Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turkeye and Islam

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Turkeye and Islam

    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??

    #2
    I would also like to know the role of the turks in putting down the Armenian revolt and the subequent genocide.

    thanks,

    CH

    Comment


      #3
      So whats ur point?

      Comment


        #4
        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
        sum1 shud hav killed Mustfpah Kamal b4 he had the chance to do anything!!

        Comment


          #5
          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.

          Comment


            #6
            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.

            Comment


              #7
              What's a Turkeye? Is it anything like a Turkear or a Turknose?

              Comment


                #8
                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.

                Comment


                  #9
                  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.
                  Muslims are so good at dividing that they can divide the atom. If you see two Muslims, probably they belong to 3 parties.
                  Al-Ghazali

                  Comment


                    #10
                    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.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      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.

                      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.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        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.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          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.
                          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.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            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.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              I know whats going on, its not only headscarves for uni protest and challenge but in general life as well.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X