INDIAN preacher Dr Zakir Naik is not known for his subtle approach to faith. Controversies have surrounded him for years and his month-long speaking tour of Pakistan, which wrapped up last week, was similarly marred by complaints from several quarters. In a letter addressed to the president, Church of Pakistan official Rev Azad Marshall has said that Dr Naik’s utterances have caused “significant distress” and “religious offence” to Pakistani Christians. The senior clergyman added that the Indian preacher’s comments “disrespected” the spirit of Quaid-i-Azam’s Aug 11, 1947, address, in which the father of the nation had clearly stated that members of all faiths would be equal before the law in Pakistan. During his visit, Dr Naik’s reported comments about single women, and working women, were also criticised for offensive language. In 2007, the preacher had caused an uproar with controversial statements about Islamic history. Moreover, he had to leave his native country for Malaysia in 2016 when the Indian state accused him of money laundering and inciting extremism; he has not been convicted.

It should be asked why an individual with such antecedents was invited as a state guest to Pakistan. Dr Naik spoke to packed crowds and was given regal treatment, meeting the high and mighty of the land, including the prime minister. There is, of course, nothing wrong with scholars discussing theological issues, historical events tied to faith or comparative religion in an academic setting, within the bounds of mutual respect. But when these sensitive questions are debated in a populist and controversial fashion — as Dr Naik did in his rapid-fire style — they are bound to cause communal discord. Dr Naik should have respected our norms, while the state should have thought twice about inviting a speaker with a debatable track record. There is no shortage of communal and divisive characters in the country; there is no need to import more.

Published in Dawn, October 25th, 2024