By Dr Tariq Mahmood,
I was introduced to Dr Zakir Naik and his TV evangelism in my younger days while I was a residential student of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). I was trying to find my footing in the world of “isms”. As I was bought up simply as a Muslim, till my foray into late teens I didn’t even understand the difference between Shias and Sunnis. I still clearly remember the long and often distasteful debates between a Shia and few Sunni students (with an Ahmadi student thrown in between to make things a bit more fun) that I was witness to during my stay in the law seminar annexe of the SS south hall. After wards I kept looking for the “ism” that would define my faith but woefully failed.
Finally I settled for my own study of religion and quran something that was strictly discouraged by various “people of faith” at various points of time. During all this I also briefly came into contact with the reactionary TV evangelism of Dr Naik but I found his explanations too “unscholarly” and his response as simply being “Tit for Tat”. Latter I came to hear of him now and then but never realized how powerful he had become in the mind of educated Muslims. This realization dawned on me when once my mother started quoting him in regards to various Islamic issues. At this point I started to think of the reasons as to why did I feel aversion to this forceful, bit hyperactive doctor smartly clad in a suit and cap.
My ruminating lead me to the reasons as to why people like him are a great threat to the Islamic ummah as well as our perception among people of other faiths. Dr Naik’s lectures on comparative religion though entertaining lack any major scholarly perspective. I would like to present here a question and his answer to that question as an example of his actual lack of any scholarly intent in his answers.
Dr Zakir Naik
Once on his question answer program a young girl asked him a question in regards to vegetarianism and expressed aversion to meat eating citing ethical reasons of animal cruelty. Dr Naik started his answer by asking the girl that would she ask for a lesser punishment for someone who would kill a person with no sensory ability left and no mouth left to say his anguish. Then he went to compare vegetables to such a vegetative person. Then he went on to talk about the way our digestive system is more competent at handling animal protein. Though the answer may seem entertaining and a crisp reply to those who fault Muslims for eating meat but neither does it display any good religious concepts and is simply reactionary and witty and would not even qualify for the pedestal of his specialty of comparative religion.
A good answer would have explained to the girl that in reality Islam is one of the first religions in the world to put extremely strict conditions on meat consumption (Halal and Haram) and also explain and quote hadiths that extol Muslims to not make their stomach graveyard of animals (a statement often misattributed to Gandhi ji). As for qurbani of animals on the occasion of Eid ul Azha one should explain that animals have been considered for long a prized asset and qurbani means giving away that animal to the poor and ones friend and family in name of Allah (SWT), is considered a pious thing. Also good tit bit of good comparative religion would have been the example of Pashupatinath mandir of Kathmadu in the Hindu Kingdom of Nepal where hundreds of buffalos are sacrificed everyday to the deity of Pashupatinath.
Another huge short coming of Dr Naik is that he plays to his gallery. He knows that his relevance is for the reason of his popularity so he would never directly say anything that would antagonize his audience. One of his biggest controversies in regards to his visa application started this way. I remember years before when he had come to Aligarh Muslim University, a Hindu friend of mine complained about his answer in regards to terrorism because other students of the class were praising his calling himself a terrorist. Though every time this question is posed to him he very well understanding the context the word has been used in the question tries to put a spin on the context of the word instead to trying to reply the question in a theological context. His reply generally goes on to call a policeman or a righteous man as a “terrorist” as the thief or the non righteous are “terrorized” by him. Though the answer is once again witty and imaginative but it lacks any theological substance. He cannot make light of one of the most important issue facing Muslims now. The choices made by Muslim youths on this issue will go on to define the destiny of our faith in the coming times. He should speak about the total concept of jihad, the laws of engagement in Islam, maybe even touch upon the context of the hopelessness that is making this destructive option a lucrative one for a class of Muslims. But he knows what would appeal to his audience. And his young upwardly mobile audience which comes face to face with religious discrimination in real world laps it up. And this audience has catapulted this obscure medicine man into the centre of the universe of middle class Urdu and English speaking Muslims all over the world.
But our Ulema are not free of blame in regards to the rise of people like Dr Zakir Naik. For ages now it had been clear that Muslim especially young Muslims have been finding the lack of logic and reason and the apathetic attitude of the ulemas towards their aspirations frustrating. While the ulemas were fighting over question of talaq in dream and sms’s the middle class Muslim youth had moved much ahead and was desperately looking for some religious solace. Busy fighting to keep their control and their old nepotism alive they completely lost touch with reality and by the time they were awakened to the situation the attention of this youth had already been caught onto by charismatic if questionable figures such as Dr Naik. Now ulemas don’t realize that every time a counter-intuitive fatwa comes out of the hinterlands of Muzzafarnagar the youth is further disenchanted and alienated. They cannot simply fight Dr Naik for madarsah funds. Something much bigger is at stake; the fight is for the true face of Islam.
The complete failure of the ulema had created a vacancy for the taking and sadly this vacancy is being filled by people with reactive personalities. At this point the ummah is in grave need of leaders of caliber but sadly such leaders are hardly there on the horizon mainly because in the last fifty years the discourse of Islamic has been stifled by the clergy. The Quran has become their protectorate. They have tried to create a powerful unshakeable clergy similar to the Roman Catholic Church. The need of the hour is leaders like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Allama Iqbal and Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. But sadly we must also remind ourselves that at least two of these leaders in their lifetimes had to face fatwas of apostasy and even had fatwas for death. So let’s wait to see when a brave soul will appear on the horizon ready to face the powers that be to lead the ummah on its true path.
—
Dr. Tariq Mahmood can be reached at [email protected].