DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**MartZubok** · 07-26-2012, 08:18 PM

POS

I don't know if you read my previous post:

I think if we are true, we would know that Dr. Zakir Naik is not spared by even Salafis of Saudi and UK, you will find a video of Sh. al-Hajouri and Salafi Publications attacking him on many issues (a thorough refutation), whilst the Deobandi's official fatwa regarding him is to remain silent about Fiqhi Ikthilafi issues, all the major Deobandi Fatawa regarding him are compiled Here. You will see a stark difference. In fact there were occasions where he was giving fatawa and said a reference was in Bukhari which was refuted by a Deobandi Scholar, which proves that just as they rightly said for him to remain quiet in regards to Fiqh and Ikhtilafi matters they have also proven (with proof) his wrong referencing (and wrong referencing can be dangerous for the layman). As you can see the Deobandis are not Ghuloo in their refutations of him unlike the Salafis and even Barelwis or Shi'ahs.

Wallahu A'lam

If what YOU say is true (i.e. your understanding of Mawlana Nadwi's words) regarding those who make accusations should bring forward proof, then the Deobandis have made it clear that he should abstain from giving Islamic Fatawa because it will have bad percussions, especially from someone who is not learned in the sciences of Islam.

I have given an example of Dr Zakir Naik's awful attribution to al-Bukhari, and here is another one showing his lack of knowledge:

DR ZAKIR NAIK - IS SUNNI, SHIA, SHAFAI, WAHABI, HANAFI Are Muslims?? confused

[1] He mis-understands, calling yourself Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanbali and fellow Peace TV veteran Br. Abdur Raheem Green refutes this (15 Mins onwards)

[2] He mis-uses the the saying of the A'immah that when "When you find a hadith going against my fatwa, throw my fatwa on the wall" and "When the Hadith is Sahih that is my Madh-hab", and classical Scholars have understood these sayings something different than Dr Zakir Naik.

[3] He says "We should follow the Qur'an and Sahih Hadith". Only a person who lacks insight into Islamic sciences will say such. Such a conception of following Sahih Hadith is flawed, because following a Sahih hadith can mean a hadith that is Sahih in Isnad and / or Matn, but it doesn't reflect nor does it encompass whether the hadith has Shaadh or not, Mahfooz or not, Mansookh or not, whether there are Shuroot attached to it or not, whether it is Munkar or not or whether there is Idthirab or not. Where as saying following Sunnah encompasses all of this in a broader scale and much more. Just shows his ignorance.

Wallahu A'lam.

07-26-2012, 08:18 PM	#36
MartZubok Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 512 Senior Member	POS I don't know if you read my previous post: I think if we are true, we would know that Dr. Zakir Naik is not spared by even Salafis of Saudi and UK, you will find a video of Sh. al-Hajouri and Salafi Publications attacking him on many issues (a thorough refutation), whilst the Deobandi's official fatwa regarding him is to remain silent about Fiqhi Ikthilafi issues, all the major Deobandi Fatawa regarding him are compiled Here. You will see a stark difference. In fact there were occasions where he was giving fatawa and said a reference was in Bukhari which was refuted by a Deobandi Scholar, which proves that just as they rightly said for him to remain quiet in regards to Fiqh and Ikhtilafi matters they have also proven (with proof) his wrong referencing (and wrong referencing can be dangerous for the layman). As you can see the Deobandis are not Ghuloo in their refutations of him unlike the Salafis and even Barelwis or Shi'ahs. Wallahu A'lam If what YOU say is true (i.e. your understanding of Mawlana Nadwi's words) regarding those who make accusations should bring forward proof, then the Deobandis have made it clear that he should abstain from giving Islamic Fatawa because it will have bad percussions, especially from someone who is not learned in the sciences of Islam. I have given an example of Dr Zakir Naik's awful attribution to al-Bukhari, and here is another one showing his lack of knowledge: DR ZAKIR NAIK - IS SUNNI, SHIA, SHAFAI, WAHABI, HANAFI Are Muslims?? confused [1] He mis-understands, calling yourself Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanbali and fellow Peace TV veteran Br. Abdur Raheem Green refutes this (15 Mins onwards) [2] He mis-uses the the saying of the A'immah that when "When you find a hadith going against my fatwa, throw my fatwa on the wall" and "When the Hadith is Sahih that is my Madh-hab", and classical Scholars have understood these sayings something different than Dr Zakir Naik. [3] He says "We should follow the Qur'an and Sahih Hadith". Only a person who lacks insight into Islamic sciences will say such. Such a conception of following Sahih Hadith is flawed, because following a Sahih hadith can mean a hadith that is Sahih in Isnad and / or Matn, but it doesn't reflect nor does it encompass whether the hadith has Shaadh or not, Mahfooz or not, Mansookh or not, whether there are Shuroot attached to it or not, whether it is Munkar or not or whether there is Idthirab or not. Where as saying following Sunnah encompasses all of this in a broader scale and much more. Just shows his ignorance. Wallahu A'lam.
	Quote