the discussion, told the guy, "if you are such a staunch supporter of Yazid why don't you name your son after him". That silenced him. [Zakir Naik is president of Islamic Research Foundation that owns the Peace TV Network]
Post-script:
A year after I wrote this post, Zakir Naik is again in the midst of a controversy. Clerics in several Cities in UP are up in arms against him. Also, a fatwa has been issued by a Lucknow mufti against him.
Naik said that one should seek help from Allah alone, not even the Prophet (PBUH). A few other statements were also responsible for this wave of anger against him. Naik says that there is a conspiracy against him.
Though he is an oustanding speaker with a strong memory, Muslims of Indian sub-continent often feel pride when he compares religions and subtly puts the other religions down. Islam is the second biggest faith in the world in terms of believers and the fastest growing religion.
We have no reason to be insecure or have any sort of compex that we need a fluent English speaking guy to rundown others. Non-Muslims see arrogance in his style. He can be a bit more humble and appreciative of other faiths and also traditions like the Sufi and Islamic sects while Muftis can also keep their cool and contain the habit of issuing fatwas.

84 comments:

Faisal said...

Adnan bhai,

This was shocking for me also to listen. I think Zakir Naik is heavily under Salafi influence and has got quite away from traditional Islam.

indscribe said...

ya, even when he was contacted again he defended his statement and the use of RH.

Ashraf's Pen said...

I have heard a lot of his speeches and many people I knew were big fans of Dr. Zakir Naik but I am not interested.

The problem with him is he is unwilling to acknowledge that there are problems within Islam. It is good if one shows using evidence from the Quran that women are given a good position in Islam but then one must have the courage to admit that on ground the situation is not all that great. Only when we admit our problems can progress be made.

Moving on I am not sure why he praised Yazid. To gain media attention maybe!!

Because Dr. Zakir NAik is not a historian and he has no right to glorify Yazid and term the battle of Karbala as a political battle unless he has evidence.

Nysa said...

Zakir Naik is not a scholar or historian or thinker he is merely a debator which has inherent desire to win. Winning is to proove, proove people which eventually boils to getting attention.When this is the intention where is humility or fairness.Zakir Naik or any who feels Yazid is r.h then they beleive anybody who can harm prophets grandson is worthy of praise.There are several sayings of prophet(pbuh) where Prophet said to love hassan hussain. Prophets words are our command and if anybody stands and say the one who fought against Hussain even if its for political reason is someone whom he pray god to be pleased with he need to think again about his love for Prophet.Besides if today karballah happens will Zakir Naik stand with yazeed against Hussain?
Zakir Naik has been shunned by salafis too and they are staunchly against him.Yes this was to please those salafi groups who are against him and desperate attempt to get media attention as media totally boycotted his Peace progamme in Bombay.Zakir Naik is man with his own agenda any person who do dawa with intentions to please Allah would not have bothered to please any group.Well we are all rewarded as per our intentions so will he!

history_lover said...

Unlike shias who hold Yazid to be pure evil ,many sunni scholars hold a more nuanced opinion of Yazid .
We he more superior to Imam Husain (RA) ? No way .
He was complicit in the brutal treatment of Imam Husain (RA) and his family although he may or may not have directly ordered his generals to behave in this vile manner.He used to drink alcohol but some praise him for his participation of jihads against the Byzantine empire .

history_lover said...

Ashraf
There are no problems in Islam although there are numerous issues within muslim society .
How can there be a problem in Allahs message to mankind ?

Hyderabadi said...

Sorry dear indscribe. On this topic, I will support Dr.Naik. However I do have contradictions with him on some issues. Also, instead of "Radi allah anhu" its better for Dr.Naik to write "Rahmahullah", as written by many more scholars like Ibn-e-Taimia, Imam Ghazali, etc.
My sincere advice to you to read different scholars books on this topic & not restrict to a single view. Especially Ibn-e-Taimia's "Minhaj us Sunnah" & Ibn Khalkan's "Wafyaat ul ayaan".

Ofcourse that battle of Karbala, was not a battle of "good v/s bad". If this was so, just think for a while... at that time many more kabaar-e-Sahaba like Abdullah Bin Abbas, Abdullah Bin Umr, Abu Saeed Khadri, Abud Darda (ridhwan allah anhum) etc. were present & they all stay away from Karbala's battle. Can we assume that those kabaar-e-Sahaba were hypocrites for not standing alongwith Hussain(Rd.A) for "good" ?? naoozbillah !!
Those are the false & baseless stories of "Karbala" which were/are propogated by a "lobby" year after years & how fools we are that we dont want to "research" & just want to stick to these "traditional stories".
& yes ofcourse, Hazrat Hussain(Rd.A) was a SHAHEED & Allah(swt) will sure punish all those who were behind his(Rd.A) "shahadet". But It is also verified from different authenticated history books (original arabic) that Yazeed was not responsible for his(Rd.A) shahadet.
May Allah guide us the straight path.

Anonymous said...

the battle was due to misundersanding between muslims and even umm ul mominien hazrat aisha RA realize the mistake and cries so many times the she was involved in that battle against hazrat ali RA and muslims. this misunderstanding was created by jews at that time.

shahid12 said...

Salam Brother Hyderabadi,
You are right. Imam Hussain was Shaheed. But what logic do you have by saying Yazeed was not responsible.
Did not Yazeed ask Bayah(alegiance) of Imam Hussain.
was not Ibn Ziyad (Governor of Kufa) appointed by him.
This is like saying that George Bush is not responsible for killing of poor Iraqis as hes not present in Iraq.
Allah has given every human intelect to decide. If one action is carried out.The person is responsible for it. Justification later has no values. The people killed in that war cannot be brought back.

Anonymous said...

Salamualaykum Brothers

I would like to tell u that why r we all forcing our self to deal in matters which have no importance.
What difference it make if Zakir Naik says "peace be upon him". Or whether the war was political or not. Is Islam been affected with this things? no. Islam is being affected when people thing about such matters and stick to it.
Try to get knowledge about the Quran, Sunnah, Sahabas life.and u will find the right work.
Main thing is that u are leaving the most important thing that Zakir is doing Dawah and if u feel that u can criticise him then bring a better Zakir Naik and come in front. This is to all criticizer in any matter

shahid12 said...

"Messengers indeed have been denied before you, but they were patient under the denial and prosecution till Our help reached them. There is none to alter the words of Allah (the conditions of His promises). Already there have reached you some reports about the Messengers." (Surah al-An'am, 6:34)

"There have been many examples before you. So travel across the land and see what has been the fate of the rejecters." (Surah Ale Imran, 3:137)

There are many incidents recorded in the Quran, We can find the example of Iblis,Firaun,Namrood and others.
If today Muslims dont take lesson from it and then the Question arises.
Why do we have so many historical refrences in the Quran.
Karabala is Battle where you have to decide where is truth and where is falsehood.
A Muslim is the one who supports the truth. If one takes Historical facts lightly and does not take lesson from it.
How can he be considered a Muslim and follwer of Truth.
Dawah is a invitation towards Truth.
Dai needs to be trained to support truth and not run away from it.

Rely said...

Dear Brother Shahid12,
You have rightly written Dawah is invitation towards truth, and Dr. Zakir is doing a good work he is inviting you towards a truth which has now and then been denied try to find what the truth is about the incident of Karbala, not just follow blindly things written by a group, the situation we are now requires evdence base to put any thing down in Black and white and to speak, what I know of Dr. Zakir is he speaks things which are evidenced in Quran, there is no doubt about everything written in the Holy book and the words of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), so try and stick to the teachings of the Prophet (Sunnah) and the Quran and the Hadeeth, which is wise for every muslim to find peace and live with it.Differences in opinion will always be there till the world ends, try and find the truth on your own by researching into the history and be rational to accept the truth in its truest sense.

umar said...

most salafi think yazid is not resonsible of Hazrat HUSSAIN RH shahadat.and they try to prove that yazid is innocent.but i think its a difference of opinion between salafi and other sects like shia and sunni.i think a common man should practise the ortion of islam which is not debateable.for practice we should follow any scholar till we find right,true and authentic practice.we should not follow our sects blindly.because blindness may lead us to hell.so no body is responsible not Zakir naik nor any other scholar if we will follow Zakir naik blindly then may be we will deviate so search and keep your faith on track.

Anonymous said...

1. When we die Allah (swt) wont ask us about the battle of Karbala.
2. Dr Naik is human like the rest of us, it is possible he can make mistakes. We are not his Judge, Allah (swt) is.
3. If you critise someone or something bring something better to the table.
4. Dr Naik is a Daee and he is spreading the truth to the best of his knowledge and understanding.
5. The hallmark of a muslim is unity. Where is it?

shahid12 said...

Either Husain is right or Yazid is right.
Either Husian is following the Quran and Sunnah or Yazid.
Muslims have to support the Truth and Reject Falsehood.
Muslims are ordered gain and again to be with the Truth.
2:161 Behold, as for those who are bent on denying the truth and die as deniers of the truth -their due is rejection by God, and by the angels,, and by all [righteous] men.
There should be a proper platform for discussing,different views.
Proper discussion could clear many mis understanding amongst Muslims.
Muslim youths should interact with each other to form unity.

zulfiqar said...

why we blame salman rushdi our own muslim scholars condemn the prophet and his family. they try to just evry one who was against prophet or his family. Still we can pray May Allah guide zakir naik to the right path (Ameen).

Ameena Lee-Haider said...

I am disgusted with Zakir Naik's comments on Karbala. However I am not suprised. Yazid was a known womaniser with many more vices attributed to his name. His father, however, was not guilty of womanising. It is interesting to note that when Zakir Naik and his family came to South Africa around 13 years ago, his father, caught everyone's attention, when he tried to sleep with the housemaids of the people they would stay with. So Zakir is the progeny of a womaniser, hence he may well be the progeny of Yazeed himself. Hence, Zakir would defend Yazeed, he knows what he has to hide.
May he suffer the same fate Yazeed did, he truly is deserving of it. Aameen.

Ophiuchus said...

It is impossible for any muslim to imagine praying for an individual, who alone conspired against the Holy Prophet SAWAW s family,and managed to kill all men but one. How dare he speak of hijab, when the daughters AS of the Prophet SAWAW were made to walk without a chadar in front of thousands of people, who still dared to call themselves muslims, all becuase of one man, for whos peace he is still praying??May Allah never be pleased with he who prays that may Allah be pleased with yazid Mal-ooon.
Amin!

Anonymous said...

I don't care much for Zakir Naik but i must say he has got it spot on when he described the battle of karbala as a civil war b/w two parties who wanted power for themselves. Though i don't think the title RA should be used for yazid or anyone else other than the prophets companions or relatives. Hussein(RA) being the rightful heir to the claim may be right to fight for it. But Yazid the stronger party emerged victorious. Just because Hussein(RA) happened to be related to the Prophet (PBUH) does not mean he should be given the status of a "Super Hero". He was only a human being just like his Grand father. Husseins(RA) warriors fought with valor and bravery against an unbeatable opposition; no doubt about that but does that make Yazid the epitome of all evil... Maybe an unfair prick for sending thousands to fight a band of 80 something people. But not the way people project it as a war of good vs evil. It's all politics man.......Mughals have been known to kill their own brothers for the throne in delhi. Even amongst the abbasid caliphs this was not unheard of..... It's all politics...nothing more nothing less!

Jawad said...

This is in reference to a question and answer session in a recent programme on 2nd Dec. 2007 by Dr. Zakir Naik. One of the Non Muslim questioners posed a question with regards to the battle of Karbala and Yazeed, to which Dr. Zakir’s response evoked strong criticism from a certain group of the Muslim community because he said “May Allah be pleased with him” after the name of Yazeed and referred to Karbala as a political war.

1. A minority of the minority community i.e. the KSI (Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat) blew this issue out of proportion thinking that they caught Dr. Zakir on the wrong-foot. They thought that the whole of Muslim Ummah had a unanimous opinion against Yazeed. However, they did not know that there is a difference of opinion in the Ummah regarding Yazeed.

Irrespective of the difference of opinion on this issue in Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah yet it is unanimously agreed that one can say RadhiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be please with him) for Yazeed.

As you are aware that Dr. Zakir has a large fan following from all the sects of Muslim Ummah including Isna Ashari, Khojas, Bohris etc. The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat could not tolerate the Shias getting influenced by Dr. Zakir’s talks.

Desperate attempts were made to instigate the whole of Muslim Ummah against Dr. Zakir Naik by publicizing the matter in all possible manners.

The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat in Mumbai is misleading the masses by making it appear as though Dr. Zakir Naik has made Yazeed into a Hero. Infact Yazeed is not a Hero for Dr. Zakir Naik.

2. In order to maintain the unity in the Muslim Ummah, Dr. Zakir Naik expresses his sincere regret and said, “I regret if unintentionally any person or section of the people’s feelings have been hurt due to any statement made by me.” He also does the same while giving da’wah to Christians and Hindus. He regrets hurting the Muslims unintentionally but that does not mean what he has said is wrong.

3. Any knowledgeable Muslim whenever he takes the name of any “Sahabah” (companions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)) or Taba’een (next generation after the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)) his name is followed by RadiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be pleased with him) or Rahmatullahi Alaih (May Allah’s mercy be on him).
Thus Dr. Zakir Naik after mentioning the name of Yazeed, who is a Taba’een, he followed his name with (May Allah be pleased with him). To pray for the Muslims is also instructed by Allah (swt) in the Glorious Qur’an – 98:8, 9:100 and 58:22.

Neither did Dr. Zakir praise Yazeed nor did he curse him. He did not comment on his actions. He only said “Yazeed (May Allah be pleased with him)” since he does not consider Yazeed to be a Kafir and it is allowed to pray for the believers as Abraham (pbuh) too prayed for all the believers in the Glorious Qur’an - 14:41.

4. The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat claims that the whole of Muslim Ummah condemns the statement of Dr. Zakir. Who are the people the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat mentions as ‘Muslim Ummah’? Do the views of the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat represent the view of the Muslim Ummah? Do they have the fatawas of all the cross section of Muslims, especially the Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat, for their stand? If it is only Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat raking up the controversy, then they are misleading the common masses by saying Muslim Ummah.

There is a difference of opinion as far as the Muslim scholars are concerned regarding Yazeed. Some are neutral and some are against him. Some are even in favour of Yazeed like the revered scholar Imam Ghazaali.

When Imam Ghazaali was asked if it was all right to curse Yazeed, he replied “No”. He was asked was it all right to say “rahimahullah”? He said “Yes it is Mustahab (highly recommended).” [Qaid as Shareed min Akhbar e Yazeed pg 57-59].

Imam Ghazaali further said, “Yazeed was a Muslim and when we pray for the Muslims “Allhummagfirli Muslimineen was Muslimaat (O Allah forgive the Musilms men and women) he is also included in our prayers.” [Qaid as Shareed min Akhbar e Yazeed pg 57-59].

Yazeed was also the commander of the Muslim army, which went to fight the battle of Constantinople, which was predicted by the Prophet (pbuh) himself along with the glad tidings, “Paradise will be granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval operation.” [Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4 Book of Jihad Hadith 2924].

This was a very prominent war as far as the spread of Islam was concerned. There were Sahabah like Hussain Ibn Ali, Abdullah bin Abbas, Ibn Umar and Abu Ayyub Ansari and Abdullah bin Zubair (May Allah be pleased with all of them) who participated and fought under the leadership of Yazeed.

5. As far as the Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat is concerned, inspite of the difference of opinion it is agreed upon that it is permissible to say “May Allah have mercy on him” or “May Allah be pleased with him” for Yazeed. Therefore saying “May Allah be pleased with him” after Yazeed’s name is not Haraam, nor a sin and is not wrong.


This has been reconfirmed recently in writing from various Darul Ulooms and Islamic Organisations in India.

Fatawas to clarify and support the above stand.
a) Darul Uloom, Deoband.
b) Nadwatul Ulema, Lucknow (verbally confirmed on phone, written copy to be received)
c) Darul Uloom, Barelwi.
d) Jamaat-e-Islami-i-Hind, New Delhi. (verbally confirmed on phone, written copy to be received)
e) Darul Uloom Ahmadia Salfia, Darbhanga, Bihar.
f) Jamiatul-Ahle-Hadith, New Delhi
g) Aligarh Muslim University
h) Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi
i) And several others who have confirmed on phone and are expected to be received in the next couple of days.

Fatawas from scholars outside India:
1) Shaikh Abdullah Ibn Jibreen (on audio, written copy to be received)
2) Shaikh al Islam Ibn Taymiyah

Note: Please find attachments of the fatawas mentioned above for your reference.

6. Some people consider “political war” in a negative sense. By saying Karbala was a political war in no way does it mean that it was not a war for Islam or Justice. Many political wars were fought for the sake of Justice and Islam.

Islam is a complete way of life, which also deals with political issues, which should be based on the Qur’an and Hadith.

In his response to the questioner, Dr. Zakir also cited the example of the Battle of Jamal that was fought between the Mother of the Believers, Aaishah (RA) and Ali (RA). The battle took place as a result of difference of opinion on a political issue. We respect and revere both the companions of the prophet (pbuh). However, with regards to the battle of Jamal, we neither favour nor are we against any one of them.

7. We disagree with a certain group of Muslims who hurl abuses on Aaishah (R.A.) and do not consider her from the Ahle Bayt i.e. family of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). However, the Qur’an considers the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) as the members of Ahle Bayt in - 33:32-33.

Moreover, even the wife of Abraham (pbuh) is addressed by Allah (swt) as one among the Ahle Bayt of Abraham (pbuh) in the Glorious Qur’an - 11:72-73.

Furthermore, this same minority Muslim sect also curses the first three caliphs of Islam, Abu Bakr (R.A.), Umar (R.A.) and Uthman (R.A.) as well as the mother of believers Ayesha (R.A.).

8. If Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat tomorrow says don’t say “May Allah be pleased with him”, after the name of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ummul Mumineen Ayesha (May Allah be pleased with them all) will we stop saying “May Allah be pleased with them”, after their names? Of course not!

As a whole, the majority of the Muslims condemn the act of anyone cursing any of the companions, including the first three caliphs of Islam as well as Ayesha (R.A.) the wife of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

9. Dr. Zakir Naik did not curse or criticize any Muslim. This same small minority sect of Muslim curse these revered Caliphs of Islam Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (May Allah be pleased with them all), and if they do it the whole Muslim Ummah will condemn them.

The Prophet (pbuh) himself said, “When a man curses anything, the curse goes up to heaven and the gates of heaven are locked against it. Then it comes down to the earth and its gates are locked against it. Then it goes right and left, and if it finds no place of entrance it returns to the thing it was cursed, and if it deserves what was said (it enters it), otherwise it returns to the one who uttered it.”
[Sunan Abu Dawud Vol.3 Book of Manners Hadith 4887].

Aaishah (R.A.) reported that the Messenger of Allah said, “When your companion dies, leave him and do not revile him.”
[Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol.3 Book of Manners Hadith 4881].

Allah will not question us on the Day of Judgement as to why didn’t we hurl abuses on Yazeed even if he deserved it, however Allah will surely hold us accountable if we curse anyone unjustly.

Our salvation does not depend on the issue of Yazeed as every person is responsible for his or her actions.

Allah says in Surah Baqarah, Chapter No. 2, Verse No. 134 & 141.

“That was a nation who has passed away. They shall receive the reward of what they earned and you of what you earn. And you will not be asked of what they used to do.“

10. Dr. Zakir Naik holds the grandsons of the Prophet in high respect and whenever he mentions the name of Hassan (R.A.) and Hussain (R.A.) he follows it with RadiAllahu Anhuma (May Allah be pleased with them).

Dr. Zakir condemns the person who actually killed Hussain (RadiAllahu Anhu) the grandson of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) whether he was the person from Yazeed’s army or someone else.

11. Dr. Zakir Naik is held in high regards by millions of Muslims worldwide. There were more than two-hundred thousand people, including Bohras, Shias, Barelwis, Deobandis etc. during his speech and no one amongst them raised the issue, not even a single from more than 20 Islamic scholars from different parts of the world who came to speak at the conference.

This issue has been raised by a few Shias from Pakistan, where raising such kinds of discords are common and later on picked up by the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat in Mumbai.

12. Saying “May Allah be pleased with him” after Yazeed’s name is a minor issue, but cursing the first three caliphs and Ayesha (R.A.) is a much more bigger issue and a grievous sin.

According to Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat cursing the first three rightly guided caliphs and the Mother of Believers, Ayesha (R.A.) is a major sin (some scholars go to the extent of saying it is ‘Kufr’ i.e. disbelief while others say it is ‘Fisq’ i.e. grave sin).

If you make a mountain out of a mole hill because of saying “May Allah be pleased with him” for Yazeed then is not cursing the first three rightly guided caliphs of Islam and the Mother of Believers, Ayesha (R.A.) a much more grievous sin?

We want unity among the Muslim Ummah. Is it proper for the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat to continue to create unnecessary discord on a ‘difference of opinion’ amongst Muslims with them?

13. If the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat give in writing that they will not curse the first three caliphs Hazrat Abu Bakr, Hazrat Umar, Hazrat Uthman and the Ummul Mumineen Ayesha (May Allah be pleased with them all) InshaAllah Dr. Zakir Naik will never say RadiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be pleased with him) after the name of Yazeed since it is optional.
It is not Dr. Zakir Naik who has a difference of opinion regarding Yazeed, but he is aware that as far as the scholars of the Ahl-e-Sunnat-wa-Jamaat are concerned, there is a difference of opinion regarding Yazeed. That is the reason he neither praised him, nor condemned him.

Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers. We should try to unite the Muslim Ummah rather than creating more divisions. If only all Muslims read the Qur’an with understanding and adhere to Sahih Hadith, Inshallah most of these differences would be solved and we could be one united Muslim Ummah. The best way to get the Muslims together is given in the following verse:

“And hold fast all together by the rope which Allah (stretches out for you) and be not divided among yourselves;” [Surah Ale Imran 3:103].

shahid12 said...

“And hold fast all together by the rope which Allah (stretches out for you) and be not divided among yourselves;” [Surah Ale Imran 3:103].

Right Brother. Just a simple question comes to my mind.

What will the Non-Muslims think?
When Muslim pray for both the Killer as well as the killed one.
is it not required we analyse the history well.
and not be among the confused ones.
A Muderer is a Murderer even if he belongs to the family of the Prophet or his Sahaba.
Islam is know to have a justice based system.
How can Justice prevail when the Propogator of Justice(Muslims).
Appeared as a confused lot.
Its Wajib on Muslims to be stand for the oppresed and be aganist the Oppressor.
Im sure the Muslims wil reform and analyse history to come to the right conclusion.

Kool Dude said...

Dr Zakir Naik is insane he doesnt knw wat he is saying, u cant gv high respect to a person who killed the grandson of the Holy Prophet who is da messenger of Allah.

There is nothing to argue in this since every1 knows Yazid was the enemy of Islam who was drinking, gambling, etc and Imam Hussein the grandson of prophet following the right n true path.. it is because of Imam Hussein tht Islam is alive 2day.

Anonymous said...

this is to reply Mr Jawad

You have given the detail analysis just to support Maloon Yazeed. I can hardly believe what you have said about Maloon Yazeed. I am saying this with full authority that whoever does not curse Yazeed will not be consider to be true muslim. Let me explain you how.

Phrophet have said. both Hassan and Hussain A.S. are the syed of all the young men in the heaven. who ever hurt them hurt me. and who ever hurt me, hurt Allah. Now tell me that how can you justify the saying of Yazeeb May Allah please.............. what ever you are saying.

HUSSAIN o Minni wa anna minal hussain ... Hussain A.s is part of me and i am part of Hussain. Now just think about it Prophet PBUH doesnot saying that Hussain is like part of my body. He is saying that Hussain IS part of me.

Now Prophet have said about ALI A.s that whoever fights Ali fight with me and whoever fight me, he is against Allah.

Now i will come to the real point. you have given the references where you have said not criticise any one. let me tell you misguided brother, our Kalama is starting with the deneing of the ghair Allah. like LA ILAHA and then ILALLAH. and there are many times God have said to first deny the things that are against Allah then Believe in Allah. HOW CAN YOU BELIEVE IN ALLAH IF YOU HAVE IDOLS IN YOUR HEARTS.

My point is that, the Hadith you have presented is absolutely not authoritative and Prophet is saying all along about his grandsons and many hadith are present about Hussain A.s not about Yazeed Maloon. So there is no point of saying any thing kind to yazeed.
final the most important thing is that Imam Hussain have no intentions to gain anything political HE not only know about His death already even Prophet have predicted his tragic Death already.

Yazeed Maloon had raided KHANA KABA and don't you know he tied his horses in MASJID E NABAWI. He was a Maloon and is a MAloon . I think only a true yazeedi fan who is a hypocryte or truelly an enemy of ahle bat can say this R.A to Yazeen.

It is also reported in Tirmizi Shareef: Hazrat Zain bin Arqam (radi Allahu anhu) reported that Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said to Hazrat Ali, Bibi Fathima, Hazrat Hasan and Hazrat Husain (radi Allahu anhuma), "I am at war with those who fight with them, at peace with those who remain in peace with them".

Anonymous said...

Thats why i don't bother with the hadees.........they only fan contradiction and confusion. The sunnis might quote Bukhari and the shia might quote Tirmizi. In the end as muslims only Quran should be referred and it neither speaks of Hussein(Ra) or Yazid. Karbala was unfortunate for the Prophets(pbuh) family and yazid was a prick......Having said that....get on with your lives and do something productive rather than arguing like morons over something that happened such a long time ago...........FOOLS......ALL OF YOU

muslim08 said...

you anonymous are just plain stupid. WHy don't you open your eyes, it was not a battle for politics,nothing happens without Allahs say so, and Allah had made this a test for the Prophet(SAAS) family. Remember the Prophet (SAAS) had to stay in sadja just because imam HUssain (AS) cam and sat on his shoulder.
And you say that we should only follow the Quran, well Allah states in the Quran,
"And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Apostle.

Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (a thorough purifying)." Imam Hussain was pure and clean, and to think the lanti yazid, was at all comparatable to them, hah, you joke.

And as for DR. zakir naik, he is just purely blind, may the lord punish him in great ways.

And you say the Prophet(SAAS) is a normal person, if he is then why doesn't everyone split the moon in half?
the day you or zakir naik can we shall believe you.

Anonymous said...

muslim 08 just proved the point i was making earlier. Muslims in general will never prosper untill they stop holding on to incidents or battles of long gone glory of the past that once was. Wake up for crying out loud.... I am no prophet and i certainly can not perform miracles. As for the Holy Prophet(pbuh) his greatest miracle was presenting Quran to the whole world not splitting the moon in half. That u must have got from some hadees of yours which i do not give any credibility to since quite a few of them are not authentic and contradictory to the Quran in the first place!!!

shahid12 said...

Its strange if Muslims say, what we have to do with history.
Moses is mentioned more then 160 Ayahs of the Quran.
This shows how Quran gives importance to History.
But we have to take lessons from it by analyzing it

Quran itself says.

12:111 "Indeed, in the stories of these men there is a lesson for those who are endowed with insight. it could not possibly be a discourse invented [by man]: nay indeed, it is confirming the truth of whatever there still remains [of earlier revelations], clearly spelling out everything, and [offering] guidance and grace unto people who will believe."

but now a days there are very few Muslims with insight. If the Muslims would have followed the Quran and taken lessons from History. Im sure they would have been better placed in this world.
Im sorry to say that now a days Muslims are trying to avoid History instead of taking lessons from it.
Strange !

sadanam12 said...

Karbala was nothing but a propaganda created by Anti Islamic, sassanid lovers and Abbassid to create dissension among muslims.
Some good books revealing this
Kabala Fact or fiction by Dr. Shabbir Ahmed
http://ourbeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/admin2/2007/08/true-history.pdf
and Allama Tammana Imadi
http://aboutquran.com/ba/ba.htm
anwer

muslim08 said...

well anonymous if u dont even know the miracles the Prophet performed, i suggest you learn a bit about the religion, and the miracles prophets performed to show others, that the yare not mere humans.
AS as for the hadees, i dont know why u carry on going on about them, wahabis are the ones who abide by them more, and trust me i have read the wahabi edition of Bukhair and Muslim, the things they have written God forbid.

And u say it is only us who live in the past, look at all the non muslims, who look up to Imam Hussain and what he did, fought against the oppressor. just have a look at what ghandi had to say.

As for your selves at least we follow the Prophet (PBUH) and the Prophets family (PBUT) and not some person who lived in the 20th century i.e. wahab.

and sadanam 12 Karbala is not fiction. it is not propaganda, rather than reading these books, please read the Hadees, and the hadees about karbala and hazrat umme salma (AS) is in many authentic books.

Most these books are propaganda, i read one on womens status in pure Islam, the things they had written, wat a joke!!

Muslim 08 said...

to jawad

yazeed is not a muslim, and if imam ghanzali said that he is qrong. If u think a person who orders the rape of thousand sof innocent women, and sops namaaz prayers in Medina for three days is a muslim, i dread to think who you class as a muslim. ans when u mention ahle jummat e sunnat, u don't speak for the majority of us. Cos we condemn what was said, that is why many sunni scholars have condemed it on national and international tv.

As for hazrat aisha(RA) she was wrong in the battle of JAmal, but that is only because she was led by two others, and the Prophet(PBUH) had warned her of the battle, however in anger she went on becuase the others de4cieved her. She did ask the Lord for forgivenes, and so no body swears at her, i have been to many majalisis and never heard and allam swear at her or any others caliphs, otherwise we sunnis would not go to the majalisis.
Also the prophets(PBUH) wifes are not the Ahle baiyt, the lrod revealed that ayat, Hwne only the Prophet(PBUH), HAZRAT ALI (AS)< HAZRAT FATIMA (AS)< HAZRAT HASSAN(AS) and HAZRAT HUSSAIN(AS) were there, the Prophet (PBUH) stated 'OH lord this is my Ahle Baiyt. and the mother of momineen Aidha (RA) herself states this story.

shab said...

Allah has given him"Iblees' Mohlat till Qayamat that I shall sit on Sirat Al Mustaqeem and misguide "Aksar"(Most of Them or Masses) with yameen &Yasar and from Up and Down. But accept for few whom I can not misguide them.

I think if you are going with Zakir Naik just because he is addressing the masses then you are wrong. Because Shaitan is misleading the masses.

There is a "Zid"(opposite) for every thing. If you can not distinguish between Good & Bad "Ziddain" then either you are not having "Aqlaqi Jurat" Courage or you are a Hypocrite.

Present day scholors like Zakir Naik should visit all the histric places from Makkah Al Mukarrama to
Damascus in Syria and decide after that If Prophet PBUH and his family or any other such Sahabis has built any palaces and lived lavishly then they might have gone after Hukoomat. On the contrary the others rulers lik Yazid Who possessed wealth.

According to Zakir Naik or any one who is defending him If Yazid was innocent just because he is addressing or inviting on right path then they are wrong.

Thousands of battles have been fought among Muslims themselves but how many of them are remembered.

Let us not talk about Islamic Battles and take for istance of IInd World War which was absolute political war can we have any justification for Atom Bomb.

Wassalam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah,

yousuf said...

I suggest Zakir Naik should dwell in Islamic history books and read the books of authors like Ibn-e-Kaseer and Ibn-e-Hajar Asqalani (Ulama of Alhle-Sunna) who have blatantly condemned Yazeed and called him Zindeeq, murtad, kafir and what not.

Below, please read about Yazeed's character and his activities.

As soon as the clan of Imam Hussain, that included the grand daughters of Rasoolallah SAWS who were made prinsoners, reached Damascus, in Yazeed's darbar, barefooted, tied with ropes, their hijab were taken off, and when he saw them, he said how I wish my forefathers were alive, who were killed in jung-e-Badr, to see how I took the revenge, and, that there was no 'wahi' or farishta brought any message from Allah. Bani-Hashem played a game to gain leadership, etc., etc.,

Many of the muslims don't know what Yazeed did after Karbala. They only know him upto Karbala.

Waqeya-e-Hirra:

Yazeed sent his army to Madeena when he heard that the people of Madeena have revolted against him after Imam Husain was brutally killed in Karbala with 72 people including his immediate family members and as-haab.

He gave his army a free hand to kill the residents of Madeena and the result was that the Army of Yazeed killed many as-haab-e-Rasool, raped thousands of girls and women, looted the residents of Madeena-e-Rasool SAWS. They were in Madeena for three days and plundred everything.

Then he asked his army to go in search of Abdulla Ibn-e-Zubair to Mecca and kill him even if they find him in Masjidul haraam holding the kaba. And the result was yazeed's army burnt the Kaaba and murdered a number of people who took sanctity in Masjidul haraam.

These are a few of Yazeed's activiteis:

He used to drink.
He used to play music.
He used to play with monkeys. He gave the name of 'Abu Qais" to his Monkey.
He used to watch animal fights.
He practised incest.
He was a womanizer.
He even didn't leave his aunt (his father's own sister) who was a young widow.

Now I leave it to all the balanced mind muslims to judge Yazeeds character and see how far Zakir Naik is justified in saying Raziallah to Yazeed. How can Allah be raazi with such person!!

wassalam.

Yousuf

shab said...

The basic problem with the followeres of Zakir Hussain is that they are not aware of the facts about human nature.

Why relegion is asking you to pray regularly and recite duas and Maghfira because there is a possibility in day to day life that you commit sins irrespective of his or her piousness. Most of them do it subconsciously and few does it purposely.

There is no court of law on earth that will forgive the commuters who has violated the law in full senses but, the court will also not let anyone go unpunished for petty sins. But Allah will not forgive the major commuters who has hurt his cause. Killing a human being is a major crime that Allah will never forgive.

Yawm Al Adl all will be summoned before Allah with their Imams "Spiritual Leaders" that gives us the option to be with Yazid or Hussain A.S

The man is respected by the Society by only two means that is "Hasab & Nasab"(Personal Deeds and achievements or he is related with renowned and pious man)

Why we should respect tose relatives of Prophet PBUH because the possess both these qualities on the contrary to the others who may be having only one of the qualities.

It is upto you that you follow those with only one quality of Hasab but no Nisbat(Relation).

Wassalam.

Anonymous said...

Assalamunalaikum
i think who ever is with niaks openion is with yazid and it is a shame for a muslim to say good about naik who said Imam Hussain had this wor for political issues if it was the case imam would seek help from the people of mekkah and madina and collect a huge army.but he never did so he took his family and went for jehad for the sake of allah becoz yazid wanted imam hussain to do bayat and accept what yazid wante,brothers and sisters dont forget islam is a religion of the pure and pious and we all know who and how was yazid he collected an army of more then 30000 soilders is this called political war???think deep and refer books and dont be with the bad and take the angreness of allah

Anonymous said...

muslim 08.......... really are u kidding me..... have u ever been to a majlis? they abuse the hell out of shit for all the three calipshs b4 ali..........so this means u r a shia posing as a sunni........screw u and u're reasons..........muslims will never be as 1..........period....too much bad blood b/w them.......
PS: I am not even sunni btw b4 u get any ideas pal.........as far as i am concerned both sunnis and shias can go to hell and masturbate on their fetishes about who was wrong and who was right........fuck all you all.........u assholes will never learn or progress! u r damned to regression!

AllAboutGQ said...

May Allah forgive Yazid for his sins and grant him Jannah. Ameen

May Allah destroy the Shia'a. Ameen

zee said...

ZEE
Aslamoalekum
I read all the comments and your thoughts,i am not going to reply individulas but i can give a sincere advice to parties suunies shia wahabees that if u are really searching for truth read the book THE RIGHT PATH.translated by Muhammad Amir Haider khan.it will satesfy you,

If you read it good for you if you dont i dont care.

AllAboutGQ said...

Is it true that the Shia'a like goat sex?

Anonymous said...

AllAboutGQ

you r a piece of shit as well....... a chip of the old block of wahabis......................screw u and all who think like you...... my statement was never meant to support assholes like u.......so fuck u and u're rhetoric!

Mohamad said...

Dr. Zakir Naik's outburst in appreciation of Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah has attracted reactions from many Islamic circles around the world. One of the responses is from a gentleman who has suggested that one should have GUTS to ask Dr. Naik directly by attending IRF centre where he answers questions. It is tantamount to saying that if anyone has objections to the US Administration's policies, he should have guts to attend the press conferences at the White House and ask the White House spokesman directly!

This is the era of electronic media which has dismantled all the barriers in communication lines. Dr. Naik's programmes are dished out to a wider audience around the world through TVs and websites. Is it feasible that his audience, spread locally and overseas, should attend in person at his centre in Mumbai and question him or pass comments against his answers? His organisation must shoulder its responsibilities by taking comments and questions from around the world through electronic media. As his financiers could well afford paying rent regularly for a huge auditorium and sponsoring him, they can surely afford to employ a few secretaries to handle the communication between him and his listeners.

In any case, why is Dr. Naik's brother an indispensable element in his Question and Answer sessions? It seems, the purpose for pre-selecting the questions is to pre-prepare the answers. Of course there is nothing wrong with this. But the problem arises when the questioner is barred from pursuing his enquiry further, which is done under the pretext that the time is over or that there are other questioners in the queue. This means that the enquirer is left with no other option but to nod and join the mob in clapping, whether he is satisfied or not. If what Dr. Naik is doing is "da'awah", then he should respond to the learned personalities, who have challenged him to select the time and place where he can face them in an open debate under the chairmanship of an impartial person.

On the one hand, these people exhort others to follow the Qur'an and authentic Hadith, and on the other hand, they pick and choose the Hadiths that comply with their political affiliations and orientations. Before his outburst in showering the pleasure of Allah for Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah, Dr. Naik should have shown a basic intellectual honesty in consulting his own Sihah al-Sitta to find out how many Hadiths are there in favour of the members of the Household of the Prophet - Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussayn; and how many Hadiths are there against the enemies of Ahl-ul-Bayt. But such an effort would not have served his undeclared motives of promoting the thoughts of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abdul Wahhab, whose allegiances for Mu'awiyah and Yazid against Imam Ali and Imam Hussayn are well documented in history.

A further sign of Dr. Naik’s hidden motives is his allegation (posted on Youtube) against whom he calls "grave worshippers". This is in line with what we normally hear in Friday sermons and the Khutbah of Arafat (like the one delivered this year), with malicious innuendos against those Muslims who believe in visiting the burial places of the purified members of Ahl-ul-Bayt. It seems, misrepresenting the beliefs of other Schools is the right they have bestowed upon themselves, and in the process, they think that only they are right and the rest of mankind is wrong.

In one of his sessions, Dr. Naik has come up with the defence of the indefensible. He supports the way Taliban terrorised the 2000-years old ancient heritage of Afghanistan by destroying the statues of Budha. He says that Taliban sought to teach a lesson to the Buddhists because Buddha had never told them to worship him. Again, true to his Salafi ideology, he puts words into the mouth of the Buddhists, irrespective of the fact that they have never claimed that they worship the statues of Buddha.

He draws a comparison between the Taliban and the Indian government who destroys narcotic drugs despite the fact that millions of people (the addicts) resent it. What a comparison?! Nevertheless, his audience did not contest his crippled logic. The destruction of the ancient heritage of Afghanistan was against the international law and that is why, there was an international outcry. Even Shaykh Yusuf al-Qardawi tried to persuade the Taliban to abandon their measures. Yet, Dr. Naik's mob digested the unjustified comparison. There is a world of difference between the two. The actions of Taliban were against the international law and the actions of the Indian government were in compliance with the international law.

But let us give the benefit of the doubt to Taliban and their ideologues and assume that there was a genuine fear that people might start worshipping the statues of Buddha. If so, then there must be some empirical or statistical evidence on which they and their supporters had relied to reach a conclusion that the statues of Buddha were a real threat to the concept of Tawhid (Oneness of God). Since the advent of Islam into Afghanistan fourteen centuries ago, how many Afghanis reverted to worship the statues of Buddha? If the answer is none, then the Taliban and their apologetic supporters are dwelling on a mere mental obsession.

In another Question and Answer session (posted on Youtube), Dr. Zakir Naik defends bin Laden! Even then, he was applauded by his mob. Since September 11, bin Laden has appeared in picture and sound in more than a dozen video/audio tapes on al-Jazeera TV and the website of the extremists, and has proudly glorified the suicide bombers of September 11, July 7, and the terror gangsters who kill innocent men, women and children in Iraq for the sake of power. On the destruction of Zarqawi, bin Laden did not have any sense of shame when he delivered a message of condolence to the Muslim ummah for his hero's death! He constantly appeals to the youths to join his terrorists in what he calls "jihad". Dr. Naik said that before accepting anything against bin Laden, we have to be certain. He said that if by fighting the terrorism of America, bin Laden is a terrorist, then all Muslims are terrorist! Bin Laden himself has not tried to conceal his crimes against innocent souls, and yet his apologetic supporters want to whitewash his black history, and call it "jihad".

Dr. Naik's sympathies with bin Laden compel him to admonish others to be certain before accusing him of any crimes. Therefore, his invoking Allah's pleasure for Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah should come as no surprise because his role models are of the same gene. When al-Qaeda was facing an immense pressure in Iraq, bin Laden's number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri appeared in one of his tapes and declared that we love al-Hussayn bin Ali and had we been with him, we would have laid down our life by fighting alongside him! This was at the time when they were targeting the shrine of Imam Hussayn through several terrorist attacks and suicide bombings.

The entire world has observed that when a politician is murdered in cold-blood, the international community condemns the crime. Nobody sympathises with these criminals except the odd-men-out. At a time when a politician is killed unjustly, even his or her staunch enemies and opponents condemn the cowardly act of the terrorists. In this situation, if one dares invoking the pleasure of Allah on his or her murderers, this would be considered as violation of basic human etiquette. What if anybody invokes the pleasure of Allah for the most brutal murderer in history, who killed the progeny of their own Prophet? After fourteen hundred years, the Nasibis and Kharijis in the Muslim community are still engaged in mixing up truth with falsehood and they call it "da'awah". When the barrel of oil was $9, they could afford financing some extremist groups in Pakistan. Their victims were thousands of followers of Ahl-ul-Bayt who were killed in suicide bombings inside the mosques. Now the barrel of oil is $100. So there is an enormous potential to revive the malice against the followers of Ahl-ul-Bayt, initiated by Banu Umayyah.

In the era when Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab were the role models, history of Arabia called the entire period, the age of Ignorance. When Mu'allafatil Quloob (those whose hearts were yet to be won for Islam) like, Abu Sufyan and Mu'awiyah were considered the role models, the roots of the Nasibis and the Kharijis threatened the very fabric of the Islamic society. But what lesson have they learnt from history? The history of oppression is being glorified. They have damaged their soul by considering the criminals, transgressors, oppressors and the enemies of Islam like, Yazid ibn Mu'awiyah and Saddam as their role models. However, Imam Hussayn himself has portrayed this situation beautifully in one of his traditions that, if one has lost all sense of shame and does not feel the presence of Allah, then let him say and do whatever he likes.

Mohamad said...

i would like to point out that is Zakir Naik’s statement on Yazeed.
he is completely wrong where he said”A minority of the minority community i.e. the KSI (Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat) blew this issue ”
Majority of muslims raise this issue and now demanding zakir nair for clarification.those who read news knows what i said here is a truth.
Listed this debate to understand more “what is right or wrong”

http://www.al-emaan.org/ammar2008/night_10.ram
and these video..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPxwsiZzRjA‘
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs8LAwTs9qM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBxc5-gBGFo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZD0eukiT8E

It is an established fact based on Qur`an and Hadith that Yazid is an eternal dweller of Hell. Yazid will not be forgiven, because he … all » tortured the family of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw). He reviled Imam Hussain, whom loved both Allah and His Beloved Prophet (saw). So, by reviling Imam Hussain, Yazid reviled Allah and the Holy Prophet (saw).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7401061645451385887&hl=en
Reply from Maulana Zaki Baqri saheb.
http://alqaem.org/zakir.html

sanaafrin said...

Zakir Naiks motive is to convey to the message but with hikmah.I dont know why he adds RA after Yazid but i know that he does not say anything that does not match with Hadith or Quran.Ofcourse he is a human being,he can make mistakes but i advice the listeners to follow that which they feel is logical and is in accordance with Quran and Hadith.
Yazid has fought battles at the time of Prophet(pbuh) and on the other side he orders the killing of Hussain(RA) .
I think in such situations arguments are going to prevail till the world ends .So instead of cursing Yazid or Zakir Naik we should first have a look onto ourselves and pray to Allah that He forgives ALL OF US (it is His choice to forgive or punish)
The Prophet(pbuh)says in his Hadith that my religion is going to divide into more than 72 sects and during that time those who follow TheQuran and the sunnah will be the righteous ones.
Allah says in the Quran that "if you love Allah follow the Propht(pbuh)"
So anonymous u cannot be a true muslim until and unless you love Allah or follow the Prophet(pbuh)which u can only do if u believe in Hadith

Kazi said...

HIDDEN AGENDA OF THE ISNA ASHARI SHIAS
Shias challenge for debate with Dr. Zakir Naik accepted,
But “A canon is not required to kill a rat”

A week before Muharram, the Muslim community experienced the pain of the onslaught of accusations on their favourite Islamic scholar Dr. Zakir Naik. Why are Some of the Shias desperate to malign Dr. Zakir Naik? What makes them so jealous of a Scholar whom even the Christians and the Hindus do not mind agreeing with? The reason is simple and straightforward.

Dr. Zakir Naik is bonding the Muslims community together with the unbreakable bond “The Holy Qur’an”.
. In fact Dr. Zakir Naik’s wise reasoning strengthened from authentic sources caused scores of educated Muslims as well as Shias from Khoja Isna Sahara Jamaat, Dawoodi Bohras and others to enter into the mainstream of Islam. i.e. follow The Qur’an and Sunnah of prophet Muhammad {pbuh}.

Dr. Zakir Naik has inspired hundred of Muslims to take up Daw’ah as their chosen and passionate profession and many of them are running their own Da’wah centers across the world.

No contemporary Muslim scholar has appealed to the masses of all Muslim sects with such a brotherly impact as Dr. Zakir Naik has managed to do. The impact was such that the conference on ‘peace –the solution of humanity’ organized by IRF saw hundreds of Shias visiting the venue every day and leaving with impressions of satisfaction. This was also evident by their presence in large number as seen by all watching the live telecast of the event. Those Shias who have always worked to create ‘fitnah’ and destroy the unity amongst Muslims could not tolerate this. Hence they picked up a statement of Dr. Zakir Naik regarding Yazid and hurled it as a weapon manipulated and out of context to achieve their destructive aim.

Challenging Dr. Naik for a debate
In a desperately and hurried attempt they also challenged Dr. Zakir Naik for a debate. Many Shias thought that this was a good opportunity to cause a division among the Muslims who were realizing their duty about spreading the message of Islam peacefully. In fact even while Dr. Zakir Naik was on Hajj these mischievous Shias spread the word that Dr. Zakir is not responding to their challenge for debate and tried to show the world that he is trying to run away.
After much restraint and patience to accusations continue Now Dr Zakir Naik has accepted the challenge and has sent the message to Safdar Karmali, president of the Khoja Isna Ashari jamaat [Mumbai] the main person who spat the venom against the global Da’wah efforts of Dr. Zakir, and sent a letter to him to organize a public debate in Excel ground which happens to be one of the largest in Mumbai. Dr. Zakir is willing to debate personally with Safdar Karmali, president of the Khoja Isna Ashari jamaat [Mumbai] himself or if Safdar Karmali is not willing but is ready to bring any scholar of his choice then any student or associate of Dr. Zakir would be available to debate with them.

Among other unknown or lesser-known Shias, a person by the name of Zaki Bakri also wishes to derive publicity out of this controversy. Zaki Bakri’s challenge for a debate is also accepted but since we don’t require a cannon to kill a rat hence any student or associate available and selected by Dr.Zakir Naik would be able to debate with Zaki Bakri. Now in order to prove himself he only has to fix a date, hire a hall preferably Excel Hall, London. Dr. Zakir Naik had delivered a talk in Excel Hall, London which has a capacity of more than 25000, due to over whelming response several thousands were denied the opportunity to hear his talk. Thus, Zaki Bakri is challenged he should take a legal permission and we will request Dr. Zakir Naik to send one of his student or an associate to debate Zaki Bakri and expose him.

This will give them a fair opportunity to condemn Dr Zakir Naik in public and a chance for the Ummah to see the other point of view of the student or associate of Dr. Zakir Naik and decide for themselves who is the real representative and the voice of the Ummah.

Shahid said...

Brother Kazi
Your Post after months the controversy is dead, Shows who is trying to divide the Ummah.
This controversy was wrong the first time and its wrong now too.
If things would have handled properly tings could have been different. I think its the case of proper lack of communication
I think if Zakir Naik could have acted humbly and accepted his mistake. The problem would have been solved peacefully.
Not only Shias but all Sunnis condemn the killers of the Family of the Prophet of Islam. If it was a slip of tongue or due to ignorance, an proper apology would have solved the matter.
We have seen condemnation from all corners of the World from the Shias and Sunnis
here are some links to prove this points.
http://sunninews.wordpress.com/2008/01/31/zakir-naik-misinterpreting-ala-hazrats-ra-fatwa/
http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/conflictofkarbala.htm

hope the good faith prevails and Muslims understand the importance of unity among Muslims.

Friend said...

I know their family very well and I know how Zakir Naik became lecturer. To be true, I have seen them closely and backstage. They have double life. IRF and peace tv is all money making gimmicks. Can anyone tell how much tax does he pay to Government ? None. he hides papers. Does he loves poor and does he encourage normal people to come towards him ? No. You will find in his eyes he avoiding you. He is after rich people only. I am a poor youngster, i was a fan of him. I did so much for him. But he ignored me because of my financial status. He used to be after rich people. Does it anyway relates to a true follower of Rasoolullah ? I have face descrimination and falsehood in his family. However, His father and Mother are great Muslims. But for him, He is just thrilled to be popular. Exactly like Shahrukh Khan or any other actor. Its for him making name and money. Its his career and not deen. Thats the reason I was not surprised by his comments on Yazeed. because He just talks and he does not do it.

ABDULBARI said...

I have read different baseless comments pls. read this and comfort yourselfs.

As-Salaamu Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuhu.


I pray to Allah (swt) for your health, happiness and vigor in Islamic spirits. Aameen.

Sorry for the delay in reply since we are Alhamdulillah overloaded with thousands of e-mails/queries etc. daily.

Jazallahu Khairan for your appreciation and for praising Dr. Zakir for his humble endeavors in the field of Da’wah. In a recent programme held on the 2nd of Dec. 2007, one of the Non Muslim questioners posed a question with regards to the battle of Karbala and Yazid, to which Dr. Zakir’s response evoked strong criticism from a certain group of the Muslim community because he said “May Allah be pleased with him” after the name of Yazid (R) and referred to Karbala as a political war.

Since you consider Dr. Zakir to be a scholar and hold him in high esteem, we feel it is necessary to clarify the issue in the light of Qur’an and Sunnah. Dr. Zakir is well known for clarifying Islamic viewpoints using the Qur’an and authentic Hadith as a basis, in conjunction with reason, logic and scientific facts. His public discourses whether on Islam or Comparative Religion are always backed with quotes and references from relevant sources. It reflects the extensive research done and the amount of efforts put in for his talks. Hence it is unlikely that in the matter of Yazid (R) and the battle of Karbala, he has just spoken without knowing the background.

1. A minority of the minority community i.e. the KSI (Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat) blew this issue out of proportion thinking that they caught Dr. Zakir on the wrong-foot. They thought that the whole of Muslim Ummah had a unanimous opinion against Yazeed. However, they did not know that there is a difference of opinion in the Ummah regarding Yazeed.

Irrespective of the difference of opinion on this issue in Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaah yet it is unanimously agreed that one can say RadhiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be please with him) for Yazeed and it is not Haraam.

As you are aware that Dr. Zakir has a large fan following from all the sects of Muslim Ummah including Isna Ashari, Khojas, Bohris etc. The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat could not tolerate the Shias getting influenced by Dr. Zakir’s talks.
Desperate attempts were made to instigate the whole of Muslim Ummah against Dr. Zakir Naik by publicizing the matter in all possible manners. All their efforts went in vain because Allah (swt) says in the Glorious Qur’an

“And (they) plotted and planned and Allah too planned and the best of planners is Allah” [Al Qur’an 3:54]

The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat in Mumbai is misleading the masses by making it appear as though Dr. Zakir Naik has made Yazeed into a Hero. Infact Yazeed is not a Hero for Dr. Zakir Naik.

2. In order to maintain the unity in the Muslim Ummah, Dr. Zakir Naik expresses his sincere regret and said, “I regret if unintentionally any person or section of the people’s feelings have been hurt due to any statement made by me.” He also does the same while giving da’wah to Christians and Hindus. He regrets hurting the Muslims unintentionally but that does not mean what he has said is wrong.

3. Any knowledgeable Muslim whenever he takes the name of any “Sahabah” (companions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)) or Taba’een (next generation after the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)) his name is followed by RadiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be pleased with him) or Rahmatullahi Alaih (May Allah’s mercy be on him).
Thus Dr. Zakir Naik after mentioning the name of Yazeed, who is a Taba’een, he followed his name with (May Allah be pleased with him). To pray for the Muslims is also instructed by Allah (swt) in the Glorious Qur’an – 98:8, 9:100 and 58:22.

Neither did Dr. Zakir praise Yazeed nor did he curse him. He did not comment on his actions. He only said “Yazeed (May Allah be pleased with him)” since he does not consider Yazeed to be a Kafir and it is allowed to pray for the believers as Abraham (pbuh) too prayed for all the believers in the Glorious Qur’an - 14:41.

4. The Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat claims that the whole of Muslim Ummah condemns the statement of Dr. Zakir. Who are the people the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat mentions as ‘Muslim Ummah’? Do the views of the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat represent the view of the Muslim Ummah? Do they have the fatawas of all the cross section of Muslims, especially the Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat, for their stand? If it is only Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat raking up the controversy, then they are misleading the common masses by saying Muslim Ummah.

There is a difference of opinion as far as the Muslim scholars are concerned regarding Yazeed. Some are neutral and some are against him. Some are even in favour of Yazeed like the revered scholar Imam Ghazaali.


When Imam Ghazaali was asked if it was all right to curse Yazeed, he replied “No”. He was asked was it all right to say “rahimahullah”? He said “Yes it is Mustahab (highly recommended).” [Qaid as Shareed min Akhbar e Yazeed pg 57-59].

Imam Ghazaali further said, “Yazeed was a Muslim and when we pray for the Muslims “Allhummagfirli Muslimineen was Muslimaat (O Allah forgive the Musilms men and women) he is also included in our prayers.” [Qaid as Shareed min Akhbar e Yazeed pg 57-59].

Yazeed was also the commander of the Muslim army, which went to fight the battle of Constantinople, which was predicted by the Prophet (pbuh) himself along with the glad tidings, “Paradise will be granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval operation.” [Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4 Book of Jihad Hadith 2924].

This was a very prominent war as far as the spread of Islam was concerned. There were Sahabah like Hussain Ibn Ali, Abdullah bin Abbas, Ibn Umar and Abu Ayyub Ansari and Abdullah bin Zubair (May Allah be pleased with all of them) who participated and fought under the leadership of Yazeed.

5. As far as the Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat is concerned, inspite of the difference of opinion it is agreed upon that it is permissible to say “May Allah have mercy on him” or “May Allah be pleased with him” for Yazeed. Therefore saying “May Allah be pleased with him” after Yazeed’s name is not Haraam, nor a sin and is not wrong.

This has been reconfirmed recently in writing from various Darul Ulooms and Islamic Organisations in India.

Fatawas to clarify and support the above stand.
a) Darul Uloom, Deoband.
b) Nadwatul Ulema, Lucknow (verbally confirmed on phone, written copy to be received).
c) Darul Uloom, Barelwi.
d) Jamaat-e-Islami-i-Hind, New Delhi (verbally confirmed on phone, written copy to be received).
e) Darul Uloom Ahmadia Salfia, Darbhanga, Bihar.
f) Jamiatul-Ahle-Hadith, New Delhi
g) Aligarh Muslim University
h) Ahmed Raza Khsan Barelwi
i) And several others who have confirmed on phone and are expected to be received in the next couple of days.


Fatawas from scholars outside India:
1) Shaikh Abdullah Ibn Jibreen (on audio, written copy to be received)

Note: Please find attachments of the fatawas mentioned above for your reference.

6. Some people consider “political war” in a negative sense. By saying Karbala was a political war in no way does it mean that it was not a war for Islam or Justice. Many political wars were fought for the sake of Justice and Islam.

Islam is a complete way of life, which also deals with political issues, which should be based on the Qur’an and Hadith.

In his response to the questioner, Dr. Zakir also cited the example of the Battle of Jamal that was fought between the Mother of the Believers, Aaishah (RA) and Ali (RA). The battle took place as a result of difference of opinion on a political issue. We respect and revere both the companions of the prophet (pbuh). However, with regards to the battle of Jamal, we neither favour nor are we against any one of them.

7. We disagree with a certain group of Muslims who hurl abuses on Aaishah (R.A.) and do not consider her from the Ahle Bayt i.e. family of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). However, the Qur’an considers the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) as the members of Ahle Bayt in - 33:32-33.

Moreover, even the wife of Abraham (pbuh) is addressed by Allah (swt) as one among the Ahle Bayt of Abraham (pbuh) in the Glorious Qur’an - 11:72-73.

Furthermore, this same minority Muslim sect also curses the first three caliphs of Islam, Abu Bakr (R.A.), Umar (R.A.) and Uthman (R.A.) as well as the mother of believers Ayesha (R.A.).

8. If Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat tomorrow says don’t say “May Allah be pleased with him”, after the name of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ummul Mumineen Ayesha (May Allah be pleased with them all) will we stop saying “May Allah be pleased with them”, after their names? Of course not!

As a whole, the majority of the Muslims condemn the act of anyone cursing any of the companions, including the first three caliphs of Islam as well as Ayesha (R.A.) the wife of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).



9. Dr. Zakir Naik did not curse or criticize any Muslim. This same small minority sect of Muslim curse these revered Caliphs of Islam Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman (May Allah be pleased with them all), and if they do it the whole Muslim Ummah will condemn them.

The Prophet (pbuh) himself said, “When a man curses anything, the curse goes up to heaven and the gates of heaven are locked against it. Then it comes down to the earth and its gates are locked against it. Then it goes right and left, and if it finds no place of entrance it returns to the thing it was cursed, and if it deserves what was said (it enters it), otherwise it returns to the one who uttered it.” [Sunan Abu Dawud Vol.3 Book of Manners Hadith 4887].

Aaishah (R.A.) reported that the Messenger of Allah said, “When your companion dies, leave him and do not revile him.” [Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol.3 Book of Manners Hadith 4881].

Allah will not question us on the Day of Judgement as to why didn’t we hurl abuses on Yazeed even if he deserved it, however Allah will surely hold us accountable if we curse anyone unjustly.

Our salvation does not depend on the issue of Yazeed as every person is responsible for his or her actions.

Allah says in Surah Baqarah, Chapter No. 2, Verse No. 134 & 141.

“That was a nation who has passed away. They shall receive the reward of what they earned and you of what you earn. And you will not be asked of what they used to do.“

10. Dr. Zakir Naik holds the grandsons of the Prophet in high respect and whenever he mentions the name of Hassan (R.A.) and Hussain (R.A.) he follows it with RadiAllahu Anhuma (May Allah be pleased with them).

Dr. Zakir condemns the person who actually killed Hussain (RadiAllahu Anhu) the grandson of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) whether he was the person from Yazeed’s army or someone else.

11. Dr. Zakir Naik is held in high regards by millions of Muslims worldwide. There were more than two-hundred thousand people, including Bohras, Shias, Barelwis, Deobandis etc. during his speech and no one amongst them raised the issue, not even a single from more than 20 Islamic scholars from different parts of the world who came to speak at the conference.

12. Saying “May Allah be pleased with him” after Yazeed’s name is a minor issue, but cursing the first three caliphs and Ayesha (R.A.) is a much more bigger issue and a grievous sin.

According to Ahl-e-sunnat-wal-Jamaat cursing the first three rightly guided caliphs and the Mother of Believers, Ayesha (R.A.) is a major sin (some scholars go to the extent of saying it is ‘Kufr’ i.e. disbelief while others say it is ‘Fisq’ i.e. grave sin).

If you make a mountain out of a mole hill because of saying “May Allah be pleased with him” for Yazeed then is not cursing the first three rightly guided caliphs of Islam and the Mother of Believers, Ayesha (R.A.) a much more grievous sin?

We want unity among the Muslim Ummah. Is it proper for the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat to continue to create unnecessary discord on a ‘difference of opinion’ amongst Muslims with them?

13. If the Khoja Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat give in writing that they will not curse the first three caliphs Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and the Ummul Mumineen Ayesha (May Allah be pleased with them all) InshaAllah Dr. Zakir Naik will never say RadiAllahu Anhu (May Allah be pleased with him) after the name of Yazeed since it is optional.

It is not Dr. Zakir Naik who has a difference of opinion regarding Yazeed, but he is aware that as far as the scholars of the Ahl-e-Sunnat-wa-Jamaat are concerned, there is a difference of opinion regarding Yazeed. That is the reason he neither praised him, nor condemned him.

Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers. We should try to unite the Muslim Ummah rather than creating more divisions. If only all Muslims read the Qur’an with understanding and adhere to Sahih Hadith, Inshallah most of these differences would be solved and we could be one united Muslim Ummah. The best way to get the Muslims together is given in the following verse:

“And hold fast all together by the rope which Allah (stretches out for you) and be not divided among yourselves;” [Surah Ale Imran 3:103].




May Allah (swt) accept our efforts in His way and Cause and may He give us more opportunities to serve His Deen better. Aameen!



Jazakallahu Khairan and Was Salaam,


Yours Brotherly in the Service of Islam,



ATHER KHAN
Research Executive


Enclosed - 1. Fatawas from various Darul Ulooms and notable Scholars.

sajid said...

we all know about maloon yazid's activities,if zakir says that Allah be pleased with yazeed then he must be his chamcha!

i used to admire zakir, but now no longer i like him

i ask zakir naik to think over this issue again and then decide about yazeed

how can Allah be pleased with yazeed who was a womaniser, a drunkyard. whole world knows what place does KAABA AND MADINA occupy in islam and yazeed burnt Kaaba and kept horses in Masjid-e-nabavi
. on the day of judgement, yazeed will be with shaitan.
zakir do you really admire a womaniser, a drunkyard........

Anonymous said...

After reading this thread, I am really worried about muslims future.

One simple soultion: Let's pray to almighty Allah:

May Allah, rest all lovers and supporters of Yazid
with Yazeed in grave, judgement day and forever after Qayamat!

Anonymous said...

AA brothers,


"Jo der ke bole wo Ali nahi hai".

Lets decide this argument in one line, and find out how deeply Dr. Zakir Naik (LA) is misguiding you all.
The hadith he referred to, and some of you took the pain of finding and mentioning it, I REQUEST YOU ALL, to also choose a book of Islamic history (any one of them you like be it Ibne-khaldoon's or be it shibli nomani's or anything of your choice) and readup. And guess what you are going to find.? First army of muslims went in 42 Hijary. Yazeed is not in picture till the 8th battle. and he was sent as a punishment not to fight. Is that enough to make it clear for you all that Dr. Zakir Naik LIED or you want me to give you more references AUTHENTIC?
Keep in mind i am making an open challenge pick any book of history and find out when first lakshar went for the fight and when yazeed (LA) comes in the picture. Now simply putting it not only you guys are making a false representation of hadith but are also being part of a wrong act. First get your facts straight.

Atif Fazili said...

Asalamualaikum!
I don't know what to say about Zakir Naik's mentioning of RH, but what i can say with confidence is that Dr. Zakir Naik is a man of logic. I have seen almost all of his debates and speeches and everyword he says has a logic behind it. I don't want my opinion to be matched with the above discussion of yazid but i can say that we muslims shouldn't use such harsh language about Zakir Naik. May be u may feel he might have said something which most people disagree with, but at the same time we should realise that this time he is the best public speaker in the muslim world. He wasn't named as Deedat++ just like that. What efforts he has put forward to bring the message of Islam to the world, i don't feel that any normal muslim like me can possibly think of going so high. The man established a channel, school, daawah training centres and what not.We should have some respect inour heart for him. He's worth it.

Meesam said...

Dear muslim brothers (both shias n suunis)! Let Dr. Zakir naik say watevr he wants! if he is wrong he will get sin if he is right he wont!!
when i started reading this thread i ws like damn sure that the end wud b with a shia sunni fight n like always sunnis startd abusin shias which is very shame shamefull!
in a such a time when all the mulims need to b togethr n fight against the injustice done by america we r fighting amongst our selves!!
as far as zakir naik is concerned i dono wat his personal life is or how hes with poors n stuff, he does dawah he has converted loads of ppl to islam thats gud n sayin RH after yazids name wasnt acceptable!! allah better knos wat is right n wat is wrong so lets leave it to him as this thread is gettin violent!!

n accordin to one of the suni brother shias curse there three caliphs right?? no not all shias do n evn if they do it they usually dont do it publicly!!

leme state somthin from the "most authentic"(according to sunnis) book after Quran in zakir naik's style!

Saheeh bukhari, vol.5 book 57 hadith 61:
"Allahs apostle(prophet muhammad pbuh) said,
"Fatima (his daughter) is a part of me and he who makes her angry makes me angry"
Saheeh bukhari, vol.4 book 56 hadith 819:
"fatima is the leader of all women in paradise and the leader of all believing women"

Saheeh bukhari vol.4 book 53 hadith 325:
ayesha reported:
"Fatima the daughter of the prophet pbuh got angry with Abu bakr and did not speak to him and conmtinued assuming this attitude till she died"

THIS anger ws due to a piece oflanmd which ws giftedto hazrat fatima by the prophet pbuh n abu bakr has uspurd it!

saheeh muslim says:
So abu bakr refused to hand over any thing from it to fatima who got angry for this reason n id not talk to him for 6 months

one who makes fatima angry makes the prophet angry n the one who makes the prophet angry makes allah angry! hw can abu bakr b the rightious cliph of the muslim community!!

saheeh muslim vol.3 hadith 10:
the prophet said:
"the religion will continue until the last hour hjaving 12 caliphs for u ,all of them from quraish!
n this is wat the shias believe!! so proves from the most authntic boks of sunnis that they r wrong !! may allah bring them to the right path! ameen!

Anonymous said...

well all the people who think that zakir naik (l.a.) was right in praising yazid may please refer to
sura no 4 (sure nisa) ayat no. 93.
also there is a hadees of hazrat ali(a.s) that "when 2 opposite views are propogated one of them is wrong."
Also prophet Muhammed (p.b.u.h) had said about Husian(a.s.) " I am from husain and husain is from me"

also Allah (s.w.t) says in the quran "and creating mischief is worse than murder". zakir naik (l.a.) is trying to divide the muslim community for personal gains
may allah (s.w.t) curse him and all those people who support him in his statements regarding yazid(l.a.).

Huzaifa said...

Listen Anonymous, you mind your tongue. You claim to be a so-called 'LOGICAL' and a 'GOOD MUSLIM', well, sorry to burst your bubble, your not. I'm not either, but the way your reacting to a discussion is certainly unislamic. You lack a lot of basic facts, and just by randomly quoting from the Hadith or the Quran is totally unacceptable as a part of discussion.

And for you not giving credibility to the Hadith, who the hell are you to question and doubt the Holy Prophet Muhammad's (SAW) words. It is a fact that some quotations are contradictory, then I'm sure your LOGICAL brain would concede to the fact that those contradictory statements are not the original Hadith, but false ones which have been altered. You claim to be so much intelligent and intellectual, well, show that too. Analyse everything and think before you speak.

You yourself should ponder over your religion. I for one do not believe in something called as SUNNI or SHI'A. There is no such thing. There was never suppossed to be. Shi'as give so much credit to Hazrat Ali (RA), which has not been mentioned. No doubt he was one of the most honourable men, even pointed out by the Prophet (SAW) himself, but that doesn't mean you start to worship him. And yes, that is what Shi'as do. "Ali Maula, Ali Maula". What does this mean. The word "MAULA", means Owner, God, The Almighty, which I'm sure all of us have sworn to believe to be Allah Subhanaotallah.

Anonymous, get your facts straight nad stop abusing and using explicit language. Your selection of words regarding the topic under discussion is not only pathetic, but extremely disgusting.

abdul ali said...

wo zakir lambade ko kuch ilm nai hai jo moon mein aaya bhokhta. uski................@)(*&^%%

Anonymous said...

i m really amazed of what Dr. naik said. i still cant believe that a man of his knowledge can say all this. i havnt seen that paticular tape n dont know the exact words. bt it has disappointed me.

shehbaz said...

shia dont have any right to call us wrong and blame us.as everyone knew it they said YA HUSAIN WOH HUM NA THE in their matam it means that they were responsible for hussain r.a shahadat .they wrote thousands of letters to imam hussain r.a and in karrbala noone come to help him neither no one answer him on call.

Anonymous said...

abdul ali ka matlab hai ali ka banda aur jo allah ke siwa kisi ko khuda banaye woh kafir hai. aksar shia aise naam rakhte hai. zakir ke baare me allah faisla karega.

Kamran Zahid said...

I think all of us here who are posing as we are Islamic scholars need to look at ourselves first before pointing fingers at Dr. Zakir Naik. If anyone here has done as much research or as much analysis of Islam and its teachings (and other religions as well), only then can you justify your outrage. At least Dr Zakir Naik is doing something for Islam. Why do we as Muslims like to bicker about Muslim scholars who are actively trying to rectify the image of Islam in this world? If you can't support him, at least don't criticize him! If you really have a problem with him, go out there and start your own non-profit organization like Dr. Naik and make yourself heard.

shoaib cheema said...

To know in depth Dr. Zakir Naik please read book “Islam Aik –Insan Aik” in Urdu language. This book consists of 110 Questions & Answers of Dr. Naik on various issues.
You may get it by post
Contact: 92-300-9555081

Anonymous said...

I have read most of the comments from the people here. One thing that every one lacks is that nobody has intensive history knowledge. Everyone is writing on the basis of myths. This discussion is centuries old. The word Yazid (یزید) and Yazidiat (یزیدیت) actually became a curse in our society due to heavy influence of Shiaism (شیعیت). Shias enjoyed the support of government, as many of the Islamic rulers were Shias. Here is a brief discussion about not abusing Yazid. The most important is that Prophet (SAW) announce the Paradise for the first islamic army who will take naval expedition. And Yazid was not just member of that army, but he was commander of that army. So is their any doubt about a person who's Paradise is guaranteed by Prophet (SAW). And a person with Paradise certificate from Prophet (SAW) can be called Rehmat Ullah e Elaih (رحمۃ اللہ علیہ).
Kindly go through these evidences with neutral mind.

Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari records under the year A.H. 49 (February 9, 669-January 1, 670) during the reign of Muawiya I, a number of forces, including one under Yazid struck at Constantinople. This First Arab siege of Constantinople was a naval assault lasting through the years 670-677. Abu Ayyub al-Ansari was also among the notables accompanying Yazid. This journey marks an important event in the life of young Yazid (27 at that time), as he became one promised paradise according to one Hadith.

They relate that 'Umair bin Al-Aswad Al-Anasi told him that he went to 'Ubada bin As-Samit while he was staying in his house at the seashore of Him with (his wife) Um Haram. 'Umair said. Um Haram informed us that she heard Muhammad saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition." Um Haram added, I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Will I be amongst them?' He replied, 'You are amongst them.' Muhammad then said, 'The first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will not be forgiven their sins.' I asked, 'Will I be one of them, O Allah's Apostle?' He replied in the negative." Volume 4, Book 52, Number 175 Narrated Khalid bin Madan

Imaam Muhammad Gazzalee(d.505H) said he was a muslim with a correct aqeedah and a complete muslim and it is not permissible in the sharee’ah to curse and abuse him. (see Ahyaa al-Uloom (3/108), Wafyaat al-A’yaan (1/328), Miratul-Janaan (3/176), al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/173), Hayaat al-Haiwaan (2/176), Sawaa’iq al-Meharqah (pg.222), Dhuu al-Ma’alee (pg.49), Sharh Fiqhul-Akbar (pg.87), Nibraas (pg.551), Shadhraat adh-Dhahab Fee Akhbaar Minal Madhab (1/69), Tafseer Rooh al-Ma’anee (13/73), Fataawa Azeezee (1/100), Fataawa Abdul-Hayy (1/60), Aqaa’id al-Islaam (pg.223).

Mulla Alee Qaaree said, "The majority of the Scholars have prohibited cursing Yazeed and Hajjaaj." (Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat (4/52). Sunni view of Yazid

What follows is a list of some of the scholars who held various opinions about Yazeed ibn Mua’wiyyah.which nulifies the shia claim that all sunni scholars curse Yazid

1. Imaam Qaadhee Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabee Maalikee (d.543H) He did not hold permissible the cursing and abusing of Yazeed nor declaring him to be a disbeliever. He said, "If it is said justice and knowledge are from the conditions of Khilaafah and Yazeed neither had justice or knowledge, then we will say what is the thing by which he have to come to know Yazeed had no justice or knowledge." (al-Awaasim Minal Qawaasim (pg.222) He also said, "Where are those historians who wrote against Yazeed in mentioning alcohol and open sinning, do they not have any shame?" (al-Awaasim Minal Qawaasim (pg.222)

2. Shaikh Abdul-Mugeeth Hanbalee (d.583H) He was not in favour of cursing Yazeed nor declaring him to be a disbeliever, rather he authored a biography of Yazeed with the title of, "Fadhal Yazeed." "and his (Abdul-Mugeeth's) book ‘Fadhal Yazeed bin Mu’awiyyah’, in it he has mentioned strange incidences." (Hidaayatul A’aarifeen Asmaa al-Mu’allifeen Wa Athaar Musannifeen (5/623), al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/328). Haafidh Ibn Katheer said about him, "He was from the righteous Hanbalee's who the common folk referred to." (al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/328). Imaam Ibn al-Jawzee said, "I hope from Allaah that me and Abdul-Mugeeth will be together in Paradise. Muhib ud deen Abul-Baqaa said from this we find (ibn al-Jawzee) knew Abdul-Mugeeth was from the righteous worshippers of Allaah and may he have mercy on both of them." (Dhail Tabaqaat Hanabillah (1/356) of Ibn Rajab.)

3. Allaamah Abul-Khair Qazwainee. (d.590H) Imaam Ibn Katheer said, "After he left Qazwain he went to Baghdaad where he became a teacher in Madrassah Nizaamiyyah and he would admonish and deliver lectures to the people. So on the day of Ashoorah he sat on the minbar to admonish the people, it was said to him to curse Yazeed bin Mu’awiyyah. He replied, "He was but an Imaam Mujtahid." (al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (9/13), Risaalah al-Mustarfah Lee-Bayaan Mashoor Kitaab as-Sunnah al-Musharfah (pg.132).

4. Allaamah Ibn as-Saalah (d.646H) He was also not in favour of cursing Yazeed or saying he was a disbeliever. Ibn Hajr Makkee writes, "Ibn Salaah who is from our jurists and scholars of hadeeth, I have seen in his Fataawa that when he was asked concerning the individual who would only curse Yazeed because he ordered the death of Hussain. Then in answer to this he said, according to us Yazeed ordering the death of Hussain is not correct and cursing and abusing Yazeed is not the sign of a believer….." (as-Sawaa’iq al-Meharqah (pg.222).

5. Shaikh ul-Islaam Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H) He was neither in favour of cursing Yazeed nor declaring him to be a disbeliever. He says, "And the people who curse Yazeed and other such people like him then it is UPON them to bring evidence, Firstly: that he (Yazeed) was an open sinner and an oppressor and therefore prove he really was an open sinner and an oppressor. As allowing them to be cursed also needs to be proven that he continued this open sinning and oppression to the end up until his death. Secondly: Then after this they must prove that it is permissible to curse specific people like Yazeed." He goes onto say, "and the verse, "May the Curse of Allaah be upon the oppressors." Is a general verse like the verses concerning punishment." He goes onto say, "And the hadeeth of Bukhaari states the first army to wage Jihaad against Constantinople is forgiven and the first army to do Jihaad against Constantinople, their Ameer was Yazeed ibn Mu’waiyyah and the word army entails a specific number and every member of this army is included in this forgiveness……….." (Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah Fee Naqdh Kalaam ash-Shee’ah Wal-Qadariyyah (2/252), al-Muntaqa Minhaaj al-Ei’tidaal Fee Naqdh Kalaam ar-Rafdh Wal-Ei’tizaal (pg.290).

6. Haafidh Imaam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (d.751H). Haafidh Ibn Qayyim writes in his book al-Manaar al-Muneef, "ALL the narration's that mention the censure of Yazeed bin Mu’awiyyah are lies." The he goes onto say on the same page, "ALL the narration's that mention the censure of Mu’awiyyah are lies." (al-Manaar al-Muneef Fis-Saheeh Wadh-Dha’eef (pg.220).

7. Haafidh Imaam Ibn Katheer (d.774H) After mentioning the position of al-Haraasee (of the permissibility of cursing) he mentions his statements and says, "Imaam Ghazzalee has opposed the attribution of open sinning and tyranny to Yazeed and has prohibited from abusing Yazeed because he was a muslim and it is not established he expressed happiness or joy on the death of Hussain…." (al-Bidaayah Wan-Nihaayah (12/173).

8. Haafidh Ibn Rajab (d.795H) Haafidh Ibn Rajab also did not hold the opinion of cursing and declaring Yazeed to be a disbeliever. On the contrary he refute the allegation on Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal that he cursed Yazeed. So he writes in clear words, "The statement of Imaam Ahmad only establishes cursing on all of the oppressors and there is no clarification or specification for the permissibility of cursing Yazeed only." (Dhail Tabaqaat Hanabillah (2/356).

9. Mulla Alee Qaaree (d1014H). Mulla Alee Qaaree said, "The majority of the Scholars have prohibited cursing Yazeed and Hajjaaj." (Mirqaat Sharh Mishkaat (4/52).

10.Ibn kathir in his famous book Albidaywanihaya quotes Mohammad bin Hanfia Hussain brother, that Yazid was a pious person and he denied the accusation against him.

Anonymous said...

for those claiming ale-sunnah wal jamat is in support of not cursing or sending lanath on yazid, this is a big LIE. the ale-sunnah wal jamat is the middle path and do not like him. the shias also do not like him and they curse him. the salafis which are also wahabis believe there are 10 rightly guided caliphas which includes yazid. i want to ask, who gives this wahabis the right to say who is right and who is wrong? when the biggest jamat is the ale-sunnat wal jamat, and the shia and wahabi are the minority compared to it. are people stupid and dumb!? just because you have technology and young english speaking people does not mean they are right. i am the biggest fan of dr zakir naik. he is the best athority right now in comparative religion. there is no one like him right now who can debate on this topic and win all the time. there is no one like him in any other sects/jamats including sunnah jamat and shia. BUT he is not an authority on Islam and he definetly can not speak on Islam as a whole. may be points here and there like he does when he compares other religions with Islam. You see in Islam there are many studies for it he does not fit in to any of them unless they are camparitive. When he talked about yazid, most of the people i know stop watching him and i started disliking him. although i would still watch his debates and comparitive lectures but the other are just views from his wahabi clan and salafi thoughts. He may well be abdul wahab 2 soon if he carries on with his dividing remarks. the scholar themiya has got 2 him. he does not at all look at any other scholars and authorities at all apart from people of his own sect. he is a narrow minded person in that regards. he needs to learn and appologise just like dr israr ahmed did when he spoke about Ali (may allah be pleased with him). he was forgiven by all sunni people and he is still loved. but naik is a mischief. will he change his sons name to yazid? only the future can tell, not be surprised if he does!!!!

Anonymous said...

for those claiming ale-sunnah wal jamat is in support of not cursing or sending lanath on yazid, this is a big LIE. the ale-sunnah wal jamat is the middle path and do not like him. the shias also do not like him and they curse him. the salafis which are also wahabis believe there are 10 rightly guided caliphas which includes yazid. i want to ask, who gives this wahabis the right to say who is right and who is wrong? when the biggest jamat is the ale-sunnat wal jamat, and the shia and wahabi are the minority compared to it. are people stupid and dumb!? just because you have technology and young english speaking people does not mean they are right. i am the biggest fan of dr zakir naik. he is the best athority right now in comparative religion. there is no one like him right now who can debate on this topic and win all the time. there is no one like him in any other sects/jamats including sunnah jamat and shia. BUT he is not an authority on Islam and he definetly can not speak on Islam as a whole. may be points here and there like he does when he compares other religions with Islam. You see in Islam there are many studies for it he does not fit in to any of them unless they are camparitive. When he talked about yazid, most of the people i know stop watching him and i started disliking him. although i would still watch his debates and comparitive lectures but the other are just views from his wahabi clan and salafi thoughts. He may well be abdul wahab 2 soon if he carries on with his dividing remarks. the scholar themiya has got 2 him. he does not at all look at any other scholars and authorities at all apart from people of his own sect. he is a narrow minded person in that regards. he needs to learn and appologise just like dr israr ahmed did when he spoke about Ali (may allah be pleased with him). he was forgiven by all sunni people and he is still loved. but naik is a mischief. will he change his sons name to yazid? only the future can tell, not be surprised if he does!!!!

Anonymous said...

I had little respect for Zakir Naik earlier because of his arrogant attitude and lack of knowledge he displayed in Islamic history and Tradition.
Such arrogant acts and comments coupled with his unapologetic attitude can surely lead to his downfall. May Allah guide us all to straight path.

anwar said...

some times mr naik gives wrong numbers and wrong meanings and direction of ayah.once answered by
him on equal witness of men and woman is completely wrong .ayah says if any find his wife in adultory should bring thee witness
if dont find they should take oath by saying iam rght if not allah ruin me.

Anonymous said...

some times mr naik gives wrong numbers and wrong meanings and direction of ayah.once answered by
him on equal witness of men and woman is completely wrong .ayah says if any find his wife in adultory should bring thee witness
if dont find they should take oath by saying iam rght if not allah ruin me. this is not witness thn.taking oath what i have done,witness is what ihave seen, in ayah witness is over on not finding witness.thn it will be oath.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Zakir Naik while replying of this Yazeed issue , he has quoted the below mentioned Hadith to support his statement. I am herewith requesting you all to verify this Hadith first and then post comments. I have not still verified this Hadith.Please verify this and post here , and when Our Prophet SAW has predicted these participants of Constantinople Battle are Jannathis, then we should agree with Dr. Naik. But the reference of this Hadith should be verified.

"Yazeed was also the commander of the Muslim army, which went to fight the battle of Constantinople, which was predicted by the Prophet (pbuh) himself along with the glad tidings, “Paradise will be granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval operation.” [Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4 Book of Jihad Hadith 2924]. (Need to Verify)

This was a very prominent war as far as the spread of Islam was concerned. There were Sahabah like Hussain Ibn Ali, Abdullah bin Abbas, Ibn Umar and Abu Ayyub Ansari and Abdullah bin Zubair (May Allah be pleased with all of them) who participated and fought under the leadership of Yazeed."

Anonymous said...

Look, I'm a Harvard Doctor. Zakir Nalaik is not a Dr.....this crook is a con-man, who's making a $hit laod of money from ignorant and uneducated Muslims-unfortunate-but he's raking it in from the sponsorships from his Wahabi friends.

Naik is a classic crammer....just like all students do for the mid-terms and national exams, this imbecile is really good at memorizing. He is not that smart, and his achievements are sub-apr either as a Dr. or a Muslim scholar.

My advice, boycott this money making Naik scheme called "Peace TV"-it's making this con-man Nalaik rich and the rest of you idiots morally corrupt

ABDULBARI said...

Harvard doctor??? your language level is even below a tea boy and definetly you are a shia munafiq (Lanatullahi alahum ajmaeen).

Anonymous said...

my self shah faisal , law student ,delhi-india . being a business law wstudent i want to correlate my business law studies with 'quraan but i dont know how do i correlate my studies , like if there is any provision of business law in quraan .if i can take assistance .

Anonymous said...

Dear Brothers & Sisters in Faith,
First of all lets analyse the facts behind the Karbala genocide. Bani Umayyad had historically been a power usurper. Umayya was banished from the Quraish because he tried to engage in an unsuccessful forcible take-over of Mecca. He was later accepted back only when he finally begged mercy. Of course the legacy was in his descendants' blood forever and they always had dreams of ruling the Arabs. That finally came to frutition when Usman became Khalifa. Although Usman had right intentions, his extended family which took-over various governerates from him, didnt. Muawiya was the biggest digressor and he started the divisive and digusting practise of cursing Ali in prayers after Usman was murdered by the Muhajirs. Naturally if his son has the propehts'(S.A.W.A.) entire clan brutally assasinated it no wonder. Sunnis have forever denounced the terrible incident and Shias, of course, curse the oppressors. There has been one impediment over the years for Sunnis to openly curse Yazid. There is a hadees of Rasuallah (S.A.W.A.) which says that whoever crosses over to Roman Empire and forms an Islamic rule over there will be exempted from all trials and tribulations in the hereafter (This is not a 100% authentic hadees though as many scholars argue it and also many argue if Yazid was a part of the group that captured Constantinople). But there is another hadees (which by the way is 100% authentic) that says that whoever attacks Medinah, the curse of Allah, His Angels & All people is on that person. "Scholars" like Ibn-Taymiyah specially on whose writings and words the modern day Salafi movement is based cannot be termed as reliable. By the way even Ibn Taymiyah never denounced cursing Yazid, although he did say that Yazid was not just and that according to him was a unanimous view amongst Muslims. As for Zakir Naik, I think he should first start understanding that Islam is not spread by his Mubahila. When Rasullaha (S.A.W.A.) was called for a Mubahila by the Christians, they fled the scene just by looking from a great distance at the Noor-E-Ilaahi emitting from the Ahl-E-Bayt. Such is the power of the House of the Prophet (S.A.W.A.) of which Hazrat Iman Hussain is an integral part. Islam doesnt need help from a orator like Zakir Naik who unjustly takes pride in putting down the opposition. The Holy Prophet (S.A.W.A.) himself never engaged in verbal duals with any one. None of Ummat have been asked to spread faith by putting down the opposition. The character of the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.A.) was such that when the Jewish woman (who used to curse him and throw dirt at him each day when he used to pass her house to go to the mosque) didnt curse him once, he visited her house to find her ill. He brought a doctor and took care of her till she became alright. The lady immediately realised her folly and professed Islam wholeheartedly. This is the essence of Islam and probably Salafis wont understand that. Extremity is Haraam in Islam and discretion is recommended what with the Quraan itself saying that "There is no compulsion in religion". True if the faith is not protected it will wear away with time, but then the idea of Qayamat and its preceding events which includes deterioration of religion, is also relevant. Allah knows Best.

Girish said...

I think this Zakir Naik is an idiot and the fatwa is right in condemning him. He uses some terrible logic in his speeches.

When asked why it is not ok for islamic countries to allow non-muslims to practice their religion, He says, Does a school want to hire a teacher who says 2+2=4 or one who says 2+2=3? In the same way, islamic countries only allow islam to be practiced.
To a follow up question, Cant the same logic be applied by non-muslim countries and should not allow muslims to practice their religion..well then he doesn;t have any good answer. He takes granted that will not happen and he probably might be thinking a Jihad (read suicide bombing) will automatically make any govt fall to its knees.

His logic is worse than that of a 10 year old and you people consider him to be scholar. Only Allah help him with some sense.

Rafay Rizvi said...

As a sunni Muslim, I honestly believe that Dr. Zakir Naik has made a blunder in using "Radhiallahu anhu" for Yazeed. As indicated by other brothers here, there are various views about Yazeed among Sunni scholars. Some curse him, some chose to remain quite in this issue while there are others who do deem him to be a Muslim. But one thing we all agree is that Yazeed was never considered upright good Muslim worthy of expression like Radhiallahu anhu. Muslim or not, he wasn't a good person and that means we should not use RA. Even though Dr. Zakir Naik is incorrect here, it doesn't mean that Muslims should curse him as certain Muslims are doing. I also believe speaking ill of Shaykhayn and Zun-Norayn (Radhiallahu anhum) is as much wrong (if not greater) as considering Yazeed a pious person.

Bader Laher said...

From Bader Laher
Maulana Abul kalam Azad write in his book if it was non Muslim government , Ahle Bayet (Childern of our prophet s.a.w.) would not have been treated the way Yazid treated them.
I think its only reaches coming out of one of our maulana !!!!!!!!!
Yazid achive has three things in his life
1. Attack Madinah munawarah , killed thousands of companion of prophet, Salat was not performed for 3 days in masjide nabawi and was used as stable for horses!!!
2. Karbal, not only killed Grandson of our prophet but locked up ahle bayet.
3. Attack makkah n kaaba and destroy the part of structure.
IF YOU THINK Yazid was hero keep your sons and Grandsons name Yazid!!!!!!!!!! Or change your names to him!!!!!!!!

Syed said...

aslm
plz brothers stop this nonsense he is doing wonderful job even personality like Dr. allama iqbal involve with a conterversy when he recite shikwa lot of ulemas issued fathwa against him declaring him as kafir inauzubillah know the same people uttering him rahmathulla alaih plz brothers dont become judgemental in one instances look upon his services r v doing enough for islam instead what v r doing shouting over the rooftops like fools over irrelevent issues he does not support yazid just find out his statement and analyze

Muhammad Iqbal said...

Being a Muslim try to have some knowledge of Islam by investigating Quran and Hadees. Without investigating about what he is saying nobody has to comment, doing so is against the teachings of Prophet.S.A.W.S.
I request my Muslim Brothers and Sisters to investigate(Tahqeeqh)his comment and then decide to belive it or not

Kumar Rakesh said...

Zakir Naik is a divisive figure. He inflates egos of Muslims with narrow world view by talking up Islam and talking down other religions using selective arguments.I have seen him compare even Prophet Mohammad and Jesus and "proving" that the prophet was more blessed. And this man is quite popular among Indian Muslims. It does not bode well for this country's and Muslims future.

Anonymous said...

No right thinking human being can use "RA" for Yazid, a war criminal on par with Nazis. Shame on Dr Naik. Dr Naik should name his sons and grandsons Yazid if he is sincere.

The real Zakir Naik is unmasked when you analyze the fee structure for his Islamic Schools, targeted for Rich Muslims only. Many muslim youth in the 1990s were taken for a ride, they worked freely for him and now he is a big shot, he wont bother about them.

He represents only his pocket, he certainly does not represent Indian Muslims. Indian Muslims will never forgive him for making a fool of himself on a program with Burkha Dutt. Every other Indian Muslim like Alyque Padamsee, Sharukh, Kabir Khan, a Maulana and even guest representative Karan Johar spoke wonderfully, Naik chose to support Taliban and Bin Laden.

I apologize on behalf of right thinking Indian Muslims to all Hindus and Christians and Muslims of all sects worldwise whose feelings have been hurt by Dr. Naik.

Yes, we exist in a majority, we can never be terrorists, we love India, we will defeat both Sangh Parivar and the Zakir Naiks of our great country.

Salams and Jai Hind.

Taimur said...

I'll leave Yazid's comment alone as that that issue has been discussed here ad nauseam. Original poster of the blog also took offense to the fact that Dr. Naik preaches against asking help from prophet Mohammad (S.A.W). I would like to iterate that this fact is correct. It is Allah alone that can fulfill your wishes and dua’a. Prophet Mohammad (S.A.W) will have an opportunity to make special request only in the Day of Judgment only when he reaches the Maqam-e-Mahmood. That is why after every azan we make the special dua that may Allah grant prophet Mohammad (S.A.W) a place in Maqam-e-Mahmood so that he can make the request to Allah to forgive his ummah. It is important to note that intercession only lays with Allah our rab ul izzat.
Sura 39, The Throngs (Al-Zumer)
[39:43] Have they invented intercessors to mediate between them and Allah? Say, "What if they do not possess any power, nor understanding?"
[39:44] Say, "All intercession belongs to Allah." To Him belongs all sovereignty of the heavens and the earth, then to Him you will be returned.

Anonymous said...

THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT ZAKIR NAIAK IS A TRUE MUSLIM AND HE VERY MUCH KNOW ABOUT ISLAM BUT IT IS FACT THAT WE ALL FALLOW THE QURAAN AND ACCORDING TO QURAAN YAZID WAS THE ENEMY OF MOHAMMAD MEANS YAZID HAD THE BAD INTENTION SO HE KILLED THE PROPHET'S GRANDSON.IT IS CLEAR THAT HE WAS NOT THE COMPANION OF PROPHET IF WE USED RA AS SUFFIX BEFORE YAZID SO ITS MEAN WE GAVE HIM RESPECT AND FORGET THE SACRIFICE OF PROPHET.

LIYAQUAT ALI said...

jo log yajeed ko galat nahi kahte wo apne aulado ka naam yajeed kyo nahai rakhte.

Meri Allah Subhanautalah se dua hai ki yazeed ko galat na kahne walo ka hasar us ke saath farmai aur jo log Husain R.A se mohabbat karte hai un ko Husain RA ka saath ata farmai. Aameen

mai history jada kyo search kru. Ye to koi bhi samajh sakta hai ki Husain RA kaun hai.
Jo kaum apne Nabi AS ki aulad ke katil koy justify kare us kaum ka kya banega, isse behtar samajh to kafiro ko hai.

Ya Allah yajeed ki napak aulado ke fitne se bacha aur apne Rasool SA aur Ahle Bait se mohabbat ki taufeeq ata farma

abukhundash said...

by going through all the comments on dr zakir's statement, i assume that our beliefs are purely based on cursing Yazeed. however cursing upon yazeed or any other sahaba has nothing to do with our emaan. yes it will be helpfull to earn the severe punishments in the hereafter. this shia sect is purely based on cursing upon all the sacred personalities among sahaba kiram who (as per their belief) against Hazrat Ali RA and his family members. however no one was against Ali ra, infact Ali ra has supported all the three khulfa with his soul and heart. if any one to be cursed in this regard he should be Abdullah bin saba (jew hypocrite) who invented this philosophy and made this sect. he actually did the undo task of abdullah bin ubayee (the leader of hypocrites). he was the one who killed usman ra. he wat the one who pushed ali ra into a war with Hazrat ASysha ra and other muslims. he was the one who forced ali ra to take over the khilafat when the prominent sahaba kiram was on hajj. he was the one who has created this school of thought which is becoming now a cancer for muslim ummah.

Anonymous said...

I support it.... Allah knows better....

HOOSSEIN Katib said...

Is zakir naiks money spinning vehicle called ISLAMIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION still functional at Dongri chaar-nal ??? Under d guise of a research scholar, this guy is nothing but a money-crazy fanatic. He may b having a high I.Q but has a zero E.Q. may b he just lacks sensitivity or he is not that fine-tuned.

Anonymous said...

I don't agree wid dis statement of Dr.Naik that its gud 2 use 'Raziallah Anhu' after the name of a sinner lyk Yazid ...guyz its totally clear dat Imam Hussain (PBUH) was killed by Yazid n theres no doubt in dat ...... n without any doubt Allah will punish him for his sins