As everyone here knows the role of turks in the capture of Qostantunia (Constantinople),the victories over the Europeans to the events of the first world war and 1923 and the Caliphate. What does everyone here views as the causes of these events and specially today the plight of muslims in Turkee. The bannings of hejab, the Islamic parties and hate for bearded people in government buildings. Could and would this change??
I would also like to know the role of the turks in putting down the Armenian revolt and the subequent genocide.
thanks,
CH
So whats ur point?
[quote]
Originally posted by Chaltahai:
**I would also like to know the role of the turks in putting down the Armenian revolt and the subequent genocide.
thanks,
CH**
[/quote]
sum1 shud hav killed Mustfpah Kamal b4 he had the chance to do anything!!
Turkey may have reflected on some things that they participated in, which in hindsight were not viewed as being the best course of action. The severe clampdown on Islam does seem to be just that, too severe. One can go too far.
Reza
answer to your question is simple the implementation of fundamentalist secularism is result of all problems in turkey!
Mustapha kemal was biggest disaster to hit turkey. But the decline of the uthmani khilafah began long time before also due to the neglect of implementation of shariah of culturing the masses instead the uthmani khilafah relied heavily on military conquests and as people should realise the strength of a nation is in its ideas military is vital for defence and offence not ideas.
When british as an example invaded muslim lands within the khilafah they spread ideas of nationalism and seperation and so called independence these ideas became widespread because the muslims where not cultured enough to refute such corrupt ideas.
Therefore ideology need to be implemented comprehensivly i.e the islamic one.
What's a Turkeye? Is it anything like a Turkear or a Turknose?
Ya but my question was that what was the making of this disaster according to u people? just a desicion of one person or the loss of faith by many.
Stu: Turkye is a country in Mideast/Southeastern europe.
Reza, Maulana Maududi viewed the root cause of popular secularism in turkey as having been the ulema of Turkey. The Ulema had become withdrawn from the mainstream of society, and began to do everything they could to maintain the status quo - they kept objecting to any change from a 17th century lifestyle.
So, for example, when during the start of the 19th century, the Caliph tried to implement mandatory schooling in mathematics, science and engineering, to enable the Ottoman Caliphate to successfully enter the industrial age, he was opposed by the ulema. When he tried to reorganise the Army along the more efficient European pattern of platoons, companies, battalions, regiments, brigades and divisions, the ulema opposed him. Even when he tried to make the army use bayonets, the ulema opposed him!!! In fact, in 1807, the ulema issued a fatwa declaring the Caliph an unfit ruler and forced him to step down.
His successor as Caliph, Sultan Mahmood, was successfully able to implement military and educational reforms, though the ulema maintained the Caliph was a heretic for doing so.
However, he himself was succeeded by Sultan Abdul Hameed, from 1867 to 1909 who was much more sypathetic to the ulema. He reversed the reforms made earlier, blocking the Ottoman Caliphate from making progress in all fields.
In this same period, 1867 to 1909, Japan went from being a far weaker and much more primitive nation than the Caliphate, to becoming so powerful as to smash Russia, at the time one of the world's superpowers, in a war.
This began to give many Turks the idea that Islam was incompatible with progress - that by clinging to Islam, the state could never progress.
Obviously, this is not true. However, this is the illusion that the reluctance of the ulema (who believed that the Gates of Ijtihad were closed) gave. The ulema were unwilling to accept any new ideas at all - they opposed all changes to the way of life of society.
Whereas many scholars now, who believe the Gates of Ijtihad to be open, are more accepting of changes to society, and are willing to justify such changes through interpretations of the Quran and Sunnah.
Unfortunately, this came too late for Turkey. However, Islam is on the rise now in Turkey because that nation's Islamists have demonstrated that they are different from the ulema of centuries back - the Islamists of Turkey are committed to Islam as a basis for the advancement of Turkey rather than merely maintaining a centuries old lifestyle.
You are both right and wrong. I think there was a contribution of the pepole in this state as well as nobody cared much when the nation was forced to change from thousand years of lifestyle.
[quote]
Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT:
**Reza, Maulana Maududi viewed the root cause of popular secularism in turkey as having been the ulema of Turkey. The Ulema had become withdrawn from the mainstream of society, and began to do everything they could to maintain the status quo - they kept objecting to any change from a 17th century lifestyle.
So, for example, when during the start of the 19th century, the Caliph tried to implement mandatory schooling in mathematics, science and engineering, to enable the Ottoman Caliphate to successfully enter the industrial age, he was opposed by the ulema. When he tried to reorganise the Army along the more efficient European pattern of platoons, companies, battalions, regiments, brigades and divisions, the ulema opposed him. Even when he tried to make the army use bayonets, the ulema opposed him!!! In fact, in 1807, the ulema issued a fatwa declaring the Caliph an unfit ruler and forced him to step down.
His successor as Caliph, Sultan Mahmood, was successfully able to implement military and educational reforms, though the ulema maintained the Caliph was a heretic for doing so.
However, he himself was succeeded by Sultan Abdul Hameed, from 1867 to 1909 who was much more sypathetic to the ulema. He reversed the reforms made earlier, blocking the Ottoman Caliphate from making progress in all fields.
In this same period, 1867 to 1909, Japan went from being a far weaker and much more primitive nation than the Caliphate, to becoming so powerful as to smash Russia, at the time one of the world's superpowers, in a war.
This began to give many Turks the idea that Islam was incompatible with progress - that by clinging to Islam, the state could never progress.
Obviously, this is not true. However, this is the illusion that the reluctance of the ulema (who believed that the Gates of Ijtihad were closed) gave. The ulema were unwilling to accept any new ideas at all - they opposed all changes to the way of life of society.
Whereas many scholars now, who believe the Gates of Ijtihad to be open, are more accepting of changes to society, and are willing to justify such changes through interpretations of the Quran and Sunnah.
Unfortunately, this came too late for Turkey. However, Islam is on the rise now in Turkey because that nation's Islamists have demonstrated that they are different from the ulema of centuries back - the Islamists of Turkey are committed to Islam as a basis for the advancement of Turkey rather than merely maintaining a centuries old lifestyle.**
[/quote]
Ok i didnt want to go into that but there are many scholors who say that Maulana Maududis some very important points of thinking were not right Islamically. Anyways thanks for info.
Mustafa Kamal is wrongfully (solely) blamed for the Armenian genocide. It was Anwar Pasha. But Kamal Ata Turk carried out other disasters. However, he is revered by Turks.
Islamists in Turkey are only found in eastern part and in less developed regions of Turkey. In the bigger cities and metropolitan areas, they do not have much support.
By the way, Moulana Maududi knows jacks about the History of the Ottoman.
[quote]
Originally posted by NYAhmadi:
**Mustafa Kamal is wrongfully (solely) blamed for the Armenian genocide. It was Anwar Pasha. But Kamal Ata Turk carried out other disasters. However, he is revered by Turks.
Islamists in Turkey are only found in eastern part and in less developed regions of Turkey. In the bigger cities and metropolitan areas, they do not have much support.
By the way, Moulana Maududi knows jacks about the History of the Ottoman. **
[/quote]
I would like to point out that u are not right in saying that nowadays islamist dont have any popularity in western turkey. The previous islamic parties got huge amount of support from the western regions as well, befroe being branded as anti state camaigners. Although They have more support from east, but anyways the headscarves on the streets of istanbul are on the increase.
Khan Bahadar. Head Scarves are not necessarily a symbol of people’s support of extremist Islam in Turkey. Even in Istanbul Uni, people do it out of a challenge to authority than to show their support of the Islamists. Go visit Turkey sometime and find it out for yourself. I will be there this summer.
I know whats going on, its not only headscarves for uni protest and challenge but in general life as well.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by NYAhmadi:
**Khan Bahadar. Head Scarves are not necessarily a symbol of people’s support of extremist Islam in Turkey. Even in Istanbul Uni, people do it out of a challenge to authority than to show their support of the Islamists. Go visit Turkey sometime and find it out for yourself. I will be there this summer.
No, if you consider the votes of welfare party as islamists when saying that islamists are found in only eastern turkey.no that is wrong. That party took most of it's votes in biggest cities of Turkey for ex in Istanbul and Ankara, the mayor of these cities were welfare party members. Actually the pro-kurdish party HADEP is powerfull in eastern turkey. Also I did not undersdtand what you meaned by saying extremist Islamist coz this term is foreign to turkey. The most part of turkish muslims belong sufi jamaahs that do not interest with policy. Also can you give a example to me to be called welfare party as extremist islam. The parties in Turkey are different from other countries, wellfare party was the same like others but only advocate to respect the values of ppl and human rights. Noone call himself or herself in Turkey as Islamist but if you pray, wear hijab, if you do not drink alchol when you are a high civil cervant or you say salamalaikum this is enough for someone to be called islamist.The welfare party was closed (main reason in the court decision) since a MP called Nazlý Ilýcak in wellfare party(though she was a popular secular)advocated education rights of hijab girls and MP Merve Kavakçý who was dismissed from parliament since she was wearing scarf. The successor of this party JUSTÝCE AND DEVELOPMENT party is taking the %46.5 of votes according the last polls. The other party which is regarded as islamist HAPPINESS party taking %6 the other party that is regarded as islamist BIG UNION party takes %3 and also ther are 5 parties like them that rae regarded as islamist also the NATIONALIST MOVEMENT party who supports a turkish-islam synthesis takes %15 of votes. So who can say islam oriented parties are not supported in turkey? and they are most popular in big cities and west part of turkey. JUSTICE AND DEVELOPMENT party is the most supportive of participating to EU(actually it is the only party) in turky, and supports a rapid industralization,basic human rights, democracy, uniting the econonomy powers of islam countries in one pool (D-8 project belonged to wellfare party which also pakistan was in that project whose aim was to strenghten the brotherhood muslim countries so that they can use their economical and natural sorces more effective). There are 75.000 official mosques in Turkey(except unofficial ones)and still islam has great respect among all kind of turks with hijab or not. Also dear friend what do you think about the genocide of turks in greece for exp the greeks pride themselves since they killed 400000 turks in greece in greek revolt in ottoman time(and millions of turks were killed in balcan), the turks were more crowded than greeks in many part of greece in 1900s, but what about now there are no turks in those plases. there happened between a inside war between turkish villagers and armanian villagers who was proveked by russia and russia since russia,british was fighting against tutks. When all soldiers of ottoman are in front of war the armanian gangs that were armied with russian killed and raided innocent muslim villagers so that there happened a strict inside war between these villagers. Since the this happened behind the war fronts ottoman government decided to evacuate the armanian villagers who participated the revolt and they had to migrate. so this event is genoside according to you??? Our grandfathers always told us how armanian gangs raided their villages and raped and killed innocents with fear. Ottoman ruled 52 countries that exist now for 600 years, ,in which country did it do genoside, it was famous with it's justice and tolerance. there happened no nationalist revolt in ottoman in hundreds year.Actually there was no minority coz otoman never regarded itself as turk Ottoman culture was the mixture of all these minority cultures. The most famous grand vizier SOKULLU was serbian, actualy the msot of the governers were from other nations. The armanians were living with brotherhood in turkish cities. Even they did not have special quarters in these cities like others. They were too much mixed with turks so that they were called LOYALTY NATION.and they were the most rich ppl in otoman since they interested with trade while turks were farmers. BUT they were proveked by british and russians in the name of nationalism like greeks,serbians, bulgarians, arabians. The mosques, churges and sinagos are near in istanbul, still jews in turkey thans always to turks since turks were the only nation who protect the jews in it's territory. THey helped the jews in spain in 1500ss who were massacred in spain and took them in ships and settled the in ottoman. Because tHis was commmand of islam. SO how can a nation be accused of genoside which was famous with it's tolerance and respect different cultures and religions???...
Assalaam u 'Alaikum
[quote]
Originally posted by Galatasaray:
*The most part of turkish muslims belong sufi jamaahs that do not interest with policy.
[/quote]
*
I am a little confused here. You say most Turkish Muslims belong to Sufi Jamaahs. But, isn't being a Sufi something really demanding - hardly 1% of the population can afford to be Sufi. So, how can the majority of the population be Sufi? If I'm right, it takes years and years to be a Sufi.
So, how do you describe the general population ("rank and file" - "'awaam" ) of Turkish Muslims?
Please explain. ** I'm interested. ** Thanks.
[quote]
Originally posted by Galatasaray:
*The most part of turkish muslims belong sufi jamaahs that do not interest with policy.
[/quote]
*
Aren't they interested in implementing the Shari'ah ??
[quote]
** but if you pray, wear hijab, if you do not drink alchol when you are a high civil cervant or you say salamalaikum this is enough for someone to be called islamist.
[/quote]
**
Man, that's really sad. There was a time when the Turks were looked upon for their deep involvement with Islam.
[quote]
** and still islam has great respect among all kind of turks with hijab or not.
[/quote]
**
I think part of the reason is that they are * culturally * attached to Islam , since a Turk , by definition is a Muslim.
So, as you say Islam has great respect among the Turks, but ** how much are they immersed into Islam ? ** By that I do not mean, how many people pray 5 times a day, but how much are they culturally and socially influenced by Islam ? How much a role does Islam play in their daily life ?
For example, if you see Pakistan, most of the population does not pray 5 times a day, but the presence of Islam is still relatively strong, especially among the poor.
Turks cannot normally wear the Fez, and they don't write their language in the Arabic script anymore. Not only the Turks of Turkey, but also the Turks of Qazaqstan, Qirghizstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tatarstan, Chuvashistan etc do not use the Arabic script anymore.
I think one of the few Turkic languages that is still written in the Arabic script, is the Uighur language of the Uighurs in Uighuristan (Xinjiang - China), and probably the Azeris of Iran. ** Is that true ? **
[quote]
Also dear friend what do you think about the genocide of turks in greece for exp the greeks pride themselves since they killed 400000 turks in greece in greek revolt in ottoman time(and millions of turks were killed in balcan), the turks were more crowded than greeks in many part of greece in 1900s, but what about now there are no turks in those plases. there happened between a inside war between turkish villagers and armanian villagers who was proveked by russia and russia since russia,british was fighting against tutks. When all soldiers of ottoman are in front of war the armanian gangs that were armied with russian killed and raided innocent muslim villagers so that there happened a strict inside war between these villagers. Since the this happened behind the war fronts ottoman government decided to evacuate the armanian villagers who participated the revolt and they had to migrate. so this event is genoside according to you??? Our grandfathers always told us how armanian gangs raided their villages and raped and killed innocents with fear. Ottoman ruled 52 countries that exist now for 600 years, ,in which country did it do genoside, it was famous with it's justice and tolerance. there happened no nationalist revolt in ottoman in hundreds year.Actually there was no minority coz otoman never regarded itself as turk Ottoman culture was the mixture of all these minority cultures. The most famous grand vizier SOKULLU was serbian, actualy the msot of the governers were from other nations. The armanians were living with brotherhood in turkish cities. Even they did not have special quarters in these cities like others. They were too much mixed with turks so that they were called LOYALTY NATION.and they were the most rich ppl in otoman since they interested with trade while turks were farmers. BUT they were proveked by british and russians in the name of nationalism like greeks,serbians, bulgarians, arabians. The mosques, churges and sinagos are near in istanbul, still jews in turkey thans always to turks since turks were the only nation who protect the jews in it's territory. THey helped the jews in spain in 1500ss who were massacred in spain and took them in ships and settled the in ottoman. Because tHis was commmand of islam. SO how can a nation be accused of genoside which was famous with it's tolerance and respect different cultures and religions???...
[/quote]
Thanks man ! I didn't read the whole thing, but I'll Insha Allah save it, and when need be, I may use it to counter the "Armenian genocide thing". Kaafirs are just so obsessed with the Armenian episode, that they overlook everthing else, and use it as the focal point of discussing the relations of the Muslims to their non-Muslim subjects in the past.
Assalaam u 'Alaikum
Galatasaray, Firstly, you probably know more about Turkey that I can ever. I have been to Turkey a number of times and my impression of Turkey is fairly limited to business interaction with Turks, and whatever I read in the magazines.
Let me say this to you. I consider Welfare Party a mainstream political party, it is more like American Democratic Party than Pakistani Jamat Islami. I don’t consider it as an extremist party. In fact they are pretty cool.
What I think are the extremist parties are, (1) Turkish Hizballah, (2) Islamic Movement Organization, (3) Islamic Jihad, (4) Islamic Great Eastern Raiders Front, and (5) VASAT. The case of Mirzabeyoglou in the early 90s got a lot of press in the USA. These are the parties that do not enjoy much support in Turkey.
In terms of religious tolerance of Turks, please don’t start me on that. Perhaps sometimes we can talk about it. I will present to you a different perspective, as I have some Greek relatives who can give you some stuff to digest. You should know that all Greeks living in Turkey were sent back to Greece, while there is still a sizable Turkish community in Northern Greece.
you know a lot NAhmadi. Not who reads a lot but whoo travels a lot know more; so you are a businessman and this gets you intellectual as I imagined. Yes you are right about comparing the wellfare pary with Americandemocreat party or christian democrat party in germany. well the groups you mentioned are not political party (actually according to political party law it is banned for partys to write a islamic,racist,communist,seperatist aim on their foundation foundarion charter, after this charter is approved a political party can be juristic person and can race in policy field. I mean the groups you mentioned are illegal groups not political parties in turkey. As to Turk Hizbulah; it is a suspicious organization not resemble to hizbullahin lubnan. Their members killed a lot of PKK(kurdish seperatist) in east turkey. It was debated on TV a lot and it was proved that it is a organization built by some illegal governers of Turkey and aimed to eradicate PKK supporters Though they are seen opposed government and turkey they only killed the opponents of turkey. It’s mentality was the best way to struggle with terrorist is beeing like terrorist. Actually till late times noone of it’s members could be imprisoned (may be deliberately was not captured). I do not want to say they wre established directly by governer, there are some dark so called nationalist groups who are composed of by police, soldiers and so on. They behave independent from governors and represent them. These illegal groups were intouch with a lot of services. Also hizbullah killed a lot of head of muslim jammahs. I mean it is not clear who supports who and what a gruup suppeorts what.
As to greeks Actually the citizens of turkey and greece are not enemy each other the problem is among governors. because thse two government are copies of each other. They used external issues to internal issus be forgotten by citizens. they both used the conflict as tool to slep citizens since they both are unsuccesfull governors. Actually greeks and turks resemle each other (they both are classic mediterneen character) they are emotional, loosing sensity about national issues, friendly and so on,. after the earthquake the relation between these countries became good since greeks aimed turkey. But thses are my personal opinions: Turks are very busy with their daily life no turk speaks about greeks, actually turksa re mixed nationa nd turk does not represent a race represents a culture so that no turk interests with greeks in daily life. But a greek always mentions how turks are barbarian, and they must get back istanbul.(I want to convey also that raciat nad nationalist parties in turkey are not supported and they became never powerfull) Most of the turks were not aware the existence of serbins till the famous speecs of milosevic in kosovo plaint. He said they will revenge the turks. A lot of nations hliken Greece a child who was ate and bring up with hatred to turks but turks do not know their existence. Also greece is oo small at population and gun power when you compare it with turkey. But I liken greece to a child who was spoiled by europa and usa so it usually try to struggle with turkey when ther is no reason. Since europan saw the greeks as their foundation of civilization and there are a lot of greeks in usa these countries always backed greece. well this is my only opinion. well as to the migration of greeks in turkey. Well, in lozanne aggrement it was agreed that both countries will change turks and greeces with each other greeks except the ones in istanbul went greece and turks in greece except the one in south north (west trakya) came turkey I mean ÝT WAS a reciprocal movement but till taht aggrement million turks were driven to anatolia by greeks and many of them were killed. Even the jews in salonika were killed by greek troops since they were regarded as loyalty to ottoman and trace of ottoman. And the greeks in turkey have own schools, churches, hospitals. May be you will surprise but the PATRIARCHATE OF FENER ORTHODOX(which is independent about it’s decisions and settled in usa)was established by Sultan Muhammad who conqured Ýstanbul in 1453. ý mean there is unlimitted freedom for greeks and all other religions. Though the revolt in greece was planedby this patriarchate it still exists in Turkey. But in southwest greece ther is not much freedom for turks. Their suitcases were in Europan human right court. they can not have education with their own language, the mufti that was chosen by turks were imprisoned by greek government they appointed a mufti but he is not approved by turks.Also turks at there can not sell their lands freely…ýf I mention all of them here there will be hundred sentences here. Also there are a lot of pkk terrorist camps in greece and these were all proved and documented and sent to NATO since both turkey and greece were member of NATO. A lot of greek officers were captured in north ýraq in pkk camps by turkish troops. The greek officers were there to train terrorists. Well I mean both these countires resembleeach other and resort unlegal operations. greece is no more innocent than turkey. Also it has problem with macedonian, albanian minorities. Also according to me greece was never in true side. they supported serbian killers since serbians are also orthodox but turks supported bosnians and kosovo albanians.Greeks aremore religious ppl than turks as I observed I appreciate them since this quality but their religious have them support killers. They supported russians in checenia turks supported chechens. Turkey supported thses countires since there are 7 million bosnian and albanians in turkey who had to migrate turkey due to persecution greek, serbian, bulgarian orthodox in 1900s. and 7 million caucasian including chechens who migrated turkey due to persecution of russian orthodox. Turkey is surrenden by orthodox countries that hate turkey since it is muslim and muslim countries who hate turkey since it is secular and not arab
http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif
personally I have not problem with greeks and many turks have greek friends there is no strict conflict among thse nations actually I congraluate the greeks since there is a powerfull leftist movement in greece which is just in all fields. for ex greece is the most supporte of palestens in europa. But lastly the things I saw the tolerance towars different religious and cultures turks are more succesfull than greeks. Extremists are more powerfull in greece.Well you will come Turkey and will see that this country does not depend on a race and noone interest with the country problems and interest with only their daily lifes.In all part turkey there are thousan sinagogs and churches if ottoman had no tolearnce it coul not succeed to last 600 years over 50 countries. Orthodoxes dis not show same tolerance to muslims like the way muslim ottoman showed them for centuries.Take care…
Salam gala bro,
I like to point out that noone dislikes turkey for thwy are not Arab. As for islamic no country either sorrounding turkey or i the whole islalmic world are islamic..