'Zakir Naik’s knowledge questionable'

COMMENT It is interesting, with some countries already banning Zakir Naik, that Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi should shower words of praise on the controversial Muslim preacher, calling him “a very wise man”.

In fact, I would say it is unwise of Zahid to call Zakir a wise man until he has carefully evaluated his credentials; otherwise, we may be embarrassed once again before the eyes of the world for accepting the help of an alleged illegal online gambling kingpin on matters relating to our national security.

From the much that I know about this man, Zakir is known to be a radical Islamic televangelist propagating Wahhabism. The reason why people including MIC, Hindraf and Penang Deputy Chief Minister II P Ramasamy have spoken against Zakir is because he has already ruffled a few feathers with the title of his lecture on so-called comparative religion even before the lectures started.

Style and approach wrong

According to friends, Zakir does not discuss comparative religion, but he runs down other religious beliefs and “shouts” his views at people. This is what hurts the feelings of people who attend his lectures.

For those who are carried away with his lectures, he soon becomes their idol; others would rather have nothing to do with him. Instead of creating better understanding between the people of different ethnic and religious backgrounds, his lectures could lead to unnecessary tension between the proponents and the opponents, as we have seen in the past one week.

For the Muslims who disagree with Zakir, they would look at Putrajaya’s official stand with disdain. For the non-Muslims whose religious beliefs are being run down, the endorsement made by Zahid would further distance them from Putrajaya.

An interesting observation made by Tourism Minister Nazri Aziz is worth quoting. Nazri, in a statement which appeared in Free Malaysia Today, said that it is “unnecessary” to bring the controversial speaker to this country “and create a mess which the public would have to clean after”.

In fact, I would put it this way. Muslims in this country have often complained that their ‘aqidah’ is weakened because of the use of the name ‘Allah’ in the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible.

To strengthen one’s aqidah, Muslims in this country should do some proper theological training, instead of listening to preachers who can only tickle their ears.

In the same breath, I have to say that since Muslims in this country have become so sensitive that even the word ‘pork’ cannot even be mentioned, they, too, should learn to respect the sensitivities of other communities by not running down other people’s religious beliefs. Respect begets respect.

For that reason, someone has even compared Zakir to the late Nik Aziz Nik Mat, and said that they are a world apart. One was a leader who endeared himself to even non-Muslims; the other a firebrand who performs to the applause of his fans, but turns thousands of people from him, and the faith that he practises.

If Zakir were here just to speak to Muslims, no one would bother with what he is here to talk about; but when he starts to ruffle the feathers, it is the locals who have to face the brickbats after Zakir is gone. The brickbats will be many times more than what a former Barisan Nasional-friendly politician had received after he made fun of a Hindu deity.

Honestly, I would not have taken the time to write this piece, if not for what Zakir tries to achieve by raising inter-religious tension, at a time when the world should be looking for healing. I maintain my role as ‘salt’ of society, to preserve it from further decay.

They always say, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” This is the reason why Malaysian Indian Progressive Association (Mipas) president Rajaretinam Armuggan had suggested that Zakir should attend a Hindu school for seven years, if he wants to talk about Hinduism.

Otherwise, he would turn out to be a fake, like the other controversial preacher from Indonesia invited to speak in another seminar organised last year, who was found to be lying about his background as a former Roman Catholic priest.

A video clip which has gone viral recently shows Zakir to have a deficit in his knowledge on a number of things. Someone has analysed one of his lectures and was able to point out 25 factual errors that he had committed within just five minutes. The video clip has been viewed by over 800,000 people worldwide, and it is worth watching.

Perhaps, Zahid may want to change his mind and retract his endorsement of Zakir after watching this video clip himself.

Bring preachers who would deal with corruption instead

One question I would like Zakir to answer, Does Islam condone corruption?

If not, why do our politicians live a lifestyle that is beyond their means, and still think it is fine for them in the life hereafter?

With the progressive unravelling of our mother of scandals involving 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), and a number of individuals, what does Zakir have to say from the Islamic point of view?

Would he rather evade the questions or does he speak as someone sent from Allah? In my opinion, preachers of any religion who do not deal with corruption - or calling it a sin punishable in Hell - reveal their true character; by their words, they are judged.

I would rather that my Muslim friends invite speakers who deal with the serious issue of corruption, instead of being easily swayed by smooth-talkers. All this is but a sign of their own level of understanding of their own religion.

As for Zakir, he is supposed to have been trained as a medical doctor. Thankfully, he is no longer in the medical profession, or I would have qualms if I had to consult him.

---

STEPHEN NG is an ordinary citizen with an avid interest in following political developments in the country since 2008. -Mkini