Share this article

FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinRSS FeedPinterest

Search Central-Mosque

Islamic date in Europe

Tuesday 10th of December 2019

13 Rabi ath-Thani 1441


Dr Zakir Naik is a Da'ii and we give him his due respect for that. He knows himself that he is not an Alim in Deen. Thus Ulema have given their decree that he, not being an Alim in deen, should focus his da'wah to what he is good at (i.e. comparative religion), and leave religious answering to the Fuqaha.

<script <script src="" type="text/j-avascript"></script><a href="" style=" color:#6D9F00; text-decoration:none;" class="printfriendly" on-click="window.print(); return false;" title="Printer Friendly and PDF"><img style="border:none;" src="" alt="Print Friendly and PDF"/></a>



Darul-uloom Deoband

Honourable Mufteen, Darul Uloom Deoband
Assalamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullah

My question is that how is Dr. Zakir Naik? Are his beliefs in accordance to those of the Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama'ah? Are his views on Hadith and Tafseer reliable or not? What is his path in Fiqh? Which Imam does he follow? Can we listen to his talks and practice upon them? Please provide a satisfactory answer.

Riyaad Ahmad Khan
Aaliya Printers, Uttar Su'ya (Ilaahabad)
Mobile 9794867772

There are many questions regarding Dr. Zakir Naik. This question is also one of these. A detailed answer regarding the beliefs, Fiqhi path and his explanations regarding the Qur'aan and Hadith were requested. Therefore, in the light of his lectures and speeches, a detailed answer is provided.

حامدا ومصليا ومسلما ، الجواب وبالله التوفيق والعصمة

Deviated things like moving away from the correct beliefs, interpolation and made up views regarding the Tafseer of the Qur'aan, awe for scientific research, unity with western thought in opposition to Islaam and turning away from the pious predecessors and the path of the majority of the Ummah in Fiqhi rulings are to be found in the lectures of Dr. Zakir Naik. Also, he is involved in an effort to turn the Muslim Ummah away from following the Mujtahid Imams, making the people renounce the religious institutions and trying to make the people have bad thoughts about the scholars. A few examples of such deviation are presented below:

1 A few points of Dr. Zakir regarding belief (belief is something very delicate. A slight slip in it could sometimes be a danger for Imaan).


a "It is permissible to call unto Allaah with the words Vishnu and Barhma."

Dr. Zakir says in one programme, "It is permissible to call unto Allaah using the names of the Hindu deities like 'Vishnu', meaning Rabb and 'Barhma' meaning Creator. This is on condition that a person does not have the belief regarding Vishnu that he has four hands and mounts birds." [Islaam and Universal Brotherhood p.33 by Dr. Zakir Naik]
It is not permissible to call unto Allaah with these non Arabic words. It is not permissible to call on Him using such names that are not specific for Him. How can it be permissible to call on Allaah with names like Vishnu and Barhma when these are the outstanding signs of the Hindus?

b "What is the word of Allaah? It is necessary to take the path of science and technology in order to test it."

Dr. Zakir said during a programme, "Every man understands that his honourable book can only be the speech of Allaah. If you want to know which book is definitely the speech of Allaah, then the final test is to take the path of modern science and technology. If it is in accordance to modern science, then understand that this is definitely the speech of Allaah (SWT) ."

[الجواب على ثلاثين جوابا على أن ذاكر الهندي وأصحاب فكره منحرفون ضلالا للشيخ يحى الحجورى]

From this we come to know of Dr. Zakir's deviated boldness, turning away from the book of Allaah, his astray thought pattern and also his awe for modern science that has reached dangerous boundaries. This is to the degree that he has made scientific research that changes every moment the standard by which to judge the divine books, especially the Noble Qur'aan. The greatest proof of it being the speech of Allaah is its I'jaaz (making helpless). Through it, Allaah (SWT) has laid down a challenge in various places (of the Qur'aan).

c "Every person has the right to give Fatwa."

Dr. Zakir states in one place, "It is permissible for any person to give Fatwa because the meaning of Fatwa is to give ones opinion." [Ibid]

In this statement, Dr. Zakir has referred to such an important task of giving fatwa with such light words like 'giving an opinion'. According to Allamah Ibn al Qayyim, a Mufti is a translator of Allaah in the explanation of divine law and he is responsible for signing in His place.

لم تصلح مرتبة التبليغ بالرواية والفتيا إلا لمن اتصف بالعلم والصدق...وإذا كان منصب التوقيع عن الملوك بالمحل الذي لا ينكر فضله ولا يجهل قدره...فكيف بمنصب التوقيع عن رب الأرض والسماوات ، فحقيق بمن أقيم في هذا المنصب أن بعد له عدته ويتأهب له أهبته وأن يعلم فدر المقام الذي أقيم فيه . إعلام الموقعين ٩١/١

This is not only regarding himself, but he has permitted it for every person. He has totally cast aside the following verse of the Qur'aan and Hadith of Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) ,

فاسألوا اهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون

If you do not know, then ask those of knowledge

من أفتى بغير علم كان إثمه على من أفتاه . أخرجه أبو داؤد في سننه ٣٥٩ رقم ٣٦٥٩٣، باب تفسير القرآن عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

He who gives fatwa without authentic knowledge, the sin will be upon the one who gave the fatwa.

2 His own explanations in the Tafseer of the Qur'aan, i.e. interpolating the meaning

Tafseer of the Qur'aan is very delicate. The Mufassir stipulates the purport of Allaah (SWT), that Allaah has taken this meaning. Therefore, it is very dangerous for an incompetent person to step into this field. It is mentioned in a Hadith,

من قال في القرآن برأيه فأصاب فقد أخطأ. (أخرجه الترمذى رقم ٢٧٧٦)

If a person renders Tafseer from his own intelligence, then even if he reaches the correct meaning, he will still be taken to be someone that has done wrong.

Another narration states,

من قال في القرآن برأيه فليتبوأ مقعده من النار . أخرجه الترمذى ١٩٩/٥ رقم ٢٩٥١

It is for this reason that there are many conditions for a commentator (Mufassir). For example, he should be well aware of all the verses of the Qur'aan, he should have great knowledge of the Ahadith, he should have good knowledge of Arabic and its laws; syntax, morphology and eloquence and clarity etc. As far as Dr. Zakir is concerned, none of the conditions are found in him to the necessary degree, he does not know the laws of Arabic as it ought to be known, he does not have deep knowledge regarding the Ahadith nor does he have great knowledge of eloquence and clarity. (All this will be clarified by means of examples further on). On the other hand, all the causes for falling into deviation are found to a complete degree in Dr. Zakir, e.g. turning away from the Tafseer narrated from Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam), the Sahabah (RA) and the Taabi'een, being awed by the thoughts of the era and misunderstanding the subject matter of the Qur'aan etc. Therefore, he has made many verses the practice ground for opposition on the basis of his ignorance. A few examples are presented below,

a Dr. Zakir states regarding the Tafseer of the verse, (الرجال قوامون على النساء), "People say that the word 'Qawwaam' refers to being a stage higher. However, in reality, the word 'Qawwaam' comes from 'Iqaamah'. The meaning of 'Iqaamah' is to stand up. Therefore, the meaning of 'Iqaamah' is being upon a higher level in terms of responsibility, not in virtue." [Lectures of Zaakir Na'ik p.295, Farid Book Depot]

Dr. Zaakir has in support of the western view of equality of the sexes made his own Tafseer and has thereby negated the level of virtue that man has, whereas the great Mufassireen of the Ummah have explained the meaning to be higher in terms of virtue. Consequently, Ibn Kathir writes under the verse (الرجال قوامون على النساء),

أى الرجل قيم على المرأة أى هو رئيسها وكبيرها والحاكم عليها ، مؤدبها إذا اعوجت

The status of a man before his wife is like that of a ruler and leader. At the time of necessity, the husband also teaches his wife honour and respect in an appropriate manner.

Ibn Kathir writes in the Tafseer of (وللرجال عليهن درجة),

وللرجال عليهن درجة أى في الفضيلة في الخلق والمنزلة وطاعة الأمر والإنفاق والقيام بالمصالح والفضل في الدنيا والآخرة . ٦١٠/١

A husband is a level higher than the wife in terms of virtue, status, obedience etc. Also, the Tafseer of Dr. Zakir indeed goes against the Hadith,

لو كنت آمرا أحدا أن يسجد لأحد ، لأمرت النساء أن يسجدن لأزواجهن. أخرجه أبو داؤد

If it was permissible to make Sajdah to anyone but Allaah, I would have commanded the women to prostrate before their husbands. This is because if they were equal in virtue and the husband had no higher status than the wife, then why did Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) want to command the women to prostrate – a sign of the greatest honour – before their husbands?

b "Dr. Zakir, a question, "It is stated in the Qur'aan that the sex of the child in the womb of the mother is known only by Allaah, but science has now developed to quite an extent and we can specify this easily though ultra sonography. Is this verse of the Qur'aan not in contradiction with medical science?" He replies, "It is correct that it is mentioned in various translations and commentaries of this verse that only Allaah (SWT) knows the sex of the child that is in the womb of the mother. However, study the Arabic verse and you will see that an Arabic word equivalent to the English word 'sex' was not used. In reality, whatever the Qur'aan says, it is what is in the womb? The knowledge of this lies only with Allaah (SWT) . Many Mufassireen have misunderstood and have taken the meaning to be that only Allaah knows the sex of the child that lies in the womb of the mother. This in incorrect. This verse does not indicate the sex of the foetus, but it indicates to the nature of the child in the womb. Will it be a cause of mercy or punishment for its parents?...[40 Objections on Islaam p.130 of Dr. Zaakir Naik, Areeb Publications, Dehli]

In this answer, Dr. Zaakir has been awed by scientific research and in order to save himself from the apparent objection, he has put the Tafseer narrated by the Sahabah and Taabi'een behind his back and has rejected a known meaning. He has criticised and said that many great Mufassireen are wrong. The meaning explained by Dr. Zaakir is the meaning of 'Maa' Mawsool. Many Mufassireen have mentioned this as a possibility under the first meaning. However, it is not correct to reject the second meaning. This is a clear proof that Dr. Zaakir does not ponder deeply and turns away from the statements of the Sahabah and Taabi'een. This is because the meaning that Dr. Zaakir has negated, another verse of Surah Ra'd points to it. The verse is,

الله يعلم ما تحمل كل انثى وما تغيض الأرحام وما تزداد. الرعد ٨

Allaah knows what every female bears and the shortages and excesses in the womb

This meaning is also narrated from the famous Tabi'i and Mufassir, Imam Qataadah (RA). He says,

فلا يعلم ما في الأرحام أذكر أم أنثى الخ

Only Allaah has perfect knowledge of whether the foetus is a male or a female

Similarly, Ibn Kathir (RA) has mentioned this in his Tafseer vol.6 p.355, 'Allamah Nasafi (RA) has written in Tafseer Madaarik vol.3 p.116 and Imam Shaukaani has written in Fath ul Qadeer vol.5 p.498. However, Dr. Zaakir has classified the meaning mentioned by these great Mufassirreen as wrong. He takes his meaning to be indisputable and is adamant upon it.

The correct answer:

The objective of the verse is to prove knowledge of the unseen for Allaah and 'Ilm Ghayb in reality refers to that definite knowledge that is attained directly without any apparent cause and without any tools. The knowledge attained through tools and instruments by doctors is not definite knowledge, nor is it attained without instruments. It is Zanni (unclear) and is attained through instruments. Therefore, the Zanni knowledge attained through ultra sonography does not raise an objection on the Qur'aanic verse.

c Dr. Zaakir states regarding the verse,

يا ايها النبى إذا جائك المؤمنت يبايعنك على ان لا يشركن بالله شيئا. الممتحنة ١٢

"Here, the word 'Bay'ah' is used. The word 'Bay'ah' will include the purport of election in our times. This is because Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) was the Rasul of Allaah and the head of the government. The meaning of 'Bay'ah' was to accept him as the leader of the government. Islaam gave women the right to vote in that time." [The rights of women in Islaam p.50, Dr. Zaakir Naik]

Here also, Dr. Zaakir makes an incorrect assertion. He wants to prove the right of women to vote by stating that the women taking 'Bay'ah' to Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) is the ancient form of voting in today's democratic system of election. This is the case when the people who know the reality of democracy (majority wins), they can understand clearly that this explanation of Dr. Zaakir is totally against what happens and it is wasting his intelligence in the Tafseer of the Qur'aan. This is because in accordance to the modern day democratic system, every person has the choice to choose the president. If someone does not gain the majority vote, then he cannot become the president. If taking Bay'ah was in reality getting votes, then did the Sahaabiyaat have the choice to reject the leadership of Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam)?

d In the famous objection, based upon misunderstanding, raised upon the verse of Surah Maryam (يا أخت هارون ما كان أبوك امرأ سوء وما كانت أمك بغيا . مريم ٢٨) that Hadhrat Maryam radhiyallaahu anha was not the sister of Hadhrat Haaroon (AS), and there was a difference of a thousand years between them, Dr. Zaakir says, "The Christian missionaries say that Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) did not know the difference between the mother of Hadhrat 'Isa (AS), Maryam, and the sister of Haaroon, Maryam, whereas the meaning of the Arabic word 'Ukht' is children also. That is why the people said to Maryam that O children of Haaroon. In reality, it refers to the children of Hadhrat Haaroon (AS)." [40 Objections on Islaam, Dr. Zaakir Naik]

This is based on the ignorance of Dr. Zaakir regarding Ahadith and lexicography. In refutation of this research, the Hadith of Muslim is sufficient. It is stated in Sahih Muslim,

عن المغيرة بن شعبة قال : لما قدمت نجران سألونى ، فقالوا : إنكم تقرأون يا أخت هارون وموسى قبل عيسى بكذا وكذا ، فلما قدمت على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم سألته عمن ذلك فقال : إنهم كان يسمون بأنبيائهم والصالحين قبلهم . مسلم ١٧١/٦ دار الجيل بيروت رقم ٥٧٢١

Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) clarified this verse 1400 years ago. The summary of it is that Hadhrat Maryam – the mother of Hadhrat 'Isa (AS) was not the sister of Hadhrat Haaroon (AS), brother of Hadhrat Moosa (AS), but the brother of the mother of Hadhrat 'Isa (AS) was also named Haaroon and these people used to keep their names after their Ambiyaa and pious luminaries. From this we learn that this is not a new objection, nor is there a need to fabricate an answer to it.

How ignorant is Dr. Zaakir of Ahaadith that instead of trying to reach the reality of the Ahadith and Tafseer, he fabricates interpretations.

e Dr. Zaakir states regarding the verse (والأرض بعد ذلك دحها), "The Arabic word used here for egg is "Dahaaha". This refers to an ostrich egg. The egg of an ostrich has a similar shape with that of the earth. Therefore, the Qur'aan clarifies with total correctness the shape of the earth. When the Qur'aan was revealed, the thought was that the earth is flat." [Lectures of Dr. Zaakir Naik, Qur'aan and Modern Science p.73, 74]

Here, Dr. Zaakir has been overawed by scientific viewpoints. He also makes up his own explanation for the verse by making wrong deductions in researching the shape of the earth. This is on account of not understanding the subject matter of the Qur'aan (detailing Tauheed and Risaalat and everything else about the nature of things comes in between). Therefore, the word "Dahawa" in Arabic refers to spreading out and expanse. In accordance to this, the translation and Tafseer of "Dahaaha" is the spreading out of the earth and the creation of all the things in it. [see Tafseer Ibn Kathir] this word and its root does not give the meaning of egg.

3 Ignorance of the Ahadith

Due to his ignorance of the treasure of Ahadith, Dr. Zaakir mentioned many rulings that are against authentic Ahadith. Also, in how many places where there are a number of Ahadith, he says that there is no proof for it. Hereunder, examples of the ignorance of Dr. Zaakir or his wilful turning a blind eye to the Ahadith are presented,

a Permissibility for women reciting the Qur'aan while in Haydh

On one programme, Dr. Zaakir says regarding a woman while she is in Haydh, "There is permission for Salaat in the Qur'aan and Hadith but it is not mentioned in any Hadith that she cannot recite the Qur'aan."

This is despite the fact that there is a clear Hadith in Tirmizi, (لا تقرأ الحائض ولا الجنب شيئا من القرآن) "A woman in Janaabat and Haydh cannot recite the Qur'aan."

Think that in the presence of clear authentic Ahadith, Dr. Zaakir has made claims and has rejected them.

bThe Ahnaaf do not have proof to show that flowing blood breaks Wudhoo'

While discussing in a lecture whether Wudhoo' breaks or not by blood, Dr. Zaakir says, "Some 'Ulema', especially the Hanafi Fiqh think that Wudhoo' breaks by blood flowing. If blood flows while in Salaat, what should a person do? The answer to this question is a detailed Fatwa (of the Ahnaaf). Regarding this, there is no proof in support of this view point." [The reality of Zaakir Naik p.214, Maktabah Madinah Deoband]

At this point, Dr. Zaakir has levelled an accusation against the 'Ulema' regarding Hanafi Fiqh that they say that Wudhoo' breaks by blood flowing, whereas there are many Ahadith narrated in this regard. In addition, the practice of the Sahabah (RA) also remained upon this. Study the following narrations,

أخرج البخاري عن عائشة رضي الله عنها قالت : جائت فاطمة بنت أبي حبيش إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقالت : يا رسول الله! إني امرأة أستحاض فلا أطهر ، أفأدع الصلاة؟ قال : لا ، إنما ذلك عرق وليست بالحيضة ، فإذا أقبلت الحيضة فدعى الصلاة وإذا أدبرت فاغسلي عنك الدم قال هشام : قال أبي ثم توضئي لكل صلاة حتى يجيئ ذلك الوقت. إذا رعف أحدكم في صلاتة فلينصرف فليغسل عنه الدم ثم ليعد وضوءه ويستقبل صلاته أخرجه الدار قطني.

If someone has a nosebleed while in Salaat, he should wash the blood and repeat his Wudhoo'.

عن زيد بن ثابت رضي الله عنه الوضوء من كل دم سائل . أخرجه ابن عدي في الكامل (نصب الراية للإمام الزيلعي ٣٧⁄١

Wudhoo' becomes compulsory by flowing blood.

Despite these and other narrations, Dr. Zaakir did not show his ignorance and claimed Ijtihaad saying that there is no proof to show that flowing blood breaks the Wudhoo'.

c It is not permissible to differentiate between the Salaat of men and women

In another place, Dr. Zaakir states regarding the difference between the Salaat of men and women, "There is no authentic, established Hadith in which there is a command for women to perform Salaat in a way separate from that of men. Instead of this, there is a narration of Sahih Bukhari, Hadhrat Umm e Dardaa' narrates that there is a command for women to sit in 'At Tahiyyaat' like men."

Here, Dr. Zaakir has said two completely wrong things.

i There is no Hadith showing the difference in Salaat between men and women


ii Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) commanded that women should sit like men


By saying the first statement, Dr. Zaakir has denied all the Ahadith in which there is an explanation of the difference in Salaat between that of men and women. A few narrations are presented below:

أخرج البخاري عن النبي عليه السلام أنه قال يا أيها الناس! ما لكم حين نابكم شيئ في الصلاة ، أخذتم في التصفيق ، إنما التصفيق للنساء. ١٧٤⁄١ رقم ٦٨٤
عن وائل بن حجر قال لي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يا وائل بن حجر! إذا صليت فاجعل يديك حذاء أذنيك والمرأة تجعل يديها حذاء ثدييها. المعجم الكبير للطبراني
عن يزيد بن أبي حبيب أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مر على امرأتين تصليان فقال : إذا سجدتما فضما بعض اللحم إلى الأرض ، فإن المرأة ليست في ذلك كالرجل . أخرجه أبو داؤد مرسلا والبيهقي موصولا
سئل ابن عمر كيف كن النساء يصلين على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : كن يتربعن ثم أمرن أن يتحفزن . جامع المسانيد والسنن

These narrations state the differences in the performance of Salaat between men and women. There are other Ahadith besides them. The detailed books on this subject can be studied. Regarding the second thing where in Bukhari, there is a command of Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) for women to sit like men, it is an incorrect attribution. The narration of Hadhrat Umm e Dardaa that Dr. Zaakir is giving, the words are as follows,

وكانت ام الدرداء تجلس في صلاتها جلسة الرجل وكانت فقيهة . بخاري ١١٤⁄١

There is no mention of the action or speech of Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) in it, but it is the action of a Sahabiyyah. By mentioning it, Imam Bukhari (RA) has indicated that she was a jurist. She used to do it out of her own Ijtihaad. In addition, Imam Bukhari (RA) mentioned in Ta'leeqan, without a chain of narration.

4 Running away from following the Mujtahid Imams and turning away from the path of following the majority in Fiqhi rulings.

In the light of his speeches and lectures, Dr. Zaakir does not seem to be a follower of any Imam, in fact, he is entrapped by permissibility, love of new things, being a Ghayr Muqallid and being without a Mazhab. Not only does Dr. Zaakir not follow a specific Imam, but he teaches the sincere masses to leave Taqlid. He links the rulings he explains to himself whether it be from any Imam or any view or deduction. Sometimes he adopts the nature of a Mujtahid and explains rulings, whereas in the narration of rulings, he should take the name of the Imam who deduced the ruling so that the listeners do not have the misunderstanding that this ruling is proven only from the Qur'aan and Sunnah. Besides this, there are other things practiced by people, whether proven from the Qur'aan and Hadith or from the view of the Mujtahid Imams, which are incorrect. From the following examples, this will be understood clearly.

a It is permissible to touch the Qur'aan without Wudhoo'

In one place, Dr. Zaakir says, "There should be permission to touch the Qur'aan without Wudhoo'..."

This statement of Dr. Zaakir is against the verse (لا يمسه إلا المطهرون) and also against the Mujtahideen.

b The Khutbah of Jumu'ah should not be in Arabic, but in the local language

In one place, regarding the Jumu'ah Khutbah, Dr. Zaakir states, "I understand that in our country, importance should be given to delivering the Jumu'ah Khutbah in the local and mother languages..."

This is despite the fact that from the time of Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) until today – through the generations -, the Jumu'ah Khutbah was delivered in Arabic. Today, Dr. Zaakir claims that the Khutbah should be delivered in the local language so that people understand, whereas this expediency (the understanding of those who do not speak Arabic) was also present in the time of Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam). However, Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) always delivered the Khutbah in Arabic. He did not command that the Khutbah be delivered in another language, nor did he command that it be translated later on. Similarly, the Sahabah, Taabi'een, Tab ut Taabi'een and those after them went out of Arabia to foreign lands. They spread Islaam in the East and West but they always gave the Khutbah in Arabic, whereas those people were in need of spreading Deen to a greater level than what the people are in need of today. Some Sahabah and Taabi'een knew foreign languages very well yet they delivered the Khutbah in Arabic. The summary of this is that the practice of the Khulafaa' e Raashideen and the Taabi'een and their adherence to it, as well as the continuous practice of the entire Ummah is clear proof that it is necessary to deliver the Khutbah in Arabic. This is to such an extent that Imam Maalik (RA) says that it is necessary for the Khutbah to be in Arabic in order for the Jumu'ah to be correct, even though the entire gathering may be foreigners and no one knows Arabic. If there is no one in the gathering that can speak Arabic, then it becomes compulsory upon them to perform Zuhr Salaat, Jumu'ah falls away.

ولو كان الجماعة عجما لا يعرفون العربية ، فلو كان ليس فيهم من يحسن الإتيان بالخطبة عربية لم يلزمهم جمعة . حاشية الدسوقي على الشرح الكبير ٣٧٨⁄١ نقلا عن المقالات الفقهية

Shah Waliyullaah Muhaddith Dehlawi (RA) says, "It is necessary for the Khutbah to be delivered in Arabic for it was the continuous practice of all the Muslims, in the East and the West." [Musaffa Sharh Muwatta p.152, Farooq-Dehli]

c One Talaaq should take effect from three Talaaqs

Dr. Zaakir says, "There are many conditions for three Talaaqs. It is impossible for all of them to be found. There are 300 Fatwas present from Saudia. Therefore Talaaq is one, in accordance to modern conditions, it should be one." [Lectures of Zaakir Naik from the reality of Zaakir Naik p.331]

He says this despite all the Sahabah, Taabi'een, the four Mujtahid Imams, majority of the Ummah and all the reliable 'Ulema' of Saudia today state that 3 Talaaqs will take effect when a person issues 3 Talaaqs in one sitting, not one. There is no difference of opinion held by any reliable scholar in this ruling, except Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn al Qayyim. However, in opposition to the entire Ummah (including the great Taabi'een and the 4 Imams – Abu Hanifah (RA), Shafi'i (RA), Maalik (RA)and Ahmad bin Hanbal (RA)) the opinion of these two can never be followed. By explaining such a ruling in opposition to such a unanimous ruling he is misleading the Ummah. This ruling of 3 Talaaqs taking effect by uttering 3 is proven from the verse of the Qur'aan, countless Ahadith and the practice of the Sahabah  clearly. Study a few Ahadith,

وقال الليث عن نافع كان ابن عمر إذا سئل عمن طلق ثلاثا قال لو طلقت مرة أو مرتين (لكان لك الرجعة) فإن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أمرني بهذا (أى بالمراجعة) فإن طلقها ثلاثا حرمت حتى تنكح زوجا غيره . بخاري ٧٩٢⁄٢ و ٨٠٣⁄٢

Hadhrat Naafi' says that when a Fatwa was asked of Hadhrat Abdullaah bin Umar (RA) regarding a person who gave 3 Talaaqs. He said, "If you gave one or two (then you could have retracted) because Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) gave me the command to retract and if you gave 3 Talaaqs, then the woman becomes forbidden until she marries another man."

عن مجاهد قال كنت عند ابن عباس فجاءه رجل فقال : إنه طلق امرأته ثلاثا ، قال : فسكت حتى طننت أنه رادها إليه ، ثم قال : ينطلق أحدكم فيركب الحموقة ثم يقول يا ابن عباس فإن الله عزوجل قال (ومن يتق الله يجعل له مخرجا) عصيت ربك وبانت منك امرأتك . أخرجه أبو داؤد ٢٩٩⁄١ باب في الطلاق على الهزل ، رقم ١٨٧٨

Mujaahid says that I was by Ibn 'Abbaas (RA). A person came and said that he gave his wife 3 Talaaqs. He says that Ibn 'Abbaas (RA) remained silent. I understood that he will return his wife (he will give the command to retract), but he said, "Some of you do foolish things and sit (give 3 Talaaqs), then scream Ibn 'Abbaas! Ibn'Abbaas! Listen, Allaah says, 'He who fears Allaah, Allaah will make a path out for him.' You disobeyed your Rabb (by giving 3 Talaaqs), therefore your wife has been separated from you."

وعن مالك بلغه : أن رجلا قال لعبد الله بن عباس : إني طلقت امرأتي تطليقة ، فما ذا ترى على ؟ فقال ابن عباس : طلقت منك بثلاث ، وسبع وتسعون اتخذت بها آيات الله هزوا . أخرجه الأمام مالك ١٩٩

A narration has reached Imam Maalik (RA) that a person asked Abdullaah bin 'Abbaas (RA) that I have given my wife 100 Talaaqs. What do you say regarding it? Ibn 'Abbaas (RA) replied, "3 of these Talaaqs take effect upon your wife and by 97 you have played with the verses of Allaah."

عن مالك بلغه : أن رجلا جاء إلى عبد الله ابن مسعود فقال : إني طلقت امرأتي ثمانى تطليقات ، قال ابن مسعود ، فماذا قيل لك؟ قال : قيل لي : إنها قد بانت مني ، فقال ابن مسعود صدقوا . الحديث . الموطا للإمام مالك ١٩٩

A narration reached Imam Maalik (RA) that a person came to Abdullaah bin Mas'ood (RA) and said, "I gave my wife 8 Talaaqs." Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ood (RA) asked about what did the people do to you? He replied that my wife has been separated. Hadhrat Ibn Mas'ood (RA) said, "They spoke the truth, i.e. 3 Talaaqs took effect."

حدثنا على بن محمد بن عبيد الحافظ نا محمد بن شاذان الحوهرى نا معلى بن منصور نا شعيب بن رزيق أن عطاء الخراسانى حدثهم عن الحسن قال نا عبد الله بن عمر أنه طلق امرأته تطليقة وهى حائض ثم أراد أن يتبعها بتطليقتين أخريين عند القرأين فبلغ ذلك رشول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال يا ابن عمر ما هكذا أمرك الله إنك قد أخطأت السنة . والسنة أن تستقبل الطهر فيطلق لكل قرء قال فأمرنى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فراجعتها ثم قال إذا هى طهرت فطلق عند ذلك أو أمسك فقلت يا رسول الله أرأيت لو أنى طلقتها ثلثا أكان يحل لي أن أراجعها قال لا ، كانت تبين منك وتكون معصية. سنن الدار قطنى ٤٣٨/٢ زاد المعاد ٢٥٧/٢ مصنف ابن أبي شيبة بحواله عينى شرح كنز ١٤١ سنن الدار قطنى ٣١/٤ مطبوعه قاهرة

Hadhrat Hasan explains that Hadhrat Ibn Umar (RA) explained to us that he gave his wife one divorce while she was in haydh. He then intended to give her the remaining two while she was pure. Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) was informed of this and said, "O Ibn Umar! Allaah has not commanded you to do like this. You have gone against the path of Sunnah (by giving Talaaq while your wife is in Haydh). The Sunnah way is that you wait for the time of purity and one Talaaq should be given in every clean period. After this, Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) gave me the order to retract. Consequently, I did so. He then said that when she becomes pure you have a choice whether to give her Talaaq or to keep her. Hadhrat Ibn Umar (RA) says that I asked Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) that O Rasul of Allaah, if I gave three Talaaqs, then would it have been permissible for me to retract ? Rasulullaah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) said, "No. in this case, your wife has been separated from you and this action of your's (giving three Talaaqs at once) is a sin."

You have seen from the above mentioned Ahadith that three Talaaqs make the ruling of three take effect. There are many narrations that show that three Talaaqs refer to three, not one.

Note: Dr. Zaakir gave reference of 300 Saudi scholars in his lecture. He then presented his own opinion. However, he did not mention which scholars they were when the reliable Mufteen of Saudi Arabia gave Fatwa from their research that three Talaaqs refer to three. The decision was passed as follows,

بعد الاطلاع على البحث المقدم من الأمانة العامة لهيئة كبار العلماء والمعد من قبل لحنة الدائمة للبحوث والإفتاء في موضوع "الطلاق الثلاث بلفظ واحد" وبعد دراسة المسئلة وتداول الرأي واستعراض الأقوال التى قيلت فيها ومناقشة ما على كل قول من إيراد توصل المجلس بأكثريته إلى اختيار القول بوقوع الطلاق الثلاث بلفظ ثلاثا...الخ (مجلة التحوث الإسلامية المجلد الأول ، العدد الثالث سنة ١٣٩٧)

d In one programme Dr. Zaakir gave the following counsel, "Muslims should adopt such a way that will allow Eid to be one throughout the world."

This opinion of Dr. Zaakir goes against the Hadith (صوموا لرؤيته وأفطروا لرؤيته), i.e. fast upon sighting the moon and make Iftaar upon sighting the moon and it goes against sound intellect as well. This is because a single Eid is based upon taking Eid to be a festival or a national celebration or communal occasion. This is a very wrong notion because our Eidayn, Ramadhaan and Muharram are not some festivals, but all of them are worship. Also, every country's times are different according to their horizon. When we perform Asr in India, it is morning in Washington. When we are performing Zuhr in India, Maghrib has been completed in London. It also happens that in one country it is Friday and in another country it is still Thursday, while in a third country Saturday has started. How can it be envisaged to have Eid on one day throughout the world?

In summary, in the light of these points we learn that Dr. Zaakir Naik has moved away from the Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama'ah in many rulings regarding belief, in the explanation of the Qur'aan and Hadith, he leaves out lexical meanings and the Tafseer narrated from the pious predecessors and takes help from his twisted intellect. He has fallen prey to interpolating the meanings. In addition to this, despite not having deep knowledge of religious sciences and ignorance of the objective of the Shari'ah, he does not follow a specific Imam. In fact, he goes the other way and criticises the Mujtahid Imams. Therefore, his talks are not worthy of consideration. It is very harmful to watch his programmes, listen to his speeches and to practice upon them without research. It is definitely not the work of any person to do research. Therefore, the general Muslims should stay away from his programmes. Also, every Muslim should remember that the matter of Deen is something felt. Man hears talks of Deen and practices only to find salvation in the Aakhirat. They should not practice just upon new research, quick answers-vast amounts of references and by apparently seeing his acceptance amongst people. In fact, it is necessary upon man to think that what standing this person has in religious sciences. From which teachers did he acquire knowledge? In what environment did he grow up? How are his ways, dressing and countenance. Does he mix with the other 'Ulema' and pious luminaries? Also, what do the scholars and Mashayikh of his time say about him? Similarly, it should also be seen whether those who take effect from him and those around him, how much awareness they have of Deen and reliable people that serve Deen are how many? If he has a number of reliable people around him, then it is necessary to know from them how he is. Why are they close to him? It should not be that they show themselves close to him because of misunderstanding, ignorance or because of some expediency. The crux of this is that if after research, a person gets contentment, then only his talks will be accepted to be reliable and worthy of practicing upon, otherwise there is safety for a person's faith by staying away from him.

The famous Taabi'i, Muhammad Bin Seereen (RA) says, (إن هذا العلم دين فانظروا عمن تأخذون دينكم) i.e. in order to listen and learn Deen, it is necessary to ponder deeply as from which people is knowledge being taken and being learnt. May Allaah (SWT) bless every person with the ability to tread the straight path. Ameen.

Zayn ul Islaam Qaasimi Ilaah Aabaadi
Deputy Mufti, Dar ul Ifta, Dar ul Uloom Deoband
20.03.1432, 24.02.2011
The Answer is correct
Habib ur Rahman
Mahmud Hasan Bulandshahri
Waqar Ali
Fakhr ul Islaam


Darul-uloom Karachi

According to information provided by people Dr Zakir Naik is an expert on comparative religion and he is known as a good orator, however he is not a qualified Islamic scholar or a Mufti. Furthermore he not only doesn't do Taqleed (himself) of any of the four Imams of Fiqh but criticises the ones who do Taqleed (of these four Imams).

Therefore the opinions of Dr Zakir Naik in Shariah matters and injunctions will not be deemed acceptable unless they are endorsed by a trusted scholar or a Mufti and general public are advised not to heed his opinions in Shariah matters...

Allah (SWT) knows best.

Humble servant,

Khalid Jameel

Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi

This answer is correct!

Humble servant,

Mahmood Ashraf

Assistant Mufti

Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi

This answer is correct!

Humble servant,


Assistant Mufti

Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi

This answer is correct!

Humble servant,

Mohammed Abdul-Manaan

Assistant Mufti

Darul-Iftaa, Darul-uloom Karachi

Jamia Binoria (Karachi)

.The above-mentioned Dr (Saheb) is not an Authentic scholar of Islam and from his external appearance doesn't appear to be "strictly religious" therefore following him in matters of religion could be detrimental.

However, if the intention of respected Dr (Saheb) is to propagate the Deen then it is advised that he should fulfil this noble obligation (of Islamic propagation) under the guidance and with consultation with Authentic and trusted scholars (of Islam) so that it may become a means of great benefit for all parties involved.

Humble servant,

Saifullah Jameel

Darul-Iftaa, Jamia Binnoria Karachi

Shaykh (Mufti) Ebrahim Desai (HA)

Question: Could you please comment about Dr. Zakir Naik. Is he preaching according to Suunah? He has views which do not agree with schools of thoughts. Should we learn from his scholarship?

Answer: In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Assalaamu 'alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh

Zakir Naik is known for discussions on comparative religions. He is not a qualified Aalim of deen. His comments on fiqh have not merit. If it is true that he condemned the fiqh of the Imams, then that in itself is a clear indication of his lack of fiqh and understanding of Shairah. We have come across a fatwa from Darul Ifta Jamia Binnoria, regarding Zakir Naik not being a certified Aalim of Deen. Zakir Naik should consult with Ulama in his endeavor of propagating deen.

And Allah knows best


Mufti Ebrahim Desai

Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah

Question: We run the web-site called Central-Mosque and we have several articles from Dr Zakir Naik about comparative religion.

1 We have NEVER put any of his opinions of Fiqh as it is clear that he is not a scholar.


2 Mufti Nawal-ur-Rahman Saheb has recently issued many Fatawa about the misguidence of Dr Zakir Naik and as an example; please see below on his site. Download Audio Answer : 6329

In the light of these Fataws what should be done? Should we remove the articles which are about Hindu'ism etc?

Answer: In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Assalaamu 'alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh

Zakir Naik is known for discussions on comparative religions. He is not a qualified Aalim of deen. His comments on fiqh have no merit. If it is true that he condemned the fiqh of the Imams, then that in itself is a clear indication of his lack of fiqh and understanding of Shairah. We have come across a fatwa from Darul Ifta Jamia Binnoria, Pakistan regarding Zakir Naik not being a certified Aalim of Deen. He should consult with Ulama in his endeavor of propagating deen.

Dr Zakir Naik is an MBBS by profession, comparative religion orator and Da'ii by choice. Knowledge is not merely information that one may acquire from books, rather it is the chain of Nûr that flows from teacher to student. Anyone who deems knowledge to be mere information then he should know that Abu Jahal (Allah's curse be upon him) was also knowledgeable, and if one thinks knowledge is in oration/khitaab then one should know that Adölf Hitler led the whole Germany with his oration into annihilation of a whole race.

Dr Zakir Naik is a Da'ii and we give him his due respect for that. He knows himself that he is not an Alim in Deen. Thus Ulema have given their decree that he, not being an Alim in deen, should focus his da'wah to what he is good at (i.e comparative religion), and leave religious answering to the Fuqaha.

Many times, our youth get impressed by contemporary comparative religious orators, because of their affluent speeches and abilities in deductive logic. This may be true to some extent in debates with a counterpart but Knowledge of Deen is much beyond this.

Conclusively, May Allah accept Dr Zakir Naik's efforts in deen and give him taufiq to take guidance from the Ulema in matter of Shariah and Aqeeda. Ameen.

And Allah knows best


Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah

Shaykh (Mufti) Nawal-ur-Rahman (HA)

Question: Is Dr. Zakir Naik's material on 'Islam and comparative religion' reliable? I know that he is not an Alim but can we listen to his lectures on 'Islam and comparative religion' without paying attention to matters of Fiqh which, I agree, he is not qualified to discuss and elaborate? Is Harun Yahya's literature (not videos) reliable? Is one allowed to listen to his lectures on topics other than the ones he is not qualified for? For e.g. his books on Darwinism and nature deserve appreciation. [United States]

The answer is within your question, itself. Those who are not authentically qualified and have learned through "Self-study" are not trustable, therefore we should be cautious and such people should be avoided.

Question: I have a question about Zakir Naik. I heard your fatwa to one of the questions posted earlier that Zakir Naik is Going Astray (gumrah hain). I just want to know on what basis is he gumrah according to you? I myself totally believe in what you have said, I don't need any Daleel but I told this to one of my friend and he was asking me for the reason. [Canada]

The injunction of him (Dr Zakir Naik) being on error was passed because on some occasions he was asked about "Sunnah" and "Dress code" etc. and in his response he denied these matters and stated that they have no importance in Islam.

Furthermore, he is not an authentic scholar of Islam and for obvious reasons to enquire from someone who is not a qualified, trusted and authentic scholar of Islam can't be deemed appropriate because a laymen would be unable to judge between the right and wrong being uttered from an unqualified person.

The times which we live in has given rise to groups and individuals who are free-thinking and he (Dr Zakir Naik) agrees with them and is one of them.

These are the reasons why we felt the need to disagree with him and point out his error. 

An answer to Dr. Zakir Naik's answer regarding Schools of thought

Composed by M. Yasin Achhodi

{jb_dropcap}I{jb_dropcap}n a question posed to Dr. Zakir Naik regarding which school of thought a Muslim should follow, he answered in the following manipulating manner in which a layman can easily be affected with lack of knowledge. His answer will be quoted first followed by the reply. To read his entire article first, click here.

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

1. Muslims should be united

Muslims today, are divided amongst themselves. Such divisions are not endorsed by Islam. Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers.

The Glorious Qur'an says:

"And hold fast, altogether, by the rope Which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves." [Al-Qur'an 3:103]

Which is the rope of Allah that is being referred to in this verse? It is the Glorious Qur'an. The Glorious Qur'an is the rope of Allah which all Muslims should hold fast together. There is double emphasis in this verse. Beside saying 'hold fast all together' it also says, 'be not divided'.

Taqleed and following of an Imam has not broken unity. In the Haramayn, it is the Muqallideen who read together and coexist peacefully whereas the ones who are strictly against it decide to make their own gatherings, Jamaa'ah and also groups.

My question: who has broken unity? A Muqallid or a person with his own views of Deen?

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

The Qur'an further says,

"Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger" [Al-Qur'an 4:59]

All the Muslims should follow the Qur'an and authentic Ahadith and ensure that they are not divided among themselves

Why is the remaining verse of the Holy Qur'aan forgotten?

"O you who believe! Follow Allah; follow the Messenger and those of authority (Amr) amongst you." (Surah al-Nisaa Verse 59)

Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) says that in this verse, 'Amr' refers to the jurists. This explanation is narrated from Mu'aawiyah ibn Salah from Ali ibn Talhah which is a sound chain, Al-Itqaan)

The verse continues, "And if you dispute, then refer to Allah and the Messenger if you really do believe in Allah and in the last day. (Surah al-Nisaa Verse 59)

Allah's statement subsequently "if you dispute..." proves that those of Amr are indeed jurists because He has ordered everyone else to follow them and then proceed to say that "if you dispute.." Hence Allah has ordered those of Amr to refer the disputed issue to the Book of Allah the traditions of the Prophet. The lay person would be unaware of how to refer the disputed issue to the Book of Allah and to the Sunnah and how their proofs would apply to the situations and events. Thus, it is established that the second command, is for the scholars. (Ahkaamul Qur'aan, vol 2, pg 257)

My question: Why state quarter of the verse as proof for not following scholars when the remainder of the verse denies your claim?

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

2. It is prohibited to make divisions in Islam.

The Glorious Qur'an says:

"As for those who divide Their religion and break up Into sects, you have no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did." [Al-Qur'an 6:159]

In this verse Allah (swt) says that one should disassociate oneself from those who divide their religion and break it up into sects.

But when one asks a Muslim, "who are you?" the common answer is either 'I am a Hanafi or Shafi or Maliki or Hanbali. Some call themselves 'Ahle-Hadith'.

When a non-Muslim asks, "who are you?" the common answer is "I am a Muslim"

When a Muslim asks, "who are you?" the common answer is, "son of so n so" or "I am a Gujrati/Pakistani/Malaysian" etc. Does this mean that to be a Pakistani is being guilty of the people mentioned in this verse?

I, till today, have not heard "I am a Hanafi" or "Shaafi'ee" being the answer to "who are you?" Furthermore, Taqleed has not created divisions. This is grave misconception. Ahlus Sunaah Wal Jamaa'ah are proud to follow the Sahaabah. The Islam of the Sahabaah was the complete Islam. They saw Nabi (s) and they saw the Qur'aan in him. The understandings of the Sahaabah is our understanding. There were differences of opinion in the Sahaabah too. Ibn Abbas (ra) narrates that 'Umar ibn Khattab gave a sermon at Jabiyah and said, "O people! If you want to know about the Qur'aan, go to 'Ubaid ibn Ka'b. If you want to know about inheritance, go to Zaid ib Thaabit. If you want to about Fiqh, go to Mu'aadh ibn Jabal. If you want to know about wealth, then come to me for Allah has made me a guardian and a distributor. " (Tabarani) We hear it all the time, "oh you follow them, but we follow Qur'aan & Sunnah." Those who claim to follow the Qur'aan & Sunnah as understood by themselves, please take a moment to observe the following. Salim ibn Abdullah narrates that Abdullah ibn 'Umar was asked about a person who owed another person some money and had to pay the load at a fixed time. The creditor then agrees to forgive a portion of the load if the debtor pays before the deadline. Ibn 'Umar disliked this agreement and forbade it. (Muwatta Imam Malik) There is no explicit Hadith of the Prophet which has been offered as proof nor was any proof sought from Ibn 'Umar (ra). It is evident that this ruling was a personal judgement of Ibn 'Umar. Abdur Rahmaan narrated that he asked Ibn Sireen about entering public baths. Ibn Sireen said that 'Umar used to dislike the idea. (Mataalibul 'Aaliyah by Hafiz Ibn Hajar) Ibn Sireen, who was one of the most learned followers of the Companions, did not mention any proof except to say that 'Umar used to dislike the idea. This is despite the fact that there are several Ahadeeth regarding the issue of public baths. There are plenty more examples available. Now my question: Who is causing the division? The one who follows a jurist like the Sahaabah and those who followed them did? Or the ones who are breaking all bonds and ties from the people of authority, the people of knowledge and telling everyone not to follow those of authority and to follow only Qur'aan & Sunnah no matter how you understand it? Who is this verse more likely to refer to?

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

3. Four Schools of Thoughts

The Islamic world has produced several learned Islamic scholars (Imams), but out of these, four became more famous and their teachings spread in different parts of the world.

It is a misconception that a Muslim should follow any one of these four schools of thoughts i.e. Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali or Maliki. There is no proof whatsoever in the Qur'an or any authentic Hadith that a Muslim should only follow one of these four Imams.

'Umar Ibn Khattab (ra)'s sermon at Jabiyah in which mentioned who to go to for which subjects is also not mentioned in the Qur'aan. It is very easy to say "it is a misconception," maybe if the conception was mentioned, the misconception would not remain. To avoid the possibility of contradictions amongst the scholars of differing Ijtihad over a primary source, the laity were encouraged to follow only one Madhhab and Mujtahideen instead of referring to several. This idea gained domination during the 3rd and 4th century AH. One of the most important reasons for this was that a person can not take the judgement which suits his desires best. According to some jurists for example, Talaaq (divorce) takes place whereas according to some, it doesn't. Most people will no doubt follow the jurist which suits their desire best.

Following desires to the extent that they believe Halaal to be Haraam and Haraam to Halaal is disastrous. Disobedience of this nature is fatal and makes religion and law mere shame. For this reason, the acceptance of following only one Madhhab has successfully continued for around 11 centuries in the majority of Muslims. Furthermore to proudly state its acceptance in the eyes of Allah that it is the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa'ah, those who do follow the Qur'aan, those who do follow the Sunnah, those who do follow the two as understood by the Sahaabah and those who do follow an Imam are those who Allah has accepted to lead prayers in the Haramayn Shareefayn.

My question: Is Qur'aan & Sunnah your only source of making judgements? If yes, why did the Sahaabah not ask for proof from Qur'aan & Sunnah? Why did some Sahaabah refer to other Sahaabah for rulings? Were they not learned enough?

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

4. Respect all the Great Scholars of Islam.

We must respect all the great scholars of Islam, including the four Imaams, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Hanbal and Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all). They were great scholars and may Allah reward them for their research and hard work. One can have no objection if someone agrees with the view and research of any one or more from these four great scholars of Islam.

Again, please refer to following rulings which suit the desires under number 3. I see no other reason why one would object to their ruling.

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

5. All Four Imam said follow the Qur'an and Sunnah.

All the four great Imams said that if any of their Fatwas or teachings contradict Allah's word, i.e. the Qur'an, or the sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) i.e. authentic Hadith, then that particulars Fatwa of theirs should be rejected, and the Sunnah of the Prophet should be followed.

To give you an example in this context – Imam shafi said that when a women touches a man who is in a state of wudhu, the wudhu of the man breaks. However, this ruling of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet.

Narrated Aisha (RA) : The Prophet (may peace be upon him) kissed one of his wives and went out for saying prayer. He did not perform ablution. (Sunan Abu Dawood Vol. 1 Chapter No. 70 Hadith No. 179)

Thus this particular teaching of Imam Shafi contradicts the authentic saying of the Prophet. So I reject this specific ruling of Imam Shafi who himself said , " If I say something, then compare it to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger and if it agrees to them, then accept it and that which goes against them, then reject it and throw my saying against the wall" – This is a saying of ash-Shafi'ee-rahimaullah. See Al-Majmoo' of an-Nawawee (1/63).

Thus by rejecting this particular teaching of Imam Shafi which contradicts the authentic Hadith, I am practically a better follower of Imam Shafi than those who call themselves 'Shafi'.

The response to this is; This is the opinion of Ibn 'Umar and some other Sahabah. However, when the Sahabah disagree in a matter, their statements are not a proof unless proof is brought from the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (s). As we stated before, Ibn 'Abbas and the reports from 'Aa'ishah contradict the opinion of Ibn 'Umar and those with their opinion. Thus, the opinion of Ibn Umar is not accepted unless supported with proof from the mouth of the beloved Messenger Muhammad (s). This topic itself is a lengthy topic in which one can not lightly accuse Imaam Shafi'ee (Rahimahullah) of going against a Hadeeth. Furthermore, everyone learning Ahadeeth and extracting rulings from them in the light of Qur'aan is unreal and somewhat impossible. Not many if not all have the ability to do so. Therefore, to say one can follow a different ruling if they find a Hadeeth which contradicts it, is absurd for a common person. Bearing in mind, does a common person have enough knowledge to know that there is no other stronger Hadeeth that this ruling? Does the layman have enough knowledge to understand why Imam Shafi'ee uses that Hadeeth as Hujjah and Imam Abu Hanifah uses this?

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

Similarly in practice, I claim to be a better follower of Imam Abu Hanifa than those who call themselves 'Hanafi'. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Hanbal than those who call themselves 'Hanbali'. I claim to be a better follower of Imam Malik than those who call themselves 'Maliki". If being a 'Ahle-Hadith' means following Qur'an and authentic Hadith then I claim to be a better follower of the Qur'an and authentic Hadith than those who call themselves ' Ahle-Hadith'. All these are mere labels (Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki, Ahle-Hadith) that are not endorsed by the Qur'an or the Sahih Ahadith.

The only label or title given by the Qur'an and the Sahih Ahadith is MUSLIM.

Very easy to fall for this last statement, yet the solution and answer is even easier. A Muslim is a person who believes in one Allah and believes in Muhammad (s) as the final Messenger. A Hanafi, Shafi'ee, Hanbali, Maliki does not come contradictory to MUSLIM. As the meaning of Hanafi is not the opposite of what makes a person MUSLIM. Being a Hanafi does not take the Shahaadah away from a MUSLIM. In fact, the following (Number 6) helps.

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

6. All the Groups have sub divisions

I personally have no objection if someone calls himself Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith. People give different labels to themselves to identify which set of teachings they prefer to follow and to disassociate themselves from those people who follow wrong practices. From history we come to know that all the labels given to different groups, at a later stage the people from that group themselves did not follow their teachings and made new sub-groups. Therefore in all the groups you find a sub-division.

But as far as giving a label to identify what a person practices in Islam is concerned, there can not be better label than what Allah (swt) has given i.e. a Muslim.

We have never labelled ourselves as an entirety 'Hanafi' or 'Shafi'ee'. But to use it to deny Taqleed is using false logic and inaccurate claims. Every title or label has its position. If a person says, "I am a MAN", does this change the fact that he is a Human? The Qur'aan and Hadeeth says we are 'son of Adam', does this mean we can't say we are son of our blood father? When one can claim that this logic is out of context, then how can saying, 'I am a Hanafi' hence not MUSLIM as the Qur'aan labels us be true logic?

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

7. Our Prophet was a Muslim

"Who was our beloved Prophet (pbuh)? Was he a Hanafi or a Shafi, or a Hanbali or a Maliki ?" No! He was a Muslim, like all the other Prophets and Messengers of Allah before him.

This is enough to show the desperateness of trying to deny Taqleed. Was Imam Abu Hanifah , Imam Shafi'ee, Imam Ahmad or Imam Malik before our Prophet (s)? A Muslim is a person of Islam. Unless Hanafi, Shafi'ee, Hanbali or Maliki is a religion, one can not use the above to clarify anything which is trying to be proven. The entire context is off track.

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur'an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.

Further , in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur'an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.

To clarify my above point, I use this quote of Doctor Zakir Naik. Here he has put a MUSLIM in oppose to Christian or Jew. Christianity and Judaism are religions, so this can be used to prove Jesus was a Muslim. Hanafi or Shafi'ee etc is not a religion, it is mere ignorance to use this out of such context. InshaAllah I will not have to use any more Qur'aan, Hadeeth, Logic or doctor Zakirs own statements to answer the following as InshaAllah one will be able to understand his lack of awareness by reading his following proofs.

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

8. Qur'an says call yourselves Muslims

There is no Qur'anic verse or any authentic Hadith that says you should call yourselves Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Ahle Hadith.

If anyone poses a Muslim the question who are you, he should say "I am a Muslim, not a Hanafi or a Shafi or a Ahle-Hadith".

In Surah Fussilat chapter 41 verse 33 Allah (swt) says: "Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, 'I am of those Who bow in Islam (Muslim)?' "[Al-Qur'an 41:33]

The Qur'an instructs, "Say: I am of those who bow in Islam". In other words, say, "I am a Muslim".

The Prophet (pbuh) dictated letters to non-Muslim kings and rulers inviting them to accept Islam. In these letters he mentioned the verse of the Qur'an from Surah Al Imran chapter 3 verse 64:

Say ye: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (submitting to Allah's Will)."[Al-Qur'an 3:64]

9. Lip Service Muslims

Allah knew that even in the Muslim Ummah there will be many people who claim to be Muslims (i.e. claim to submit their will to Allah) but practically will not follow Allah's commands.

Allah refers to such people in the Qur'an as lip service Believers (Al Qur'an 5:41). Thus we can conclude that those who claim to be Muslims but do not follow Qur'an and Sunnah are Lip-Service Muslims. Those who follow the Qur'an and authentic Hadith should not change their label, and stick to the best label given by Allah (swt) i.e. Muslim and which the Prophet also called himself.

This verse is being used once again against the Muqallideen. This time, the Muqallideen are said to not be following the Qur'aan & Sunnah.Imagine giving a person the Qur'aan, the Ahadeeth and then saying, live your life according to these rulings. Will that person be able to understand what the Qur'aan means by Quroo' in the verse where Allah says, "And those women who are divorced should wait for three Quroo'"? And what type of (Mukhaabarah) will he know or understand in the Hadeeth where Nabi (s) said, "Whoever does not stop the practice of Mukhaabarah should hear the proclamation of war (against him)."? (Mukhaabarah is a certain type of farming. There were several forms of Mukhaabarah practiced) The Hadeeth is fairly general, how would a lay person distinguish between the permitted ones and the forbidden one? Then there's one Hadeeth which says, "Whoever has an Imaam, then the Imaam's recitation is his recitation." On the other hand, another Hadeeth says, "There is no Salaah for he who does not recite the Faatihah." How would a common person which Qur'aan and Hadeeth be able to choose which Hadeeth to follow, or what is the middle route, or does it refer to something else, or was the Hadeeth for a particular event only? Obviously one is will have to turn to a learned jurist who has mastered himself in these issues and whom Allah (swt) has blessed unrecognizable wisdom. So when the person asks this jurist/imam, is he now following the Imaam or Qur'aan and Sunnah? Obviously he is following the Qur'aan and Sunnah as passed on by these scholars as they compiled rulings. And it is common sense that if a person tries to follow all the Madhaahib then he will lead to following the rulings which suit him best. My question is, who is following a more reliable and sound meaning of the Qur'aan and Sunnah and who is taking literal and incomplete perceptions of the Qur'aan and Sunnah. The obvious answer would be the one who chooses to follow a Madhhab is safer from making his own meaning of Deen whereas following a Madhhab is actually following a sound understanding of Qur'aan and Hadeeth.

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

10. The Prophet had said that there would be 73 sects.

Some may argue by quoting the Hadith of our beloved Prophet, from Sunan Abu Dawood Hadith No. 4579. In this Hadith the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, "My community will split up into seventy-three sects."

This hadith reports that the prophet predicted the emergence of seventy-three sects. He did not say that Muslims should be active in dividing themselves into sects. The Glorious Qur'an commands us not to create sects. Those who follow the teachings of the Qur'an and Sahih Hadith, and do not create sects are the people who are on the true path.

According to Tirmidhi Hadith No. 171, the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, "My Ummah will be fragmented into seventy three sects, and all of them will be in Hell fire except one sect." The companions asked Allah's messenger which group that would be. Where upon he replied, "It is the one to which I and my companions belong".

The answer of Nabi (s) is so strong and true in its wisdom. He did not say, "It is the one who follows Qur'aan & Sunnah." He said, "It is the one to which I and my companions belong." Note, the Sahaabah are mentioned. The Sahaabah passed on the true Islam to the Tabi'een. When the Tabi'een followed the Islam of the Sahaabah, they are included in that sect. Now will you say that the Tabi'een aren't because they followed the Sahaabah and not the Qur'aan and Sunnah? The Tabi'een turned to certain Sahaabah and similarly the Tab' Tabi'een turned to certain Tabi'een for certain issues. Why did they not look directly into Qur'aan and Hadeeth? A Madhhab is a compilation of rulings, an understanding of Fiqh related issues. The Islaam we follow is the Islaam of the Sahaabah. Do we have a better understanding of Hadeeth and Qur'aan than these great scholars? If one does, they can feel free to be a Mujtahid and have their own Fiqh. As for those who follow a Madhhab, they are following the Islaam of the Sahaabah.

Dr. Zakir Naik wrote:

The Glorious Qur'an mentions in several verses, "Obey Allah and obey His Messenger". A true Muslim should only follow the Glorious Qur'an and the Sahih Hadith. He can agree with the views of any scholar as long as they conform to the teachings of the Qur'an and Sahih Hadith. If such views go against the Word of Allah, or the Sunnah of His Prophet, then they carry no weight, regardless of how learned the scholar might be. A true Muslim will not follow any ruling or teaching of any great scholar of Islam if that particular ruling or teaching contradicts the Qur'an and Saheeh Hadith.

Thus, the only school of thought that a Muslim should follow, is that of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The only Madhab that a Muslim should follow, is the Madhab of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). And Allah knows the Best.

By saying the only school of thought you should follow is Prophet Muhammad, you have clearly showed that you do not understand the meaning of "school of thought." A school of thought is a doctrine, The point of view held by a particular group (dictionary) a set of ideas or opinions which a group of people share about a matter (Cambridge). The Islaam of Nabi (s) was not a 'point of view.' It was the true Islaam in its state. When the narrations varied after the Sahaabah, that is when the need for school of thoughts emerged. That is when a strong opinion was required. A common person can not conclude the Deen with his own understandings.

Follow up Questions:

The following questions were posed very nicely upon the above reply:

Questioner wrote: Brother mash'Allah nice points. I'm guessing that you beleive in madhabs and that we should follow them?let me ask you on what basis?Does following a madhab go against the teachings of Rasulullah?Brother if you have a problem with the statement made by our honorable Zakir Naik then oh well.Till now brother mash'Allah nice points,but what you said is the same exact thing people say to approve of madhabs.Why is this?

Questioner wrote: I'm guessing that you beleive in madhabs and that we should follow them? Let me ask you on what basis?

On the basis that the Muslims of early years were more knowledgeable, more pious and less affected by Shaytaan than us. If you have the ability to extract rulings from Qur'aan in the light of Ahadeeth so it does not contradict other Ahadeeth being aware of the chains of narrations making sure that when you take one Hadeeth for the ruling, the other Hadeeth is not rejected and a valid reason is available, if you are able to distinguish between different terms used for the same ruling or the same word used in different context for multiple rulings, if you are able to distinguish between a weak chain and a sound chain of narrations, if you are able to distinguish between rulings which were permitted for a certain period of time, if you are able to do all this and more then by all means, Taqleed is not for you. Now ask yourself, are we capable of even 1% that they spent their entire lives on? If everyone becomes this, what will happen to Muslims? The entire Muslim world will differ in rulings and the entire Muslim population will be stuck in books their entire lives. Now you tell me, on what basis should we not follow a Madhhab and on what basis should we reject what has been a successful way of life from the time of Sahaabah. Like i said above in reply to Dr Zakir Naik, even the Sahaabah (ra) followed other Sahaabah in Fiqh matters and did not look into Qur'aan & Hadeeth as the Sahaabah they followed in the matter knew the ruling better than them. They did not ask for proof in differences of opinions like we do.

Questioner wrote: Does following a madhab go against the teachings of Rasulullah?

Following a Madhhab is securing oneself to following a steadfast Fiqh instead of a purpose driven misunderstood perception of what a person makes of Ayaat and Ahaadeeth.

Questioner wrote: Brother if you have a problem with the statement made by our honorable Zakir Naik then oh well.

Ironic that you used the word honorable. In your honor for him, you have forgotten that he dishonored all the verses I mentioned, the Ahadeeth and events of the Sahaabah i mentioned above and also the ways of the Muslims since the 3rd century AH. I'm afraid he lost all his honor upon this one article. This doesn't change the fact the he speaks very good intellectual things. But once he talks about 'Aqaaid or Taqleed, I can't but help feel sorry for him as do many scholars and highly respected and learned Ulamaa-e-Kiraam.

Questioner wrote: Till now brother mash'Allah nice points,but what you said is the same exact thing people say to approve of madhabs. Why is this?

What I said is not to approve Madhhabs, to approve Madhhabs, there are much stronger and evident literature available. What I said was a simple answer to everything Dr Zakir Naik has said. Any person attacking Taqleed with Qur'aan and Hadeeth can be answered with their own statements because all their statements are incomplete and very easy to be blinded to a simple minded person.

"The Legal Status of Following a Madhab" by Chief Justice Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani is a book i recommend. If any, read this inshaAllah at the least. If you still do not agree then Innallaha Yahdee Man-Yashaau Wa Yudhillu Man-Yashaa.

And Allah knows best.