This post contains ripping apart of hollow arguments of fraud preachers of Islam like Zakir Naikin favor of Hijab -the Islamic veil.
The video is titled Hindu woman questions Zakir Naik about Hijaab (Islamic veil) which can be watched here
The Hindu lady in the above video asks Dr. Naik that isn’t a Hindu woman who wears a salwar kameez modest? Why degrade women by forcing hijaab(veil)? She also mentions that since Dr. Naik is so inspired by reformist Raja Ram Mohan Roy, why doesn’t he accept his stand against the purdah (hijab, veil) system?
Dr. Naik, the literalist follower of Islamic scriptures that he is, presents the following arguments to defend the retrograde 7th century Arabic practice.
(*our responses follow his arguments)
1. Dr. Naik argues that just because he agrees with many of Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s reformist ideas, it does not mean that he must agree with ALL the reformist ideas of Raja Ram Mohan Roy
2. To reinforce his argument, Dr. Naik gives the example of Mr. L. K. Advani’s statement that “rapists deserve death punishment”. He supports Mr. Advani’s statement because it’s in line with Islam. But this does not mean he will agree with every statement of Mr. Advani.
We concur with Dr. Naik that it’s impossible to agree with or follow all the views of any person, no matter how great that person be. This much of Dr. Naik’s argument is rational indeed and we would add that Dr. Naik should apply the same logic on Prophet Muhammad too. Many Muslims blindly follow each and every tradition of the prophet (Sunnah) no matter how inordinate or irrational they be in current context. [for instance wearing mera naam joker trousers that don’t reach your ankles!. Others refuse to use soap after lavatory because soaps were not manufactured during Prophet’s era!]
But the rest of this argument of Dr. Naik is a departure from rationality and a surrender to blind belief. Nowhere does Dr. Naik enlighten us about Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s arguments against purdah and his rebuttal of those arguments. Instead he gives us a glimpse of the rigid yardstick that he uses to accept or reject an argument. This is evident from the example he presents. He agrees with Mr. Advani that “rapists should be put to death” NOT because of any rational merit (that it may act as a deterrent) BUT only because that statement is in line with Islamic Law (Sharia) 🙁 Dr. Naik in a way admits that his brand of
Islam is not open to reforms. It’s well known that a religion that is not open to noble ideas from within and without is bound to transform into a fanatic irrational cult dominated by dumb-heads.)
Anyways, this part of the lady’s question and Dr. Naik’s response has little bearing on the subject topic of Hijaab. It only highlights the rigidity of Dr. Naik’s doctrine. So lets move forward.
3. He then informs us that modesty levels differ according to different regions/cultures. What is modest here may be considered immodest elsewhere. He also takes a jibe on Indian Saree and eulogizes the great Islamic culture of not casting a second glance on women as this would be considered “feasting on her beauty”
When Dr. Naik knows that modesty is better defined by the culture and region we live in, how foolish it is for his brand of Islam to force a single rigid dress code on women (and men) across the world? Dr. Naik has rather naively exposed his brand of Islam that does not respect cultural differences but wants all cultures to succumb to a 7th century Arabic culture, no matter what the negative implications of such a custom be on the people! Very Sad indeed.
While taking a Jibe at Indian Saree, Dr. Naik forgot that modesty of any other culture may seem taboo and preposterous in another culture. Does he know that an Arab village woman may lift her skirt to cover her face if spotted without a veil (as for her revealing her face is the most immodest act !). She may end up revealing what most of the world may consider immodest exposure !
Dr. Naik also doesn’t know or doesn’t want the audience to know that the Islamic dress code was not a reformist step for women at large. One must know that slave women were NOT ALLOWED to wear the veil. So the devout Muslims were always free to “feast on the beauty”(yuck!) of slave women all the time! Islamic veil is not to maintain modesty of women but to make distinction b/w free Muslimah and a slave girl! [By the way, doesn’t allowing Muslims to keep women as slaves expose how much Islam is concerned about modesty of women?]. What springs up from the literal accounts of Islam is that women in
Islam are no more than sex objects, some of whom (called wives) are protected exclusively for husbands and rest (called slave women) need not be protected as their modesty carries no weight and they are public property in Dr. Naik’s terminology.Here’s how it’s been immodestly and explicitly mentioned in the Tafsirs and Sahih Hadits: (These are not taken from anti-Islamic sites by the way. They are lifted straight from Islamic Publication Houses versions that are online on almost every other Islamic site.)
Quran [33:59], Tafsir Ibn Kathir-
Here Allah tells His Messenger to command the believing women — especially his wives and daughters, because of their position of honor — to draw their Jilbabs over their bodies, so that they will be distinct in their appearance from the women of the Jahiliyyah and from slave women…..if they do that, it will be known that they are free, and that they are not servants or whores.
Sahih Bukhari Vol 5 Hadith 523:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet stayed with Safiya bint Huyai for three days on the way of Khaibar where he consummated his marriage with her. Safiya was amongst those who were ordered to use a veil.
Sahih Bukhari Vol 5 Hadith 524:
Narrated Anas: ….The Muslims said amongst themselves, “Will she (i.e. Safiya) be one of the mothers of the believers, (i.e. one of the wives of the Prophet ) or just (a lady captive) of what his right−hand possesses” Some of them said, “If the Prophet makes her observe the veil, then she will be one of the mothers of the believers (i.e. one of the Prophet’s wives), and if he does not make her observe the veil, then she will be his lady slave.” So when he departed, he made a place for her behind him (on his and made her observe the veil.
The brand of Islam that Dr. Naik follows glorifies the traditions of 7th century Arabic Muslims, which is an insult to modesty anywhere in the world today. Keeping women as slave is not only immodest but cruel and inhuman. Isn’t it painfully ridiculous that Muslim men cannot stare Muslim women but stare and rape slave women? Can this at all help in keeping the Muslim men modest in their thought, speech, dress and action?
Here are few Sahih Hadith which expose how much Islam cares for modesty of women.
Sahih Muslim: Book 008, Number 3371:
Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-’azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception).
But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.
Sahih Muslim: Book 008, Number 3373:
Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported: We took women captives, and we wanted to do ‘azl (coitus interruptus) with them. We then asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) about it, and he said to us:
Verily you do it, verily you do it, verily you do it, but the soul which has to be born until the Day of judgment must be born.
Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, “Do you really do that?” repeating the question thrice, “There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.
So this is the “modesty” that early Islam brought to the world. How comfortable would you be with this kind of twisted modesty? “Allowing rape of innocent women”, is this about modesty at all?”
In memory of our brave soldiers & 40 martyrs of Pulwama terror attack, Agniveer is making its eBooks free until the attack is avenged by India. Paperback books have already been made available in minimum possible price. Simply click the below button (Tribute to our soldiers) and download the book directly from Google drive folder. Download as many books as you want, speared then far and wide, and help us break backbone of terrorists, extremists, fanatics and conversion nexus ready to takeover India.
If you want to purchase the book on normal price to support Agniveer, you can choose other options below.
If you wish to support Agniveer, please visit and make your valuable contribution http://agniveer.com/support/
About the book:
For first time, complete refutation of every point a Jihadi thinks to justify his hate against non-believers. The only book of its kind to solve the problem of brainwashing and self-radicalizationMore info →
Disclaimer: By Quran and Hadiths, we do not refer to their original meanings. We refer to interpretations made by fanatics and terrorists to justify their kill and rape. We respect the original Quran, Hadiths and their creators. Our fight is against those who misinterpret them. For example, Mughals, ISIS, Al Qaeda, and every other person who justifies sex-slavery, rape of daughter-in-law and other heinous acts. For full disclaimer, visit site.