(Please go through the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTtQpR4w_sE)
Being an independent creation human has been made dependent.
This is because what becomes independent by design becomes dependent by its own devise.
Structural formalities within and among creation are arranged actually in a manner that principally works on the code of selective extraction may, it be in a manner of symbiosis or parasitic.
What is itself a mixture as method remains the tool of same stature and means?
My point is! If you are made of water; you need water to remain within your own stature as water and similarly what need blood remains the requirement of similar; so as to be under its own realm hence; again dependent on its own and similar and the very same blood.
It’s the qualities and requirement as essential that becomes the reason of necessity, as and when the necessity demand as essential and in need.
This is like, if you have instinct there must be a tool that is and should become the reason of procurement hence dependent on same; to resurrect necessity.
If you have drive for food and sex as potential and necessity; you definitely need the mode and model therefore supplement to achieve the desire hence again dependent on necessity and its existence by nature or else by invention or vide desired methodology of procurement as per your understanding and realm of belief therefore mode ,method amid manner.
This is the logical rule of human dependency though still in state of free and self regulating as independent.
Now if we look at human as being; it is dependent on similar being but reflection as opposite therefore; specially designed creation from same as similar but opposite, that is a female as gender;
This gender is for the procurement of similar being with identical methodology and stature hence for desire as progeny; but in any make as male or female; which again depends on cellular level of fertilization as auspicious dependency.
Thus under no means by natural and understandable mode we cannot deny our make as independent but with dependency as essentiality and modus operandi.
If we logically and clinically look in our internal milieu; we see each and every concept actually depends on each other therefore to become and work as one even for a cycle as one single breathes.
So the rule of thumb defines subject in a real fashion as; a dependent make with independent exhibition.
Being a lover of logic! I am astonished over this myth as undisclosed fact for my reason of birth; for my birth does not console my mind where I could find a better solution for what is that specialty that was to be and was the reason of my birth.
Naturally my make, self define a reasonable justification that; such skilled make needs a potential outcome as well; this is as a reasonable reason of justification behind such skilled performance as human make.
If I trace it on logical ground; I would naturally scroll towards the first input that was, or that became the reason as birth.
Regardless of theories as assumption and religious concern as postulates and even as belief ;I see a continuous tit for a tat hence one for the other in a cycle as circle, being part and parcel hence facilitated and affiliated and concerned chapter of one for the other and vice verse.
So again conclusion drives that under all means a channel system remains the essence of vocabulary of this birth or whatsoever around the universe; for nothing as individual can claim as very and only reason for individuality and nonentity as useless, independent and unconcerned.
Now as per logical avenue what became initiator has similar responsibility in finale as well hence; without escape and responsible equally.
Similarly roots are the essence of leaves hence the freshness within the pulp of tree as effect.
Equally though none can see the activity within the buried root as necessity yet the essence of their lively effect full of energy can be perceived under the shades and shadow of the tree as image.
This defines nothing but; that existence as seen has essence of unseen though buried and alive hence very much in capacity and capability to earn and established; what is bud out as part or remnant.
When we see onion, its root buds out even before what is its final destiny as bury; this is if at all rightly and thereafter buried; therefore to procure more onions in future thereafter.
My point is; what you cannot see and understand as unseen and concealed; can never be predicted and understood as non existence but; it’s the understanding that gives you input, this is; what is not seen still exists and can be perceived and evaluated from the surround as around hence; around the tree as its leaves and pulp hence stem and similarly as such.
So logically burring has no implication that things do not exists or are dead or unattended hence unattainable and without nursing and nurturing.
If I logically put everything within its own cycle as method; I find birth relating and comprehending necessity as death by all means, if I talk about living objects.
Similarly if I relate birth as coming with an ultimate definite death as departure; logical mind detract and detach itself from reason of arrival; this; that why this igniter initiated birth if it has no role in final; for we know what initiate as igniter has responsibility to share as final and in fate hence there must be a concept as thereafter like a fate that must stay within the realm of thought as connection and responsible or the claim as legitimate hence responsible can neither be put nor vindicated.
This is especially when people within the realm of reign as followers are in belief of the book that was delivered to the very same Him and as well Shariah; that was being put to follow as law by the one as disclaimer.
How come generations of people as followers; are left over with a book and a sketch as role model whose generations of followers are actually dependent on His Shariah or he being the preacher is responsible for them till finale as decision; yet (Naozibillah) not present as dead and unattainable.
Logical Avenue says; when you are there you are responsible and if you are not there; you cannot be asked for you cannot share the responsibility; for not being there at all.
Now if someone is responsible as care taker or igniter to bring this belief in God and book as Quran and is not present as absent; how come his verdict as book and Shariah as law can be under grilled and asylum concept of safety for; there should be an ideological legitimated generation or means; whom must be there to precedent what has been delivered over their followers.
My point is; if this Quran and similar laws as Shariah are the conversation of the Two in secret; than the two should be there in reach to remedy and detoxify if at all, problem arises.
Logic is communication between the two is secret between the two.
If you can reach one among the two; you would understand the truth as reality behind and between the two, this is as and when you need as requirement and necessity.
Again logic demands that under such open field of vast methodology one should ideally be there to derive and desire the one as follower.
Now either admit that one between the Two is there or say the second as God is very much within your reach as Constant consultant who can be breach and consulted whenever and wherever as you deem necessity and if it’s your consultant then you must claim that there was no need to send messenger for the remedy to believe in God; for he was very much in your reach or you were the chum as righteous peasant from day one.
It’s here where I see! A necessity for someone as One (SAWAW) whom was their like all and always; this is to be with all as One and responsible; hence to be there till all are there, as responsible; this is especially to resurrect and carry whatever is needed as living hence in the name of procurement and necessity like an establish relation between root and leaves.
You! Deviant Zakir Naik (Malaoon); keep your concept for your future which is very near as heel and hell.
Truth is you are someone as the same like the one as cultivator for Dujjal; who is there to derail humanity hence Muslims therefore to execute his plan as forfeit humanity.
I am astonished! Who &What brings this concept; that God is the one who provision you what you desire for; if in your opinion ,things that do not exist as see ;have fate as inexistence; all concepts within the belief and understanding becomes and remains absurd .
My point is what has been made a vicious cycle is to be followed by destiny ,this is like a morning sun and sibling moon in evening but the absence of the two never meant that they are dead and without reason as no more.
You (Zakir Naik) (Malaoon) hell lover; if at all I believe you (Naozibillah) than my logic demand that one who is responsible; and if he is there as God hence as existing; must come up as seen therefore to sign as signature before me and my belief; this is in support of the logic that what I see do exist and what I don’t see does not exist.
This is also amazing if things were that much easy to ask the One as Lord (SWT) hence to procure the one as desire; seemingly this conditional reflex to send Messengers (A.S) after and thereafter was illogical for; if Zakir Naik (Malaoon) can procure his demand by asking directly to God (SWT); he seemingly must be the real beneficiaries as legitimate concern of God (SWT) and His (SWT) Grant above all within humanity and among all as Prophesy?
Which is of course? Not the case as presentation;
In my opinion the moment I consider unseen to be seen by compulsion before me as belief, my belief becomes what I called nonsense or you may say my belief becomes absurd and criminal like that of Zakir Naik(Malaoon) and his Family of Yazeed Malaoon.
Now the point is whether Rasool-e-Khuda (SAWAW) is very much there; or not as in disbelief of Zakir Naik (Malaoon).
I am 40 years old but I don’t find myself ahead and before these years within this whole patch of decades as centuries though still, every thing was there and then as existing and running.
What if I say I was there within the plan of God (SWT) as to form and fix the day on that day as desire hence 40 years back and after thousands of centuries hence not early before the date of birth as expected date of delivery?
So naturally logical rule resides that similar days as to come and thereafter are the asset of the very same and only (SWT) who must be in know of the departure as well.
Now if I disbelief one concept of my birth from His (SWT) know and knowing; my second theme automatically becomes irrelevant and discarded hence a concept without implementation as belief declaring my birth as unreasonable birth and similar death as though unpredictable but understandable therefore every thing as thereafter .
Thus every concept and eventualities; this is after death becomes irrelevant and with no definition thereby negating the concept of God and Akhirat hence the judgment day and whatever as hell or heaven and thereafter.
So reflection gives image that I got to believe on one as essential therefore to land as finale hence in right and as right; thus in righteous direction of belief as a logical clue of investigation.
However this Zakir Naik Malaoon; here is seen negating the first(Lillah Illal Lah) and the last rule (Muhammad ur Rasool Allah) thus putting and explaining his concept of Yazeediat like his ancestors that he do not believe on Akhirat neither on Shahadat and life after death may it be the Questionnaire as will be ask in Grave.
Again reverting on same point that whether Rasool-e-Khuda (SAWAW) is very much there or not; as in disbelief of Zakir Naik (Malaoon);
At the moment if I logically take this rule of essentiality and first input as belief being Muslim as Kalima tull Haq (Lillah Illal Lah o Muhammad Ur Rasool Allah); it out rightly explains me that this subject as kalima; is the foremost chapter of essentiality for any one within belief as Muslim, may it be previous, past, and future; this is like any one who claim faith must admit this kalima before being declared within the concept of Islam.
Now if I own Malaoon Zakir Naik concept; than Logically this kalima should now be changed (Naozibillah); for if Muhammad is not there(Naozibillah) how can we use this terminology therefore to declare our arrival within this domain of Islam as new by simply saying (Muhammad ur Rasool Allah ) because; this term as phrase is itself explainable that someone(SAWAW) is still there like the one(SWT) as always and will always be there; if it’s the matter of Islam , this is because if God(SWT) is existing and is an essentiality to say and declare him as One and Only(SWT) in kalima; similar essentiality is the part as parcel to say Muhammad(SAWAW) as is his Prophet may it be today ,tomorrow or thereafter.
This is similarly like and not just that Muhammad was his prophet in past but; he is His prophet still in present and in future hence thereafter as after and whatever.
How come one remains under reign as essentiality and in present tone as tense, if his existence is denied and defied?
So the logical avenue again reflects that the very same (SAWAW) within kalima must be there like the one (SWT) as in kalima before him (SAWAW); if the same kalima is the essentiality of the past, current and future hence a part and parcel of belief to believe that the two (SWT) within are there as one hence like one and in similar sense as one order; therefore ways and means to procure ask and remedy.
You deceiver Zakir Naik Malaoon, may God curse you Today on this day for your sin and your actions to derail and denture Islam and Muslim.
Ya Rasool Allah (SAWAW) (Dr Raza)