Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje Quotes

The treaty followed an aggressive military policy of Russia against the Ottomans on several fronts. Turkey then granted independence to the Crimea and ceded control of several key ports to Russia. This treaty was seen as a major humiliation of the Ottoman Empire and marked a turning point in the relations between Europe and the Middle East.

The last Caliph of the Muslims was removed in 1924 as part of the Turkish Reform. The position has had attraction for many Muslim leaders who saw themselves in the role, but since 1924, nationalism and modernism and the lack of an effective international Muslim leader has precluded it.

The Byzantine emissary had pointed out that Mehmed’s predecessors had signed a treaty agreeing to “consult” with Constantinople before building any fortified structure in the area surrounding Constantinople. Mehmed was only 19 years old at this time. His intention f building a fort was to have a platform from which to attack and capture Constantinople itself which he did 2 years later. Earlier, the Eastern Roman Empire was much stronger and the Ottoman sultans were more cautious in dealing with them. However, the various Christian factions were all feuding with each other, and Mehmed II, despite his youth, was much better organized and was a better leader than his predecessors.

The People’s Party that Ataturk formed is the oldest political party in Turkey.

Ataturk wrote this manual personally. Religious Turks took violent offense to Ataturk’s proclamation that Turks were great without Islam.

The last Caliph of the Muslims was removed in 1924 as part of the Turkish Reform. The position has had attraction for many Muslim leaders who saw themselves in the role, but since 1924, nationalism and modernism and the lack of an effective international Muslim leader has precluded it. This anti-revolutionary sentiment of the Islamic political state that is so traditional, may in part account for the Islamic tolerance of autocratic regimes. Note that the distinction between religious responsibilities and civil are important. Tyranny must be tolerated but not blasphemy or heresy. Traditional Muslims provide more tolerance and forbearance for a leader’s civil failings than religious. But Muslims were not the only people to do this. A British prime minister had a view with the same conservative logic. See {639130}. The ancient Jewish Macabean revolt against the Jewish king was all based on failure to perform required religious duties of sacrifice as opposed to tyranny and poor government which also existed. Popes excommunicated Kings for religious reasons, not because of their civil failures at governing. Holding rulers accountable for civil performance is a relatively new concept yet is indispensible in a modern democracy.

The last Calif of the Muslims was removed in 1924 as part of the Turkish Reform. The position has had attraction for many Muslim leaders who saw themselves in the role, but since 1924, nationalism and modernism and the lack of an effective international Muslim leader has precluded it.

In 1925 his administration had passed a law banning the wearing of the traditional Muslim hat.

When the Turks defeated the Christians, the only explanation many Christians could conceive of was that God was on the side of the Turks.

In 1856 Turkey and its Ottoman Empire was struggling with new ideas and attempts to reform before they were hopelessly engulfed by modernism. A set of reform laws were passed in February of 1856 which horrified the conservatives and traditionalists. But interestingly the orthodoxy of the Greek minority were unhappy with their legal elevation if it meant that all would be equal. The Minister’s description of opposition to the reforms was somewhat self-serving in that he opposed most of the reforms and wanted to maintain the traditional Islamic state.

Turkey under its great leader, Ataturk, underwent a major cultural revolution. Although Turkey is overwhelmingly Muslim, its constitution provides that it be a secular state with compulsory public non-sectarian education. They adopted a European style law and prohibited Sharia (Islamic law). The nation thrived as no other Muslim country has. Muslims, the world over, are divided on Turkey. For this Sheikh its secular government is an insult to Islam because there is complete separation of mosque and state. For others it is the model which all Muslim countries should emulate.

Khomeini was a politician as well as a cleric. He was not always consistent depending on his audience. This book was the publication of 17 different speeches with different audiences. Here he opposes all monarchy, but there is little doubt that his main target was the monarchy of Saudi Arabia. In {620335} he suggests that monarchy would be acceptable if the monarch followed Islamic law. Here he leaves no room for monarchies of which there were and are a number in the Muslim world. And at the height of Islam there was a Caliph who not only had absolute rule of ALL Muslim countries, but he was the absolute ruler of the religion. The Caliph and later the Islamic Sultan held more absolute power than any king or Pope ever had. Most of the Islamic fundamentalists claim that they want a return to having a Caliph with absolute power. And even in Iraq today, the “Supreme Leader” exercises more autonomous power, than any monarch or dictator does in his own country.

Giovanni de Medici

This is a very important quotation as it focused on one critical difference between historical Islam and all the other major religions and fundamentally on the separation between church and state. In Islam there was a Caliph who was both the political ruler and the religious ruler. In comparison at the time, the Christians had a Holy Roman Emperor who was theoretically the overlord of all the Christian Kings but in reality he really could not exercise total or even much authority over all the other kings. At the same time, there was the Pope who was the religious leader of all the Christians. Since the distinction between Church and state was constantly in flux, the Christian Pope and Holy Roman Emperor were often at odds. The third Abrahamic religion, Judaism, had neither a secular leader or a religious one and no hierarchy other than local. Khaldun observed the theoretical advantage of Theocracy as a model, however he did not analyze the disadvantages among which were the assassination of many Caliphs and the laces. Even the Muslim Arabic states abandoned the idea of a Caliph in modern times until Iran adopted a Theocracy with a single Leader all powerful. However, all the other Arab nations wanted no part of a singular leader for all Muslim nations or even a single civil and religious leader within any other country. Al Qaeda however claimed to be fighting for a return to a Caliphate not only for the current Islamic Nations but for all nations which must be subservient to Islam.

This is one of the fears of many Israelis—that a Palestinian state with a peace treaty—will just be an opportunity for the Arabs to gain strength and develop their capability to again try and destroy the Jewish state which they have tried to do ever few years until they are defeated and another truce is negotiated.

Mark Twain referring to and reflecting on his encounter with the Sultan of Turkey, Abdul Aziz.

In one of the historical ironies of the 12th century, a Christian sect preferred the rule of the Muslims than their Christian brethren—on the grounds of religious tolerance. It illustrates the changes that take place over time. By the 21st century, it was the Christians who were thought of as tolerant and the Muslims as the opposite.

The Ottoman Turks had just conquered the city of Constantinople including the Eastern Roman Empire in their domain. They would be the dominant power in the area until the First World War when they made the mistake of siding with the Germans and the Ottoman Empire was broken up in the Treaty of Versailles.

This quotation illustrates that the Muslim conquest and attempt to destroy and desecrate the symbols of other religions was not limited to Christianity—it was ALL other religions. In that sense, Christianity and Islam of the period were very similar at the time—intolerance to the point of murder and destruction of any “heathen” religion.