Gulen`s Interview with the German Newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung

Interview with German Newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung ‘Charge of the Preacher’, dated 13th December 2014

Interviewers: Tim Neshitov and Christiane Schlötzer

Question: The Turkish government demands your extradition from Barack Obama. Do you still feel safe in the US?

The US is a democratic country with the rule of law. No one can be convicted arbitrarily and without due process here. There is no legal basis for the Turkish president’s extradition request. By doing so however, the only thing that is being is achieved is the violation of international law and the degradation of Turkey’s international standing and reputation.


Question: Once you supported of Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s conservative-Islamic AKP party. What has changed since then?

AKP was founded on the promise of democracy, human rights, EU-membership, an end to corruption and stigmatization of ‘others’, and economic development. In the first years they undertook steps in accordance with these promises and accordingly participants of the Hizmet movement supported them. However, after coming to power for the third time in 2011, the AKP government started to govern in ways that was completely contrary to the democratic steps they had taken in their first two terms.


For example, the political pressure on the media, the granting of super powers to the intelligence services (MIT), the use of Stasi-like methods, the disregard and contempt of judicial decisions, the mistreatment of protestors and many other such measures and steps all prove how far we have gone back on our democratic gains. To cover up their corruption and to form an authoritarian system, the government has declared me an enemy of the state. But there is a saying that fits well in this context and that is: ‘a liar’s candle only burns till sunset.’


Question: Together with Erdogan you have forced back the influence of the army on Turkish politics. Is this all forgotten?

In the past Turkey has experienced four different military coups. Governments have been brought down, ten thousands of people have been interrogated and arrested, and many of them got tortured. In Turkey terrible things have happened which are not imaginable in the EU (which we want to join). In a 2010 referendum 58% of the Turkish population voted for a change in the law. This constitutional change allowed bringing officers who had attempted a military coup to a civil court. If the AKP hadn’t politicized the referendum so much, maybe 70% would have approved it. For the first time in my life I made a recommendation on a matter of public vote (i.e. the referendum). I had said, ‘even the dead should rise and take part in this referendum’. After the country had been freed from the repression by the military, the AKP connected all state bodies to the executive and thus made institutions that supervise and keep illegal activities in check completely dysfunctional. As a result, the judiciary was no longer independent, creating a tutelage of a political party. Just as we took a stance against military tutelage in the past, we are against a political party’s tutelage today. That is why we have been labelled as traitors.


Question: Where is Turkey heading for?

During the recent period, the Turkish Republic gives the impression that it is no longer a social, laic, constitutional democracy. It has rather become a one-party state; even a one-man state. The separation of powers has been suppressed except for the constitutional court which is still putting up resistance. Today, Turkey is experiencing an internal polarization and is losing any international reputation it has. Turkey is getting lonelier. I am saddened by the current situation that my country finds itself in.


Question: Erdogan says that he wants to raise religious youth. Don’t you want the same thing?
The objective of the state cannot be to raise religious youth. Otherwise, the state would be imposing one worldview on its citizens. Freedom of religion and belief is a basic human right. It is the state’s responsibility to create an environment in which its citizen are able to freely practice and teach their faith and religion, whatever that might be.


What was expected of Erdogan, who has been in power for over 12 years, was to pass laws that protected and provided this freedom for religious minorities in Turkey as well. Whether this has been done or not is a matter of debate. What’s more, a religious person should not compromise upholding people’s rights and justice. In this sense I wish for a religious generation. But if you mean a generation which has no idea of its own religion that sows division and hatred in the society, then my answer is very clear: No.


Question: Recently you published statements in five major US newspapers taking a stand against Isis. How dangerous Isis?

In the history of Islam radical groups have come up. In fact, these groups suppressed other communities, murdered people and hereby betrayed their religion. A few years ago there was Al-Qaida. Now there is Isis; that’s all we needed! Isis defiles the image of Islam. What they are doing is nothing but barbarism. Whoever was prejudiced against Islam feels vindicated now. The situation is dire and scares our sleep away.


Unfortunately, the Islamic World has not taken an unequivocal stand on this matter including the Islamic scholars of Mecca, Medina, Egypt and Turkey.


Question: Did you expect more protests?

Sadly I haven’t seen any large demonstrations. Furthermore it is alleged that Isis is being supported from other countries with weaponry and logistics. If these claims are true, world peace and the future of Islam are in danger.


Question: Are Isis fighters Muslim?
They are victims of a mass psychosis. In Europe this phenomenon is well known. People followed movements, which were responsible for massacres. Isis members are ignorant people who don’t know their own religion in the least. They made up a ‘holy war’. It is a system of madness.


Question: How can young Europeans be protected from this madness?

Although this might appear to contradict the ideals of freedom in the Western world but we need to better control our youth. They should be better educated through seminars and conferences. The responsibilities of the countries that these young people come from should not be forgotten, too.


Question: What do you recommend to the politicians of the Turkish government on this subject?

I cannot recommend them anything. They will not listen to me. They have brilliant minds and know everything.


Question: How do you like Erdogan’s palace?

Every state needs prestigious buildings. However, instead of erecting a palace with 1000 rooms, they could have renewed the existing buildings. There was a court order to even freeze all work on the new constructon. The Prime Minister ignored it. Such behaviour shakes the citizens’ respect for the rule of law. In the Ottoman Empire the most splendid palaces were built during the time of their decadence and decline. Today many heads of states work in modest buildings. That’s why this magnificent building has in fact harmed Turkey’s reputation. 60% of the Turkish people regard it as wasteful. From a religious perspective this is “haram” (sinful and forbidden).


Question: Erdogan accuses your movement of infiltrating the judiciary and the police.
A citizen cannot infiltrate the institutions of his own country, he serves them. Anybody who has the necessary qualifications can be a public employee. I wonder whether what is disturbing these people is that such employees or civil servants have not sworn allegiance to their particular party. The current political practice does not only stigmatize Hizmet sympathisers, but anyone who keeps themselves at arms length from the governing party. They see everyone within this spectrum as harmful elements in the state. This is called a witch-hunt.


Question: Thousands of civil servants have been moved and dismissed. How many of them were Hizmet members?
I don’t even know a tenth of the people who feel connected to this movement. After a certain time it will be recognized that many of the concerned prosecutors, police officers and teachers that have been dismissed have nothing to do wit the Hizmet movement. It is possible that they are doing all these things with two things in mind. On the one hand, they try to present us as a big threat by stigmatizing so many people. On the other hand, they want to get rid of everybody who keeps him or herself at arms length from the AKP. Most recently a leading member of AKP has also admitted to this strategy as well.


Question: The officials had collected corruption allegations against sons of ministers and pro-government businessmen. What do you think about these allegations?

No one has been able to get to the bottom of the matter now that the judicial investigations have been derailed. Had this happened in a western democracy, the government would have resigned. Ankara went so far to portray the investigations as an international conspiracy – again, a typical strategy in authoritarian regimes.


Question: Has the Hizmet Movement been weakened?
Indeed, it cannot be denied that the propaganda by the state-controlled media has tarnished the image of Hizmet. People who send their children to our schools and support us with donations are being scared. But some day these lies and propaganda will eventually turn against those that manufacture them.


Question: The government plans to close down all your schools in Turkey.

These schools have won high praise and many awards. If Turkey is a state of law, we expect that nothing will happen to these schools. Otherwise, Turkey will lose.


Question: Recently Gülen Schools have been closed down in Central Asia. Is the Turkish government’s influence responsible for that?

The Turkish government tries to find different arguments against us in every country. In the republics of the former Soviet Union they say we are American spies. In the US they call us religious fundamentalists and in Islamic countries they allege that we are luring their children away from religion. They are pragmatists. Yet, in this way Turkey is breaking down bridges of friendship and is harming its international standing. In this way, Turkish paranoia is being transported abroad.


Question: A former US ambassador once described you as second most powerful man in Turkey. How do you see yourself?

I seek refuge from God of such entitlements. Anyone who knows me a little can confirm that I do not want to be known or famous. I have never tried to obtain spiritual or material gain by being known. My life of 76 years attests to this. If there is any success worth applauding in this movement that should be directed towards the many voluntary participants of it.


Question: Will this movement exist after Fethullah Gülen?

People who do not necessarily share my worldview have supported this movement. Our view has always been universal values. People in Africa whom I have never met co-financed the schools and hospitals there. These were people from whom we were not expecting anything. Every night when I go to bed I doubt whether I might wake up again. But I do not have the least amount of doubt about the future of the movement.


Question: Do you think about returning to Turkey?
I miss my country very much. I am an emotional person. I have got family and friends. Recently my brother passed away and I wasn’t able to attend his funeral. This was also the case with other relatives. I have spent 60 years of my life in Turkey. I feel very connected to places and even to objects; the village I was born in, the graves of my father and my grandparents, the neighbourhood in Izmir where I lived for many years, the books in my library there… All of these are always in my mind and I can’t hold back my tears when I recall them. If I returned to Turkey today, some people working at the highest levels of the state would abuse this for their ill intentions.


Question: Can you imagine reconciliation with Erdogan?
We didn’t start a fight. That’s why they have to make the first move for reconciliation. If some day Erdogan confesses to everyone that everything he said at his rallies and meetings against the movement were nothing more than lies and slander, then I will be I will be content with such efforts. [In a later comment, Gulen says “provided that they are allow for an independent judicial process to take its course and adjudicate on the corruption allegations”.]


Question: Is there anything which makes you happy nowadays despite all difficulties?
I have never been happy for a long time. After each military coup I was persecuted. But what I experience today is even worse. Still, on the bright side ‘coals and diamonds are now separated’ (Turkish saying). The world is now recognizing the meaning of this movement.


Question: Many in America were amused about Erdogan’s recent statement that Muslims had discovered America before Christopher Columbus. What are your comments on this?
It is up to researchers and scientists to discuss when something is first discovered. There are people who say: “Who is Einstein anyway? And who is this Edison?” They argue that Muslims knew all about this in the 5th century. It is not right to say ’only Muslims could have done’ a certain thing.

Fethullah Gulen's Interview with Asharq Al-Awsat [PART 1]

In Conversation with Fethullah Gülen

In the first part of this interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, the Turkish Islamic scholar talks about the Hizmet movement, the Turkish government ban on private prep schools, the Hanafi school of Islam, and the relationship between Islam, politics and democracy.   *Read Part 2 here

London, Asharq Al-Awsat—Over the last 10 years and up until the Gezi Park protests that erupted in Istanbul last May, Turkey’s democratic and mostly secular political system was hailed by many as a model for other Muslim-majority nations across the Middle East.

Much of the credit has gone to the leader and founder of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Since he entered the office of prime minister in 2003, Turkey has found the stability needed to tame chronic inflation and re-establish itself as a regional economic powerhouse. The ever-looming specter of military intervention in the country’s political life under the banner of the defense of Atatürk’s secular state has been sidelined. Tangible progress has been achieved in the peace process with the Kurds. Under the guidance of a succession of very active foreign ministers, Turkey managed to push ahead important reforms with an eye on EU membership, while at the same time opening other diplomatic options in the face of the skepticism from EU member states.

But the Turkish honeymoon has come to an end. At the center of the storm is Erdoğan himself, accused by the opposition of succumbing to the arrogance of power and of pursuing an agenda to Islamize Turkey. His heavy-handed response to protests and a succession of recent corruption probes and allegations involving AKP ministers, as well as the prime minister and his close family, have only added fuel to the fire.

For the AKP leadership and many observers of Turkey, it is the supporters of Fethullah Gülen, the hugely popular Turkish Islamic scholar who lives in self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania, who are behind the allegations and the anonymous release of audio recordings with the purpose of incriminating the prime minister. Erdoğan accuses Gülen of running a “parallel state” and of infiltrating the police and the judiciary. Gülen has publicly denied those accusations.

The Turkish government has now transferred hundreds of policemen and pushed forward new laws to monitor the Internet and govern the work of the judiciary. Last year’s widely opposed bill to close private preparatory schools (known as dershanesin Turkish), many of which are run by the Hizmet (“Service”) movement led by Gülen, was approved by parliament earlier this month.

Critics of Gülen believe the Hizmet movement, which runs over 2,000 privately owned educational premises in 160 countries around the world, is pursuing a secret agenda to Islamize Turkey. Many others note the movement has no formal organization and official membership, and that Gülen has long been an advocate of peace, tolerance, humanism, science, and a teacher of moderate Hanafi school of Sunni Islam, rather than of political Islam.

Asharq Al-Awsat spoke with Mr Gülen on the eve of Turkey’s municipal elections, considered an important barometer for the forthcoming presidential elections this summer and the parliamentary polls scheduled for next year.

Asharq Al-Awsat: Do you see your millions of supporters and the hundreds of schools established by your followers around the world as a single, integrated movement?

Fethullah Gülen: Personally, I don’t think it is right to call people my supporters or any other person’s supporters. I have frequently emphasized that it hurts me greatly to witness people being referred to by their ideological designations. I would like to emphatically note that these people come together voluntarily to implement projects which they find reasonable and logical. While it is a movement inspired by faith, this community of volunteers develops and delivers reasonable and universally acceptable projects which are in full compliance with humanitarian values and which aim to promote individual freedoms, human rights and peaceful coexistence for all people regardless of their faith. Accordingly, people from every nation and religion have either welcomed these projects or have lent active or passive, direct or indirect, support to them in 160 countries around the world. In this sense, it is impossible to say that the composition of this movement is homogeneous.

This heterogeneity applies not only to the values nurtured by the participants in the Movement, but also to their sympathy toward or participation in the Movement’s projects. Some work as teachers in the schools abroad, while others pay stipends or allocate part of their time to voluntary services, etc. They are people from a diverse array of ethnic, religious or political groups who voluntarily come together in light of certain common values. [Those values include] freedom, human rights, respect for beliefs, accepting everyone for who they are, openness to dialogue, dislike for abuse of religion for political ends, respect for laws, refraining from the abuse of state resources, asserting that there is no turning back from democracy, rejecting the use of the state resources and coercion to transform individuals or societies or impose certain religious beliefs on them, trust in civil society, and promoting peace through educational activities. [It also includes more religious values such as] seeking the consent of the Creator in every act or word, loving the created for the sake of the Creator, reinforcing the moral values of individuals irrespective of their religious or other values, etc. While several names have been used to date to refer to them, the term Camia in Turkish, which means a large community of diverse people, or “movement” in English, seems to be best one. I can say that these people—who are banded together in light of the foregoing values—despite not constituting a homogenous group, sport such a spirit or awareness of unity and integrity that they cannot be manipulated into breaching the above-mentioned values.

Q: What do you think about the Turkish government’s move to ban private prep schools?

In the first place, I must state that prep schools are a necessary byproduct of the Turkish educational system’s shortcomings. They are legitimate businesses run by people in full compliance with existing laws and in line with the principle of free enterprise, which are enshrined in the Constitution. Secondly, even those associated with the Hizmet Movement are not run directly by the Movement itself, but by a number of private companies belonging to businesspeople who are personally inspired by the Movement. They operate under the constant educational and financial supervision of the public authorities. Moreover, they dutifully pay their taxes to the state. What is more, only a small proportion of the prep schools in Turkey belong to businesspeople affiliated with the Community.

Given that nothing is being done to eliminate the grave problems facing the country’s educational system, of which prep schools are a natural byproduct, trying to shut them down can therefore hardly be seen as a well-intentioned effort. These institutions provide aspiring students with consulting and educational services in certain fields, such as mathematics and science, and operate according to the laws of the land. If the state forces these schools to shut down, it would deal a blow to both access to education as well as the principles of free enterprise.

Furthermore, it is a fact that the teachers who act in accordance with the Movement’s basic principles tend to be positive, proactive, upright, honest, hard-working and non-discriminatory, and that this can have a positive influence on their students.

Thus, we observe that these prep schools are, thankfully, successful in combating students’ harmful habits, such as smoking, alcoholism and even drug use, which constitute huge problems for state schools. Despite the fact that these institutions have never acted in breach of Turkey’s laws and moral values or universal human values and democracy, and that the plan to shut down them has not been sufficiently debated, and that many people want them to remain open, the decision to proceed to ban these schools will eliminate the continuation of such positive impacts and successes into the future.

Q: You have always denied having political ambitions, but you have followers within the state apparatus. Do you think this works to your advantage in Turkey?

First of all, I must note that this Movement does not pursue political aims, but aims to serve humanity through educational, social and cultural activities. It invests all its time and energy in these services. It aims to solve social problems by focusing on individuals.

In my sermons, I have stated that we have enough mosques but not enough schools. I have encouraged the congregation to try to open schools instead of mosques—many of which were empty at the time. If we nurtured any political aim, such as establishing a political party, various signs of our aim would have become manifest during the past 40 to 50 years. Over time, various political positions and ranks have been offered to me and my friends, but we rejected them all. If the Movement had political aspirations, it would have established a political party in 2001, when the political scene was quite suitable for such an initiative, but it did not. Likewise, if we really wanted to, we would have ensured that we had many supporters in the ruling parties that have come to office to date, but we did not. Until very recently, there had been only two Members of Parliament associated with the Hizmet Movement in the ruling party, which is known to everyone.

I have never approved of the instrumentalization of religion or religious values to attain political ends, the abuse of religion with political motives, or the use of religious slogans in political contexts. Of course, it is legitimate for people to engage in political activities, and although we are not involved in politics—such as by establishing a political party—we do not preclude others from doing so. Indeed, political parties are essential constituents of any democratic system. Of course, the Hizmet Movement does not seek to establish a political party. Yet the Movement’s fundamental dynamics and common universal values, which I tried to elucidate in response to an earlier question of yours, do have political implications. Individually or collectively, participants in this Movement who are engaged in educational, social and charitable projects may have demands from politics and politicians. But these legitimate demands are always sought through legitimate means and, in this process, unlawful, illegitimate or unethical methods are strictly avoided and counseled against.

Participants in and supporters of the Hizmet Movement naturally expect its administrators to promote the rule of law, human rights, freedoms, peace, freedom of thought and enterprise, and stability and order in the country, [and they also expect] that they [the political leaders] work to eliminate chaos and anarchy and ensure that everyone is accepted as they are. Such participants resort to civilian and democratic means available to them to raise their voices about shortcomings in this regard. Raising public awareness is both a civic duty and one of the goals of civil society. No one can be forced to establish a political party in order to do this, and those who raise public awareness about these shortcomings cannot be accused of pursuing political goals, trying to partner with the ruling party, or meddling with democratically elected representatives. This is how it works in any true democracy.

Political parties and free elections are prerequisites of a democratic system, but they are not sufficient on their own. The effective and smooth functioning of civil society is important as well. It is wrong to say that elections are the only way to hold politicians accountable to the public. With its media, organized structure, legal activities, petitions and social media messages, civil society continuously supervises the ruling party and checks whether it is fulfilling its promises. Those who sympathize with our Movement tend to refrain from involvement in partisan politics and from seeking political careers. But this does not mean that, as members of civil society, we relinquish our responsibility to hold politicians to account.

Furthermore, the Hizmet Movement does not have a homogenous composition and it does not have a central or hierarchical structure, so its participants do not have a single political view. Therefore, it is unreasonable for it to closely support any specific political party. The Movement’s participants have their personal political views, and the Movement does not impose any specific view on its participants. The Movement is not focused on elections or political developments, but on projects that promote common universal values. Likewise, the Movement does not meddle with the internal affairs or political developments of any country. Wherever it goes, it seeks to develop and implement civil, educational, cultural and humanitarian projects. Since it sticks with this principle, the Movement is able to be active in 160 countries around the world.

If it is true that there are people who are sympathetic to the values and projects of the Movement working in various positions within the Turkish state but whose identities are not readily obvious—it is both unlawful and unethical to attempt to profile them through various methods. Public servants who are said to be sympathetic to the Movement are bound by the laws, by-laws and the code of conduct of the authorities they work for, and they are strictly subordinated to their superiors and their duties are defined by the relevant laws. I really don’t know if or how this may be an advantage for any social group.

Let me repeat a point: In any state there may be those who feel affection towards me or towards another person or who sympathize with an intellectual or ideological movement. This is quite normal. No one should or can meddle with the personal convictions, beliefs or worldviews of another person. The people who graduate from schools associated with the Movement or who sympathize with the ideals promoted by the Movement are expected to act in a way that is honest and respectful of the rule of law, human rights and democratic principles, [regardless of] whatever positions they assume in public office.

If there are people within the state bureaucracy who take orders from an ideological or other group instead of obeying the orders of their superiors or the provisions of laws and regulations, they must be found and punished, even if they claim to be acting on my behalf. If there are public servants who claim to sympathize with the Hizmet Movement [who] commit crimes, investigations should be swiftly launched against them; they must be brought to justice. The Movement’s stance regarding transparency and accountability is clear and will remain so.

Yet, as you might appreciate, only political systems which rest upon the principle of full transparency can demand that civil society be transparent as well. It is a sign of insincerity to refrain from making the state and politics more transparent while telling everyone else to be more transparent. The latest wave of profiling, wiretapping and bureaucratic purges in Turkey reinforces the point I make. Thousands of public officials have been reassigned without any disciplinary procedure following the December 17 corruption investigations. The public still does not know the criteria that are being used to identify who should be reassigned where. The entire process gives the impression of an arbitrary process.

Q: Do you believe Islam should be given more room in the public sphere and in politics?

Islam, as a religion, is a set of principles and practices based on divine revelation which guides human beings to absolute goodness through their own free will and shows them how to strive to become a “perfect person.” People can live their religion in any way they please in a democratic country which allows people to enjoy their religious beliefs freely. In such a country, free elections are held in compliance with democratic principles and universal human rights and freedoms, and people freely voice their demands of their representatives. They do this by casting their votes at the elections and through using other democratic rights available to them. They can do this individually or collectively by participating in the activities of civil society groups. I always reject the idea of treating religion as a political ideology.

In my opinion, a Muslim should continue to act as a Muslim in social life and in the private, public, civilian and bureaucratic spheres. In other words, a Muslim is supposed to stick to Islam’s moral and ethical values everywhere and at all times. Theft, bribery, looting, graft, lying, gossip, backbiting, adultery and moral lowness are sins and are illegitimate in every context. These sins cannot be committed for political or other purposes and no one can issue a fatwa allowing their commission. At the same time, these acts of corruption are generally deemed by universally accepted norms as criminal offences. If an individual has lost his or her moral integrity in these respects, what is the use of this individual assuming a role within a public body or within a political faction? Like anyone else, I would like to see these ethical positions adopted by all people who hold public office, whether as a civil servant or as a politician. Indeed, the above-listed afflictions are the main source of complaints about public bodies and political structures everywhere around the world.

Let me put it blatantly: If Muslims can freely cherish their religion, perform their religious duties and rituals, establish institutions defined by their religion, teach their religious values to their children or other aspirants, speak their mind about their religion in public debates, and make religious demands in compliance with laws and democracy, then they do not have to try to establish a religious or “Islamic” state. We know from history that rebellions, revolutions, uprisings and other violent incidents that have the potential to drag a country into chaos and anarchy will eventually make us lose our democratic and human rights achievements and lead to irreparable damage to that country. As a matter of fact, if a country’s administration is forcibly seized and people are forced to become religious, it would turn them into hypocrites. These people will pretend to be pious at home, but when they go abroad, they will indulge in the most extreme forms of sin and irreverent and irreligious acts. In such a country, respect for the rule of law diminishes and hypocrisy increases. If you look closely at diverse experiences in different countries, you will realize that my seemingly abstract words rely on concrete cases and observations.

Q. Do you think Islam can be reconciled with democracy in Turkey? How could a successful reconciliation of the two affect Turkey’s European Union membership bid?

Turkey has been governed by democratic rule, despite its shortcomings, since the 1950s. Democracy is a popular form of governance around the world. The preliminary moves to transition our country’s administration to democracy were made by the Ottoman sultans, who were caliphs at the same time, in 1876, and non-Muslim deputies constituted one-third of the first democratically elected parliament. It is wrong to see Islam as conflicting with democracy and vice versa. Perhaps it can be argued that democracy is a system that fits well with Islam’s governance-related principles, both in terms of its allowing the rulers to be accountable to the ruled and its being the opposite of despotism, which is defined by Islam as an evil form of governance. Islam is readily compatible with human rights, democratic elections, accountability, the supremacy of law, and other basic principles. When I said “there will be no turning back from democracy; it is not perfect, but the best system we have,” in 1994, certain groups raised objections to my assertion. But there are numerous implementations and types of democracy. We can hardly say it is a perfect form of governance. It is still going through a process of perfection.

A country where life and mind, as well as property, family and religious freedoms are protected, and where individual rights and freedoms are not restricted save for in exceptional cases such as war, minorities are treated as equal citizens and do not face any discrimination, and people are allowed to freely discuss and implement their personal, social and political views—this would be a country which is suitable for Islam. If people can freely express their views and beliefs, cherish their religion, perform their religious duties and rituals, and have freedoms such as freely acquiring property, neither Muslims nor practitioners of other religions are supposed to change the regime in that country. In countries where they cannot enjoy these liberties, they should try to obtain them through democratic means, but never by resorting to violence.

I believe that Islam and democracy can coexist peacefully not only in Turkey, but also in Muslim countries or, more precisely, in predominantly Muslim countries. We sadly observe that in countries where democracy is demonized, human rights violations, moral and legal turmoil, and religious and ethnic disputes and conflicts abound. Currently, democracy is evolving to become a common asset and custom, as it were, of the entire human race. In countries that comply with the EU standards, Muslims are entitled to cherish, implement, represent, and even promote and teach their religion. Both as individuals and as a community, our essential duty is to cherish and represent our religion.

Turkey is not described as a full-fledged democracy. Practicing Muslims who were oppressed in the past, such as Muslim female students who were banned from wearing headscarves on university campuses, have attained many rights as a result of the country’s EU bid. In this respect, the EU accession process has brought a number of benefits to Turkey. As part of this process, serious democratic reforms have been introduced to the country. If these reforms are maintained and Turkey’s democratic system can attain the EU standards regarding the rule of law and respect for human rights and freedoms, then I think Turkey’s Muslim identity will not be seen as a roadblock to its full membership. Even if anti-Islam fanatics block Turkey’s EU membership, the gains Turkey makes during its attempt at becoming a full member are still important wins for Turkey’s democracy. However, Turkey has recently started to backpedal from the EU democratic standards.

Q: Could you explain your vision of Hanafi Islam to our readers?

Such a thing is out of the question. Neither Hanafis nor other schools of Islamic jurisprudence can come up with their own interpretations of the basic tenets of Islam, but they are allowed to interpret certain aspects of Islam which are open to interpretation using a specific method. These interpretations may overlap with or contradict those of other schools. These interpretations are considered within the circle of Islam as long as they do not contradict the very spirit of Islam and the basic tenets of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. The prevailing circumstances influenced the interpretations of the founding scholars of these various schools of Islamic jurisprudence. Political and cultural circumstances, too, had an effect on these interpretations. But Imam Hanafi, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Malik and Imam Hanbal—may God be pleased with all of them—were sincere people who devoted their lives to Islam and who suffered numerous troubles in serving Islam. Through God’s will, these interpretations of Islam came to being thanks to their and their students’ hard work; these interpretations should be seen as an asset.

I try to stick to their tradition. In their understanding of Islam, protection of life, mind, property, family and religion prevails over the glorification of the state. [In addition,] people’s freedom of choice and enterprise is stressed; the role of reason, public interest and even social experience is acknowledged in addition to transmitted knowledge as a way of understanding divine revelations; the use of ijtihad—that is, interpretive reasoning—is encouraged in areas of the religion that are open to interpretation, reasoning and explanation; and the freedom to enjoin the good and forbid the evil is sought. [Furthermore], the freedom of practitioners of any religion to cherish their religion not only individually, but also the public sphere, is recognized; the respect for laws, public order, and peace is fostered; terror and the murder of innocent people are recognized as crimes against humanity; and reasoning is promoted as a method to be employed instead of coercion in the civilized world. [In their understanding] religion is defined as mainly consisting of spirituality, morality, belief in the Hereafter, worshiping God, perfection, empathetic understanding, representation, and good counseling. As a matter of fact, from a sociological perspective, this is how Islam has been accepted and interpreted in Anatolia for thousands of years. This perception of Islam defies all forms of violence, extremism and the politicization of religion, but promotes love, tolerance, mutual acceptance, humility, humbleness and inclusiveness. In the social and public sphere, this perception of Islam prioritizes rights, freedoms, justice and peace. That is, it seeks to create a social texture open in all respects.

The second part to this interview will follow in the coming days.


SOURCE: http://www.aawsat.net/2014/03/article55330430

Fethullah Gulen on Political Participation

On Political Participation

Q: Nowadays some say it is imperative to support a political philosophy. What do you say?

Sometimes political participation may be imperative. Every believer should vote and participate in the decision making process regarding the general public as it is a duty of any citizen. A believer would be responsible if she or he does not fulfill this assignment. Not only that, one should also inform their parents and other close relatives about the importance of this matter.

However who should vote for what party is not my business. Throughout my life, I always found it essential to avoid not only publicly commenting on it but even making a slightest bit of an innuendo. I am not saying “Vote for this party, or do not vote for that party!” All I am saying is, “Voting is a duty for every citizen, so everyone should do their job, or otherwise they will be responsible”. That is as much as I participate in politics…

On the matter of supporting a specific party; our interest in the elections start only a week before the election date. People like us can talk among themselves and discuss what party they should vote for and then they go and vote on the Election Day. After that, they don’t discuss it a bit. In the real democratic countries this matter is handled like that. As an example, when a citizen of the US arrives at Turkey, and asked about what party he did support, “Are you a republican or a democrat?” He replies as “I don’t support either!” When asked, “Have you not voted? Who did you vote for?” he says “I voted for Kennedy, but I don’t think about the rest, as my business and interest in elections is just that, nothing more!”

As such, we have very important duties in our own life that we need to focus on. While we are doing our own job, this or that political thought should not interfere with that. This very important duty is related to our spiritual life. We mostly keep ourselves busy with that.

These principles are important for every believer. Because believers have very important duties within the domain of heart and soul; duties like performing the daily prayers regularly, cleansing one’s heart, paying close attention to one’s connection with the Almighty and considering any disconnection in that regard a fatal failure. These are continuous ongoing duties of a believer that should not ever be interrupted. But elections come only every four years. The campaigns last and get intensified within the last week. Then people vote and the fight is over. That’s what smart people do. Others, who are foolish, keep talking about after everything is over, badger others, keep singing the same tune –of disunity, and promote hatred and waste their lives in this fight.

Let’s think about the Messenger (peace be upon him). Before Uhud he recommends to stay in Medina and not go out to Uhud. In response to this, especially the youth say “No lets go out and fight and stop them all!” The results of the consultation come out as the way the young wanted. They all go out to Uhud, but right before the fight, the hypocrites leave the front. At this point anyone in the position of the Messenger could have got mad. Although he never gets mad about that, the Almighty warns the believers in the Holy Quran (3:159) “It was by a mercy from God that (at the time of the setback), you (O Messenger) were lenient with them (your Companions). Had you been harsh and hard-hearted, they would surely have scattered away from about you. Then pardon them, pray for their forgiveness, and take counsel with them in the affairs (of public concern); and when you are resolved (on a course of action), put your trust in God. Surely God loves those who put their trust (in Him).” This is the way taught to the Messenger (peace be upon him). Now we should evaluate our own situation accordingly and try to understand what I am trying to say in my above comments.

This is a partial translation of an excerpt “Siyasete Bakis” from Cizgimizi Hecelerken by Fethullah Gulen.


SOURCE: Who is Fethullah Gulen? http://whoisgulen.com/on-political-particapation/

See also Suggested Links:

• Rumi Forum official web site

• Media, Articles, Conferences

• Corporate Video

• Newsletters

• Videos & Photos

• White House

• Learn Turkish at Rumi Forum

• The Necessity of Interfaith Dialogue by F. Gulen

• Fethullah Gulen Biography

• Quotes by Fethullah Gulen

• Books on Fethullah Gulen & Gulen Movement

• Fethullah Gulen & Gulen Movement

• Fethullah Gulen Blog

Fethullah Gulen: "Neither Now, Nor in the Future Should Our Friends Have Any Ambition for Government"

This is a part of an interview with Fethullah Gulen by Mehmet Gundem of Milliyet Daily in January 2005.

Have you written a will?

I had written a will a long time ago. In this, I requested to be buried wrapped in my robe, and with my turban (the traditional garment of a Muslim scholar). The money in my wallet now will suffice to pay for my shroud and funeral expenses. I don't want the copyright money to be used for matters of burial; I am not sure whether it will be correct. I don't want it to be paid for by my pension, which would mean the state is paying for it, either; this is why I keep this money for my funeral. I bought some of my books with my pension; I regard them as being bought by the state; some of my books were presented to me by some publishing houses, for I am a scholar. They did this because of my position. Therefore, just as I keep the presents sent by people in my collections and present them back to the nation again, I have willed my books and personal belongings to be donated to the establishment in which they are found.

There used to be some friends who paid for the tea they drank or the food they ate. I mentioned them in my will or if they're not alive, their families; I hope that they will be pleased by being given of what I have left behind. Before I came here, I wrote that if I died somewhere away (from Turkey), there would be no need to undergo extra expenses in taking my body back to Turkey, but I am not easy about this decision. I wish to be buried in Turkey next to my father or mother.

As for the movement; neither now, nor in the future should our friends have any ambition for government, they should not be engaged in politics, even if all the power and pomp of the world is laid at their feet; my friends who love me and heed my advice should not show a moment's hesitation to push all this away with the back of their hand. I had made similar statements at other times; even if others do not understand, let them seek good pleasure of God, let them strive sincerely in the path of glorifying the Name of God without a moment's lapse. Now I want to write a new will and clarify the details of such points.

You have been in the USA for six years [as of 2005]. How do Americans look on you?

I am not a well known person here. I haven't met anybody, other than a few people whom I had to accept for courtesy's sake.

Why don't you meet people?

When I came here in 1997, I met some people, for example those who worked in Turkey as diplomats, envoys, academicians, and priests. I came here due to my illness. Then when the storms (i.e., The June 1999 cassette conspiracy against Fethullah Gulen) broke out in Turkey, I thought it would be more appropriate to continue my treatment here. It was obvious that I would not be able to bear the events in Turkey with the health problems of my heart, blood pressure, cholesterol, etc. I was in America , but I stayed away from America . There were rumors like the green belt claims, and they made an association with us and America 's projects. I did not meet anybody, for I did not want to prepare ground for improper claims, I did not accept any of the offers to give conferences at universities.

My place is in my country with its earth and stone, among my nation. Recently, the Turks here have started carrying out some activities here, and expressing themselves. In this way some people have gotten to know me through some of my books. These were people who accepted Islam for the sake of our friends and said, "Muhammad is the Messenger of God." I have met some people from the intellectuals and academicians who were curious about the movement.

How have the years in America affected you?

If we express it in the terminology of Islamic Jurisprudence, my staying here was choosing the better of two evils. I did not want to come here at all, but Dr. Sait insisted, and he stated that my health could not tolerate any neglect. Even if it was hard for me, I had to either be away from my country and my people, in a foreign state, or—as one of our statesmen said—I had to consent to face a new conspiracy everyday, where they made mountains out of molehills. After having consulted with my friends, I consented to bear homesickness in order not to witness the evil that was happening and to be offended by our own people. Although I knew the conspiracy (the montage tapes) beforehand, I saw some of it when it was broadcast. I did not read what the supporters of the conspirators wrote, in order not to hold a grudge against them.

How did you know about it beforehand?

A friend from the business world had come to visit me. His phone rang. Somebody called him and said "there are a sack-full of tapes, we are making a montage. The guys here said, 'don't let him know, you will lose your job' but anyway, I wanted to call." He also said things like "I hope you will not forget this favor of mine and you won't let me down." In a way, it was blackmail.

What is it that you miss most?

I miss everything from Turkey . Traveling, having a tea-break at the cafés on the way, everything (even) the way our people dress. It may be good, it may be flawed- but I miss our architecture. The sky-scrapers here may seem majestic, but our ground-scrapers seem more attractive to me.

You miss Turkey so much, but you don't return, why?

After a certain age, your body just can't handle it. As an Arab poet expressed, I keep away but prefer being there with my heart and conscience; nothing prevents me from feeling close. Let me tell it through a simile. In Sufism, there is a certain station above that of lovers. Those who reach that station even do not want to unite with the beloved (return to God). Namely, they say let me burn inside, let me always moan with the pain of separation, but I don't want union. I feel that such a pleasurable longing, a delightful pain of separation is deeper, more faithful, and more heartfelt.

Does this mean that you will not return?

There is no legal obstacle to my return. I have never given up thinking about returning to Turkey. I have had this inquired about from people in some important positions in Turkey. They said, "There's nothing wrong, he can come." But from the way they said "he can come," I sensed that I might give them a headache if I return.

You mean some people from the state?

Yes, someone asked the question "What does his return mean to you" to a person who had retired from an important position. He smiled but said "it would be better if he didn't." It is probably thought that my return may trigger some things. Like some people will provoke others to fill the streets, and cause unrest. I do not want to open a door that will lead to the present stability in Turkey being disturbed.

There are also those who worry that you will return like Khomeini.

Even if I return, I will return like myself, the son of Ramiz Gülen who served as an imam at a Mosque in Edirne for three years. It may sound funny to you, but I wonder whether they would let me serve as an imam at that mosque again, whether I could stay there in a corner as I used to. . . or if they even do not let me be the head of a Qur'an course in the Kestane Pazari, I wonder whether they would let me stay in a wooden cabin as I used to. Another thought that passes through my mind is, with all sincerity, that there is a guest house in my village which was built in a field belonging to my grandfather; I say let me go and stay there, and die like a villager in the village where I was born and grew up.

You say you wish to go to the village in which you were born, and to die there. Will you just go to the village and keep quiet?

I did not have expectations, but I had concerns in the world. I will just keep chanting the same concerns; whatever the conditions are, I will encourage those who value my words to eagerly go to corners of the world to pursue educational activities. Even when I am being put in the grave, if I can, I will say "go establish schools, don't give up striving to make Turkish a world language.

I will tell our businessmen to go all around the world as (fresh) shoots, and be trees, to constitute lobbies, and to support Turkey. I will keep on saying that it is impossible for Turkey to be detached from the world and to stand on its own. Even if they make a special law and seal my mouth, then I will write it with my hands or feet; again I will say the same things. I have already said all these openly in my sermons in mosques, as an employee of the state. Not to my "disciples," as they say. Not like other hodjas, I may have said "Develop Turkey, let the voice of the Turkish people be heard everywhere."

In my opinion, (genuine) nationalism can only be carried out in this way, not by paying lip service to the issue. The cause of Turkey is a great one. I will keep on saying the whole nation should back it, like it did the War of Independence. I don't know any laws that will silence me in this, nor not allow me to speak so. I will keep on saying these as a debt of faith to my nation.

Source: http://en.fgulen.com/press-room/mehmet-gundems-interview/1934-gulen-qas-for-the-movement-neither-now-nor-in-the-future-should-our-friends-have-any-ambition-for-government

Ethnic Diversity and Ethnic Tolerance in Montenegro - His Excellency, Ambassador Srdjan Darmanović