Namaste,
Dr Zakir Naik is a self-proclaimed know-all of all scriptures of all religions on this earth. He keeps denigrating every religion other than Islam to prove supremacy of Islam again and again. Normally, such people don't need any attention but when millions of people start believing this, it becomes a matter of grave concern. I don't know how a person who is not from a particular religion can claim to understand the scriptures of that religion better than what the followers of that religion do but that is exactly the case here.
He relies on half-truths and lies to spread his poisonous thoughts among his gullible fans. Sadly, many Hindus too come under influence of such speakers and start believing that what he is saying is right.
Let's take it one-by-one :
1. Image-worship is not endorsed by Hindu Scriptures :
The biggest issue that Dr Zakir Naik has with Hindu Dharma that we worship images and therefore we are sinful as per their scripture. But he also adds that we are not following our scripture too because SvetAsvatar Upanishad and Yajurveda says, "Na Tasya PratimA asti" i.e. there is no image of that lord.
Truth:
It is true that the verse says, "Na tasya PratimA asti". So, can we say that God is formless ? Let's assume that it is so for argument sake. Now, does the Upanishad / Veda say that God cannot be worshiped through any image ? Nowhere in the entire Vedas, Image-worship has been banned. None of our scriptures say that if God is worshiped through "his" image, He would be so angry that He would throw us into fire of hell for eternity ! There is no need to remind the Hindus with this verse. God has been described as Ananta i.e. Infinite and which covers everything in this universe and anything which is Infinite cannot have a definite shape.
But are we deducing what the shape and size of God is or that He can't be worshiped through an image ? It is the latter and that has no support in the verse quoted. So, for this half-truth, Dr Zakir Naik gets applaud of his thousands of audience !! Image is a convenient tool to connect to God. Before worshiping an image, the priest does "PrAnpratishThA" of that image and requests God to come and stay in that image so that He can be worshiped through that image. Image-worship procedure are available in Agamas and PurANas.
Incidentally, the correct meaning of the above verse is "There is nothing like Him" i.e. there is nothing with whom He can be compared. "PratimA" means "image" but also means "exactly as one is" and that is the correct meaning in that verse.
2. Lord Ganesha is not God :
This is a highly condemnable statement of Zakir Naik. In support of his argument, he says :
"Lord Ganesha cannot be omniscient/omnipotent God. Why ? Because how can a son who is God can fail to recognise His father and Lord Shiva ? When He can forget his father, how can He remember to help us ? So, logically He can't be God." Naik also challenged Hindus to defeat him on this issue if he was wrong.
Truth :
Our Scriptures say that God is the sole Reality and whatever else we see has only relative reality and both the realities exist simultaneously all the time. God is Infinite and that all Hindu scriptures say but God can be perceived in a definite shape and size too ... that too is possible and both the realities exist simultaneously. This complex nature of Reality is very difficult to understand. MAndukya Upanishad tells us that Turiya is the Ultimate Reality which cannot be described and that is the Self and that is Brahman. But same Brahman has been described in other verses as Waking state, Dreaming state and Deep sleep state too. Brahman exists in all these parallel dimensions of existence simultaneously. I will give an example :
Let's assume that there is a Red Flower in front of us. Now, the flower is perceived red because our eyes convert the signal generated by falling of electromagnetic wave of a particular wavelength into a signal which is perceived by our minds as Red. In reality, there is no colour anywhere. We just perceive it like that. In absence of that programming of mind and the eyes, there is no perception of colour anywhere. So, reality of the flower having a color and having no color exist simultaneously. Again, what would have been seen if the flower was seen not through visible light but with X-rays ? If our eyes / mind were designed to "see" with the help of X-rays and not with the help of "electromagnetic-waves" of visible light range, we would not have been able to see the flower at all (or may be some skeleton of it) !
Brahman cannot be described in words with our mental concepts. This is what our scriptures say again and again. But when you try to perceive Brahman with your mind, you come to ridiculous conclusions of Mr Naik.
God Shiva in form in Deva-loka with the limitations accepted like being ignorant about who the child was and Lord-Shiva in his Infinite form, pervading everything in this universe, omniscient and omnipotent God exist simultaneously in two parallel dimensions of reality. Same is the case with Lord Ganesha. This is how an Avataar is possible. Lord Krishna is a complete Avataar with all his Godly powers. Does that mean that when Lord Krishna was on this earth in his limited form, He stopped being Infinite and stopped pervading this universe ? Definitely not. So, God existed in both dimensions of Reality simultaneously. Therefore, it is logical that in one form in a particular dimension of Reality, he may play the part of a normal Deva of Devlok instead of Omnipotent/Omniscient God but at the same time, maintaining his Omnipresent+Omniscient+Omnipotent nature intact in other dimension of reality. This is popularly known as "Leelaa" of God. So, if you don't understand LeelA of God, it doesn't make Him Non-God ! Due to this peculiar nature of God, sometimes we find Him acting with limited powers and at other places with his full powers.
Contd ....
OM
Bookmarks