While I have always been critical of his approach and conclusions, I always admired Dr Zakir Naik’s sincerity and loyalty to Muslims. I was impressed by his gigantic efforts in studying thousands of pages of scriptures and selecting verses that could be used to derive whatever crazy interpretations he has derived to prove Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in all world scriptures. I always used to wonder how he could gain all the time and energy to do so despite such a busy schedule of lecturing world around!
But suddenly I came across a book “Muhammad in World Scriptures” by Maulana Abdul Haque Vidyarthi written in 1936. And I was shocked to find that Dr Zakir Naik has done NOTHING MORE THAN simply copying-pasting from this book, mostly word-to-word and cooked up his own ‘original’ research which he uses to claim that he is an expert in ‘Comparative Religion’. This is blatant plagiarization! And that too from a source that his followers consider worse than Kafirs.
So all Dr Zakir Naik has done is copying from works of another person, memorizing those and claiming all the fame for himself! And he did this so blindly that he did not bother even see the background of the original writer or how he has backstabbed his followers in the process.
Because Maulana Adbul Haque Vidyarthi was not an ordinary Muslim.
On contrary, he belonged to a cult which almost the entire Muslim world, and especially the sects which believe in ideology of Dr Zakir Naik considers as non-Muslim. They are in fact banned in Pakistan and many other countries. Ask any Muslim scholar, and he would start hurling abuses on them for disgracing Islam and Muhammad.
Yes, I am referring to the Ahmadiyya or Qadiyani cult. Maulana Abdul Haque Vidyarthi was a disciple of its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmed who is considered worse than a Kafir by all Muslims who are fan of Dr Zakir Naik.
The reasons why Muslims hate Ahmadiyyas and refuse to consider them as Muslims are because they hold certain beliefs that no Muslim and follower of Dr Zakir Naik would dare to agree. Some are as follows:
a. Ahmadiyyas believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed was a Prophet or Messenger, and this is ‘shirk’ – unpardonable sin as per Muslims
b. Ahmadiyyas believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed continued to receive new revelations
c. Ahmadiyyas believe Mirza Ghulam Ahmed to be a Messiah
d. Ahmadiyyas believe that Ram, Krishna, Buddha, Ashoka and Guru Nanak were also Prophets
e. Ahmadiyyas believe that Kalki Avatar would also be the final Prophet
and most importantly, the founder of Ahmadiyya cult is alleged to have hurled abuses and even cursed to Hell those who refused to believe in his prophethood!
The concept of Avtar is a ‘shirk’ as per Islam. All Islamic Madarsa teach books of Maulvi Md Ismail which specifically states that anyone believing in Avtars or further Prophets or Avtars as Prophets is doing ‘shirk’.
Dr Zakir Naik knows all this – that is why in FAQ on Hinduism, he refused to accept that Vedas can be revelations.
But he forgot that the material he has used to write other articles are directly lifted from Maulana Abdul Haque’s writings who agrees that Vedas are revelations. Thus proving Prophet in Vedas or Bhavishya Puran is fine with Ahmadiyyas because that is how they justify prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad also.
But for all other Muslims, on whose faith popularity of Dr Zakir Naik rests, this is ‘kufra’.
While these writings do not affect Hindus or even Buddhists, Christians etc much, they definitely backstab a devout Muslim, especially when source of reference is not being quoted.
In summary, Dr Zakir Naik is guilty of :
a. Copying directly, even word to word, from works of Maulana Abdul Haque Vidyarthi, an Ahmadiyya without even quoting his references. This is blatant plagiarism.
b. Using his own name instead to falsely proclaim that he is expert on comparative religion
c. Cheating with other Muslims who consider Ahmadiyya and their beliefs to be worse than those of Kafirs
d. Backstabbing his blind followers who quote his works without realizing that Dr Zakir Naik has made them follow ideology of Qadianis/ Ahmadiyyas.
e. Trying to prove Vedas and Puran contain revelations of Muhammad but also refusing to clear admit Vedas as revelations. Thus he has deliberately not made clear whether in reality Dr Zakir Naik is a Qadiyani or not.
Only Dr Zakir Naik knows what is the real truth and what is his true mission. But his backstabbing has left his blind followers nowhere. Either they will have to admit to Ahmadiyya beliefs, which is the complete foundation of his writings and ‘research’ or regret their faith in Dr Zakir Naik being a Muslim.It seems obvious that Dr Zakir Naik is actually a Qadiyani/Ahmadiyya in disguise trying to fool common Muslims. But why does he need to put this disguise? Is it because Ahmadiyyas are persecuted in all Muslim countries? Or is it that he is a spy with some other hidden agenda. Or perhaps, the way he claims to have discovered new researches in Quran that even Allah, Muhammad, Ali et al could not discover, he is laying foundation of his own Prophethood!
And as per Islamic Criminal Law, that Dr Zakir Naik is such a great fan of, he himself can decide what should be the most appropriate punishment for him. Sharia says that a thief’s hands should be chopped off. Hadiths say that one who deserts his faith or community should be killed. This is time to test how sincere are Dr Zakir Naik and Muslims who have followed him so far, to the teachings of their own divine texts.
I am attaching the scan of the book with this post so that everyone can see Dr Zakir Naik’s fraud with his own people themselves. You can download original here.
You can view (not-so) original article(s) of Dr Zakir Naik at IRF website: http://www.irf.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=145&Itemid=128 to compare with the original.
To know more about Qadiyanis, please visit:
or any Qadiyani site for that matter.
Here I provide comparison of work of Dr Zakir Naik and Maulana Vidyarthi, as explained by a Qadiyani Zahid Aziz.
1. Zakir Naik’s article gives various prophecies under four headings. Under the first heading (I) are three prophecies from the book Bhavishya Purana. The first of these is given as follows:
“A malecha (belonging to a foreign country and speaking a foreign language) spiritual teacher will appear with his companions. His name will be Mohammad. Raja (Bhoj), after giving this Maha Dev Arab (of angelic disposition) a bath in the Panchgavya and the Ganga water (i.e. purifying him of all sins), offered him the present of his sincere devotion and showing him all reverence said, I make obeisance to thee. O Ye! The pride of mankind, the dweller in Arabia, Ye have collected a great force to kill the Devil and you yourself have been protected from the malecha opponents.”
This is also the first prophecy in Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi’s book. It is identical with the quotation in Zakir Naik’s article. Except that in the Maulana’s book the word malecha is spelt as malechha, and his quotation has the following extra words at the end: “O Ye! The image of the Most Pious God, the biggest Lord, I am a slave to thee, take me as one lying on thy feet.
2. After quoting the prophecy, Zakir Naik’s article draws out six points from it. The Maulana, after quoting the prophecy, lists ten points. We find that Zakir Naik’s first three points are the same as the Maulana’s first three points, and his points (4), (5) and (6) are the same as numbers (10), (7) and (6) respectively of the Maulana. The wording is also very similar.
For example, point (3) in both begins with the words: Special mention is made of the companions of the Prophet”.
3. Following these six points, there are two further comments in Zakir Naik’s article. The first is in answer to the objection that Raja Bhoj lived in the 11th century C.E. The objection and its answer as given in this article are exactly as in the Maulana’s book, namely, that there was not just one Raja Bhoj. The article says:
The Egyptian Monarchs were called as Pharaoh and the Roman Kings were known as Caesar, similarly the Indian Rajas were given the title of Bhoj.”
while the Maulana’s book has:
Just as the Egyptian monarchs were known as Pharaohs and the Roman kings were called Kaisers, similarly, the Indian rajas were given the epithet of Bhoj
4. The second comment relates to the part of the prophecy about giving the promised one a bath in the Ganges, and the article says:
The Prophet did not physically take a bath in the Panchgavya and the water of Ganges. Since the water of Ganges is considered holy, taking bath in the Ganges is an idiom, which means washing away sins or immunity from all sorts of sins. Here the prophecy implies that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was sinless, i.e. Maasoom
The same comment is found in the Maulana’s book in the following words:
“Another point which requires elucidation is the Prophet’s taking bath in ‘Panchgavya’ and the water of the Ganges. This did not, of course, actually happen as it was only a vision; so we give it the interpretation that the Prophet will be purged of and made immune from all sorts of sins.”
5. The second prophecy from the book Bhavishya Purana in Zakir Naik’s article is also the second prophecy in the Maulana’s chapter. It begins with the words:
The Malecha have spoiled the well-known land of the Arabs. Arya Dharma is not to be found in the country.
The wording of the entire prophecy (of which about one-tenth is given above) is identical in the article and the book.
6. Following the prophecy, Zakir Naik’s article makes ten points about it, while the Maulana’s book makes twelve points. Naik’s first two points are the same as the Maulana’s first two points. His 3rd to his 10th point are the same as the Maulana’s points (5) to (12), in the same order.
7. The third and final prophecy from the book Bhavishya Purana in Zakir Naik’s article begins as follows:
Corruption and persecution are found in seven sacred cities of Kashi, etc
In the Maulana’s book also, this is the next prophecy, and is given in almost the same words.
8. We now reach the second heading (II) in Zakir Naik’s article. Under this are given three prophecies from the Atharva Veda. In the Maulana’s book also, these are the prophecies that occur next.
Each and every point noted in the article about these prophecies is to be found in the Maulana’s book, in the same order. Below I list the chief aspects of these prophecies as mentioned in Zakir Naik’s article and place in parenthesis the page number in Muhammad in World Scriptures where the same is mentioned:
Kuntap, which is the name of some chapters of the Atharva Veda, stands for Bakkah, a name of Makkah.
The word Narashansah means ‘the praised one’ and refers to the Holy Prophet.
The Holy Prophet is prophesied as the camel-riding rishi.
He is called Mamah Rishi and given certain signs such as a hundred gold coins, ten chaplets, etc.
He is called Rebh, which means the same as the name ‘Ahmad’.
The battle of the Allies of the Holy Prophet’s time is described and the word karo refers to the Holy Prophet.
The conquest of Makka is prophesied and the Holy Prophet is termed as an abandhu, meaning a helpless man.
9. Coming now to the third heading (III) in Zakir Naik’s article, under it one prophecy is briefly mentioned, to the effect that the Sanskrit word sushrava in the Rig Veda applies to the Holy Prophet. The same is in the Maulana’s book.
10. The fourth and final heading in Zakir Naik’s article gives one prophecy, which is from the Sama Veda, and it is translated as follows:
Ahmed acquired from his Lord the knowledge of eternal law. I received light from him just as from the sun.
This prophecy is found in similar words in the Maulana’s book.
11. Zakir Naik’s article then makes three points about this prophecy. The first of these is that the word ‘Ahmad’ here has been read by previous translators not as a name but as Ahm at hi and therefore they translated the mantra as alone have acquired the real wisdom of my father”. These three points under this prophecy are found in the Maulana’s discussion.
12. At this point Zakir Naik’s article comes to an end — and so does the chapter ‘The Prophet in the Hindu Scriptures’ in Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi’s book.
It can be seen that the article by Zakir Naik is nothing at all more than a greatly compressed version of certain parts of the Maulana’s treatment of the subject, following exactly the same order as in the Maulana’s book.
No doubt a later author can make use of the work of an earlier one, but if he benefits substantially from it then integrity requires that he must acknowledge the source.
In this case, the later author has merely repeated the results of the earlier work without any contribution at all by himself, and with no mention of the earlier work.
Do Hindu scriptures contain any Divine revelations?
The research by the Maulana was based on the teaching of Islam that prophets from God had appeared among all nations before the Prophet Muhammad. Muslim scholars had generally limited this to the Israelite prophets and a few others.
Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad revived and laid stress on this unique teaching and concluded from it that the great sacred persons of the Hindu religion must have been true prophets and its scriptures must have been Divine revelations originally. It was on the basis of this belief that the Maulana found prophecies about the Holy Prophet Muhammad in Hindu scriptures. This is why, in explaining the second prophecy given above, the Maulana writes:
The coming prophet will attest the truth of the Aryan faith.
However, Dr Zakir Naik has stated, in a different place, that the Vedas may not be revealed scriptures. Answering the question, whether we can consider the Vedas and the other Hindu Scriptures to be the revelations of God?, he replies:
There is no text in the Quran or Sahih Hadith mentioning the name of the revelation that was sent to India. Since the names of the Vedas or other Hindu scriptures are no where to be found in Quran and Sahih Hadith, one cannot say for sure that they were the revelations of God. They may be the revelation of God or may not be the revelation of God.
If nothing at all in them was revealed by God, then how did prophecies about the advent of the Holy Prophet come to be in these books? If they may not be revelations at all, then it is also possible that the quotations from them given by Dr Zakir Naik may not be prophecies about the Holy Prophet Muhammad revealed by God.
Interestingly, in his article Dr Naik has actually copied the Maulana’s statement above: The coming prophet will attest the truth of the Aryan faith, which means that the Holy Prophet confirmed that those scriptures were originally revealed by God. Perhaps Dr Naik did not realise that this contradicts his own belief expressed elsewhere.
This article is also available in Hindi at http://agniveer.com/2971/naikexposed-hi/
This article is also available in Hindi at http://agniveer.com/2971/naikexposed-hi/