Khushwant Singh versus Zakir Naik

By Imtiaz Mir I have been a great admirer, reader and a fan of veteran Indian writer and journalist Khushwant Singh, notwithstanding the difference of faith and ideology.

He is a non-believer, a 'Kafir', as he loves to call himself and me a firm believer in God.

I have been enjoying reading his books and the regular column that appears in 'Hindustan Times' without fail, sometimes even at the cost of some important professional engagements.

He has an unmatched skill of satire mixed with humour, a writer par excellence; he is one of the founding father of English journalism in India.

He Indianised English and made it a common-man's reading-no doubt about that.

In his column 'Why Muslims lag behind' (Hindustan Times, Nov.3), Kushwant Singh has passed a judgement on eminent Islamic scholar Dr.

Zakir Naik and decreed how people like Dr.

Zakir Naik make Muslims lag behind other communities.

I find it absolutely outrageous and unacceptable for those who believe in reason and argument.

Not only that all the forward looking Muslims have great respect for this young Islamic scholar, but even non-Muslims around the world interested in knowing about Islam are involved in some purposeful debate with Dr.

Zakir Naik, which is revealed by the mammoth gatherings that Dr.

Naik keeps on addressing at various places in India and outside.

In the first place, I differ with Mr.

Singh's perception that Muslims lag behind other communities.

How come a community, which is ruling nearly half of the world, has as many as fifty or more sovereign countries existing on the world map with flourishing economies, owning huge reserves of natural resources, large kingdoms, controlling unconquerable water bodies, plains and mountains, can lag behind.

Have not Muslims produced scientists, educationists, economists, doctors, engineers, writers, scholars and so on.

Singh must be addressing a small constituency of down-trodden Indian Muslims or the fundamentalist Muslim cadres active in few parts of the world who are more or less forced to resort to violence.

Instead of looking towards Kandahars and Wazirstans, Mr.

Singh should have a broader view over the splendid Islamic culture spread across the world, the prosperous Muslim countries and their bustling cities and towns with their booming economies, be it Cairo, Dubai, Kuala Lampur, Tehran, Istanbul, Karachi or Lahore to name a few.

Singh, now confined to his Sujan Singh park apartment must have made his observations by looking at the Muslims rickshaw pullers around the Khan Market area in his immediate neighbourhood.

Agreed, in India Muslims do lag behind other communities, but the reasons for their backwardness are not people like Dr.

Naik as Khushwant Singh wants us to believe.

The reasons for the backwardness of Muslims in India are entirely different.

Like Muslims here have been deliberately kept low on education.

They are an economically exploited and socially discarded class.

They do not get their quota of government services and are given fewer opportunities in economic field.

Muslims in India are discriminated against in the matters of selection in professional colleges.

Their numbers in paramilitary and armed forces are shamefully low and above all, Muslims in India are living under the perpetual fear of Guajrat like communal holocaust, their peaceful existence in this country is threatened by the likes of Narendra Modi, Parveen Togadia and their blood thirsty field-commanders.

How can a community prosper under such horribly hostile circumstances? Let Mr.

Singh spare a thought for that and suggest answers.

Kushwant Singh disagrees with almost anything Dr.

Naik has to say about misconceptions about Islam.

He has a right to do so.

Strangely, instead of raising matters of national and international importance concerning the well being of humanity, the internal politics upheavals in the Muslim countries, recurring communal riots, world economy and so on; Khushwant Singh chooses to ask questions that are of little significance having nothing to do with a common man's cause.

Like, why is eating pork forbidden in Islam? Despite agreeing with Dr.

Naik's arguments that pig happens to be the filthiest animal on earth as it eats garbage including human and animal excreta and further that Pig symbolizes shamelessness as it invites its friends to have sex with its mate.

Again, Singh accepts it to be a swinish aberration.

What Kushwant Singh disputes is that pork does not create health problems and that several countries breed pigs to boost their economy.

It must be kept in mind that use of drugs, smoking and alcohol despite being confirmed health-hazards, are in practice throughout the world and is a means of livelihood for millions and millions.

Does that make the practice valid? The answer is no.

Khushwant Singh agrees with Dr.

Naik's argument that drinking ruins one's health, improvishes families leads to bad behavior and crime.

This is what happens with majority of people who indulge in drinking.

Then how does one dispute the Islamic injunction against the use of alcohol? Khushwat Singh justifies use of alcohol as he has been enjoying it for the last seventy years without any problems and further that his role-model is Asadullah Khan Ghalib.

Singh probably forgets Ghalib's remorseful confessions for being a drunkard: Yeh Masaile-tasauf, yeh tera bayaan Ghalib- Tujhe hum Wali samjhte jo naa bada khwar hota.

Next, Khushwant Singh is not satisfied with Dr.

Naik's arguments on polygamy.

Naik quotes holy Quran to prove that it is just and fair to have only one wife as an individual can not do justice with more than one, as laid down in the holy Quran.

Kushwant Singh confronts the argument by putting forth the example of Arab Sheikhs who have multiple wives, little appreciating that such a practice in a country or a region does not effect the basic commands of Islam.

Zakir Naik's lectures on Islam and other religions of the world are phenomenal.

He is undoubtedly the greatest student of comparative study of religions.

He has his own resonance and an unmatched skill of answering questions put to him.

Surely, it is a treat to hear and watch him speak.

He has his contribution in making Islam the fastest spreading religion in Europe and elsewhere, whereas Khushwant Singh is a one-man army in his faith and ideology.

I would have loved Khushwant Singh to put few relevant questions to Zakir Naik regarding the violence and political indiscipline of the present day Muslims than to criticize him on trivial issues.