FATAWA OIN DR.ZAKIR NAIK
- Fatwa Regarding Dr Zaakir Naik
FROM DARUL ULOOM DEOBAND
English Translation Edited by:
Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias (May Allaah protect him)
Honourable Mufteen, Darul Uloom Deoband
Assalamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullah
My question is that how is Dr. Zakir Naik? Are his beliefs in accordance to those of the Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama‟ah? Are his views on Hadith and Tafseer reliable or not? What is his path in Fiqh? Which Imam does he follow? Can we listen to his talks and practice upon them? Please provide a satisfactory answer.
Riyaad Ahmad Khan
Aaliya Printers, Uttar Su‟ya (Ilaahabad)
There are many questions regarding Dr. Zakir Naik. This question is also one of these. A detailed answer regarding the beliefs, Fiqhi path and his explanations regarding the Qur‟aan and Hadith were requested. Therefore, in the light of his lectures and speeches, a detailed answer is provided.
Deviated things like moving away from the correct beliefs, interpolation and made up views regarding the Tafseer of the Qur‟aan, awe for scientific research, unity with western thought in opposition to Islaam and turning away from the pious predecessors and the path of the majority of the Ummah in Fiqhi rulings are to be found in the lectures of Dr. Zakir Naik. Also, he is involved in an effort to turn the Muslim Ummah away from following the Mujtahid Imams, making the people renounce the religious institutions and trying to make the
people have bad thoughts about the scholars. A few examples of such deviation are presented below:
1. A few points of Dr. Zakir regarding belief (belief is something very delicate. A slight slip in it could sometimes be a danger for Imaan).
a. “It is permissible to call unto Allaah with the words Vishnu and Barhma.”
Dr. Zakir says in one programme, “It is permissible to call unto Allaah using the names of the Hindu deities like „Vishnu‟, meaning Rabb and „Barhma‟ meaning Creator. This is on condition that a person does not have the belief regarding Vishnu that he has four hands and mounts birds.” [Islaam and Universal Brotherhood p.33 by Dr. Zakir Naik]
It is not permissible to call unto Allaah with these non Arabic words. It is not permissible to call on Him using such names that are not specific for Him. How can it be permissible to call on Allaah with names like Vishnu and Barhma when these are the outstanding signs of the Hindus?
b. “What is the word of Allaah? It is necessary to take the path of science and technology in order to test it.”
Dr. Zakir said during a programme, “Every man understands that his honourable book can only be the speech of Allaah. If you want to know which book is definitely the speech of Allaah, then the final test is to take the path of modern science and technology. If it is in accordance to modern science, then understand that this is definitely the speech of Allaah I.” 
From this we come to know of Dr. Zakir‟s deviated boldness, turning away from the book of Allaah, his astray thought pattern and also his awe for modern science that has reached dangerous boundaries. This is to the degree that he has made scientific research that changes every moment the standard by which to judge the divine books, especially the Noble Qur‟aan. The greatest proof of it being the speech of Allaah is its I‟jaaz (making helpless). Through it, Allaah I has laid down a challenge in various places (of the Qur‟aan).
c. “Every person has the right to give Fatwa.”
Dr. Zakir states in one place, “It is permissible for any person to give Fatwa because the meaning of Fatwa is to give ones opinion.” [Ibid]
In this statement, Dr. Zakir has referred to such an important task of giving fatwa with such light words like „giving an opinion‟. According to Allamah Ibn al Qayyim, a Mufti is a translator of Allaah in the explanation of divine law and he is responsible for signing in His place.
This is not only regarding himself, but he has permitted it for every person. He has totally cast aside the following verse of the Qur‟aan and Hadith of Rasulullaah r,
If you do not know, then ask those of knowledge
He who gives fatwa without authentic knowledge, the sin will be upon the one who gave the fatwa.
2. His own explanations in the Tafseer of the Qur‟aan, i.e. interpolating the meaning
Tafseer of the Qur‟aan is very delicate. The Mufassir stipulates the purport of Allaah I, that Allaah has taken this meaning. Therefore, it is very dangerous for an incompetent person to step into this field. It is mentioned in a Hadith,
If a person renders Tafseer from his own intelligence, then even if he reaches the correct meaning, he will still be taken to be someone that has done wrong.
Another narration states,
It is for this reason that there are many conditions for a commentator (Mufassir). For example, he should be well aware of all the verses of the Qur‟aan, he should have great knowledge of the Ahadith, he should have good knowledge of Arabic and its laws; syntax, morphology and eloquence and clarity etc. As far as Dr. Zakir is concerned, none of the conditions are found in him to the necessary degree, he does not know the laws of Arabic as it ought to be known, he does not have deep knowledge regarding the Ahadith nor does he have great knowledge of eloquence and clarity. (All this will be clarified by means of examples further on). On the other hand, all the causes for falling into deviation are found to a complete degree in Dr. Zakir, e.g. turning away from the Tafseer narrated from Rasulullaah r, the Sahabah y and the Taabi‟een, being awed by the thoughts of the era and misunderstanding the subject matter of the Qur‟aan etc. Therefore, he has made many verses the practice ground for opposition on the basis of his ignorance. A few examples are presented below,
a. Dr. Zakir states regarding the Tafseer of the verse, (), “People say that the word „Qawwaam‟ refers to being a stage higher. However, in reality, the word „Qawwaam‟ comes from „Iqaamah‟. The meaning of „Iqaamah‟ is to stand up. Therefore, the meaning of „Iqaamah‟ is being upon a higher level in terms of responsibility, not in virtue.” [Lectures of Zaakir Na‟ik p.295, Farid Book Depot]
Dr. Zaakir has in support of the western view of equality of the sexes made his own Tafseer and has thereby negated the level of virtue that man has, whereas the great Mufassireen of the Ummah have explained the meaning to be higher in terms of virtue. Consequently, Ibn Kathir writes under the verse (),
The status of a man before his wife is like that of a ruler and leader. At the time of necessity, the husband also teaches his wife honour and respect in an appropriate manner.
Ibn Kathir writes in the Tafseer of (),
A husband is a level higher than the wife in terms of virtue, status, obedience etc. Also, the Tafseer of Dr. Zakir indeed goes against the Hadith,
If it was permissible to make Sajdah to anyone but Allaah, I would have commanded the women to prostrate before their husbands. This is because if they were equal in virtue and the husband had no higher status than the wife, then why did Rasulullaah r want to command the women to prostrate – a sign of the greatest honour - before their husbands?
b. “Dr. Zakir, a question, “It is stated in the Qur‟aan that the sex of the child in the womb of the mother is known only by Allaah, but science has now developed to quite an extent and we can specify this easily though ultra sonography. Is this verse of the Qur‟aan not in contradiction with medical science?” He replies, “It is correct that it is mentioned in various translations and commentaries of this verse that only Allaah I knows the sex of the child that is in the womb of the mother. However, study the Arabic verse and you will see that an Arabic word equivalent to the English word „sex‟ was not used. In reality, whatever the Qur‟aan says, it is what is in the womb? The knowledge of this lies only with Allaah I. Many Mufassireen have misunderstood and have taken the meaning to be that only Allaah knows the sex of the child that lies in the womb of the mother. This in incorrect. This verse does not indicate the sex of the foetus, but it indicates to the nature of the child in the womb. Will it be a cause of mercy or punishment for its parents?...[40 Objections on Islaam p.130 of Dr. Zaakir Naik, Areeb Publications, Dehli]
In this answer, Dr. Zaakir has been awed by scientific research and in order to save himself from the apparent objection, he has put the Tafseer narrated by the Sahabah and Taabi‟een behind his back and has rejected a known meaning. He has criticised and said that many great Mufassireen are wrong. The meaning explained by Dr. Zaakir is the meaning of „Maa‟ Mawsool. Many Mufassireen have mentioned this as a possibility under the first meaning. However, it is not correct to reject the second meaning. This is a clear proof that Dr. Zaakir does not ponder deeply and turns away from the statements of the Sahabah and
Taabi‟een. This is because the meaning that Dr. Zaakir has negated, another verse of Surah Ra‟d points to it. The verse is,
Allaah knows what every female bears and the shortages and excesses in the womb
This meaning is also narrated from the famous Tabi‟i and Mufassir, Imam Qataadah þ. He says,
Only Allaah has perfect knowledge of whether the foetus is a male or a female
Similarly, Ibn Kathir þ has mentioned this in his Tafseer vol.6 p.355, „Allamah Nasafi þ has written in Tafseer Madaarik vol.3 p.116 and Imam Shaukaani has written in Fath ul Qadeer vol.5 p.498. However, Dr. Zaakir has classified the meaning mentioned by these great Mufassirreen as wrong. He takes his meaning to be indisputable and is adamant upon it.
The correct answer:
The objective of the verse is to prove knowledge of the unseen for Allaah and „Ilm Ghayb in reality refers to that definite knowledge that is attained directly without any apparent cause and without any tools. The knowledge attained through tools and instruments by doctors is not definite knowledge, nor is it attained without instruments. It is Zanni (unclear) and is attained through instruments. Therefore, the Zanni knowledge attained through ultra sonography does not raise an objection on the Qur‟aanic verse.
c. Dr. Zaakir states regarding the verse,
“Here, the word „Bay‟ah‟ is used. The word „Bay‟ah‟ will include the purport of election in our times. This is because Rasulullaah r was the Rasul of Allaah and the head of the government. The meaning of „Bay‟ah‟ was to accept him as the leader of the government. Islaam gave women the right to vote in that time.” [The rights of women in Islaam p.50, Dr. Zaakir Naik]
Here also, Dr. Zaakir makes an incorrect assertion. He wants to prove the right of women to vote by stating that the women taking „Bay‟ah‟ to Rasulullaah r is the ancient form of voting in today‟s democratic system of election. This is the case when the people who know the reality of democracy (majority wins), they can understand clearly that this explanation of Dr. Zaakir is totally against what happens and it is wasting his intelligence in the Tafseer of the Qur‟aan. This is because in accordance to the modern day democratic system, every person has the choice to choose the president. If someone does not gain the majority vote, then he cannot become the president. If taking Bay‟ah was in reality getting votes, then did the Sahaabiyaat have the choice to reject the leadership of Rasulullaah r?
d. In the famous objection, based upon misunderstanding, raised upon the verse of Surah Maryam () that Hadhrat Maryam radhiyallaahu anha was not the sister of Hadhrat Haaroon u, and there was a difference of a thousand years between them, Dr. Zaakir says, “The Christian missionaries say that Rasulullaah r did not know the difference between the mother of Hadhrat „Isa u, Maryam, and the sister of Haaroon, Maryam, whereas the meaning of the Arabic word „Ukht‟ is children also. That is why the people said to Maryam that O children of Haaroon. In reality, it refers to the children of Hadhrat Haaroon u.” [40 Objections on Islaam, Dr. Zaakir Naik]
This is based on the ignorance of Dr. Zaakir regarding Ahadith and lexicography. In refutation of this research, the Hadith of Muslim is sufficient. It is stated in Sahih Muslim,
Rasulullaah r clarified this verse 1400 years ago. The summary of it is that Hadhrat Maryam – the mother of Hadhrat „Isa u was not the sister of Hadhrat Haaroon u, brother of Hadhrat Moosa u, but the brother of the mother of Hadhrat „Isa u was also named Haaroon and these people used to keep their names after their Ambiyaa and pious luminaries. From this we learn that this is not a new objection, nor is there a need to fabricate an answer to it.
How ignorant is Dr. Zaakir of Ahaadith that instead of trying to reach the reality of the Ahadith and Tafseer, he fabricates interpretations.
e. Dr. Zaakir states regarding the verse (), “The Arabic word used here for egg is “Dahaaha”. This refers to an ostrich egg. The egg of an ostrich has a similar shape with that of the earth. Therefore, the Qur‟aan clarifies with total correctness the shape of the earth. When the Qur‟aan was revealed, the thought was that the earth is flat.” [Lectures of Dr. Zaakir Naik, Qur‟aan and Modern Science p.73, 74]
Here, Dr. Zaakir has been overawed by scientific viewpoints. He also makes up his own explanation for the verse by making wrong deductions in researching the shape of the earth. This is on account of not understanding the subject matter of the Qur‟aan (detailing Tauheed and Risaalat and everything else about the nature of things comes in between). Therefore, the word “Dahawa” in Arabic refers to spreading out and expanse. In accordance to this, the translation and Tafseer of “Dahaaha” is the spreading out of the earth and the creation of all the things in it. [see Tafseer Ibn Kathir] this word and its root does not give the meaning of egg.
3. Ignorance of the Ahadith
Due to his ignorance of the treasure of Ahadith, Dr. Zaakir mentioned many rulings that are against authentic Ahadith. Also, in how many places where there are a number of Ahadith,
he says that there is no proof for it. Hereunder, examples of the ignorance of Dr. Zaakir or his wilful turning a blind eye to the Ahadith are presented,
a. Permissibility for women reciting the Qur‟aan while in Haydh
On one programme, Dr. Zaakir says regarding a woman while she is in Haydh, “There is permission for Salaat in the Qur‟aan and Hadith but it is not mentioned in any Hadith that she cannot recite the Qur‟aan.”
This is despite the fact that there is a clear Hadith in Tirmizi, () “A woman in Janaabat and Haydh cannot recite the Qur‟aan.”
Think that in the presence of clear authentic Ahadith, Dr. Zaakir has made claims and has rejected them.
b. The Ahnaaf do not have proof to show that flowing blood breaks Wudhoo‟
While discussing in a lecture whether Wudhoo‟ breaks or not by blood, Dr. Zaakir says, “Some „Ulema‟, especially the Hanafi Fiqh think that Wudhoo‟ breaks by blood flowing. If blood flows while in Salaat, what should a person do? The answer to this question is a detailed Fatwa (of the Ahnaaf). Regarding this, there is no proof in support of this view point.” [The reality of Zaakir Naik p.214, Maktabah Madinah Deoband]
At this point, Dr. Zaakir has levelled an accusation against the „Ulema‟ regarding Hanafi Fiqh that they say that Wudhoo‟ breaks by blood flowing, whereas there are many Ahadith narrated in this regard. In addition, the practice of the Sahabah y also remained upon this. Study the following narrations,
If someone has a nosebleed while in Salaat, he should wash the blood and repeat his Wudhoo‟.
Wudhoo‟ becomes compulsory by flowing blood.
Despite these and other narrations, Dr. Zaakir did not show his ignorance and claimed Ijtihaad saying that there is no proof to show that flowing blood breaks the Wudhoo‟.
c. It is not permissible to differentiate between the Salaat of men and women
In another place, Dr. Zaakir states regarding the difference between the Salaat of men and women, “There is no authentic, established Hadith in which there is a command for women to perform Salaat in a way separate from that of men. Instead of this, there is a narration of Sahih Bukhari, Hadhrat Umm e Dardaa‟ narrates that there is a command for women to sit in „At Tahiyyaat‟ like men.”
Here, Dr. Zaakir has said two completely wrong things.
a. There is no Hadith showing the difference in Salaat between men and women
b. Rasulullaah r commanded that women should sit like men
By saying the first statement, Dr. Zaakir has denied all the Ahadith in which there is an explanation of the difference in Salaat between that of men and women. A few narrations are presented below:
These narrations state the differences in the performance of Salaat between men and women. There are other Ahadith besides them. The detailed books on this subject can be studied. Regarding the second thing where in Bukhari, there is a command of Rasulullaah r for women to sit like men, it is an incorrect attribution. The narration of Hadhrat Umm e Dardaa that Dr. Zaakir is giving, the words are as follows,
There is no mention of the action or speech of Rasulullaah r in it, but it is the action of a Sahabiyyah. By mentioning it, Imam Bukhari þ has indicated that she was a jurist. She used to do it out of her own Ijtihaad. In addition, Imam Bukhari þ mentioned in Ta‟leeqan, without a chain of narration.
4. Running away from following the Mujtahid Imams and turning away from the path of following the majority in Fiqhi rulings.
In the light of his speeches and lectures, Dr. Zaakir does not seem to be a follower of any Imam, in fact, he is entrapped by permissibility, love of new things, being a Ghayr Muqallid and being without a Mazhab. Not only does Dr. Zaakir not follow a specific Imam, but he teaches the
sincere masses to leave Taqlid. He links the rulings he explains to himself whether it be from any Imam or any view or deduction. Sometimes he adopts the nature of a Mujtahid and explains rulings, whereas in the narration of rulings, he should take the name of the Imam who deduced the ruling so that the listeners do not have the misunderstanding that this ruling is proven only from the Qur‟aan and Sunnah. Besides this, there are other things practiced by people, whether proven from the Qur‟aan and Hadith or from the view of the Mujtahid Imams, which are incorrect. From the following examples, this will be understood clearly.
a. It is permissible to touch the Qur‟aan without Wudhoo‟
In one place, Dr. Zaakir says, “There should be permission to touch the Qur‟aan without Wudhoo‟…”
This statement of Dr. Zaakir is against the verse () and also against the Mujtahideen.
b. The Khutbah of Jumu‟ah should not be in Arabic, but in the local language
In one place, regarding the Jumu‟ah Khutbah, Dr. Zaakir states, “I understand that in our country, importance should be given to delivering the Jumu‟ah Khutbah in the local and mother languages…”
This is despite the fact that from the time of Rasulullaah r until today – through the generations -, the Jumu‟ah Khutbah was delivered in Arabic. Today, Dr. Zaakir claims that the Khutbah should be delivered in the local language so that people understand, whereas this expediency (the understanding of those who do not speak Arabic) was also present in the time of Rasulullaah r. However, Rasulullaah r always delivered the Khutbah in Arabic. He did not command that the Khutbah be delivered in another language, nor did he command that it be translated later on. Similarly, the Sahabah, Taabi‟een, Tab ut Taabi‟een and those after them went out of Arabia to foreign lands. They spread Islaam in the East and West but they always gave the Khutbah in Arabic, whereas those people were in need of spreading Deen to a greater level than what the people are in need of today. Some Sahabah and Taabi‟een knew foreign languages very well yet they delivered the Khutbah in Arabic. The summary of this is that the practice of the Khulafaa‟ e Raashideen and the Taabi‟een and their adherence to it, as well as the continuous practice of the entire Ummah is clear proof that it is necessary to deliver the Khutbah in Arabic. This is to such an extent that Imam Maalik þ says that it is necessary for the Khutbah to be in Arabic in order for the Jumu‟ah to be correct, even though the entire gathering may be foreigners and no one knows Arabic. If there is no one in the gathering that can speak Arabic, then it becomes compulsory upon them to perform Zuhr Salaat, Jumu‟ah falls away.
Shah Waliyullaah Muhaddith Dehlawi þ says, “It is necessary for the Khutbah to be delivered in Arabic for it was the continuous practice of all the Muslims, in the East and the West.” [Musaffa Sharh Muwatta p.152, Farooq-Dehli]
c. One Talaaq should take effect from three Talaaqs
Dr. Zaakir says, “There are many conditions for three Talaaqs. It is impossible for all of them to be found. There are 300 Fatwas present from Saudia. Therefore Talaaq is one, in accordance to modern conditions, it should be one.” [Lectures of Zaakir Naik from the reality of Zaakir Naik p.331]
He says this despite all the Sahabah, Taabi‟een, the four Mujtahid Imams, majority of the Ummah and all the reliable „Ulema‟ of Saudia today state that 3 Talaaqs will take effect when a person issues 3 Talaaqs in one sitting, not one. There is no difference of opinion held by any reliable scholar in this ruling, except Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn al Qayyim. However, in opposition to the entire Ummah (including the great Taabi‟een and the 4 Imams – Abu Hanifah þ, Shafi‟i þ, Maalik þand Ahmad bin Hanbal þ) the opinion of these two can never be followed. By explaining such a ruling in opposition to such a unanimous ruling he is misleading the Ummah. This ruling of 3 Talaaqs taking effect by uttering 3 is proven from the verse of the Qur‟aan, countless Ahadith and the practice of the Sahabah y clearly. Study a few Ahadith, ⁄
Hadhrat Naafi‟ says that when a Fatwa was asked of Hadhrat Abdullaah bin Umar t regarding a person who gave 3 Talaaqs. He said, “If you gave one or two (then you could have retracted) because Rasulullaah r gave me the command to retract and if you gave 3 Talaaqs, then the woman becomes forbidden until she marries another man.”
Mujaahid says that I was by Ibn „Abbaas t. A person came and said that he gave his wife 3 Talaaqs. He says that Ibn „Abbaas t remained silent. I understood that he will return his wife (he will give the command to retract), but he said, “Some of you do foolish things and sit (give 3 Talaaqs), then scream Ibn „Abbaas! Ibn„Abbaas! Listen, Allaah says, „He who fears Allaah, Allaah will make a path out for him.‟ You disobeyed your Rabb (by giving 3 Talaaqs), therefore your wife has been separated from you.”
A narration has reached Imam Maalik þ that a person asked Abdullaah bin „Abbaas t that I have given my wife 100 Talaaqs. What do you say regarding it? Ibn „Abbaas t replied, “3 of these Talaaqs take effect upon your wife and by 97 you have played with the verses of Allaah.”
A narration reached Imam Maalik þ that a person came to Abdullaah bin Mas‟ood t and said, “I gave my wife 8 Talaaqs.” Hadhrat Ibn Mas‟ood t asked about what did the people do to you? He replied that my wife has been separated. Hadhrat Ibn Mas‟ood t said, “They spoke the truth, i.e. 3 Talaaqs took effect.”
Hadhrat Hasan explains that Hadhrat Ibn Umar t explained to us that he gave his wife one divorce while she was in haydh. He then intended to give her the remaining two while she was pure. Rasulullaah r was informed of this and said, “O Ibn Umar! Allaah has not commanded you to do like this. You have gone against the path of Sunnah (by giving Talaaq while your wife is in Haydh). The Sunnah way is that you wait for the time of purity and one Talaaq should be given in every clean period. After this, Rasulullaah r gave me the order to retract. Consequently, I did so. He then said that when she becomes pure you have a choice whether to give her Talaaq or to keep her. Hadhrat Ibn Umar t says that I asked Rasulullaah r that O Rasul of Allaah, if I gave three Talaaqs, then would it have been permissible for me to retract ? Rasulullaah r said, “No. in this case, your wife has been separated from you and this action of your‟s (giving three Talaaqs at once) is a sin.”
You have seen from the above mentioned Ahadith that three Talaaqs make the ruling of three take effect. There are many narrations that show that three Talaaqs refer to three, not one.
Note: Dr. Zaakir gave reference of 300 Saudi scholars in his lecture. He then presented his own opinion. However, he did not mention which scholars they were when the reliable Mufteen of Saudi Arabia gave Fatwa from their research that three Talaaqs refer to three. The decision was passed as follows,
d. In one programme Dr. Zaakir gave the following counsel, “Muslims should adopt such a way that will allow Eid to be one throughout the world.”
This opinion of Dr. Zaakir goes against the Hadith (), i.e. fast upon sighting the moon and make Iftaar upon sighting the moon and it goes against sound intellect as well. This is because a single Eid is based upon taking Eid to be a festival or a national celebration or communal occasion. This is a very wrong notion because our Eidayn, Ramadhaan and Muharram are not some festivals, but all of them are worship. Also, every country‟s times are different according to their horizon. When we perform Asr in India, it is
morning in Washington. When we are performing Zuhr in India, Maghrib has been completed in London. It also happens that in one country it is Friday and in another country it is still Thursday, while in a third country Saturday has started. How can it be envisaged to have Eid on one day throughout the world?
In summary, in the light of these points we learn that Dr. Zaakir Naik has moved away from the Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama‟ah in many rulings regarding belief, in the explanation of the Qur‟aan and Hadith, he leaves out lexical meanings and the Tafseer narrated from the pious predecessors and takes help from his twisted intellect. He has fallen prey to interpolating the meanings. In addition to this, despite not having deep knowledge of religious sciences and ignorance of the objective of the Shari‟ah, he does not follow a specific Imam. In fact, he goes the other way and criticises the Mujtahid Imams. Therefore, his talks are not worthy of consideration. It is very harmful to watch his programmes, listen to his speeches and to practice upon them without research. It is definitely not the work of any person to do research. Therefore, the general Muslims should stay away from his programmes. Also, every Muslim should remember that the matter of Deen is something felt. Man hears talks of Deen and practices only to find salvation in the Aakhirat. They should not practice just upon new research, quick answers-vast amounts of references and by apparently seeing his acceptance amongst people. In fact, it is necessary upon man to think that what standing this person has in religious sciences. From which teachers did he acquire knowledge? In what environment did he grow up? How are his ways, dressing and countenance. Does he mix with the other „Ulema‟ and pious luminaries? Also, what do the scholars and Mashayikh of his time say about him? Similarly, it should also be seen whether those who take effect from him and those around him, how much awareness they have of Deen and reliable people that serve Deen are how many? If he has a number of reliable people around him, then it is necessary to know from them how he is. Why are they close to him? It should not be that they show themselves close to him because of misunderstanding, ignorance or because of some expediency. The crux of this is that if after research, a person gets contentment, then only his talks will be accepted to be reliable and worthy of practicing upon, otherwise there is safety for a person‟s faith by staying away from him.
The famous Taabi‟i, Muhammad Bin Seereen þ says, () i.e. in order to listen and learn Deen, it is necessary to ponder deeply as from which people is knowledge being taken and being learnt. May Allaah I bless every person with the ability to tread the straight path. Ameen.
Zayn ul Islaam Qaasimi Ilaah Aabaadi
Deputy Mufti, Dar ul Ifta, Dar ul Uloom Deoband
The Answer is correct
Habib ur Rahman
Mahmud Hasan Bulandshahri
Fakhr ul Islaam