[QUOTE=imbindas;345394][B]Is it compulsory to curse or abuse Yazid ? will we be asked in Qabar "how much you curse him" ? and why would i curse a muslim(Yazid) if syeddina Muhammad(PBUH) forbade us to do so ?[/B]

[B][COLOR=Green]I already mentioned that no muslim except Salfi's Praises him, it was not about Sayids or Shia's.
[/COLOR][/B]
[B]and Secondly i don't have the time to curse him , Allah will deal with him,justice would be done by Allah for his atrocities on the Great Imam Syeddina Imam Hussain(ra).[/B]

[B]I am not the follower of Zakir naik or any one. I am the Followers of Best of creation,the Lord of both worlds, Syeddina Muhammad(PBUH) and the Rightly guided Caliphs . I love and respect all Scholars disregarding their sect and affiliation.[/B][/QUOTE]


Both are extremes.
If we don't abuse him it does not mean we have sympathy for him.
Here abuse is not intended but having soft corner takes it to other extreme.

[QUOTE=Shootingstar;345392]Isn't it Hazrat Uzair instead of Hazrat Idrees?[/QUOTE]

sorry,you are correct.

Hazrat Uzair(AS) was put to sleep for 100 years.It was Hazrat Idrees(AS).

[QUOTE=Shootingstar;345392]Isn't it Hazrat Uzair instead of Hazrat Idrees?
[/QUOTE]

The Prophet Idris (peace be upon him) was taken alive to Heavens at the age of 365 years. Ibn Jarir relates in Rauzatul Ahbab that the Prophet Idris (peace be upon him) was the special friend of one of the angels of heaven. The angel took him up into the heavens and when they arrived in the fourth heaven, they met the Angel of Death. The angel questioned the Angel of Death how many years there were remaining of the life of the Prophet Idris (peace be upon him). The Angel of Death said: Where is Idris because I have been commanded to end his life. The Prophet Idris (peace be upon him) then remained in the fourth heaven and he died in the wings of his angel friend who had taken him from earth. Mutwaslah was one of his distinguished son who made his mark.

[CENTER][IMG]http://qurango.com/images/t3/366.jpg[/IMG]
[/CENTER]

[QUOTE=JazibRoomi;344948]In my opinion Zakir Naik is not at all a scholar./QUOTE]
Download his book The Quran and Modern Science.(Download link is
[url]http://www.google.com.pk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sunnahonline.com%2Film%2Fquran%2Fqms.pdf&rct=j&q=the+quran+and+modern+science+by+zakir+naik&ei=HVMxTvWrEcHmiAKavJSeBg&usg=AFQjCNE-wkGIBYZSdUo1Cd2ofH_S3Z43-g&cad=rja[/url] I ll point mistakes in the first 6 pages of this book, ie, from pg 9 to pg 15. I left one mistake on page number 12 because it requires much detailed explanation
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
[B]1- On page no 9, Zakir Naik wrote “According to the Big Bang, the whole universe was initially ONE BIG MASS (PRIMARY NEBULA). Then there was a Big Bang (secondry separation) which resulted in THE FORMATION OF GALAXIES. THESE THEN DIVIDED TO FORM STARS, PLANETS, THE SUN, THE MOON, ETC." (mistakes in capital)[/B]

[I]But according to big bang, initially all the matter, energy and space of the universe was concentrated at a MATHEMATICAL POINT. Mathematical point has no mass and no volume and infinite density. So according to big bang universe was created from NOTHINGNESS and not from ONE BIG MASS. ( In fact no one has still able to calculate what happened at zero time T = 0)[/I][/QUOTE]
He is right! You can say that earth was one big mass before big bang. For when you say it had infinite density it means either it had infinite mass(a very big mass) or (almost)zero volume.
As Density=mass/volume, Density=infinity if and only if mass=infinity or volume=zero. If mass=0 and volume too=0 then density=undefined(indeterminate).

[QUOTE]
[B]2- As already stated, Naik said that after big bang first Galaxies were created followed by stars, planets, sun and moon.[/B]
[I]Now this is wrong because after big bang first atomic particles (electron, proton, neutron ) came into being which join to form hydrogen atoms. Hydrogen atoms then came together to form stars and stars came together due to gravitation to form galaxies.[/I]
[/QUOTE]

He is just a molvi, he is not supposed to teach us quantum mechanics. If he starts talking in terms of quarks and things like that no one will understand. By the way what's wrong with his statement? Did these atomic particles not ultimately join together to form stars and planets?

[QUOTE]
[B]3- In the same book pg no 10, Naik wrote: “ in early times people believed that the earth is flat. For centuries, men were afraid to venture out too far, lest they should fall off the edge. SIR FRANCIS DRAKE WAS THE FIRST PERSON WHO PROVED THAT THE EARTH IS SPHERICAL WHEN HE SAILED AROUND IN 1597.[/B]

[I]It is wrong to say that people in 15th century believed that earth is flat. Aristotle (340 BC) told that “earth is not flat like a plate but spherical like ball” and he also gave logics to support his argument.[/I]
[/QUOTE]

Of course Aristotle knew but how many of the lay men knew of that? If every one knew that, why did uncle Copernicus take pains to prove in 16th century that earth is round?

[QUOTE]
[B]4- Same book pg no 11, Naik wrote, “IT WAS BELIEVED BY EARLY CIVILIZATION THAT THE MOON EMANATES ITS OWN LIGHT”.[/B]

This is also not right … Aristotle knew that moon does not have its on light but reflects sunlight.
[/QUOTE]

Only Aristotle knew of that!

[QUOTE]
[B]5- Same book same pg (no 11) Naik wrote, "The Arabic word for the sun in the Quran is Shams. It is referred to as Siraaj, which means a torch, or as Wahhaaj which means a blazing lamp or as diya which means shining glory. All three descriptions are appropriate to the sun, since it generates intense heat and light by its INTERNAL COMBUSTION".[/B]

Even a 10th grade student knows that the sun owes its heat and light not to combustion but fusion.
[/QUOTE]

10th grade student must also know that Zakir naik is not a nuclear scientist.

[QUOTE=Last Island;345389]@Imbindas

I have said already I am not discussing Aqeeda and Fiqa so dont discuss sunnism and wahabism. Moreover, he has no formal education in Islamic studies. He is an MBBS doctor, not a Doctor of Philosophy.


Since none of them have enough courage to answer those question. Let me.

1. Prophet Isa (AS) and Prophet Idrees (AS) were lifted to heaven.

According to Zakir Naik, only Hazrat Isa (AS) was lifted to heaven and no other Prophet was lifted alive.

2. Status of Prophet Isa (AS) will be of a Prophet but he will follow the Shariyah of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Your Zakir Naik says that Hazrat Isa (AS) will descend as a common man and He (AS) will not be a Prophet.[/QUOTE]
According to Zakir Naik, only Hazrat Isa (AS) was lifted to heaven and no other Prophet was lifted alive.
YES HE
is correct
bcoz As our holy Quran says
hr nafas ko mout ka zaiqa chakhna hy.
to Isa (AS) k elawa hr aik ki jaan nikali gahi hy
ur Idress ki b jaan nikal li gahi thi wo alag bat hy kh
He has gone to heaven with malahika.(will give hadith,if u demand)
2. Status of Prophet Isa (AS) will be of a Prophet but he will follow the Shariyah of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Your Zakir Naik says that Hazrat Isa (AS) will descend as a common man and He (AS) will not be a Prophet.
these are also correct

He will b under Imam mhdi.will pray salat behind Him.

[QUOTE=fatimak;345420]According to Zakir Naik, only Hazrat Isa (AS) was lifted to heaven and no other Prophet was lifted alive.
YES HE
is correct
bcoz As our holy Quran says
hr nafas ko mout ka zaiqa chakhna hy.
to Isa (AS) k elawa hr aik ki jaan nikali gahi hy
ur Idress ki b jaan nikal li gahi thi wo alag bat hy kh
He has gone to heaven with malahika.(will give hadith,if u demand)[/QUOTE]

Un ki Jaan Aasmaon pe hi qabz ki gai thi. Zameen se wo hayat hi uthaye gaye thay.
[QUOTE]
2. Status of Prophet Isa (AS) will be of a Prophet but he will follow the Shariyah of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Your Zakir Naik says that Hazrat Isa (AS) will descend as a common man and He (AS) will not be a Prophet.
these are also correct

He will b under Imam mhdi.will pray salat behind Him.[/QUOTE]
You are mistaken. Baat Imam Mehdi ki nahi ho rahi. Sawal yeh hai keh Hazrat Isa AS ki hesiyat kya ho gee? Zakir Naik clearly said "He will not come as a Prophet". Jab ke baat khud Nabi Pak (SAW) ne fermai hai keh Hazrat Isa AS Nabi hon gay. Aap Zakir ki baton ko sahi sabit kernay ke liye us ki baat ko koi aur maani na pehnaein.

[QUOTE=Last Island;345422]Un ki Jaan Aasmaon pe hi qabz ki gai thi. Zameen se wo hayat hi uthaye gaye thay.

You are mistaken. Baat Imam Mehdi ki nahi ho rahi. Sawal yeh hai keh Hazrat Isa AS ki hesiyat kya ho gee? Zakir Naik clearly said "He will not come as a Prophet". Jab ke baat khud Nabi Pak (SAW) ne fermai hai keh Hazrat Isa AS Nabi hon gay. Aap Zakir ki baton ko sahi sabit kernay ke liye us ki baat ko koi aur maani na pehnaein.[/QUOTE]
mam this discussion is going no where. you should close this thread as discussing religion without proper knowledge is very sensitive matter.
shaid discussion k doran kuch members kuch galt bol dain ya kuch ulta seedha bol dain aur gunah k murtkib hon... so it is my humble request to close this thread.

@ respected LI & roomi
 

koi ya nai kehta k Dr,ZAKIR NAIK jo kehta ha wo lafz-ba-lafz thek ha, wo hamari thara aik insan ha, be-shak un say ghalti hogi lekin is ka ya matlab nai k ham kahy k wo logo ko gumra kar raha ha. ap us k role ko deky, kitny log un k hatho mushaf-ba-islam huey ha. kitny log jo quran ka mazaq uraty thy un ki waja say ab mun tak nai kol sakty.

mery khyal ma to aj kal k material dor main ager koi islam ki khidmat k ley aik din b waqaf karta ha to hamy un ki dil-o-jan sa qadar karni chhey na k un k khilaf baty kary...

ap uny sunny jo bat un ki thek ho us ko ly jo thek nai usy na ly, aur jahan tak bat ha mislead karny ki to mery khyal ma koi kisi ko mislead nai kar sakta qk ya har insan ka faraz ha wo jo bat suny to us par amal karny aur dusro tak pohnchany sa pehly us bat ki tahqeeq kary. ham bazar ma ager 10 rupees ka aik jeez jab kharedthy ha to 5-6 shops ma us ki quality k bary ma tahqeeq karty ha to q na ham deen ki koi b bat 5-6 ulama sy confirm kary.

[QUOTE=candidguy;345417]He is right! You can say that earth was one big mass before big bang. For when you say it had infinite density it means either it had infinite mass(a very big mass) or (almost)zero volume.
As Density=mass/volume, Density=infinity if and only if mass=infinity or volume=zero. If mass=0 and volume too=0 then density=undefined(indeterminate).[/QUOTE]
The point you missed is that there is a difference between one big mass and infinite mass.

[QUOTE=candidguy;345417]He is just a molvi, he is not supposed to teach us quantum mechanics. If he starts talking in terms of quarks and things like that no one will understand. By the way what's wrong with his statement? Did these atomic particles not ultimately join together to form stars and planets?[/QUOTE]
Sequence is wrong. By the way what is wrong with this statement that first he was born and then his father?

[QUOTE=candidguy;345417]Of course Aristotle knew but how many of the lay men knew of that? If every one knew that, why did uncle Copernicus take pains to prove in 16th century that earth is round?[/QUOTE]
Albiruni ,born in 973 AD, estimated the diameter of Earth (his figure was very near to the correct one). And your uncle did not work to prove that earth is spherical but to prove that the sun is center around which earth and other planets revolve, the theory known as heliocentric theory.

[QUOTE=candidguy;345417]Only Aristotle knew of that![/QUOTE]
You underestimate early civilizations.
[QUOTE=candidguy;345417]He is just a molvi, he is not supposed to teach us quantum mechanics.[/QUOTE]
In other words you say that he is just an MBBS doctor, he is not supposed to teach us what he is teaching....
[QUOTE=candidguy;345417]10th grade student must also know that Zakir naik is not a nuclear scientist.[/QUOTE]
Then why is he delivering lectures on this subject?

[QUOTE=most wanted;345444]koi ya nai kehta k Dr,ZAKIR NAIK jo kehta ha wo lafz-ba-lafz thek ha, wo hamari thara aik insan ha, be-shak un say ghalti hogi lekin is ka ya matlab nai k ham kahy k wo logo ko gumra kar raha ha. ap us k role ko deky, kitny log un k hatho mushaf-ba-islam huey ha. kitny log jo quran ka mazaq uraty thy un ki waja say ab mun tak nai kol sakty.

mery khyal ma to aj kal k material dor main ager koi islam ki khidmat k ley aik din b waqaf karta ha to hamy un ki dil-o-jan sa qadar karni chhey na k un k khilaf baty kary...

ap uny sunny jo bat un ki thek ho us ko ly jo thek nai usy na ly, aur jahan tak bat ha mislead karny ki to mery khyal ma koi kisi ko mislead nai kar sakta qk ya har insan ka faraz ha wo jo bat suny to us par amal karny aur dusro tak pohnchany sa pehly us bat ki tahqeeq kary. ham bazar ma ager 10 rupees ka aik jeez jab kharedthy ha to 5-6 shops ma us ki quality k bary ma tahqeeq karty ha to q na ham deen ki koi b bat 5-6 ulama sy confirm kary.[/QUOTE]

Munasib baat hay. Meray khayal main kisi kay gumrah honay ya na honay ka faisla hum nahi kar saktay chahay wo sunni ho wahabi ya Ahal Tashee. So I limited my discussion to his scientific mistakes and not religious viewpoint.

Bilkul wo Islam ki khidmat kar rahay hain. I appreciate his thesis that all religions have a common origin. But while he is working on finding similarities between religions, he says something which infuriates a sect of Islam. No doubt he is free to believe whatever he wants to but you know whatever you say publicly will be discuss publicy. No one asked him to curse Yazid but agar wo yazeed ko openly Razi Allah na kahtay or door az kaar Ahadith kay mafhoom say yeah sabit karnay ki koshish na kartay kay wo Ashra Mubashra ki saf main khara hay tu is say Zakir Naik pay koi azaab tu nahi aa jana tha. Unka personal aqeed jo bhi ho laikin unhain munafarat or firqa wariat nahi phailani chaheye.

Baqi rahi baat unki credibility ki tu I was once his fan and a regular listener, but when I had the oppertuinity to transcribe and edit his work my view was thoroughly changed. And I already explained why was it so.