If you could post a clip it would be helpful so that we can judge for ourselves exactly in what context he said it...!
Here is wasting 5 minutes of life to transcribe for you.
ZK: Sister, By definition Hindu is a person who lives in India.
Sister: No Sir, it’s not like that.
ZK:Sister, Hindu is a geographical definition. You don’t know. I know. I am a Hindu by geographical definition. I am a Hindu. Sister, geographically the word Hindu was first used by the Arabs. There are many Arabs here. They call me Hindi when I go there….Hindi Hay Hindi….They (stutters)…I am a Hindu. The word Hindu was first used by Arabs when they came to India…It was also used by the Persians to describe people who lived in India…So geographically I am a Hindu
نہ میں اعجمی نہ ہندی ، نہ عراقی و حجازی
کہ خودی سے میں نے سیکھی دو جہاں سے بے نیازی
Junaid Jamshaid (RA) recites it somewhere at the begnning of Tu Nay Poochi Hay Imaamat....
The challenge still stands, let Professor Maripat and the Sister declare "I am a Hindu" and I will bow out of the thread.
Arabs DO NOT say that Hindi means Hindu by any stretch of imagination and neither did they visit India, observed Hinduism and decided to call it Hind.
You all know it linguistically and technically but you seem to be just arguing about it anyways.
Muslims of India are Hindi but not Hindu
Do not know and if you want to send me on a wild goose chase that's fine and I will look into it when I have time. Don't care at this point..
What I have categorically proven is that in Arabic, Urdu and Persian geographical residents of India are not Hindu but Hindi
Now you can admit that fact or you can keep on going in different directions. Muslim have NEVER called themselves Hindus, they have (and still) refer to themselves as Hindi.
I am certain that a man of your calibre know what is a Hindu!
As I have said, these are pre-staged events and thing are flippantly thrown for maximum TV ratings.
If not let the Indian Muslims claim that “They are Hindus” and I bow out of the discussion. I myself won’t refer them to as such but if they wish to label themselves as such they can claim to be “Hindus” and that will be the end of this strand of the discussion.
I think you all understand very clearly and distinctly the difference between the words in the context of Arabic, Persian and Urdu.
If he would have said in English this word originates as such it would have been different. He claims Arabs coined it (based on religion).
Let the Indian Muslims claim to be “Hindus” in this thread.
And the discussion of this strand ends.
Paki or Pakistani are both NOT religious connotations.
From Hindustani, you become Hindi and not Hindu I have quoted both Arabic, Persian and Urdu examples.
As I said, I am fairly certain that all of you know the differences between Hindi and Hindu but keep going.
There are many Indian Muslims on this forum let them claim “I am a Hindu "” and that will end this strand of discussion.
Neither Arabs nor Persians claim or call Muslims of India Hindus, the word Hindi doesn't equate to Hindu
Its fairly standard Arabic construction
Arabic and Persian, not British colonial definition
And importanly Indian Muslims don't call themselves Hindus
Dear honourable and respected (Sir) Professor Maripat Saheb,
It is but stones which remain rigid in their stance.
We (humans) process information, analyse facts and articulate our position. Dr (Allamah Muhammad Iqbal (RA) originally praised the discipline of the Qadiyani Jamaat when he looked at the matter purely from a “Punjabi Muslim” perspective. When he actually got to know the beliefs and tactics behind the Jamaat, he absolved himself from Qadiyanees. When he was confronted about his original position and the fact that he had changed his mind, he uttered the famous line which I have written above.
I have always been admirer of Dr Israr Ahmed (RA) since the days of Al-Huda, long before the English speaking Muslims or those outside of Pakistan have heard of him. As I grew older and consciousness developed (my uncle a stanch Ahl-e-Hadeeth) used to come to our father and praise Dr Israr Ahmed (RA) and his Aqeedah.
Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadeeth (Pakistan) were staunch supporters of Dr Israr Ahmed (RA) UNTIL he made his views clear about Ashari Aqeedah and then they threw the book at him.
Deobandees have opposed him pretty much from day 1 on account of him (not being a Scholar) on similar grounds to what they did with Maulana Maududi (RA). The Deobandees equate and consider them both to be the same and it is (fundamentally) flawed position. Nevertheless, it is their stance.
I have read and heard Dr Israr Ahmed (RA). I have met his students researched his centre (in Lahore and Karachi). There is nothing which has made me change my mind in his person, his organisation and his teachings and his dogma (in general). I do disagree with his views on Jihad and revolution so the agreement is not total but general.
I was one of the first people amongst Deobandees to look at the Dawah of Dr Zakir Naik and contact Ulama (including www.askimam.org). I had private discussions with then (student) Abu Hajira that in the Indian Muslim context his efforts should be praised and appreciated. The issue is about a Muslim against (Non-Muslims) of India.
The article is still here:
As I began to view Peace TV and delve into Dr Zakir Naik and IRF, I began to get uneasy. They clearly have a divisive, corrosive, sectarian, communal and poisonous agenda. I then made contact with people on the ground in Mumbai and got to know about financial irregularities and fake stage sessions and drama long before Indian (citizens) through Indian Media got to know about it.
Based on new and irrefutable evidence, I had to change my view on Dr Zakir Naik. It would have been irresponsible, callous, careless, unethical and immoral for me not to do so. You seem to have not done your research and seem to be sticking to your original premise. As a professor, how can you accuse me of not being able to separate the wheat from the chaff? That is an absurd accusation. Your original accusation that my stance is guided by sectarian concerns (Ahl-e-Hadeeth vs Deoband) is even more absurd because you seem to be a bigger Deobandi then me? In the last 10 +years that you have interacted with me, when you have seen or viewed me to be a dogmatic Deobandi?
I also view Dr Zakir Naik t be coward who fled and left India and Indian Muslims and abandoned him when things got tough for him. You and Brother Abdur-Rahman disagree with that assessment and clam that it is pragmatism so let’s agree to disagree. I am saying (as someone who has been the victim and suffered) that Dr Zakir Naik has the unique position to raise funds, get a crack legal team and has the ability to make his voice heard despite IRF and Peace TV being shut down. Akhlaaq who was lynched does not! I am perplexed as to why an Academic of your stature is so acute and obtuse in your vision that you cannot see this point? Effectively, it appears to be that you have given up on the hope and cause of Indian Muslims, there is no ray of light in your opinion and everything is (simply) futile. If Dr Zakir Naik with his resources cannot get justice then NO INDIAN MUSLIM can!
I respectfully submit that you are being disingenuous here and going out of your way to sidestep a fundamental Aqeedah point which goes against you.
I believe that a person of significant Academic stature and learning such as yourself, knows it. Instead of coming clean and informing many (common) Muslims that YES it is an error, you have taken a diplomatic way out and said that you are a Hindi. I don’t believe that you can possibly and sincerely advocate or articulate the position that Indian “Muslims” are Hindu.
I have always respected you for your stature and courage but your accusations are unfounded and unsubstantiated. Your responses also don’t befit your stature as a leading (Muslim) Academic.
Sir, it is I, who has researched the subject and changed my stance due to new information. It is YOU, who has remained dogamtic on the original premise of defending Dr Zakir Naik (merely) on the basis of his Dawah. Sir, I would like to respectfully submit that it is I who has pragmatically evolved (with the circumstances) while you have remained ideologically wedded to your original positon. How can you as a leading (Muslim) academic blame me or chastise me for my evolution of thought? Dear Sir, am I not displaying maturity, complexity and ability to separate wheat from chaff while you are displaying stubbornness, dogmatism and idealism?
04th of July 2017.
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.