UPI - agniveerupi@sbi, agniveer.eazypay@icici
PayPal - [email protected]

Agniveer® is serving Dharma since 2008. This initiative is NO WAY associated with the defence forces scheme launched by Indian Govt in 2022

UPI
agniveerupi@sbi,
agniveer.eazypay@icici

Agniveer® is serving Dharma since 2008. This initiative is NO WAY associated with the defence forces scheme launched by Indian Govt in 2022

Dr Zakir Naik’s fraud exposed

This entry is part [part not set] of 19 in the series Zakir Naik Exposed

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:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophethood_%28Ahmadiyya%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya_Muslim_Community

or any Qadiyani site for that matter.

Addendum:
————————————————————————————————

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/

Series Navigation

739 COMMENTS

  1. ISLAM KI SACHHAI 4- ISLAM ME YE BAATE NAHI HAI1) chitt ya mind aur uske nirodh, thahrna,shant hona is koi gyan islam me nahi hai 2) atmagyan hona aapne andar ke aatma ka sakshat karna 3) sab ki jad man hai ,ye man hi dukh ka karan hai aur man hi avidhya hai.aisa koi bhi gyan is me nahi hai 4) man se mukt kaise ho iska koi gyan is me nahi hai.5) man ki jagrut,swapna,shshupti aur 4th turiya is awasta ke baare me koi jankari nahi hai. 6) panchikaran arthat das indriya aur gyarvaha man,buddhi,antakaran,aahankar in saboka milke jo ye sharir bana is ka pruthakaran karke, akhir me aahankar ko bhi koi jananewala hai aisa vichar karke jo jo jananane me aata hai us se aapne ko alag karte karte phir karan deh,mahakaran deh,sadharan akash ,mahakash,chidakash is ke bhi paar aapne swarup ko janana ye panchikaran me aata hai islam me aisa panchikaran ka gyan nahi hai

  2. I piss on the Kaaba. I don’t worship it. I WORSHIP ALLAH ALONE. I piss on the Quran. I don’t worship it. I WORSHIP ALLAH ALONE. I piss on the prophet Muhammad (may shit be upon his head). I don’t worship him. I
    WORSHIP ALLAH ALONE. I piss towards Mecca. I don’t worship it. I WORSHIP ALLAH ALONE. Turn away from shirk before its too late. SMASH your idols to remove idolatry. Come back
    to worshiping ALLAH ALONE. Only then the Islamic renaissance will be unleashed. Allah
    will again bless the Islamic world for worshiping ALLAH ALONE. Some Mohammedan idolaters and Quran idolaters say ‘if you worship Allah you will
    RESPECT HIS message book and HIS messenger’. That is exactly what a Hindu will say ‘if
    you worship god you will RESPECT HIS creations, HIS creatures, HIS idols’. Respect is just a
    cover for idolatry. Only disrespect can remove idolatry. Allah knows whats in your heart
    you Mohammedan idolaters. I once asked in a forum, “Is Allah all powerful? CAN he send
    more prophets?” Note: I asked ‘CAN he’ not ‘WILL he’ but the vote was 9 to 0 against Allah. No Mohammedan idolater believes in Allah’s power to send more prophets. Allah is
    just a straw god in whose name Mohammad is worshiped. Mohamed is dead, Allah isn’t
    dead is he?

    • @pagal-shankar,
      edon k ishwar ko tune dekha hai kiya? agar nahi dekha aur manta hai to phir tu bhi to andvishwasi hua na??

      kiya tune 4 rishiyon ko dekha hai jinko ved diye gaye the? agar nahi aur tu manta hai to tu andhvishwasi hua na?

      yeh shankar kon hai jiski tu jaijaikar kar raha hai? kiya tune dhekha hai shankar ko? agar han to kahan dekha hai? moorti mein?
      tu samajh bhi pa raha hai ki mein kiya pooch raha hun?

      kiya tune 4 risiyon ko dekha hai? kiya har cheez dekh kar manta hai? hum to sachche logon par bharosa kartein hain. jab eik table khud nahi ban sakti to kiya yeh duniya ban jayegi?

      jis ne yeh sara sansar banaya aur iska nizam chala raha hai wohi Allah hai aur woh AHAD hai yeh humein Allah k rasoolon ne bataya hai aur Allah k rasool sachche hotein hain to un par bharosa kiya jata hai.

      aqal bhi yehi kehti hai ki do Allah nahi ho sakte… to phir kiyun na mane?

      maire sawal ko kiyun nazarandaz kar rahe ho 4 rishiyon wale? aur raj.hyd aur tum dcide karlo ki aryasamajiyon ka kiya concept hai ishwar k bareinmein????

      “hi” ya “bhi” hahahha

  3. @pagal-shankar, tu isliye answer nahi de raha kiyunki tu de hi nahi sakta.

    is ka answer dene mein dar gayakiya? pol khulne ka darr hai kiya ki tu bhi bina dekhai cheezon ko manta hai??? teri asani k liye phir likh deta hun …hahahaha

    //vedon k ishwar ko tune dekha hai kiya? agar nahi dekha aur manta hai to phir tu bhi to andvishwasi hua na??

    kiya tune 4 rishiyon ko dekha hai jinko ved diye gaye the? agar nahi aur tu manta hai to tu andhvishwasi hua na?

    yeh shankar kon hai jiski tu jaijaikar kar raha hai? kiya tune dhekha hai shankar ko? agar han to kahan dekha hai? moorti mein?
    tu samajh bhi pa raha hai ki mein kiya pooch raha hun?//

    “hi” aur “bhi” ka faisla ho gaya kiya?

    //tu isliye answer nahi de raha kiyunki tu de nahi sakta//

    waise tujhe maine yeh to samjha diya ki capital nahi likhna chahiyye.

    eik vedanti jo na ved parh sakta hai aur na uske satya hone par hi vishwas karta hai, agar karta to use phailata uski shiksha batata?? negative vedanti.. kamse kam yeh hi bata deta ki “ved kitne hain” ???? 4????

  4. @rsdfgg,paglonke seertaj allah ne duniya banayi ye uske smruti se ki bina smruti se??? kyo ki bina memory ke aadmi kuch samaj nahi pata,bina memory ke aadmi kuch bhi bana nahi sakta ye siddha hota hai to allah ki smrti kya hai??? Allah to akela hai phir use smriti bhi hai agar manana hai to phir kaan,naak,haat,pair bhi mano???ha.ha.ha…bina smruti ke allah ne duniya kaise banai??? pahale ki duniya se to phir wo kaha hai???kya us me bhi muhammad hai?? Kya bhagwan bhi hai??hindu bhi hai???ha.ha.ha…allah ne duniya banai to ek hi baar kyo nahi banai,6 din ka samay kyo lagaya ??? aadmi ko samne rakh kar duniya banai ki khud ko samne rakh kar duniya banai??? Agni,vayu,prithvi,jal,akash ye allah ke haath me hai to is se bana aadmi kyo nahi??? Jab ji chahe bacche janmata hai aur ji chahe marta hai to allah uncontrol kyo ho gaya?? ye allah simit hai ya asimit hai?? Simit hai to kitna aur asimit hai to kitna??ha.ha..ha..

  5. @rsdfgg,pagalonme awwal,tu pahale apne chitt ko saf kar,shudh kar sab vishwas se mukt ho ja swikar kar ki allah ek mithak hai,false concept hai,muhammad ki dimagi soch hai.fir tuze mai ved ka gyan dunga….ha.ha.ha..bina allah ka vichar liye ved ka gyan nahi mil sakta tu quran chod .ved ka eshwar tabhi samaj me aata hai, jab man sahit sari indriya samapt hoti hai.sirf shudh aatma hi ved ke eshwar ko dekh sakti hai. “‘yato vache nirvtrantre mansa sah aanandam brameti vidvan na bhibheti kadachan”‘ tu ye dushit man se ved ke eshwar ko nahi jaan sakta.allah khud dushit raha hoga isliye to us ne gande man ko saaf karne ki baat hi nahi ki??ha.ha.ha….sirf sharir dhone se koi shudh hota to sabun bananewale sabse bade kahlate???ha.ha.ha….

    • @pagal-shankar, tu isliye answer nahi de raha kiyunki tu de hi nahi sakta.

      is ka answer dene mein dar gayakiya? pol khulne ka darr hai kiya ki tu bhi bina dekhai cheezon ko manta hai??? teri asani k liye phir likh deta hun …hahahaha

      //vedon k ishwar ko tune dekha hai kiya? agar nahi dekha aur manta hai to phir tu bhi to andvishwasi hua na??

      kiya tune 4 rishiyon ko dekha hai jinko ved diye gaye the? agar nahi aur tu manta hai to tu andhvishwasi hua na?

      yeh shankar kon hai jiski tu jaijaikar kar raha hai? kiya tune dhekha hai shankar ko? agar han to kahan dekha hai? moorti mein?
      tu samajh bhi pa raha hai ki mein kiya pooch raha hun?//

      “hi” aur “bhi” ka faisla ho gaya kiya?

      //tu isliye answer nahi de raha kiyunki tu de nahi sakta//

      waise tujhe maine yeh to samjha diya ki capital nahi likhna chahiyye.

      eik vedanti jo na ved parh sakta hai aur na uske satya hone par hi vishwas karta hai, agar karta to use phailata uski shiksha batata?? negative vedanti.

  6. jab aadmi sapna dekhta hai,tab wo aapne bhitar pura jagat nirmit karta hai.jaisa jagat bahar hota hai vaise hi bhitar hota hai.bahar,chand,suraj,aakash,zamin,diwar achal hai to us ke sapne me bhi wo achal hote hai.is ka arth hua wo jo duniya banata hai wo apni man ki shakti se banata hai.koi bhi mehanat,samugri,sadhan use nahi karta.kyo wo allah ka sathidar nahi hai kya???thodi der ke liye to wo duniya banta hai,duniya me rahta hai,aur duniya ko distroy bhi karta hai,wo creator bhi hai distroyer bhi hai,is se bhi wo sathidar nahi hoga?????hahaha…..

    • ASSALAM ALIKUM

      ALLAH PAK ney ye dunia banaya aur wo ALLAH PAk ki marzi hai k jab chaye isay destroy karey aur jab chaye banaye usey koi rokhney wala nhi hai…..

      • param pujya bahan fatima ji , jarayah bhi sath me batlaiye aur sochiye bhi allah me yah duniya kyo banayi agar uski marji hai to marji ka bhi koi karan bhi hona chahiye kya kurani allah koi atankvadi ,pagal, moodi, tana shah adi hai jo uski marji chalegi , koi bat tark yukt bhi to honi chahiye ? usko koi rokne vala hai ki ya nahi mukhy bat yah nahi balki uske niyam kya hai? uske siddhant kya hai? vivad isi bat ka hai ! kurani allah ka star[Qvality] kaisa hai /

      • mahamahim bahan Fatima ji ,agar ap urdu- hindi me likhe to jyada behatar rahega ! apke uttar ke intjzar me ?

      • murkhta se purn ans ..allah ne duniya kab banai yeh batao pehle kya adam, ko kun fiyakun kahne se aadam nahi ban sakta tha …aur kis chiz se duniya banai ..kya material use kiya

  7. @fatima,kyo bechare allah ko pareshani me dal rahi ho.?hahaha allah ko Bina smruti ke iska khayal kaise aaya? duniya uski smruti me thi to pahale ki duniya kaha hai?aur aise hi duniya banata aur mitata to wo kya pagal hai?mitana hai to banaya kyo? duniya banate waqt powerful tha sirf ho ja kaha aur ho gayi,par aadmi ke samne itna bebas kyo hai??Quran ko kahta satya ho ja to ho jati,bichare muhamad ko sataya kyo?kyo darbdar ye satya kitab hai kahalwaya?kyo namaj,azan,hajj karne ki taklif di?

  8. @fatima,Ye MARZI ka kya arth hai??? Kaydekanun ki bina kaydekanun? Dekho Uski marzi hui to hindu ko zannat dega aur muslims ko jahannam???uski marzi hui to isai aur yahudi ko zannat aur muslim ko jahannam??uski marzi hui to muhammad par naraj jejus par khush??uski marzi hui to quran mananewale ko saja dega aur na mananewale ko chod dega??? Ye marzi kya hai?? Tum kahogi na na na na?????ye hoga nahi??to ye kayadekanun hua ki nahi?? Jo quran,allah,muhammad, ko manega sirf usko hi zannat ye yaha to kayada kanun,niyam aa gaya.phir marzi ka kya ho gaya??yahudi aur isai ko jahannum bhejega uski marzi se jannat thode hi bhejega?ye marzi ka jhamela kya hai?

  9. SATANIC VERSES KI SACCHAI – aaj tak satanic verses ki sacchai samne nahi aayi thi,pahli baar raj khul raha hai.sabhi budhimani logonko ye baat samaj me nahi aayi ki,jo aayate allah ke 3 beti,bete ka zikr karti hai,us me do ayte pahale thi aur bad me,nikali gayi.uska khulasa ki, wo aayte shaitan ne muhammad ki zuban me utarkar kahi.aisa sabhi log mante hai,ab raj ki baat ye hai,ye kaisa ho sakta hai? Shaitan sirf do ayto ke liye kaam kare?baki ki quran ki aayte kyo nahi dikhi?agar hum thik se dekhe to ye kaam shaitan ka nahi lagta.phir sawal hai,ki ye aayte kisne likhi?yahi raaj ab khulnewala ha,.JAB MUHAMMAD KO PATA THA ARAB JO AL-LAT UZZA AUR MANAT KI PUZA KARTE HAI,TO AGAR MAIN UNKE IN TEEN DEVTA KO BHI MANU TO YE MUZPAR YAKIN ,VISHVAS KARENGE.IS LIYE USNE KHUD YE AAYAT BANAI.PAR JAB USKA KAAM HO GAYA TO USNE HI USKO SHAITAN KA KAAM KARAR DIYA.TAKI KISIKO SHAQ NA HO.AAJ TAK LOG US KO SHAITAN KI AAYTE KAHTE HAI.PAR QURAN KHUD MUHAMMAD AAPNE MAN SE BOLTA THA,KOI ALLAH NAHI KOI GIBRAIL NAHI THA.ISKA PRAMAN KHUD QURAN HAI.DEKHE SURA FURKAN 4-5.

    • U r trying to refer out of context and there is nothing like this written in Surah Furqan Ayat 4-5 ……….. Quran are the words of ALLAH thats why till now it is the same as revealed 1400 yrs back and their is no interference in Holy Quran like other books….

      • I asked you a simple question, why is there so much hatred in your words? if someone wants to clarify something about your religion, is this how you talk to them? Do i seem like an illiterate to you??!

        I want to know:
        1. why mohammed had so 12 wives including a 6 year old child aisha for his sexual desires. was mohammed a nympomaniac? I have read he raped his prisoners as well…was he that insatiable?!

        2. Why is thuggery, rape, loot, killing amongst other heinous crimes permitted in islam? isn’t it meant to be the religion of peace?

        3. if you are saying god created everything, he must be the father of all….why is he so hate filled towards his own children? According to your book, we are all born muslims…so why does he hate us so much?

        e.g. I am a keen football fan, if my one of my sons wanted to be a cricketer, is it right for me to hate him, treat him brutally or to banish him and wish him hell, even if he was a good child, helped others and excelled in humanity??

        I look forward to your answers

      • @Fatima the root word of Islam is NOT salam. See explanation below. Sad you don’t even know that.

        That you continue to use the derogatory word Kaffir reveals a lot about your cheap character and what Islam teaches you. You are no better than the white racist who uses the n-word for blacks. But you are an excellent example of Muslim character when you continue to use the derogatory word Kaffir. The neutral word if you are a truly a descent human being, which at this point I doubt since you just love using the derogatory word Kaafir, is non-Muslim.

        And it makes no sense when you say “Quran doesn’t describe all other religions because at that time there were no jews or christans but only kaafirs who associated partners with ALLAH.” First of all if there were no Jews or Christians but only “Kaffirs” as you put it then the Koran should be describing the religions that existed (the “Kaafir” religions) and not the ones that did not exist yet which you say is Judaism and Christianity. You are totally illogical. Even about that you are wrong. Mohammed was born at a time after Judaism and Christianity, so they BOTH did exist and many faiths of the world already existed as well. If anything the Koran should have described not only Judaism and Christianity which contrary to what you said did exist by then, but all the other religions of the world also in existence at that time. It is a great big hole in the Koran that it does not describe all the religions as it pretends to be the book for the whole world.

        “Etymology
        Main Article: The Meaning of Islam

        Lissan al-Arab, one of the most authoritative lexicons of the Arabic language, mentions that the word ‘Islam’ is derived from the root verb istaslama (استسلاما); which means ‘to submit’ or ‘give in’ or ‘surrender’, while the term salam (سلام) means peace, a truce, or a non-warring state.

        The word Islam derives from the Arabic triconsonantal root sīn-lām-mīm (SLM [ س ل م ]). Many different words are created from this root word by inserting different vowels between the three root consonants. Many English speakers wrongly assume that if two Arabic words share the same root word then their meanings are related when in reality the fact that some words share the same root word does not imply a relationship between the meanings of the words. For instance, all of these words are derived from the root S-L-M:
        Word Arabic Meaning
        Islam اسلام Submission
        Salam سلام Well-being/Peace
        (Derivation of) Salama سلما The stinging of a snake or the tanning of the leather
        Saleema سليما To be saved or to escape from danger (when refering to a female)
        Saleem سليم To be saved or to escape from danger (when refering to a male)
        Aslam اسلم To submit
        Istaslama استسلاما To surrender
        Musal مسل Undisputed
        Tasleem تسليم To receive a salutation or becoming submitted
        Many people have wrongly attempted to equate the word Islam with peace by showing that Islam, meaning ‘submission’, shares a root word with Salaam, meaning ‘peace’. But if such relationships between the meanings of Arabic words can be created then that would imply that there is a relationship between one of the derivations of the infinitive Salama, meaning the stinging of the snake or tanning the leather, and Salam, meaning peace; a relationship which obviously does not exist. ” http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam

  10. Muslims are the biggest image worshippers. Muslims are frauds and hypocrites when they do not admit this truth. When they say the name “Mohammad”, automatically the image of a man comes to the mind. The image of a 7th century Arab comes to mind. When you say “mountain”, automatically the image of a mountain comes to mind. When you say the word “river” or think of it the picture of a river comes to mind.

    This is the law of the mind and thinking process. You cannot force the mental image to go away. Muslims say “no image worship”. OK. But how will the Muslims be able to destroy mental images? This proves that the insane, crazy muslims are against all mental laws and against all original thinking.

    • For your kind information if u r a literate person then u must know that images r not worshiped……. They r not kept in front of us like hindus and we don’t bow in front of anything except Allah and we do not worship Muhammad…….

      • @Fatima: Then why is it important to say “i bear witness that Allah is the only god and MUHAMMD IS HIS MESSENGER” can one become Muslim by Saying only “I bear witness that there is no god but Allah ” and leave the second part out…? Even in Azaan you people repeat the same cry about Muhammad , though it said to be call for prayer (which made sense only in the desert times when there were no Alarm clocks.),why does one need to mention Muhammd in a call for prayer. to Allah.

      • Because we love our Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and whoever doesn’t believe oh him is not a Muslim….. By saying the kalma we enter in Islam and if we do not practice it we r not muslims

      • You said you bow only to allah and no one else….so how come Satan was punished for this? he refused to bow to adam, who allah created with his own hands from mud/clay…why was satan thrown out of heaven and deprived of his 72 virgins and rivers of wine?

      • Satan was thrown out because he went against the commands of Allah……. Angels were made to do whatever Allah says but he refused to follow the commandments of Allah that’s why he was thrown out…..

  11. Dear Brother AGNIVEER. YOU are REALLY AGNIVEER!!!!!

    FIRE HERO!!!!! May the holy Rishis Bless you and Protect you.

    As a fellow Sanathan Dharmi I am thrilled and overwhelmed by the Grand Magnificent work you are doing. I humbly join my little strength with your GREAT STRENGTH in contributing towards protecting our GREAT SANATHAN DHARMA!

    The ANUGRAHA and RAKSHA fall on you for SUCCESS from the Great ever-living ancient Rishis and from the ever-living ancient Divine Warriors as well!

  12. Agniveer (and others), please read about Political Islam. It has everything to do with Islams plans for non-Muslims such as Hindus http://www.politicalislam.com/principles/pages/five-principles/

    This site and the articles and books are vital for all non-Muslims to understand.

    “Mission

    Islam is a cultural, religious and political system. Only the political system is of interest to kafirs (non-Muslims) since it determines how we are defined and treated. The Islamic political system is contained in the Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira.

    Our mission is to educate the world about political Islam, its founder Mohammed, his political doctrine and his god, Allah.”

    • We know your mission very well Fatima to destroy all civilizations not Muslim. You don’t get it. No one cares if you call god Allah, and pray five times a day. We have no interest in abolishing that. If that was all Islam was about there would be no issue with us. But it is your violent mission to destroy all non-Muslim civilizations and subjugate non-Muslim people to your Islamic rule that is the problem. That is what we will fight, fight for OUR survival against your global supremacist goal.

  13. A great thanks to DR.INEGBEDION the man that help me when i was very sick, i and my husband where HIV positive and my little daughter had it too, I have try all my possible best to get cured but I couldn’t come up with anything, am from Congo married and Lives in USA I have gone to different hospital but no cure, when i discovered i was losing my mind because of thinking i will die soon, I informed my family back home in my country, they feet bad, but told me about a cure in Africa, they gave me

  14. Dear all, I believe that our last prophet was Mohammed(S.A.W) and most of the muslims do. When coming to Ahmadiyya, they are going against Quran and Hadith which proves that Muhammad(SAW) is the last prophet.

    When Zakir Naik doesn’t follow Ahmaddiya why he will be following their writing which again will be against his own sect. Agniveer, you big story has nothing useful than criticizing someone. Better you write something which will be helpful to others.

    When you believe that he has great learning and remembrance, then its a god gifted. Show me one in the world who can remember end number of scriptures and ready for the debate at any point in time.

    • question is not only who is saying. we have to analyze the content whether it match with quran or prohet story or does it making any sense of human understanding. for example if KASAB the terrorist has view or say STRICT LAW to IMPLEMENT for the RAPIST. Will u not favour the strict law jsut becoz kasab has same view. so lets talk sense.
      Shri Shri Ravi Shanker agree that prophet was mention in bavishaya purana. do u acceot that?
      we hav to analyze what purana say , does it gel with prophet and to what extent.
      and islam dont need the confirmation from other book to show its truth.
      whether it match or doesnt . it doesnt affect the glory of islam.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay Connected

0FansLike
0FollowersFollow
91,924FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
Give Aahuti in Yajnaspot_img

Related Articles

Categories