During the discussion, Javed Akhtar raised questions about the existence of God, pointing to human suffering, injustice, and oppression.
He challenged traditional beliefs, highlighting why cruelty and pain continue in the world if a divine presence exists.
In response, Mufti Shamail provided a theological perspective on the existence of Allah, emphasizing order in the universe, moral responsibility, and human free will. He argued that individuals, not God, are accountable for their actions and cruelty.
During the debate, Javed Akhtar argued that the widespread presence of evil raises questions about God’s nature. He said that since much of the world engages in wrongdoing, it seems as if God is “on the side of evil.” Using an analogy, he added that pointing out evil helps highlight innocence, but if evil didn’t exist, innocence would go unnoticed.
Mufti Shamail responded by comparing life to an exam: the examiner is not at fault when a student chooses the wrong answer—the responsibility lies with the person making the choice. He explained that God allows evil as a test but is not evil Himself. Those who commit wrongdoing bear responsibility, just as a knife maker is not at fault, only the person who misuses the knife is.
Read Also: Jannat Mirza responds to ramp walk criticism
The debate quickly gained traction, with many viewers analyzing Javed Akhtar debate on existence of Allah from different angles. Some praised Mufti Shamail for his structured reasoning, while others supported Javed Akhtar’s philosophical questioning.
Ultimately, Mufti Shamail has been widely seen as winning the discussion, as his logical explanations and clear examples appeared to resonate more with the audience. The exchange around the existence of Allah has sparked curiosity, debate, and reflection among people from diverse beliefs.
