Ataturk's Legacy vs Caliphate and implications for Pakistan

[Quwa]

let me get this stright ... you are telling me that to respect a country that their very own founder condemed islam and they still do!? my dear brother the only reason why these turks are including these mou are beacuse they know they will be ghetting big money out of us ...we are a country who looks out for our *** but not what is growing inside of it(horrible example ) we are a country thinking that one day our friends will come to our aid ...lllooolll...no. one thing i have learned in life dont trust in anyone ... which we always do

I'd like to separate the people of all these Muslim countries from their corrupt rulers. The feudal elite in Pakistan have done just as much to undermine Islam as Attaturk, we're on the same moral levels here. Either we go for the complete change, or we don't...there's no middle ground.

 

[Nutuk]

I'd like to separate the people of all these Muslim countries from their corrupt rulers. The feudal elite in Pakistan have done just as much to undermine Islam as Attaturk, we're on the same moral levels here.

??? Dear Mark Sien, what you write above shows that you have understand nothing about Ataturk.

People tend to think about Ataturk as anti Islamic because he abolished the Caliphate and brought secularism. If you just look at the surface you get that picture but in fact Ataturk did the best for Islam in Turkey.

Many people turn a blind eye to the fact that Islam is hostage in the hands of radicals, self declared mullahs, talibans etc. What Ataturk did in Turkey was putting our religion free from the yoke of these hostage takers. I want to remind you that Turkey is secular yet it is a country having the most mosques in the entire world. There is no single village in Turkey without a mosque. People should enjoy their religion, not the teachings of self declared radicals and talibans.

 

[Nutuk]

Ataturk abolishing the Caliphate was something that protected Pakistanis as well, yet some are too blind to see. After the Ottoman empire was defeated the Sultan Caliphe turned into a puppet of England (note that after Ataturk abolished the Caliphate the Sultan took a British ship to settle in Britain)

Now to those Ataturk haters: how would a puppet Caliphe of the British served Pakistani's? Just think for once! How would the Caliphe even serve Islam?

Mustafa Kemal burried only what was already dead or better said hostage in British hands!

 

[Quwa]

??? Dear Mark Sien, what you write above shows that you have understand nothing about Ataturk.

People tend to think about Ataturk as anti Islamic because he abolished the Caliphate and brought secularism. If you just look at the surface you get that picture but in fact Ataturk did the best for Islam in Turkey.

Many people turn a blind eye to the fact that Islam is hostage in the hands of radicals, self declared mullahs, talibans etc. What Ataturk did in Turkey was putting our religion free from the yoke of these hostage takers. I want to remind you that Turkey is secular yet it is a country having the most mosques in the entire world. There is no single village in Turkey without a mosque. People should enjoy their religion, not the teachings of self declared radicals and talibans.

The Caliphate and Shariah Law is what sustained the Muslim World for over 1300 years, and is our obligation to Allah SWT to preserve -- or rather re-establish -- this system. Granted that the radicals, mullahs, Talibans, etc, are a problem, but to kill a virus, you don't kill the person (or system), but remove the actual virus.

Instead, Attaturk created a Turkey that would one day become a client state of the IMF, become subject to the financial instability/injusticies of the West, and also allow the formation of a foreign state upon Muslim soil. Obviously, these charges are not limited to just Turkey, every other Muslim country is also guilty of the same.

Prayer in a masjid is only a single aspect of Islam, there are entrenched rights that every Muslim in the world deserves to enjoy -- and there are responsibilities/obligations upon every individual. I am not saying that we should have the Taliban rule us, far from it...I am saying that we remove the Islamic claims from the Taliban. We think we know more about Islam than the Taliban, and that we can implement it better and fairly than the Taliban. Yet, despite all the talk, it is the Taliban who continue to scott free giving Shariah a bad name...when it was Shariah that had given birth to female professionals, universities, sciences, etc.

Secondly, the Caliphate isn't restricted to the names of monarchs or sultans, but is an actual system. It is the just and legitimate Islamic state, that must meet certain criteria before it can claim to be legitimate in front of Allah SWT. If the Ottoman Sultan was problematic, then remove him...the Ummah is actually required to select their leaders via. merit and consensus anyways. This was the distinguishing feature of the Khulafah Rashidun. If the Ottomans sold out, then remove them, but don't destroy the Khilafah State. If you had a democracy, but elected an idiot sellout ruler, do you destroy the democracy or remove the ruler?

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

The caliphate and the shariah law has done nothing for the muslims in centuries---the caliph was most of the time and incompetent drunkard, a womanizer and a mass murderer against anyone who talked against him.

Shariah law was selective in nature most of the times---most of the shariah law is based on tribal customs of that time---it also has its basis in the biblical law---.

As the present day and the previous day muslims lived in nation states---it is by choice the system they chose to live under---if a caliph was selected from nomadic tribes---and tribal leaders chose a caliph---then current days muslims can have their own selection procedure in place to select a govt of their chosing.

I am glad that Ataturk stepped upto the plate, pulled the nation up from its boot starps and gave an ideology to the nation and its people to move ahead with life.

Muslim history is filled up with the most incompetent caliphs---who could be---except for a handfull of them---there is no pride of performance from any of them.

If a systematic analysis is done---very simply, we will find out the how criminally neglegent these caliphs were of their duties to he nation and to the populace---.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Ataturk abolishing the Caliphate was something that protected Pakistanis as well, yet some are too blind to see. After the Ottoman empire was defeated the Sultan Caliphe turned into a puppet of England (note that after Ataturk abolished the Caliphate the Sultan took a British ship to settle in Britain)

Now to those Ataturk haters: how would a puppet Caliphe of the British served Pakistani's? Just think for once! How would the Caliphe even serve Islam?

Mustafa Kemal burried only what was already dead or better said hostage in British hands!

it was the Wahhabis who were the sell-outs!!!

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Hi,

The caliphate and the shariah law has done nothing for the muslims in centuries---the caliph was most of the time and incompetent drunkard, a womanizer and a mass murderer against anyone who talked against him.

Shariah law was selective in nature most of the times---most of the shariah law is based on tribal customs of that time---it also has its basis in the biblical law---.

As the present day and the previous day muslims lived in nation states---it is by choice the system they chose to live under---if a caliph was selected from nomadic tribes---and tribal leaders chose a caliph---then current days muslims can have their own selection procedure in place to select a govt of their chosing.

I am glad that Ataturk stepped upto the plate, pulled the nation up from its boot starps and gave an ideology to the nation and its people to move ahead with life.

Muslim history is filled up with the most incompetent caliphs---who could be---except for a handfull of them---there is no pride of performance from any of them.

If a systematic analysis is done---very simply, we will find out the how criminally neglegent these caliphs were of their duties to he nation and to the populace---.

look man.....

Religion and State Affairs do not go well together.


There is one of many reasons for that and it is clearly illustrated:

You can spend 3 weeks in parliament debating over a new bill or measure. You can spend 387 years discussing what is Shariah and what is not.


religion is a private matter. At least according to my humble opinion.


Mullahs don't run countries. Statesmen who are well learned in the art of leadership and nation-building --those are people you want running your country. They had Ataturk, we had Jinnah.


we celebrate our strong and time-tested friendship

 

[Nutuk]

Secondly, the Caliphate isn't restricted to the names of monarchs or sultans, but is an actual system. It is the just and legitimate Islamic state, that must meet certain criteria before it can claim to be legitimate in front of Allah SWT. If the Ottoman Sultan was problematic, then remove him...the Ummah is actually required to select their leaders via. merit and consensus anyways. This was the distinguishing feature of the Khulafah Rashidun. If the Ottomans sold out, then remove them, but don't destroy the Khilafah State. If you had a democracy, but elected an idiot sellout ruler, do you destroy the democracy or remove the ruler?

Well in normal circumstances I could agree with your thoughts, but think of it in the real situation of 1924, Turkey had just emerged from the ashes of the remains of the Ottoman empire (and still greatfull to the help sent by our Pakistani brothers).

Strange as it may sound the Caliphate as puppet of the British fought the freedom seeking Turkish army siding with the British!!!!! All Arab lands (former Ottoman empire soil) where occupied by British, India/Pakistan where under rule of the British, Indonesia evenso.

So to whom do you suppose Ataturk could trust the leadership of the Caliphate, without having also our faith and spiritual leadership hostage to the British???? Please answer.

 

[Arsalan]

i guess it would be better if we can discuss key aspects of the MoU rather then debating on "turkey and its religion"

regards!

 

[Super Falcon]

good news for pakistan anvy and pakistan defence i hope we will get better deal from turkey.


one more thing i want to tell to our adminstrative that im finding probleums on loging in in the forum so kindly help me i was just loged in for 5 min than disconnected from the forum kindly send me new password on my E-maill to our administator help is neded

 

[Quwa]

Well in normal circumstances I could agree with your thoughts, but think of it in the real situation of 1924, Turkey had just emerged from the ashes of the remains of the Ottoman empire (and still greatfull to the help sent by our Pakistani brothers).

Strange as it may sound the Caliphate as puppet of the British fought the freedom seeking Turkish army siding with the British!!!!! All Arab lands (former Ottoman empire soil) where occupied by British, India/Pakistan where under rule of the British, Indonesia evenso.

So to whom do you suppose Ataturk could trust the leadership of the Caliphate, without having also our faith and spiritual leadership hostage to the British???? Please answer.

Islam is not just a religion, it is a way of thought...its application starts from the mind, and flows down from there. No one cares about the Caliph's private life, the Caliph's job is to lead a state: its army, its foreign policies, its domestic policies, etc. The "Caliph" merely means "viceregent", the one who applies Shariah. If the Ottomans sold out to the British, then they were no longer our rightful leaders...Attaturk could easily have been the Caliph and his army the Mujahideen. Except, he removed the system, and we lost that Islamic legitimacy...which the tribal-illiterate Taliban abuse freely.

 

[Quwa]

Hi,

The caliphate and the shariah law has done nothing for the muslims in centuries---the caliph was most of the time and incompetent drunkard, a womanizer and a mass murderer against anyone who talked against him.

That may have been the case for some of the Ummayads and Abbasids, but we do not use them as our examples. The example of what the Caliphate should model itself on is the Khulafah Rashidun - under the Sahabbas. They were far from the "incompetent drunkard, womanizing mass-murderers". Secondly, the "Caliph" - i.e. leader - is only part of the actual issue, Islam is an entire system. Yes, the Caliph may be corrupt, but as long as the governing institutions - such as military, judiciary, etc - are following Shariah, then the overall system is legitimate.

As bad as the previous Caliphs were, there is no doubt that Muslims were generally not backward fools. In fact, it was in the period of the Caliphate that the Muslim world gave birth to its finest scholars and judges (men and women alike). It was when the intellectual understanding of Islam decreased, that the ability to do proper Ijtehad failed and thus the lag of rulings vis-a-vis the ever-changing reality.

Shariah law was selective in nature most of the times---most of the shariah law is based on tribal customs of that time---it also has its basis in the biblical law---.

That doesn't make sense. Shariah law conflicted with many of the Arabian tribal customs and beliefs, so how can it be from it? Shariah clearly has a different precedence.

 

[Nutuk]

Islam is not just a religion, it is a way of thought...its application starts from the mind, and flows down from there. No one cares about the Caliph's private life, the Caliph's job is to lead a state: its army, its foreign policies, its domestic policies, etc. The "Caliph" merely means "viceregent", the one who applies Shariah. If the Ottomans sold out to the British, then they were no longer our rightful leaders...Attaturk could easily have been the Caliph and his army the Mujahideen. Except, he removed the system, and we lost that Islamic legitimacy...which the tribal-illiterate Taliban abuse freely.

As I see Marksien you base your thoughts without knowing the Turkish history. The Caliphate was safe and well protected in times when the Ottoman empire was strong (or better said a superpower in the world). But begin 20th century in WW1 the Ottoman empire lost the war and became occupied by British, French and Italians. The sultan/Caliph had become a puppet in the hands of the British. He even called jihad (in the name of the British!!!) against general Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) who had started rebellion against the British/French/Italian occupiers. To make it short and plain, without a Muslim country out there who is fully independent, strong enough (preferably being a superpower) to keep the Caliphate safe there was no point keeping it, best thing was to abolish it so that at least our faith could not become a toy and hostage to Christian powers. Now if you are thinking that was wrong I am completely thinking the opposite. To underline my thoughts I think there is still no Islamic country in the world (unfortunately) strong enough and independent enough to be a safe country to revive the Caliphate!

 

[Quwa]

The Caliphate was safe and well protected in times when the Ottoman empire was strong (or better said a superpower in the world). But begin 20th century in WW1 the Ottoman empire lost the war and became occupied by British, French and Italians. The sultan/Caliph had become a puppet in the hands of the British. He even called jihad (in the name of the British!!!) against general Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) who had started rebellion against the British/French/Italian occupiers. To make it short and plain, without a Muslim country out there who is fully independent, strong enough (preferably being a superpower) to keep the Caliphate safe there was no point keeping it, best thing was to abolish it so that at least our faith could not become a toy and hostage to Christian powers.

I understand that the Caliph had sold out to the British, but, at that moment he was no longer the Caliph of the Muslims. In Islamic Law, once the Caliph (or government) breaks the Shariah, then they are to be removed -- this was an order by the Prophet SLAWS. However, the Islamic System which actually governs the Muslims' political, economic and judicial affairs cannot be removed. Secondly, it isn't us who define how strong a Muslim country must be in order to establish the Caliphate, it is Allah SWT. Looking back at the guidelines set by the Prophet SLAWS, it would seem that Turkey was still in the best position to maintain, if not revive the Islamic Ummah.

Now if you are thinking that was wrong I am completely thinking the opposite. To underline my thoughts I think there is still no Islamic country in the world (unfortunately) strong enough and independent enough to be a safe country to revive the Caliphate!

Today, we are beyond the bounds of removing rulers and re-establishing the system on its own. Now, the Muslim World must undergo an intellectual revival of Islam in terms of understanding Islam and being able to implement it properly. Without this understanding, the Caliphate will not be ressurected, regardless of the Muslim World's physical strength. In fact, the Caliphate's success rests upon the intellectual basis of Muslims, more so than their wealth and power.

However, the Prophet SLAWS said, that the Muslims will be ruled in multiple eras: First era being under the rule of Prophethood, then under the rule of the Khulafah Rashidun, then the rule of Monarchies, then the rule of Tyrants and finally, the rule of the Khilafah on the path of Prophethood.

 

[Nutuk]

Closing the eyes for realities is your weaknes Mark.

Let us summon the Muslim countries:
- Pakistan (plagued by civil unrest, taliban)
- Turkey (plagued by Kurd terorism)
- Iran (plagued by international isolism US policy)
- Egypt (plagued by radicalists teror)
and the list goes on!!!!

The few Arab countries who are not plagued by something are fully in control of the US

Now what does that tell you? You never heard of divide and rule tactics that has been played on you for century by the Britis, now taken over by the US?

Face it, there is no single Muslim country on the whole world strong enough to fight of the outside influences (plain said read USA) that plague our countries, none of us could defend and keep the Caliphate free of being influenced / controlled by outside powers.