Islam and Hinduism Debate

Note: In the whole website in general and this article in particular, we mean by “Muslims” only fanatics like Zakir Naik who believe in killing of apostates and hell for every Non Muslim. This analysis does not apply to the peaceful Muslims who believe that good Non Muslims will also go to heaven and apostates too have right to live and propagate their new faith.  

Quran is the book of signs and not science. This is the famous quote of Zakir Naik, the famous Wahabi/Qadiyani preacher (this confusion still remains because he uses Qadiyani sources to prove divinity of Islam from Hindu scriptures but on the other hand his Peace TV Wahabi ally and speaker Israr Ahmed declares Qadiyanis as Wazib ul Katl/fit to be killed).

But whatever be the case with his sect, his quote draws attentions of both intellectuals as well as fanatics. It makes clear that Islam is not at all for those who want to judge everything around with logic and reasoning before accepting it as truth. On the other hand it is a treasure for those who believe signs (not science)/miracles to be the basis of TRUTH that they can never verify!

Advent of Zakir Naik has pumped Wahabi Muslims in India with unprecedented energy and petrodollars that he gets from his Arab masters. Wahabis have started campaigns of proving Islam logical. Zakir Naik has mentored his disciples so smartly in linking Islam and science (logic and reasoning) that in spite of having least/no formal education, understanding, and representation in science, it is Muslims, today, who talk about science the most! Many of them are masters in proving how the miracles of moon breaking and Kaba at the center of the earth have been accepted by NASA 🙂 Cyberspace is full of discussions of such Islamic scientists trying to convince others about the TRUTH of Islam. Interestingly, now Wahabis have started challenging Hindus for the debates!

Many Muslims every now and then throw challenges of debates at us if we have guts. Many Hindus ask us to debate Zakir Naik and settle the Islam and Hinduism issue forever. Agniveer challenged Zakir and his team for debate many times but he refused each time. Did Agniveer do right in challenging Jihadis for debate? In our opinion, no!

Though we appreciate Agniveer for their attempts to expose the self proclaimed scholar/expert in Islam and comparative religion Zakir Naik face to face in front of public, we do not agree with the idea of debates with any Jihadi in general and Zakir Naik in particular. Thus we differ with Agniveer at this point. And this article covers the reasons why we don’t consider Jihadis like Zakir Naik worth debating. All Muslims who dream of debating Hindus should read it carefully. All Hindus who want to see us debate with Jihadis must read it. Anyone who gives/accepts offer of debate with Muslims should read it because whom to talk logically and whom to ignore/reply in their own tone, is also the part of logic.

1. What is debate? Can Muslims debate?

Debate is a process of exchanging thoughts between two or more ideologies in order to reach closer to the truth in friendly manner. A truth seeker remains always in a state of debate within. Debate is nothing but to challenge an old ideology with new thoughts and if found necessary, the old stand is modified in order to face new challenges/questions that will further lead to rectification of our thoughts. And this process goes on and on. This is the basis of science and philosophy. Prerequisite of debate is nothing but to accept that I will modify my stand if needed. In other words, it is to accept that my current belief may not be perfect and I am ready to refine it.

But is this possible in Islam? No, because Islam is defined as the complete belief in Allah, Muhammad, heaven, hell, angels, judgment day, Quran etc. As soon as you question/disbelief/agree to accept that there may be imperfection in the concept of any of the above, you are no more a Muslim. 🙁

And unfortunately, any Muslim, if labeled as Non Muslim, propagates his new belief, is to be put to death!

This is what Zakir Naik says

So when it is proven that any Muslim (as per the definition of Quran) does not fulfill the prerequisite of debate, how can there be debate with him? Moreover, if someone ensures that he does not believe in killing of apostates, he automatically becomes apostate because of disbelief in Quran and Sunna duo. So in one case Jihadis can’t fulfill the condition for debate and in other case they no longer remain Muslims even before starting the debate.

There is no third case unluckily 🙁

2. Purpose of debate

We have elaborated what we see as debate and what is the purpose behind it for us. We are ready to convert to Islam if we get convinced with it, there is no one to kill us. But what will Zakir Naik or any of his Mujahid do if he loses the debate (we don’t believe in winning/losing concepts while seeking truth but it is the style of Jihadis and thus we used it)?

For sure any Jihadi will not leave Islam because that will lead to threat to his life as per Zakir’s words! Who knows after Zakir Bhai leaves Islam, his own IRF Madarsa students start searching him to kill him and fulfill the desire of their great mentor, expressed in the video above?

So when this is sure that even after losing the debate, no Muslim will leave Islam and on other hand, we, being truth seeker, will accept Islam, if we lose debate to a Muslim, why should we debate with them in first place?

If Muslims win, we convert but if we win, Muslims do not convert, then why the hell we should debate?

Is this not heads I win tails you lose situation for Momins? Muslims have motivation of converting me behind debating, but what is the motivation I have except increasing the number of my enemies that will threaten me for committing blasphemy and curse me to hell?

3. What is the common ground in Hindu-Muslim debate?

For any debate to happen, there are certain common grounds on the basis of which one convinces the other. The most common among those is common sense itself! Logic/reasoning, science are others on which one should rely while having dialogues for truth seeking. When I back my argument with such commonly accepted facts/arguments, my counterpart has to accept it and if I go against these, I have to leave that claim and accept my fault. For example, everyone today agrees that earth is not flat but almost spherical. And now if someone claims that a point (Kaba idol) on the surface of earth is the center of the earth, his claim automatically vaporizes because a sphere has its center inside it, not on its surface as per established Mathematical principles!

Similarly, if one claims that a camel was born out of stone, or stones ran away stealing clothes of Moses and wept on beating, it is simply ridiculous as per logic and thus can never be accepted in debates. When one claims that God created everything out of nothing (no matter/energy) by saying Kun Faykun in Arabic, it goes against the basic principles of science of conservation of mass/energy. Same applies with the stories of heaven, hell, Satan, Allah sitting on 7^th heaven (why not on 2^nd or 3^rd.. ?), Muhammad’s flying donkey, Jesus born without father, and countless such signs/miracles believed in Islam. And when Muslims are asked to prove these, they simply say Allah is above all. But unfortunately they forget that “Allah is above all” was not at all the common ground on which our debate started! It is just your belief that is being cross examined in the very process of debate and thus you can’t use it as argument! So this way, Muslims and a truth seeker find no common ground for debate 🙁

Another problem with Islam is the moral standards it sets for its followers and believes those to be universal i.e. to be accepted by every human. Polygamy, sex slavery that is equivalent to rape (which most of the Momins fail to realize), pedophilia, incest, blind belief in unseen (Gaib), blind belief in every verse of Quran even if you don’t understand an iota of it being Non Arab, waging war against infidels for the only reason that they are idolaters/disbelievers, etc are few examples of low standards of morality in Islam.

Now imagine, while debate, someone asks Muslims why Islam allows rape and polygamy? Why Islam believes in pedophilia? Why Muhammad married a girl of 6? Why Muhammad raped his concubines (Safia and Rehana etc), why captured them in first place? Why he kept slaves? In the reply Muslims attempt to defend such heinous acts that they can never tolerate if done to their own mothers and sisters! They conclude saying that in the wars, it was custom of capturing women and treating them as sex objects and thus Muhammad did not do wrong. But we don’t accept it at all. For us polygamy, sex slavery (rape), abduction are all crimes and we don’t argue with those believing in these. We simply can’t accept someone to be “the best man lived on earth ever” who practiced pedophilia and captured/enslaved/raped women in wars. So here again there is no consensus b/w us and Muslims on what is the moral benchmark to call an act as crime.

One can ask, many Hindus also believe in books like Puranas in which one finds lot of immoral acts. Then why you go after Islam every time? It is because Muslims believe that anyone who does not believe in such prophet and practices, will be thrown in hellfire but that is not the case with Hindus. You can deny/condemn the stories of Puranas and still get the bliss. But can anyone Muslim or Non Muslim deny/condemn such Islamic practices and acts of prophet and still get heaven? NO. Moreover, in Islamic countries, any Non Muslim has no right of preaching his religion. He has no right to call polygamy and sex slavery as ill practices at all. On the other hand, Hindus don’t claim exclusivity of truth in their texts alone. They never curse non believers to eternal hell unlike Islam/Muslims. They never stopped Muslims to practice and preach their religion in India.

So I have on one side, the tolerant Hindus who allow even the fanatics like Zakir Naik to spew their venom on Hinduism and to openly threaten the apostates, and on other side I have Muslims who are all set to prohibit the preaching of Hinduism in India the day they succeed in imposing Shariyat (Islamic Law) here.

So whom should I target? Now can any Muslim suggest me why should I put Islam and Hinduism on the same level while analyzing and criticizing ill practices of both?

4. Burden of Proof is on Muslims

As discussed above, Muslims believe that non believers will be in hell. They invite Hindus to Islam saying that Quran is perfect and each of its word is to be believed as final truth in order to remain safe from hell. Now this claim of Muslims/Islam brings a responsibility on them and that is to PROVE EACH WORD OF QURAN AS FINAL TRUTH. Since they want me to surrender to each word of Quran or else Allah will put me in hell and they will restrict my freedom as soon as Shariyat works in India, I want them to prove each word of Quran as final truth and this is my right. Without this, if I believe Quran to be ultimate, I will cheat my soul and God that I deviated from the path of truth seeking and believed something due to fear or superstition. So now can Muslims prove each word of Quran as final truth? If no, they have no right to curse me to hell or restrict me as per stupid unverifiable Shariyat.

Since no Muslim can ever understand complete Quran (there are many verses in Quran that no one can understand, for example 2:1, 13:1, 29:1 etc) forget about proving it in front of me, Muslims should leave their claim of Quran to be ultimate truth for entire humanity and those who don’t believe it are to be fought [as per Quran 9:29] in order to be fit to debate with reason and logic. But as soon as they do that, they deny [9:29] and thus become apostate/fit to be killed as per Zakir Naik 🙁 So the only way out for truth seeker Muslims is to openly denounce the ill practices of Islam which are the biggest hinderances in truth seeking.

5. Hypocrisy of Jihadi debaters

Jihadis often vomit few lines while debating Hindus to prove Hinduism as false. But in this zeal, they often forget the facts related to Islam that we are giving in brackets.

-Lol.. Ram left Sita for none of her sin. (In Islam, any man can divorce his wife without her consent any time)

-Krishna married 16000 women. (Muhammad married more than 10 and kept many sex slaves. He used to buy slaves. He used to capture women in wars and rape them. (Rehana and Safia). One of the prophets of Islam, Solomon married hundreds of wives and still remained prophet 🙁 )

-Krishna danced with Gopis. So vulgar and immoral! (Muhammad used to fondle his wives during their menses. He allowed his men to rape women of enemies, refer Bukhari 7/62/137, Muslim 8:3371)

-Shiva cut Ganesha’s head and then made him alive by fitting elephant’s head on his shoulder. Lol.. How can the head of elephant befit on a human’s shoulder? (Allah turned Jews into apes. Allah gave child to virgin marry. Muhammad flew to heavens on a flying donkey. But don’t ask how man can turn ape or a virgin can conceive or a donkey can fly! Only Allah knows the best!)

-Lol.. Hindus worship false gods.. So funny! Bowing to false gods aka idols can never benefit or harm the worshipper. Then why you Hindus worship false gods? Lol.. (Kissing, bowing, and circumambulating the Kaba idol cant harm anyone nor it can benefit. Why such stupid rituals then?)

-Vedas say earth is static. Scientific errors in Vedas.. (Stones ran away stealing Moses’ clothes and wept when beaten. She camel was born from stone. Sun after setting goes straight under the throne of Allah and waits Allah’s commands to come out for next day! All this is super science, can someone call these as errors?)

-Vedas say Brahma practiced incest. He ran after his daughters. (Sons and daughters of Adam and Eve who were siblings, had sex with each other 🙁 But who can say it as incest? It was divine method of all wise Allah to start humans which was later considered as sin)

-Vedas have many Mantras related to fighting and brutal killings of enemies and non believers. (Hundreds of Quranic verses that talk of Jihad against polytheists and disbelievers and curse them to eternal hell are not at all violent! After all Allah is merciful and Islam means peace!)

-Vedas are lost.. (Uthman chose one version of Quran to protect and burnt all other existing in his time 🙁 That’s great! Burn everything and call yours as true and uncorrupted! Shia Muslims claim original Quran to be of 17000 verses, three times the current Sunni/Wahabi Quran. Who is to believe?)

-Vedas are corrupted.. (Quran was corrupted by none other than Satan 🙁 You will find Satanic verses in Quran!)

-Muhammad is prophesied in Hindu scriptures.. etc etc.. (Those scriptures call Muhammad as demon and ghost http://agniveer.com/479/prophet-puran/ ! Do Muslims agree?)

So we see that Muslims start analyzing ill practices of Hinduism logically and morally but they forget to do same for theirs. Can I debate someone who ridicules miracles of others but believes Islamic miracles as TRUE and prays hell for those who disbelieves in Islamic miraculous TRUTH?

6. Equity for debate- do Muslims and Hindus get equal opportunities?

Muslims in India demand debates with us. They demand freedom of preaching their religion and to convert Hindus to Islam. Muslims enjoy religious freedom like any other in India. Now we ask, just as a Muslim in India can preach Quran, can I preach Vedas in Saudi Arabia? No, I can’t. Because preaching Vedas, in Islamic countries, is equivalent to teach 2+2=5 in front of Math teacher as per Zakir Naik. So I can’t preach Vedas anywhere in the world where Muslims have Shariyat. Also, I will not be able to preach Vedas in my own country India if Zakir Naik and co gets successful in imposing Shariyat here. So what should I do now?

For equality, it is compulsory that like Muslims in India, Hindus too should be granted permission and security to propagate their religion in Islamic countries.

Equality says that Zakir Naik and Muslims build mosques in India and we build temples in Saudi Arabia.

Equality says that Muslims built Babri Mosque at Ram Mandir, we build Ram Mandir near Masjid ul Haram in Mecca.

Equality says that Muslims demand Shariyat in India and Hindus demand Hindu laws in Saudi.

Equality says that Muslims convert Hindus in India, Hindus convert Muslims in Saudi, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, and Somalia.

Equality says that Muslims have rights to question/ridicule Vedas in India, Hindus have rights to question/ridicule Islam in Muslim countries.

One of the Muslim bloggers from India once posted a link on our site that was claimed to be the response of one of our articles, he, in his response had written about Eeshvar of Hinduism-

Only the Protestant Hindu god (Ishwar) would need to steal things…

He further wrote about Swami Dayanand (Moolshankar was his previous name), the famous Hindu Acharya-

This also shows how Moolshankar swallowed the excreta of philosophers and atheists’

Now this needs some attention. Just imagine how much freedom India has given to Muslims. They can call Hindu God as stealer and Hindu role models to be the swallowers of excreta of others and still enjoy living in India. Now equality demands that if a Muslim sitting in India can insult Hindu legends with these words, any Hindu should also be given this freedom to state the following in Mecca and be given state protection-

“Muhammad swallowed the excreta of Jew and Christian philosophers”

And unless Hindus don’t get equal rights as Muslims, how can there be debate between the two? If I am not allowed to question/ridicule Quran in Islamic country, why will/should I allow any brain dead Jihadi to question/ridicule Vedas and Vedic Philosophy in India?

But in the current situation, without equal rights, Muslims remain oppressors and Hindus remain oppressed and there can’t be any debate in the situation of oppression. First there should be the demand of equal rights and then any talks. We will be ready to debate Muslims if they agree with our demands of equality everywhere. Are we asking too much? Even if it is, so be it and so be the debate 🙂

7. Should we debate terrorists?

According to Zakir Naik’s ally and peace TV speaker Israr Ahmed, Muslim armies will attack India for the last time and establish the Islamic Caliphate again (This has been called as Ghazwa e Hind/conquest of India). This operation of Islamization of India at the point of the sword will be carried out by Muslim forces of Indian subcontinent. He ensures the Muslims in Pakistan that this final conquest of India is pre destined and it was prophesied by none other than Prophet Muhammad in one of His Hadith.

Now it is impossible that Zakir Naik does not know what his fellow terrorist has said in Pakistan and also that he can disbelief in the Hadith Israr quoted. So Zakir and his Wahabi Mujahids are certainly the part of this dangerous game being played against their own motherland India.  Please visit Zakir Naik- Traitor to know in detail about the plans of traitors of India under the name of Islam.

Dear readers Hindus as well as Muslims, who love their country and consider it as their mother should awake now and start campaigning for the ban on Zakir lead Wahabi terrorist gangs throughout India.

So now after knowing that the ultimate objective of Zakir and his Jihadis is to see Islamic caliphate in India with the help of anti Indian elements, is there anything left for which we should debate them? They are terrorists literally then how is debate coming into the picture? Have we gone insane that we will debate those who are ready to repeat the bloody history of Islamic invasion/rule in India? Should not we get united against the terrorists and kick them out of our country rather than giving them opportunity to ridicule our Dharma, Vedas and role models anymore?

Accepting every challenge is not at all bravery. In fact it is to be worked out rationally as to which person/ideology is worth discussing and which one is the ghost of kicks. And we conclude saying we will not debate anyone who

-believes in killing of apostates preaching their new faith

-believes in hypocrisy

-believes in unequal treatment of Non Muslims and Muslims anywhere

-believes in the eternal hellfire for those who differ with his beliefs

-believes the hadith of Islamic conquest of India to be true and does not condemn this hadith as well as its believers

In the end we clarify that denying any debates with Jihadis does not mean we stop analyzing Islam. We will continue to do that and put our views forth so that people can get aware of Islam as well as Vedic Dharma. However anybody dreaming debate with us needs to fulfill the above prerequisites. We welcome all those who want to discuss anything with us in friendly and compassionate manner and thus agree to our above criteria. We recommend every Hindu to make sure Jihadis you are debating fulfill these conditions.

धर्मो रक्षति रक्षितः !

You protect Dharma, Dharma will protect you!