I recently watched a scholar who broadened my perspective on the sin of lying. In the video, he say, “let me take a sip of water, my lips are dry,” and brought the water to his mouth. After taking two sips he continued with these words:  

“I said let me take one sip, but I took two, I wonder if that becomes a lie too. It is a sensitive issue because everything that comes out of the mouth is being recorded. We say ‘a sip’ as a figure of speech to imply that we will not drink much; but why speak in figures of speech when you can speak truth with clarity? Perhaps the correct form should have been to say ‘let me take one or two sips.’ That indicates a few sips.”¹  

This sensitivity over a sip of water should in fact be a subject of deep thought for all of us. If such sensitivity is needed for such a small action, how more careful should we be for more major things in our lives?

Starting from this matter of a sip of water, I reviewed our daily life and unfortunately realized how common these seemingly insignificant lies are in the virtual world. This virtual world is very colorful, attractive, and just as entertaining. It brings many things to our feet, lets us shop with one click, gives us access to far more than what people once learned through months of travel with a single touch in the blink of an eye, allows us to see and speak with our loved ones far away as if they were right beside us, and lets us complete our work from our homes. A long list of benefits stands before us. But together with this potential for good, who knows how many times each day we also use it for harm. Sadly, the virtual world has become a world of lies. It seems to have melted away our moral values and all the beauty we possess. If you want examples, the examples are so many that even mentioning a few here may make us all hold up the mirror to ourselves, do some reflection, and act more carefully from now on.

It is very clear that this is not only an individual problem but also a reflection of a global collapse of mindset. The following words of Noam Chomsky shed light on this very situation: “I don’t know what word in the English language – I can’t find one – that applies to people who are willing to sacrifice the literal existence of organized human life, not in the distant future, so they can put a few more dollars into highly overstuffed pockets. The word ‘evil’ doesn’t begin to approach it.”²

This statement expresses in a deep way the selfishness and indifference behind the recklessness of the digital world.

After all this, let us look together at some mistakes that many people make knowingly or unknowingly and search for solutions.

Deceptions in the virtual world

User agreements

When buying anything or installing an application or program, the user agreements that appear before us include many risks and lies for both those who provide them to us and those who say I have read and approve. These texts, consciously written in pages of tiny font, contain so many misleading pieces of information that we would not like, harming our privacy, full of verbiage and slippery expressions and word tricks, that it is impossible for many people to read them, understand them, or willingly accept them. Unfortunately, the number of users who actually read these texts is almost non-existent, but the number of those who approve them is very high, and perhaps none of us refrains from approving. In this situation, we may try to justify ourselves by saying “but I need to use this, I do not want to pay money, I have no choice but to accept”; this does not change the fact that we slip into lying by accepting texts with an “I have read” statement without reading them, nor does it change the fact that we are too lazy to learn our rights as users and too unwilling to demand that companies stop wrongful practices when necessary.

Likewise, the behavior of producers who, out of greed, violate the rights of users, manipulate default settings to their own advantage and to the detriment of consumers, and exploit people’s weaknesses and legal loopholes is also among the unacceptable actions.

Fake identities and digital courage

In the virtual realm, hiding behind fake identities to present oneself differently in order to seek a job or spouse, to pick fights and provoke people, to spit hatred toward individuals or groups of different beliefs, cultures, or statuses, and to shout from behind a screen like a warrior, things one cannot do or say face to face are among the most common painful scenes. There may be some objections on this matter. For example, those living under oppressive regimes or those who fear discrimination may be excused to some extent and may be exceptions, but even there, caution is needed and one must not depart from truth and justice.

Digital lies in work and livelihood

Another problematic area is the lies used due to livelihood needs, job searches, or sometimes out of greed. Using fake experience or information is the most striking example of this. Entering jobs that we do not deserve through different names, photos, experience claims, and the like is unfortunately an open wound and the first step toward unethical earnings, which is a very dangerous path. Using artificial intelligence in interviews or exams to cheat, having someone else take an exam in one’s place, or obtaining answers illegally are behaviors that are both morally and legally wrong and unfortunately increasingly widespread.

We also sadly witness situations where remote work possibilities are exploited. People working in developed countries for higher salaries hire individuals from countries with fewer opportunities and much lower wages to work in their place and pocket the difference without doing any work themselves, gaining unjust profit. In addition, in hourly paid work, failing to do one’s tasks and instead engaging in personal chores, or using provided resources for personal matters, are also mistakes seen at a significant rate.

As a general principle, both the employee and the employer must adhere to the initial agreement and respect each other’s rights. The employer must not prevent the employee from fulfilling obligatory religious duties, and if he does, one should not work in that job. However, the employee must also be very careful and must not forget that even optional worship cannot be performed at work without the employer’s permission. On the other hand, employers taking overly restrictive measures, such as constantly monitoring and recording the employee and violating privacy, or making them work longer hours than agreed, are also wrong.

Comment manipulations, bots, and fake crowds

Fake reviews written for products, thousands of automated likes, and praise or criticism campaigns carried out with fake accounts mislead social media users. Some companies employ people to write good reviews, delete negative ones, or give the product for free in exchange for fabricated praise. The presence of tens of thousands of comments on some products often reflects not genuine user interest but systematic manipulation.

Rage bait and the exploitation of human emotions

Rage bait, chosen as Oxford’s word of the year for 2025, shows how widespread the trend of gathering engagement through anger has become. These contents provoke people through extreme expressions, and as the argument grows, the content becomes more visible. Thus, the most sensitive points of society are turned into tools of conflict, hatred, and hostility, becoming mere engagement material.

Clickbait, deliberate mistakes, and price tricks

Clickbait titles mislead users with irrelevant content. Some accounts deliberately make spelling and punctuation mistakes to cause people to comment corrections. Hiding the price of a product and saying message for price is another common tactic used to increase engagement. Showing a large carpet in a photo but listing the price for the smallest doormat model, then showing the real numbers after someone clicks, is among the new forms of deception in digital spaces.

Troll networks and state supported digital manipulations

Troll networks working with thousands of fake accounts to spread certain ideas, silence opponents, and shape public perception are among the most dangerous elements of social media today. The fact that some of them are supported by powerful companies or authoritarian states exposes the global dimension of the issue. Societies are manipulated in this way, and grounds are laid for wars, conflicts, and isolation.

The vicious cycle fed by algorithms

It is also clearly seen that technology companies directly feed this unethical situation. Because these companies use algorithms that promote content by click value and push forward high engagement posts automatically. These algorithms rank content only by superficial metrics such as clicks, comments, and shares, without looking at what is true, false, harmful, or beneficial. As a result, content based on truth, calmness, and constructive dialogue becomes invisible, while provocative, conflict raising, anger inducing, or deceptive material is constantly pushed forward.

This system rewards wrongdoers, increases their visibility, and gives them material profit. Those who behave correctly remain in the background and become less visible. Consequently, people receive a subconscious message saying, “I earn more by doing wrong” and increase their unethical behaviors. Companies also feel no need to change the system because they profit from this increase through advertising revenue. In the end, the user, the producer, and the technology company become parts of a cycle that feeds one another.

As long as this cycle is not broken, social media will continue to be a mechanism that suppresses truth, magnifies lies, and accelerates moral collapse.

What can be done?

It is not enough to mention problems only. Both individual and social steps are needed to keep the digital world on a moral foundation. In summary:

Reporting harmful content: Provocative, hateful, manipulative, or deceptive content must be reported when encountered. As report numbers rise, the algorithm will push such content back.

Not giving engagement through comments or shares: Liking, commenting, or sharing makes a post more visible. Not engaging with wrong content is the most effective response.

Establishing a culture of blocking: Blocking accounts that cross moral boundaries protects personal peace and prevents their behavior from being rewarded.

Creating public pressure on technology companies: Societies must demand more transparent algorithms, clearer user policies, and privacy protecting settings. Feedback is effective. Symbols similar to those used in films may be used to warn users about the reliability of content or its elements, and problematic users may be banned from systems.

Encouraging legal regulations: Demands must be delivered to lawmakers and decision makers. Clearer laws and regulations should be introduced in digital ethics, data security, and combating manipulation.

Digital awareness and ethics education: Children, youth, and adults must be taught digital literacy, source checking, truth distinction, information verification, and digital ethics. This strengthens the social fabric.

The role of opinion leaders: Religious scholars, academics, artists, scientists, and public figures must raise awareness on this issue. Social change continues only with the contribution of broad groups.

Conclusion

The world is changing very rapidly. As a result, new problems emerge in societies, and there is an urgent need for appropriate solutions. For these solutions, it is essential for experts from fields such as law, theology, sociology, psychology, technology, etc. to come together quickly and produce practical and applicable solutions suited to the conditions of this era and the issues deeply affecting society. Otherwise, problems will become gangrenous and major wrongs will be normalized. Instead of artificial rating boosting fruitless debates that distract society, it is unavoidable for our valuable scholarly community to focus on these issues.

What falls upon us is not to depart from truth. Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said “Always seek truth. Even if you see your destruction in truth, your salvation lies in it.” This is why the message he brought always upholds the truth, be it in the context of the employee and the employer relations, or whether it is a real or virtual world context.

Democritus (460-370 BC), an ancient Greek philosopher, described the human being as “a world in miniature” akin to a microcosm. A human being is an image of the cosmos (macrocosm) that surrounds us by virtue of containing all the facets of reality: body, mind, and spirit. The Stoic approach understood humanity in the framework of the cosmic order as a microcosm that reflects upon the macrocosm of the physical universe [1]. In a similar way, Islamic scholars consider human beings as a sample or a model of the universe and symbolize them as mirrors of God’s names and attributes on the earth, thus the essence and the vital element of being, the index and core element of the universe and societies.

“The middle way” is an important concept in order to understand our place as human beings in nature and how this relationship manifests in culture, history, and institutions. Individual and collective happiness lies, according to many Islamic scholars, in disciplining three innate faculties of a human person: reason, anger, and lust. This is, to a great extent, similar to Aristotle’s conceptualization. Aristotle criticized the Platonic “virtue-versus-vice” categorization and classified phenomena in three groups, two of which are vices (excess and deficiency) and one of which is virtue (the mean or the middle way). In their daily prayers, Muslims entreat about forty times to maintain on “the middle way” (al-sirat al-mustaqim) and be protected from excess (ifrat) and deficiency (tafrit) (Qur’an 1:7).

Since the time of Ibn Miskawayh, a prominent Muslim scientist who lived in ca. 930–1037, human faculties or drives have been dealt with in three categories—intellect, zeal, and lust. The first category of intellect or reason enables a person to make the right decision and encompasses all of our capabilities such as conception, imagination, calcula­tion, memory, learning, and so on. The second category of zeal or anger covers the power of self-defense, which according to Islamic jurisprudence is defined as that which is needed to de­fend faith and religion, sanity, possessions, life and family, and other sacred values. Thirdly, each man and woman desire, or lust, after the opposite sex, and love their children and worldly possessions. In other words, lust or desire is the name for the driving force of one’s animalistic appetites. Figure 1 visualizes these three drives or faculties of the average person, and its each virtue and its two extremes (levels/limits) [2].

“The middle way” could collectively be considered to be the reasonable, just, and fair balance of the three humanistic drives, which correspond to three middle way positions: wisdom (for intellect), courage (for zeal), and chastity (for lust). For instance, the excess of the intellect is demagogy or sophistry, while its deficiency is stupidity, and its middle way is wisdom. As for zeal, its two extremes are rage and cowardice with courage being the compromise of the two. Chastity is the middle way of lust whose extremes are licentiousness and frigidity [3].

In sum, the extremes for the three drives are over-the-top and result in some form of wrongdoing or injustice, whereas the middle ways aim to establish balance and justice. A most important characteristic of the ideal human is that he or she finds a balance in the middle way and practices it in all aspects of human life. Such a person can express and reflect the attributes appropriately and comprehensively because he or she does not behave in the extremes of life (excess and deficiency), try to be molded by ethical values and achieve good character.

A moral life

The middle way is the harmony of the inner and outer life. That makes a person balanced and whole. The inner and outer are parts of a whole structure, and in order for this wholeness to be useful at all the existence of both parts is essential. When both aspects come together then our different dimensions of spirituality, thought, and behavior are completely functional and balanced. A peaceful coexistence and integrity between one’s inner and outer worlds are necessary in order for one to gain moral maturity.

In this context and in relation to the “middle way,” we need to consider how moral values interplay with an ideal human life. Morality is the knowledge, behavior, and feelings which comprise what, where, how, and why a person does something. A human’s personality and his or her inborn qualities are neutral and available to be shaped in a certain direction, good or bad. Morality is a key dynamic in this process. Character training, and education about morals, are important ways to discover ethical values. In general, there are two types of morality: that which is innate from birth, and that which is acquired afterwards. These two types of morality are interrelated and illuminate each other. While the first one is more idiosyncratic and is a part of a person’s natural constitution, the second type of morality reflects a person’s personality qualities acquired after birth [4]. Every human person lives in between.

The initial steps of every action, and every kind of work, are ethics and self-knowledge. In spiritual disciplines, self-knowledge requires being mindful of one’s own helplessness, deficiency, and poverty vis-à-vis the Divine. This sort of self-knowledge is believed to be necessary to be a mature human with appropriate morals. A deep, genuine understanding of oneself is closely related to obtaining a person’s own inner and outer uniformity and completeness. Knowledge of oneself does not stem from awareness of one’s physical needs but instead focuses on our more metaphysical aspects. Self-knowledge helps understanding our choices in daily life. This means undergoing an ongoing observation every day by “rereading oneself” in order to get to know ourselves again every day. Our lives are not stagnant and that they are ever growing and morphing, like a tree. Our soul, willpower, and consciousness are the mechanisms that help us to observe and ponder over the occurrences that are related ourselves [5].

The most difficult thing to discover are deviations and constant changes that occur in the inner dimensions of our being. When a person’s inner being changes, his or her choices and expectations change as well. Gaining insight into existence increases self-awareness and self-knowledge—which is considered to be a path to know God—and this comes to opening up to multi-dimensions, i.e., seeing everything not only with their outward forms but with their functions, duties, and inner qualities. The ones who can open themselves to multi-dimensions go beyond the narrow frames of their physicality and construct their moral personality accordingly. Moral personality manifests with the manners, behavior, persuasions, evaluations, comments, views, and interpretations of a person. In this case, every human has an image that is shaped according to his or her inner moral personality [6].

Four principles recalling ethical values

“Everyone acts according to his or her own disposition” and, thus, displays his or her own character. This Qur’anic principle (17:84) refers to an important step in acquiring good moral values when a person knows, feels, and perceives his or her own mistakes. Without seeing a person’s own fallacies and faults, defects, and deficiencies, it is not possible to stay away from delusions and caprices, and to find the right path. Therefore, it is strongly advised that we become equipped with the tools necessary to consistently make proper self-assessment so that we can remain aware of our shortcomings. In this regard, the following four suggestions could be helpful [7].

1. The first one is to find a guide, an educator, or a teacher who will enlighten and inspire the individual to organize his or her life, who will redirect him or her to right path.
2. The second is to select a good friend or a coach, a magnanimously brave ally, who reminds one of ethical values and points out one’s fallacies and mistakes.
3. The third is to get rid of fallacies and faults and to adopt a good moral point of view. This will allow a person to value what has been said, negatively or positively, about oneself and to question oneself effectively. In this respect, a critically reflective attitude always offers a learning opportunity.
4. The fourth suggestion for gaining good moral values, and to eliminate bad habits and immorality, is to be among people and to be involved in human society. This interaction enables each person to learn human values and to discover feelings and emotions about him or herself.

In conclusion: The virtuous generations

The concept of the “ideal human” refers to individuals of spiritual, moral, and intellectual excellence. By virtue of drawing attention to the relationship between the eternal life and a person’s greatest achievement on the earth will be the attainment of a station of the ideal human. This is a prelude to one’s “superlative person,” who lives for others (altruism) at the expense of his or her own life’s pleasures. Such a person will only take positive action in a social arena and will be supposed to absorb and represent both modern realities and timeless moral values and to constitute its identities through its mind, its behaviors, and its spirituality. This is the constant exercise of an ideal person as they seek balance in life.

References

1. Pannenberg, W. Anthropology in theological perspective. Philadelphia, PA: The Westminster Press, 1985, p. 27.
2. Çelik, G. The Gülen Movement: Building Social Cohesion through Dialogue and Education (PhD thesis, Tilburg University). Delft, NL: Eburon, 2010.
3. Gülen, F.G. “Öfkene Hakim Ol” [Control your anger], Vuslat Muştusu, Kırık Testi (vol. 8), 2008, pp. 68-80.
4. Nursi, B.S. İşaratü’l-İcaz [Signs of Miraculousness]. Istanbul, TR: Sözler, 1993, pp. 22-23.
5. Harman, G. The Nature of Morality: An Introduction to Ethics. Oxford University Press, 1997.
6. Gülen, F.G. Sohbet-i Canan [Cordial Conversations]. Kırık Testi (vol. 2), 2004, pp. 169-170.
7. Gülen, M.F. Ahlaki Mülahazalar [Ethical Considerations]. Series of sermons. No.3. 1980.

Author’s note: Many of the books and authors mentioned here are well-known. There are dozens more from writers of various nationalities, and only a lack of space precludes complete inclusion. It is my hope, however, that any bookish reader with an interest in Orientalism may find something to enhance their interest with some works still to be discovered. The prevalence of British authors here does not indicate prejudice, but does reflect the books that are actually on my shelves.

There has been much debate about the authenticity, or otherwise, of Orientalism and its influence on socio-political thought. The books and authors figuring in this essay had, with the exception of Kipling, Lawrence and Gertrude Bell, no political axe to grind. Most of them were travelers who found the East, indeed, “other” than what they experienced at home. Their quest was a personal enthusiasm for the Orient. I would contend that their writings and translations had no relevance to a debate about socio-political attitudes based on worldly devices. The world of the spirit is likely to be more enduring and, as for this world, socio-evolutionary investigation would be more apt.   

The British may currently be retreating to their island home, but in earlier times they were inclined to leave their homes at the drop of a hat. Those with the wherewithal journeyed away to sometimes sunnier and definitely more exotic regions. One of the noticeably inherent vanities of the British, however, was founded upon the notion that they were never actually foreigners in whatever region they found themselves beyond their own coastline.

Sir Richard F. Burton must have had a horror of doing a proper job because he went to extraordinary lengths to avoid a nine-to-five existence. Even when being extremely erudite, he was also eloquently funny in a sardonic sort of way and his dealings with the Oriental mind were tempered by a perfect understanding of the conditio humana, which means the state we are all perpetually in. For his two-volume Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Madinah and Meccah, Sir Richard elected to travel by choosing a travel box to contain his necessities that was sturdy enough to withstand falling off a camel’s back twice each day. With a command of Farsi, Hindi, and Arabic, together with the dialects thereof, which he learned among tons of other languages and picked them up the way lesser mortals collect butterflies, he disguised himself as a wandering Dervish. He explored bazaars, frankly searching out the bizarre (which must surely be a derivative), and drinking countless cups of chai in his attempt to find rare manuscripts about Al-Islam.

The point of Sir Richard’s drop-out endeavor is that he certainly spent more hours daily than he would be required to submit to in a mundane job. There must have been the endless waits, the errant camel or donkey that refused to be moved, the aggravation of monetary negotiation. In 1856, Burton made clear his reasons for exotic travel. Notwithstanding his erudition, he was heard to maintain: “The gladdest moments in human life, methinks, is the departure upon a distant shore into unknown lands. Shaking off with one mighty effort the fetters of Habit, the leaden weight of Routine, the cloak of many Cares and the slavery of Home, man feels once more happy. The blood flows with the fast circulation of childhood…the glorious face of nature gladdens the soul”.

Many Orientalists went, quite obviously, in search of something ethereal, the atmospheric interludes in life that may offer a hint of the divine. If any reader has heard the hypnotic call to prayer from a muezzin, floating at dawn over palms at the edge of a jungle, they will know what I mean. The point is that although there may be a sudden crashing rise of birds, the voice itself does not shatter the silence. It really does float hauntingly as an isolated sound. The call to prayer heard in a city is often more strident but no less enchanting. One is struck by something stealthily all-encompassing, something impossible to ignore. Something that lingers in a suddenly pervasive brittle silence.

It was the likes of Wilfred Thesiger, whose Arabian Sands and The Marsh Arabs became must reads for devotees of the Arab experience. His memoir The Life of My Choice would seem to echo the sentiments of Burton. The intrepid Freya Stark gave us, among many other works, The Southern Gates of Arabia and Valleys of the Assassins. Her book Ionia is about the history of Asia Minor, Turkey today. She was heard to maintain, “I do like people who have not yet made up their minds about everything, who in fact are still receiving.” These resolute travelers fashioned the romantic notion of eccentric Brits plodding resolutely across an impossible desert on an understandably belligerent camel. Despite the political implications – which your correspondent suspects were sometimes a handy excuse – Gertrude Bell, who also translated Hafiz, and, of course, T. E. Lawrence, both seemed to be seeking the sort of satisfaction that only the delights of foreignness could offer.

Looming as one of those literary mountains that remains to overshadow all others is Charles William Doughty’s Arabia Deserta. Setting off from Damascus in 1876, the author endured the deserts of what were regions previously unexplored by travelers from the West. He found a way to become attached to the Hajj of his day and his account was couched in a somewhat archaic English. Initial publication was denied due to his inaccessible language but – and this is a personal view – if the first step in meditation is concentration then Arabia Deserta deserves to be approached with the sort of perseverance that can flower into the magic of immersion that great literature can offer. In this case one will feel the sand in one’s shoes and savor the odor of a camel train in all of its pungency. T. E. Lawrence defended and fostered further publication of Doughty’s recordings and also wrote a forward to an edition of the book. Charles Doughty, who was born in 1843, wrote his monumental work in 1888. Arabia Deserta eventually came to be known among discerning readers as being the finest travel book in the English language.

E. Lawrence’s The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, which became his magnum opus, was published in 1926. Lawrence was at first an archeologist who became enchanted with the Arab mind while passing through the Holy Land on foot. He felt a great affinity for the peoples he met in his travels, which can be sensed pervasively in his great work. The Seven Pillars of Wisdom tells of the political side to his nature but also relates of his unswerving affection for his Arab friends and his appreciation of Islam. By all accounts Lawrence was a man of some complexity. One senses a somewhat philosophical passion in his thinking. He adhered to what he would have likely maintained was “the rightness” of things – although capable of indulging in war. Well, many will have read the book, many more will have seen the movie. Whatever the outcome, we will be aware that this was Lawrence’s Arabia, a place in which he probably felt most at home.

We come, quite unavoidably, to Arthur John Arberry, a British orientalist who was born on May 12, 1905. His work was rooted in a profoundly scholarly endeavor and he cannot be counted among those who were simply fascinated by the exotic East as a travel destination. In his slim volume of biographies, British Orientalists, Arberry relates of the sustained passion for the Islamic world pursued by British academics, translators, travelers, and linguists of all stripes. This passion was inflamed at an early date and we read of a 12^th century philosopher, one Adelard of Bath, who preceded, according to Arberry, nigh on 100 others sharing similar enthusiasms. There were even more, of course, but Arberry names only the most prominent who made a solid contribution to Islamic studies. With more than 70 works to his own name, which includes his own translation of the Qur’an in which he attempted to retain the poetics of the Arabic original, Arberry was probably the most seriously academic of all Orientalists. One of Arberry’s most useful books is The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam – and other Persian Poets. Together with the Rubaiyat, in Fitzgerald’s first edition of 1859, and the fourth edition of 1879, the book offers samples of the works of twenty-five Persian poets – including Rumi, Saadi, Hafiz, and all of the others your correspondent has still to fully discover. Arberry’s The Islamic Art of Persia, is a wonderfully edited volume containing the writings of many Orientalists, which includes an essay by Vita Sackville-West who writes charmingly about Persia gardens.

R. A. Nicholson was a colleague of Arberry but his works are largely unknown to myself. In his Mystics of Islam Nicholson brings to light an expert appraisal of Sufism. Without demeaning his subject, the book is fashioned in a concise and easily understood way. A fascinating passage begins, “…seventy thousand veils separate Allah, the One Reality, from the world of matter and sense. And every soul passes before birth through these seventy thousand.” At the time of submission I can only offer Nicholson’s translation, from a different source, of a succinct burst of beauty by Hafiz of Shiraz, a poet Goethe proclaimed to be unsurpassed:

STRIFE

The calm circumference of life
When I would fain have kept,
Time caught me in the tide of strife
And to the centre swept.

Of this fierce glow which Love and You
Within my breast inspire,
The Sun is but a spark that flew
And set the heavens afire!

Edward William Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon, a 3,064-page work from the 19th century, would appear to be something that could be a starting point for budding   Arabists. Lane is also credited with an acclaimed translation of A Thousand and One Nights. His most accessible work, however, and one often quoted by Burton, is his Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, which was first published in 1836 and was to have several editions. The work is an astounding coverage of life in Muslim Egypt. Despite the obvious conclusion that what was modern in the 1800s is no longer pertinent today, Lane’s book covers what is indeed the very life of Egypt. His essays, chapter for chapter, are on characteristics and dress, infancy and early education, religion and laws, language and literature, ad infinitum. Lane addresses just about every conceivable aspect in his subjective social research. The work is further enhanced by the author’s own magnificently detailed engravings.

Rudyard Kipling’s works can be difficult to find in India today. His was an imperialist stance and he was a stout defender of the British army. Nevertheless, he came to write the famous… OH, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet, Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God’s great Judgment Seat;

But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
When two strong men stand face to face, tho’ they come from the ends of the earth!

The last line mitigates much that Kipling was accused of. Whether or not the British had good cause to be India will be debated until doomsday, and when Kipling published his poem, The White Man’s Burden, in 1899, he was accused of promoting the cause of imperialism. But Kipling did spread before us the magnificent panoply of the Indian subcontinent, and he was also recorded to have said, “Asia is not going to be civilized after the methods of the West. There is too much Asia and she is too old.” The Kipling Society in London maintains that he believed in British rule over India, but he did not hesitate to criticize the government savagely. It may be well to consider that Kipling was a man of his time and place. He was born in Bombay in 1865 of Anglo-Indian parents and he obviously knew and understood, and was largely sympathetic, to the colorful life around him. Only such experience could have made possible the publication of Kim, in 1901. Kipling produced an astonishingly varied wealth of works. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1907.

It has long been my personal love of good writing, despite having no special interest in the subjects at hand, which led me to R. H. Blyth’s inestimable Zen in English Literature and Oriental Classics, which was first published by the Hokuseido Press in Tokyo in 1942. Here is a survey to the finest detail of literature displaying the quality of the words transcending the confines of conventional literary usage. In this sense Blyth did not merely travel to the East but also sought echoes of the East in works of the West. Zen may be described variously as a fragrance, hint, nudge, or breeze that cannot be clutched though its effect can be observed, but with no sly wink seeking collusion, for therein is to be found the headache we call “mind.” Blyth’s works also include his investigations into Haiku poetry and Japanese culture. The writer’s approach to that indefinable essence of life that makes life itself agreeable, perhaps even acceptable, in its endless display of what could be called, to borrow and amend a phrase, the good, the bad, and the sometimes lovely.

Francis Edward Younghusband’s The Heart of a Continent is a book in which the author elaborates on the difficulties of travel in regions comprising almost inaccessible terrain. He took himself off from India to China, the hard way, and then found an even more difficult way to come back via the Gobi Desert, Turkestan, the Himalayas, with a great deal in between, then the Pamirs, Kashgar and eventually back home (but hardly in time for tea). Younghusband was indeed a nice man, a stalwart Christian but one who allowed much scope in his thinking for other religions. Younghusband apparently suffered greatly from mosquitoes on the way out. I would suggest that there could be an interesting discourse about why God created mosquitoes. I was put straight by a restaurant waiter in Kerala who maintained that, “God chose the mosquito to be India’s heraldic beast.”

The Canadian Colin McPhee is possibly less known, but should be wider read. His A House in Bali was first published in 1944. It is a transcendent book, one that makes reading a deeply satisfying experience. The author was a highly talented composer and ethnomusicologist who studied with Edgar Varèse and became a jazz critic of note. There were collaborations with Benjamin Britten to make their recording of Balinese Ceremonial Music for Two Pianos. He was also a friend of Margaret Meade’s family and figures often in Meade’s memoir of her life and work. It is McPhee’s obvious sensitivity that charms the reader. These were the days before Bali became a tourist destination, and the author captures the lingering, slow-motion lapse of time, and the throb of the gamelan gongs which reverberate with an insistency across the hills of that lush island that he knew so well and so lovingly described.

H. V. Morton was a British writer of note. In 1934 he published In the Steps of the Master which ran to four editions. Although the book related his efforts to trace the passages of Jesus through the Holy Land, Morton was a man of fine sensibility and he records much of the life in Palestine with inclusion of his encounters with the Arab fellahin, the common folk within the population. What was Morton’s greatest talent, which he showed in all of his works, was his equal degree of quality of content and refinement of literary style. The author opens with the following passage as he approaches the Holy Land from Egypt. “As the sun goes down, a stillness falls over Egypt. Water channels that cross the fields turn to the color of blood, then to bright yellow that fades into silver. The palm trees could be cut from black paper and pasted against the incandescence of the sky. Brown hawks that hang all day above the sugar-cane and the growing wheat are seen no more and, one by one, the stars burn over the sandhills and lie caught in the stiff fronds of the date palms”. The book also contains nearly forty of the author’s own fine photographs, mostly black and white, but beautiful and exemplary images of the Holy Land.

With an inaugural conference titled “Islam in America: Civic and Religious Youth Identities” on October 21-22, 2017, Respect Graduate School in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, has made an important academic contribution to this field. Respect is an institution of higher education which grants Master’s degree in Islamic Studies. Founded in 2014, Respect has slowly grown indigenous roots in the Lehigh Valley’s various communities of faith and academic and artistic institutions. The vision with which Respect enthusiastically launched its Inaugural Academic Conference, “Islam in America: Civic and Religious Youth Identities,” was two-fold.

On the one hand, Respect aims to be an integrative learning platform for Islamic Studies. To this end the graduate school develops events and programming that serve as host sites for scholarly, professional, faith-communal, and artistic networking. On the other hand, Respect would like to develop its own reputation for rigorous academic scholarship in Islamic Studies. In the thirteen months of planning that preceded the curtain’s draw on Saturday morning, October 21st, Respect faculty and staff, aided by invaluable consultation from community allies, brainstormed and researched ideas of concern to American Muslims today. Organizers discussed questions of early childhood and teacher education, diasporic Islam in relation to youth culture, mosque cultures, the history of faith communities in the Lehigh Valley, bicultural competencies, indigenous versus immigrant Muslim groups, and many more. In the end, Respect decided on the civic and religious identities of American Muslim youth as the Inaugural Academic Conference theme.

The conference was well-attended and well-received, and the high quality of papers and the salience of the conversations provoked in each of the panels filled conference participants with a vigorous energy in learning, articulating, and addressing questions of American Muslim youth identities in their civic and religious dimensions. While a majority of panelists were from different states within the US, some of them were from the UK, and Canada. Moderators of the panels were David Grafton of Hartford Seminary, Rubie Ghazal of Moravian College, Giovanni Herran of Respect Graduate School and Temple University, Patricia Anton of University of Pennsylvania, and Sherrine Eid of the Muslim Association of the Lehigh Valley.

Dr. Ingrid Mattson, the London and Windsor Community Chair in Islamic Studies at Huron University College at the University of Western Ontario, Canada, was the first to initiate the robust conference with her Keynote Address. She was especially struck by the emphasis on healthful youth development and civic roles in the conference call for papers.

Acknowledging that American Muslims are experiencing high anxiety and pressures, Mattson at once captured her audience and delved into a number of directions that American Muslims must hasten to explore and develop. These included:

1. The “need for a sanctified expression,” to make our interfaith relations, celebrations, and communal expression of our human condition more beautiful. Several decades of “cultural genocide” on account of free literature that deems everything haraam (unlawful) has created a vacuum that American Muslims must fill with creative, productive, organic, and celebratory cultural expression.
2. The idea of “proprietary knowledge in religious learning” should be investigated. Early Islamic legal literature showed concern about religion becoming a commodity.
3. Reaffirming that “charity is not a substitute for justice.” American Muslims must be aware of inequalities and the structures and processes that enable them, and work toward their reform. Because American Muslims’ biases can’t be willed away simply by citing the right texts and verses, we need to work toward institutional reform. Racism and patriarchy are, after all, structural problems.
4. We must clarify and reorient our embodiment in relation to land. American Muslims have to turn back to nature with our whole perspectives. Land, language, experiences, and tradition are the soil from which emerge songs and rituals. American Muslims must generate cultural forms that give importance to music, joy, celebration, and community. “Is there an American Muslim song?” asked Mattson.
5. Environmental and social justice must be approached with a holistic, integrated Islamic approach. We must bring back a brotherhood of humanity and created things.
6. We must resist scapegoating and learn better mechanisms for relieving tension. Our community has a “social justice warrior phenomenon” that unhealthily manifests at times by uniting to grind down a person or group.

Dr. Mattson’s insightful prescriptions found intellectually rigorous interlocutors throughout the two-day conference. In the opening panel, “Pedagogy and Praxis: Sharing Best Practices in Spiritual Education,” conference attendees were presented with theoretical and practical problems and models for the spiritual education of American Muslim youth. A UNC Chapel Hill graduate student and Dr. Nuray Yurt presented findings from Peace Islands, a youth academy. They shared the activities that Peace Islands conducted with their youth around Martin Luther King’s legacy of leadership and service, nurturing social justice activism, women’s history month and empowerment, Earth awareness, and much more. In this way, educators were able to instill a value for service for a god-conscious life among youth. Long-time educator and Islamic school principal Bayyinah Muhsin gave a fruitful presentation of the ways in which the Waldorf education paradigm embodies many of the pedagogical practices of the Prophet Muhammad, may God’s peace and blessings be upon him. In Waldorf education, the spiritual emphasis teaches children from the inside out. Muhsin made a compelling case for further research and practice among American Muslim educators for the spiritual development of our youth. Dr. Ozgur Koca, Assistant Professor of Islamic Studies at Bayan Claremont Islamic Graduate School/Claremont School of Theology, presented a sophisticated argument for the benefits of teaching metaphysics to American Muslim youth. Islamic metaphysics, according to Koca, can serve as a tremendous resource for youth in confronting contemporary challenges, such as “extreme post-modern relativization of all truth claims, post-truth politics, tension between religious and scientific claims on the nature of the world, and reduction of religion into blind-faith or polarizing and violent exclusivism or excessive literalism.” Metaphysics can also serve a common language amongst adherents of different traditions and religions.

The next panel, “Social Transformation,” addressed three vital areas of American Muslim discourse and praxis today: serving those affected by mass incarceration, intellectual honesty with regard to historicity in contemporary debates over religious authority, and the chasm between the Qur’anic vision of women’s empowerment and the real conditions of inequity in Muslim societies. Erol Dincer, Respect student and organizer/volunteer for PA House of Hope, gave a heartfelt presentation of the service to families affected by mass incarceration provided by the organization. Across religious affiliations, PA House of Hope reaches out to families of incarcerated persons and provides visitation trips, gifts during holidays, and mentoring and financial support. Their guiding principle, as articulated by Said Nursi, is that ignorance, poverty, and disunity are three universal social ills that hinder society from becoming virtuous. Relwan Onikoyi, Arabic instructor and graduate student in Religion at Temple University, presented on the extremes of “westoxification” and “reactionary apologetics” among American Muslim debates on traditional authority and textual interpretation. Drawing on the scholarly arguments of Khaled Abou El Fadl, Scott Kugle, and Khaled El-Rouayheb, Onikoyi gave examples of various standpoints vis-à-vis historicity on apostasy and daraba (the Qur’anic verse on disciplining lewd wives). He enjoined American Muslims to keep sight of how reasonableness was historically employed as a criterion in Islamic debates. Dr. Parvez Ahmed of the University of North Florida presented on the inequality index rendered by the Global Gender Gap report. He pointed out the discrepancy between the Qur’anic vision of women’s empowerment and iniquitous indicators from the international statistical finding. Ahmed enjoined American Muslims to create positive pathways to girls’ and women’s success in our institutions and homes.

Sunday morning’s opening panel was aptly titled “Separate but Equal? American Islam through the Fulcrum of White Supremacy.” This diverse panel drew on various histories tangential and constitutive of the American Muslim narrative today to highlight concerns of white supremacy. Dr. Mansa Bilal Mark King, Associate Professor of Sociology at Morehouse College, presented a detailed analysis of how the Africana Muslim narrative can resuffuse respect for Muslim youth. American Muslims must learn the robust and rich history of Africana Muslims in America. Even before the significant invigoration of white supremacy under Donald Trump’s presidency, hip hop, youth culture, and “rock star” ulama (scholars) have connected American Muslim youth to Africana identity in different ways. One of the first ways to combat the tyranny of dark-skin stigma affecting both the American Muslim ummah (community) and the Global ummah is to learn of the existence of Africana Muslims, and highlight their distinctions, challenges, and victories; that is, “to move non-stigmatizing Africana Muslim stories into the center of Muslim perspectives.” Rabbi Nancy Fuchs Kreimer, Associate Professor of Religious Studies and the founding Director of the Department of Multifaith Studies and Initiatives at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, presented on the history of American Jews as they moved through waves of racialization, persecution, acceptance, and integration. Kreimer spoke of several critical junctures in this history in a way that is instructive for American Muslims today. Student Heba Qureini of Missouri spoke of her experiences as a Muslim woman wearing a veil (hijab) in a rural, overwhelmingly conservative town. Qureini spoke of her experiences as the alien other in order to speak of the broader implications of observing hijab in an increasingly normalized white supremacist public culture.

Another forceful panel was entitled “Youth Leadership on Campus and in Community Mosques.” Muslim Chaplain and first Muslim president of the National Association of College and University Chaplains Adeel Zeb presented on the histories of the Muslim Students’ Association, Hillel, and Chabad. Zeb provided important lessons from these parallel yet distinct histories. Shi’i imaam and Resident Scholar for the Khoja Muslim community Nuru Mohammed joined the conference from Birmingham, UK to provide practical suggestions for cultivating leadership among Muslim youth in interfaith activity. Given that diversity is deeply enshrined in our holy Books, fleeing diversity is fleeing nature. Drawing on the wise words of ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, when he sent Malik to Egypt, Mohammed enjoined American Muslims to encounter either our brothers/sisters in faith, or our equals in creation. Our communities currently suffer a serious disintegration between older people and youth. American Muslims must accept that conditions are changing. The youth have inquisitive minds and it does not suffice to tell them that something is haraam. There must be hewar, or dialog, between the generations. We must seek patience through prayer and be motivated by hubbul haqiqi, or true love. Four areas Imaam Mohammed encouraged participants to focus on in youth interfaith dialog were: lived dialog, i.e. practice; dialog of cooperation; dialog of religious experience; and theological dialog. Assistant Dean for Religious Life at Howard University and Muslim Chaplain Nisa Muhammad presented on the experiences of African American Muslim college students in their MSA (Muslim Students Association) encounters across predominantly white institutions and historically black colleges. She highlighted the many layers of challenges that Black Muslim students must face given the endemic and deeply engrained white supremacy that infects access to college, neighborhood policing, and intra-Muslim interactions. Muhammad offered several concrete, researched strategies that Muslim chaplains and other professionals can utilize to allay the micro aggressions and marginalization that Black Muslim students encounter on predominantly white campuses at the hands of fellow Muslim students and faculty. Examples of these include inviting Black guest speakers to events, having Black khateebs and imaams, and cultivating shared spaces and activities where Black and immigrant Muslim students “grow up together in Islam” and “bonding takes place.”

In Islam in America‘s final panel “Cultural Hybridity in an Identity Politics Paradigm” presenters tackled the messy realia of cultural inter-penetration as it affects American Muslim youth identities. Dr. Liyakat Takim, the Sharjah Chair in Global Islam at McMaster University, Canada, presented a developed and thorough critique of some of the ills of Muslim communities. Aini Firdaus and Muhammad Rahman of Old Dominion University presented a thorough analysis of the various ways Indonesian American youth maintain and reinvent “moderation, inclusiveness, and Islamic manners” alongside the values of “a modern, civil and progressive America.” Firdaus and Muhammad gave several illustrative examples of how youth’s religious education is conducted in Indonesian American families, informal groups and formal institutions like schools and Islamic centers. The presenters focused on three areas: engagement with a capitalist economy, secular democracy and nationalism, and the cultural articulations of modernity and tradition. Recent Respect graduate Shahid Rahman presented on the election responses of South Asian millennials age 18-25, and provided much-needed context from the various personages in the Trump administration.

Overall, the conference was a blessed gathering where much intellectual and spiritual exchange took place. Participants benefitted from Dr. Ingrid Mattson’s thoughtful keynote address and the well-researched scholarship presented in all the panels on a myriad of subjects affecting American Muslim youth.

The last year represents one of the darkest periods in modern Turkish history. In lectures around the world, I once argued for the geopolitical significance of Turkey, which at the time was functioning as an impressive, democratic bridge between East and West. Here was a deeply devout Muslim nation that stressed democracy and civil liberties, a country that modeled an authentic religious identity and yet was not afraid of science and the secular world.

And then all hell broke loose. Our world is no stranger to ruthless and megalomaniacal leaders presiding over brutal and immoral regimes. And yet even by these standards, the Erdoğan regime has set records over the last years. The government’s attack on freedom of speech and education is particularly dangerous:

The numbers surrounding other educational sectors are mind-boggling: 44,000 staff from the Education Ministry, the great majority of them teachers, 1280 schools, 800 dormitories and 550 foundations (many of them educational). Upwards of 90,000 civilians have been detained, with roughly half arrested, and more than 120,000 have been fired or suspended from their jobs… So consequential was the purge of deans that at one university, the Rector, Prof. Dr. Ihsan Gunaydin, became the dean of six faculties (Celik, 2017).

The brutality of the purges and the suffering they have caused are self-evident and are being covered by other authors. In this article I wish to explore a different question: how is one to understand the conflict between good and evil, and peace and violence, this disastrous year in Turkish history represents? Why does the dictator label the peaceful imam a terrorist?

Hizmet, the movement inspired by Fethullah Gülen, and falsely accused by the Erdoğan regime of plotting the 2016 coup attempt, is known publically for its service projects around the world. In an age when many non-Muslims often associate Islam with violence and terrorism, Hizmet exists as an informally structured movement of religiously inspired individuals who engage in acts of goodness. Although Hizmet is especially known for building schools and offering high-quality education around the world, organizations inspired by the movement have been involved in charity around the globe: famine relief in Somalia; disaster relief after the tsunami in Japan; responses to earthquakes in Pakistan, Peru, and Haiti; involvement after the Bangladesh floods; and medical treatments offered to many poor communities in Africa.

In the United States, people are most likely to have participated in friendship dinners and public forums. In his book on Hizmet, the famous American scholar of religion Martin Marty comments:

When, on occasion, we and our colleagues were challenged to point to forms of Islam that could be called “moderate,” “open,” or “dialogical,” we explored a Turkish-based but international movement often called Hizmet… This same interest had drawn me to study Hizmet as a model or exemplar of a promising way of being religious in Islamic contexts (Marty, 2015, 2).

In North America, Hizmet’s interfaith dialogue activities stand out. Over the last two decades, religious differences have been used by certain groups to incite violence. Hizmet interfaith dialogues explore ways that religious differences can become constructive, not destructive. One might even say that because Hizmet is a Muslim movement, it seeks brotherhood/sisterhood across the families of Abraham.

There are skeptical voices. Fethullah Gülen is above all else an imam and scholar of Islam, working primarily in the Sufi tradition. He teaches and practices traditional Islamic purity and calls his followers to personal piety. Consider this passage from his Pearls of Wisdom:

There is no limit to doing good to others. Those who have dedicated themselves to the good of humanity can be so altruistic that they live for others. However, such altruism is a great virtue only if it originates in sincerity and purity of intention, and if it does not define the others by racial preferences.

But can such pious language really speak to the complexities of the modern world? Or does it represent an escape into internal spirituality? Or worse, is the strong focus on “sincerity and purity” merely a cynical front, while behind the scenes Mr. Gülen pulls the strings of power, seeking to bring down governments and put himself into positions of political power?

One can only say that, if overthrowing regimes is his goal, he is singularly bad at it. As Graham Fuller asks, “Why would Gülen choose to attempt a coup that’s contrary to all his views, and at a time of maximum weakness vis-à-vis Erdoğan?” (Fuller, 2016). Studies of the July 2016 so-called coup attempt reveal that it was never a serious effort to bring down the Turkish government. It would require a massive conspiracy theory to connect Gülen with the gun-carrying rebels. For example, one would have to say that all of Gülen’s teachings for three decades were merely a hypocritical pretense. All his claims that violence is never justified in the name of religion were merely a way to mislead opponents while Gülen orchestrated violent political actions aimed at putting him and his followers in charge of the Turkish government. He only preached peace because he really wanted to wage war.

It doesn’t make sense. As Goshen-Gottstein notes, “[Gülen’s] views respecting democracy, the rule of law, and opposing terror and violence have been consistent for decades” (Goshen-Gottstein, 2016).

If the charge is absurd, then the interesting question becomes: why is it made? Politically, the answer is obvious: Erdoğan adds to his power by finding a scapegoat. Labeling the Gülen Movement a terrorist organization also gives him an easy excuse to cripple the strongest civil society organization in Turkey, which helps him in his drive for absolute power.

But I want to ask the deeper “why” question. My goal is to understand the relationship between peace on the one hand, and striving for power through violence on the other. In service of this goal, I’ll set the question against the backdrop of the Qur’anic verse, “And not equal are the good deed and the bad” (Surah 41, verse 34).

The greatest challenge to a dictator is a movement of people who are ready to make great personal sacrifices based on their belief in God. (By contrast, the greatest gift for a dictator are people who will kill others based on their belief in God.) After all, the dictator’s army and police―together with his control over laws (the legislative branch of government) and how they are enforced (the judicial branch)―can suppress his direct opponents and small movements within the state. But a strong enough civil movement will ultimately remove him from power. To use only one of myriad examples, think of the peaceful rebellion of East Germans that brought down the wall in 1989. This is why dictators often become obsessed with charismatic cultural and religious leaders: their power is of a completely different sort than that of political strongmen. Dumanli clearly expresses this insight:

A peaceful civil society movement called Hizmet, or service, focusing on democracy, education, interfaith dialogue and social welfare efforts has become the primary object of Erdoğan’s obsession. In its mission and values, Hizmet is similar to the U.S. civil rights movement. Its supporters are ordinary citizens drawn from a cross-section of public or private institutions, but Erdoğan equates their presence in the bureaucracy with a legal coup. The government has purged thousands of police, prosecutors and other public officials. Erdoğan’s attack machine has also cracked down on Hizmet in the private sector, going after institutions and businesses affiliated with its supporters. (Dumanli, 2015).

He argues that the movement’s growth and impact both inside and outside Turkey position both its leader and its followers as indicative of a “post-political” turn in twenty-first century Islamic political identity in general, and illustrative of Turkey’s political, economic, and cultural transformation in particular.

The answer to our guiding question now begins to emerge. Dictators like Erdoğan crush religious leaders like Gülen because the two inhabit completely different realities. One reality is the logic of power. A person who is addicted to ruling over others will maintain his power at all costs, because power is his central reality. But people who subordinate worldly power and prestige to the call of compassion have their eyes focused on a different reality. Their religious ideals are incomprehensible to dictators. Consider the way Mr. Gülen formulates his goals:

…if we are able to implant in the young firm belief, pure and sound thoughts, a strong feeling of love of nation and country; if we enable them to come together around a sacred cause to which they should be made to dedicate themselves; if we bring them to prefer such values as honor and dignity over passing pleasures; and if we inculcate in them the duty of loyalty to the country and working for its good… then the young will maintain their essential identity against mental and spiritual corruption (Hendrick, 2013, 123).

As Hendrick comments, “[Gülen’s] objective is to cultivate action-oriented people of service who dedicate their personal and professional lives toward the realization of a better future” (ibid., 101).

The anthropologist can demonstrate the different social and cultural worlds that these two men inhabit. The philosopher will argue that they live by two different “logics.” For the religious observer, however, the differences cannot be expressed without using the terms “good” and “evil.” In the Christian New Testament, it is said of Prophet Jesus, “He was in the world … and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not” (John 1:10). Martin Luther, the Christian leader who is called “the Father of the Reformation,” described two kingdoms: the kingdom of the world and the kingdom of heaven. In the contrasts between Erdoğan and Gülen, we surely see examples of this distinction.

Of course, many religious persons are walking their own journey from one kingdom to another. (Perhaps this is one meaning of hajj.) Religious people do not live perfect lives. If the distinction is between light and darkness, we are often struggling our way toward the sunrise (or, perhaps, the sunset). What we do believe, however, is that the categories of light and darkness express real realities in human existence. Moral questions are raised not only in individual lives, but also in the history of kingdoms and countries. The Christian scriptures describe the difference: “’Put your sword back in its place,’” Jesus said to him, ‘for all who draw the sword will die by the sword’” (Matthew, 26:52), whereas “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control” (Galatians, 5:22).

And not equal are the good deed and the bad.

References

Celik, Emre. 2017. “Class Dismissed ― The demise of academia in Erdoğan’s Turkey,” Huffington Post; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/class-dismissed-the-demise-of-academia-in-Erdoğans_us_58e413bce4b09deecf0e1b54 .

Dumanli, Ekrem. 2015. “Turkey’s witch hunt against the media,” Washington Post Op-Ed (January 1, 2015),

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ekrem-dumanli-turkeys-witch-hunt-against-the-media/2015/01/01/7544429a-8fad-11e4-ba53-a477d66580ed_story.html

Fuller, Graham E., 2016. “The Gülen Movement Is Not a Cult — It’s One of the Most Encouraging Faces of Islam Today,” Huffington Post; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/graham-e-fuller/Gülen-movement-not-cult_b_11116858.html . (Mr. Fuller is the former vice chairman of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council.

Goshen-Gottstein, Alon. 2016. “Fethullah Gülen — His Vision, Our Response,” Huffington Post; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alon-goshengottstein/fethullah-Gülen-his-visio_b_11198546.html ,

Hendrick, Joshua D., Gülen: The Ambiguous Politics of Market Islam in Turkey and the World (New York: NYU Press, 2013).

Marty, Martin E., Hizmet Means Service: Perspectives on an Alternative Path within Islam (Berkeley: Univ of California Press, 2015).

** For further sources on the Gülen Movement, see also:

• Helen Rose Ebaugh, The Gülen Movement: A Sociological Analysis of a Civic Movement Rooted in Moderate Islam (Springer, 2009).
• David Tittensor, The House of Service: The Gülen Movement and Islam’s Third Way .
• M. Hakan Yavuz, Toward an Islamic Enlightenment: The Gülen Movement.
• Klass Grinell, Reflections on Reason, Religion, and Tolerance: Engaging with Fethullah Gülen’s Ideas (Blue Dome Press, 2015)

Philip Clayton, PhD, Claremont School of Theology

This article has first been published in the special issue of the Fountain Magazine © Blue Dome Press

Hizmet is a group of people that I have observed carry out the best of
Islamic ideals: kindness, hospitality, love, selfless service. They are
mainstream in their creed, as far as the Sunni Islamic school of thought
goes. They read the Qur’an; they pray five times a day; they fast. They’re
very spiritual people. They don’t push their beliefs, their Islamic
beliefs, on non-Muslims. That’s not what they’re out to do. They’re out to
serve the world, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. So in terms of being an
“un-Islamic cult,” Hizmet is anything but. What they really are, in my
opinion, is a true embodiment of the Islamic ideals of love and service to
the other. And I’ve never seen anything to suggest otherwise.

I’m a civil rights activist, a human rights activist; I don’t take my
marching orders from demagogues whether they are domestic or foreign,
whether they are elected or dictators. What I look at is the process, and
what troubles me in today’s Turkey is the process. Due process is the
arbiter between those who accuse and those who defend. It’s absent in
contemporary Turkey. And there has to be independent judiciary; it has to
be judges and a court that is not in anybody’s corner. What we’re seeing in
Turkey, unfortunately, is a situation where government is essentially run
by one party that acts as both the accuser/the prosecutor, the judge and
the executioner. And those who are accused don’t really have any leeway in
the system to defend themselves.

Those who know Hizmet, who have interacted with Hizmet, know Hizmet is the
farthest thing from violence. They’ve never promoted violence; they’ve
never accepted violence; they’ve been the first to condemn violence,
including a violent overtake of a Republic, a coup. They’ve condemned this
coup, and they’ve never promoted anything close to it. They’ve never been
involved in anything that is violent in nature.

Now that the accusation is there, we have to ask for proof. And, even if
there are individuals who may be associated with the Hizmet who were
involved in one crime or another, including a coup, the question becomes:
at what point do you incriminate an entire movement of millions of people,
volunteers who want to serve humanity through their Islamic ideals? Can we
condemn a teacher, a 24-year-old woman serving in some remote part of
Turkey, Pakistan, or Kazakhstan, or anywhere in the world where they build
schools in areas of underserved, underprivileged communities? How are these
souls devoted to service affiliated or associated with that particular
crime?

What you look at here is a witch hunt; it is “guilt by association.” These
are not in the tradition of liberal justice, liberal values that
democracies espouse.

And it’s exactly what is happening around the world when people in power
want to shut out those who are not in their pockets, those they can’t
control, or those whom they don’t like.

When a government is moving towards autocracy, when you’re becoming a
demagogue, when you become the “state” (l’état, c’est moi) and
when you shut out opposition, shut down media, imprison journalists, and
declare organizations, schools, mosques, or associations or universities or
charities, as terrorist organizations just by a signature, then I have to
say, that is incorrect, and that is problematic, and that is unjust!

And I’ll raise my voice, as a Muslim, as a human being, but also as a civil
rights and human rights activist, because civil rights and human rights are
not piecemeal. They cannot be divided; they cannot be allocated to one
group and then denied to another. I believe that ideals are only good and
are only meaningful if they apply to all human beings. It’s a belief in
blind due process, a blind independent judiciary, and having the procedures
and the processes of justice apply everywhere, equally, to all people.

When I read the news that [Hizmet] schools were being shut down in
Pakistan, it hurt, because Pakistan is in need of good schools, it’s in
need of education. We hear about radicalization, we hear about illiteracy,
we hear about the lack of education in parts of the country – same in the
United States, same in the world. And anyone who is putting themselves into
service to build schools and educate young people is doing good in the
world. As someone who built an organization, I understand how much effort
this takes. I understand every wall that is painted, every nail that is
hammered into that wall, every computer that is bought and connected, every
chair and every table, and then all of the content that comes along with a
good education. It takes so much to build a single classroom, let alone a
whole organization. And here you have a school of many classrooms, and then
you have a movement of many schools. One signature, for political pressure
or for personal gain, shuts it all down.

It’s so hard to build. It’s so easy to destroy. And we, Muslim-Americans
and people of conscience, have to raise our voices and say, “We don’t stand
for that!”

Ahmed Rehab, CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), Chicago

This article has first been published in the special issue of the Fountain Magazine © Blue Dome Press

According to Roy (2004, xi), “[g]lobalised Islam refers to the way in which the relationship of Muslims to Islam is reshaped by globalization, westernization, and the impact of living as a minority.” Roy (2004) defines global Muslims as those who have either settled in the West permanently or are trying to distance themselves from a local version of Islam by identifying with the worldwide Muslim community (the Ummah).

In studying Muslims in the West, one must take into account “the instances and places of reciprocal [historical] influence between the cultural constructs of the European and Muslim worlds” and the transcultural space created by this mutual influence in “the context of globalization, characterized by the mobility of cultures and religion” (Cesari 2004, 5). According to Cesari (2004), the Americanization or Europeanization of Islam cannot be separated from the space and time dimensions of global Islam, as well as its political crises. Cesari (2004) also posits that Islam should be examined as a process of the local, national, and international levels; it is the conglomerate production of cultural meaning and symbols. Hence, it is important to avoid the trap of essentializing Islam and Muslims based on assumptions on a single level, especially without considering Islam at all three levels.

All immigrants face challenges in their new countries. For Muslim immigrants or their offspring in the West, these challenges are heightened. How can Muslims successfully integrate without losing their rich, unique religious heritage?

“European Islam is connected with the stakes and political and cultural difficulties of the Muslim world, as demonstrated by September 11,” and key issues that are being debated about Muslims in the West such as pluralism, citizenship, and religious education cannot be limited to the national contexts of the West due to cultural globalization (Cesari 2007, 22). Although there is an interconnectedness of the Ummah, Western Muslims are not an exact reflection of issues elsewhere, since they are at the heart of religious and cultural developments connected to the Western context. Accordingly, cultural globalization has had an accelerating effect on the formation of a hybrid European or American Islam. This “hybrid” Islam is based on tolerance and respect for the other, which has been a product of Muslims living in the West (Cesari 2007, 23).

European Islam is a nascent phenomenon in that “the emergence of such an Islam does not imply the rediscovery of an Islam sui generis, but the invention of a new religious model, through the intensification of contacts among European Muslim communities, the confrontation of their uncertainties and the hybridisation of their practices” (Bougarel 2007, 20). This hybridi[z]ation is likely to grow stronger in the large cosmopolitan European cities as Muslims try to find solutions to their common problems, such as ethnic and religious discrimination, and requires a shared intellectual space where diverse communities can exchange ideas (Bougarel 2007). In its current form, European Islam “often encompasses phenomena that are quite distinct, or even largely opposed to one another” (Bougarel 2007, 1).

Pauly (2004) argues that a clash of identities takes place as a result of the establishment of minority communities in the West. Such clashes can be traced back to religious as well as broader cultural differences between the migrants and the majority populations, and integration can be a vehicle for bridging such identity gaps (Pauly 2004). Angenendt, Barret, Laurence, Peach, Smith, and Winter (2007) outline the integration strategies used by European states in recent years. These strategies have either generated mixed results or been criticized.

Dialogue with Muslim councils is one strategy that has been applied in Britain, Germany, and France – to mixed results, as the councils need to build youth participation, deliver tangible results effectively, and increase diverse participation.

Another strategy, primarily in Italy and Finland, has been a multicultural policy that promotes religious symbols. This approach encourages cultural differences and supports migrants in preserving their religious identities. Multiculturalism has its critics who claim that it promotes isolation rather than integration, all while creating economic disparities. In Britain, however, multicultural policy has fostered migrant social mobility in adults (no data on youth was available at the time of my research) (Angenendt et al. 2007).

In contrast to multiculturalism, France has attempted to transform migrants into French citizens first and Muslims second by diminishing their religious identities, specifically through a ban on religious symbols in schools. Similarly, in Germany headscarves were banned for teachers in certain states. Forced integration contracts and citizenship tests in countries such as Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Denmark require migrants to learn the native language and social norms. In general, such programs have been received negatively by Muslims, who view them as unwelcoming (Angenendt et al. 2007).

France is an interesting case of mixed approaches. Despite a tradition of harsh secularism, France also has proposals ensuring employers hire minorities – and a university actually started recruiting students using what the U.S. calls “affirmative action.”

In a similar vein, Britain and the Netherlands passed stricter anti-discrimination laws in an effort to extend equal opportunities to migrants. Spain, Germany, and the Netherlands have also attempted to teach Islam at schools.

Not all tensions in European Muslim communities are between immigrants and native citizens. According to Pauly (2004), Muslims in Europe suffer from a lack of political representation and cooperation between different communities. There are many divisions across heterogeneous ethnic, philosophical, and national boundaries. There are also clashes that emanate from countries of origin, such as the one between Turks and Kurds (Pauly 2004).

To create a Euro-Islamic identity at peace with the larger societies of their respective countries, instead of isolating themselves Muslims need to become active and get involved in all aspects of social life. There is no inherent conflict between such involvement and their faith or religious requirements (Ramadan 2004). Economic and political involvement is the way to a successful hybrid European Muslim identity that strikes a balance between the two extremes of total isolation from the larger society and abandonment of Islamic identity (Pauly 2004). Accordingly, Muslims should not be afraid to integrate into their European home lands. They should be able to blend their British, French, German, or American culture with their faith, shaping hybrid identities while enriching the cultures of their home countries.

In this respect, Gülen Movement (Hizmet) volunteers exemplify such an effort and could serve as an example for Muslims living in the West. In Germany, for instance, the Gülen Movement has worked on transforming the image of Muslims, focusing on reintegration of immigrant youth into the German education system. Furthermore, Hizmet has realized social engagement and dialogue with the German non-Muslim community by establishing cultural and dialogue centers to build bridges between cultures, all while offering a cosmopolitan and tolerant form of Islam. According to Hunt and Aslandogan (2007, 19-20), “[o]riginating in Turkey but becoming increasingly transnational, the [Hizmet] movement represents novel approaches to the relationship between faith and reason, peaceful co-existence in liberal democracies with religious diversity education, and spirituality.” As Yavuz (2013, 247) contends, the Gülen Movement “has the potential to be the beginning of religious Enlightenment in its Turkish and wider modern Islamic context where we are witnessing a new era of Muslim religious revival deeply embedded in modern processes of neoliberal market reforms and middle classes, open public spheres, democratic governance, modern education and technology-driven globalization.”

Moreover, Turkey’s membership in the European Union could have helped integrate Muslim communities living in Europe to their countries by buttressing the European Union’s credibility among Muslims. Given the current circumstances, this does not seem to be possible in the near future. Such an accession would mean redefining European identity as a more inclusive one. EU membership for Turkey would also help shape the evolving relationship between Islam and Christianity around the globe (Pauly 2004).

In sum, Muslims in the West face both challenges and opportunities in the countries in which they live. The challenges may emanate from cultural differences and identity clashes as well as the failed integration policies of the host countries. Nevertheless, Muslims living in the West can shape a brighter future both for themselves and the global Muslim community by becoming active contributors to their societies – and without any fear of losing their religious identities. There are many opportunities for Muslims living in the West to build bridges between the West and their homelands, as well as among the followers of different faiths. Embracing their host countries, while working as active contributors to society, is the key to building a peaceful future for all.

References

• Cesari, Jocelyne. 2004. When Islam and Democracy Meet: Muslims in Europe and in the United States. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Cesari, Jocelyne. 2007. “The Hybrid and Globalized Islam of Western Europe.” Portability and Exportability. 21.
• Hunt, Robert, and Yuksel Aslandogan. 2007. Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World. Kindle Edition.
• Roy, Olivier. 2004. Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah. Columbia University Press.
• Bougarel, Xavier. 2007. “Bosnian Islam as ‘European Islam’: Limits and Shifts of a Concept.” Islam in Europe. Diversity, Identity and Influence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Pauly Robert J. Jr. 2004. Islam in Europe: Integration or Marginalization? Aldershot. UK : Ashgate Publishing Limited.
• Ramadan, Tariq. 2004. Western Muslims and the Future of Islam. New York: Oxford UP.

Facebook was the first big social media site. It’s been followed by Twitter, Instagram, WhatsApp, Snapchat, and so on. There are more than 60 social media platforms today, and all have added different layers and functions to our social media interactions.

Although other platforms have reached hundreds of millions of users, Facebook is the most popular: it is closing in on 2 billion users, as of 2017. In 2012, researchers in Norway published a psychological scale to measure Facebook addiction, and their findings confirm that social networking is a “modern” addiction. Here, I will focus on the case of Facebook and I want to examine the psychological consequences and implications of extensive social media use.

Facebook is the largest online entity with the capacity to have direct access to the most extensive and in-depth information about its members. Imagine a state that has the capacity to know what an ordinary person ate on a certain day; with whom he or she has recently become friends; what his or her likes and dislikes are; and what his or her views are on a wide spectrum of issues. A state with that much knowledge would be terrifying.

With the degree and content of data that Facebook has access to, it is awfully similar to this theoretical authoritarian “state.” Through a systematic analysis of this large amount of data, one could professionally identify a member’s emotional and cognitive world and behavioral patterns, thereby gaining predictive leverage over his future preferences, reactions, and attitudes. All of these could be utilized by companies to access more information on their customers’ needs and desires, which could then translate to better advertisement and innovation. This could also be advantageous for security institutions, as such personal information including networks and relationships at the global level, these institutions believe, could help authorities contain and prevent violent terrorist activities. The implications – and potential implications – of widespread Facebook use on security, commerce, individuality, and privacy, are manifold.

Facebook is profoundly shaping our perception of reality. Since someone’s Facebook profile keeps track of his or her “post” history, it provides others with easy access to a brief “personal history.” Many of us develop first impressions about a person from their Facebook profile.

Human beings generally use cognitive shortcuts to figure out what a person is like; our first impressions are very unlikely to change. If someone has been put into a certain box or coded as having a certain type of personality by others, that rash and incomplete image is difficult to change without strong sensual information to the contrary. Even then, this opposing information may fail to change our mind: our brains tend to categorize such information as an exception, according to therapist Noah Rubenstein. The nature of Facebook use – the fact that people often choose to share what they want their friends to know about them (which happens to be the best parts of their lives) – also contributes to the construction of incomplete and distorted images of other people.

As the cliché goes, human psychology is very complicated and every human being is a different world of ideas, feelings, experiences, fears, and hopes. The prevailing practice of getting to know someone through a short visit on his or her Facebook profile results in the consumption of people’s individuality in a way similar to how a commercial good gets consumed. Human beings are not and should not be treated as aggregated pieces of information. It is not healthy nor fair to form ideas and opinions about someone’s personality without observing how that individual’s behaviors and attitudes change under different conditions and with different individuals. As an overarching principle, saying and posting should not be weighted equally with actual doing. One should rather prefer to observe an individual’s behavioral patterns (repetitive actions) before forming any opinions about them. And this can only be achieved with a philosophy that views individuals as aggregates of behaviors rather than as aggregates of pieces of information.

Secondly, intense Facebook use (average time spent on Facebook by a user is 50 minutes a day) might cause one’s impulse to do things to be replaced by the desire to update his or her profile, informing one’s crowd of friends, on Facebook, about what is going on in their life. This deep urge to share the moment indeed harms our ability to live the moment. The logic of sharing on Facebook also fosters a set of standards in regards to potential reactions. For example, if someone’s posts are being liked by 30-40 people on average, this would automatically create a threshold for the acceptable level of appreciation and lead to the feelings of frustration when this level of appreciation is not constantly achieved. This greed for appreciation and affirmation often contributes to the development of a habit of trying to look like the person that our general crowd of friends on Facebook unconsciously and indirectly wants us to become through displaying differing reactions towards our posts on Facebook. By intentionally not being ourselves, or by becoming afraid of appearing as ourselves on Facebook, we are allowing our Facebook identity to be shaped on the basis of the likes and dislikes of an online community and sacrificing our individual differences. This is like being a celebrity and being subjected to the pressure coming from presenting yourself in a way that is acceptable to the larger community. But the difference is that in this situation, the burden of being a celebrity is carried by ordinary people who don’t have access to the economic benefits of celebrity.

Thirdly, Facebook is changing the nature of our fundamental social interactions. For example, celebrating someone’s birthday turns out to be as simple as posting a happy birthday message on that person’s Facebook profile, as opposed to celebrating in a face to face interaction or making a phone call. Sharing someone’s grief is being reduced to adding an “I am really sorry” comment on that person’s Facebook post expressing grief for their loss.

According to Forbes magazine, only 7% of communication is based on the verbal word. That means that over 90% of communication is based on nonverbal cues such as body language, eye contact, and tone of voice.  Social media interactions are not conducive to the exchange of these nonverbal cues that are essential for healthy communication.

Fourthly, active Facebook users occasionally suffer from an informational obesity as they constantly get exposed to unnecessary loads of information about their friends’ private and public lives. From an opposite angle, this leads to a situation where the modern individual who attaches a great level of importance on privacy and autonomy willingly becomes the provider of a great level of visual and verbal information on his or her private life to a mixed audience (people whom he or she just met a minute ago and people who are closest to him or her). This indicates the stark contradiction between the intentions and actions of the modern individual.

Finally, Facebook increases the risk of getting named and shamed in front of an online community if we change or contradict our previous behaviors or beliefs.

About seven years before that, in May 2009, I received an award at the International Turkish Olympiad. The festival was essentially a cultural event consisting of Turkish songs, dances, and poetry recitals performed by students from Turkish schools around the world. It took place in a modern convention hall in Ankara with thousands of spectators in attendance. The event was sponsored and organized by members of the Hizmet movement, a Muslim community inspired by the preaching and writings of Turkish scholar Fethullah Gülen. When I, together with a handful of other recipients, mounted the stage to accept our awards, there to shake our hands was the smiling Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

The incident underlines how less than a decade earlier relations between Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party (known by its acronym, the AKP) and the Hizmet movement guided by Gülen’s teaching were characterized by cooperation and respect. Foreign observers in Ankara even referred to Hizmet as “the religious wing of the AKP.” Although inaccurate even in those days, such a characterization reflected a commonly held view among Turks and others that there was some kind of ideological link between the AKP and the followers of Gülen.

There is no doubt that the Gülen supporters had great influence in Turkey. They ran the best high schools and college prep institutions, and students from those schools, year after year, obtained the top scores in the standardized college entrance exams. Hizmet members published Zaman, the most widely circulated and highly regarded newspaper in Turkey, referred to by Erdoğan himself as “the guardian of democracy in Turkey.” Hizmet members published scores of professional journals and popular magazines. They established associations of medical professionals, teachers, and business leaders. They set up hospitals and clinics, and in Turkey’s highly polarized society they conducted national “dialogues” that brought together Turkish thinkers and leaders: Right and Left, Sunni and Alevi, Turk and Kurd, and Muslim, Jewish, and Christian.

However, storm clouds were gathering. Perceptive observers could see trouble ahead. In a prophetic column in the left-center Hurriyet newspaper on October 5, 2010, the late political commentator Mehmet Ali Birand noted:

“I don’t know whether they are aware of it, but a danger that needs to be taken very seriously awaits the Gülen movement. In the eyes of Turkish society, which believes conspiracy theories, the Gülen movement is mythicized beyond its real dimensions. The power and influence of the Gülen movement is being so exaggerated that if no precautions are taken, this imagined power will one day destroy it… If the current trend does not change, future politicians will go after this movement with a view to annihilating it.”

Birand, who claimed to be neither a member of Hizmet nor opposed to it, believed that, “The power attributed to the Gülen movement is enormously exaggerated. It does not reflect the truth but the winds of exaggeration…”

The first overt sign of tension between Gülen, who lives in retirement in the United States, and Erdoğan can be dated to the pro-democracy Gezi Park protests of June, 2013, when Gülen criticized the Turkish government’s heavy-handed suppression of the protests. The real break came later that year when investigators reportedly associated with Hizmet pursued charges of corruption leveled against the sons of various ministers of the Turkish government, implicating Erdoğan’s own son. Since then, Erdoğan (President of the Republic since 2014) has sought to destroy Hizmet and break its influence on Turkish society. After last summer’s failed coup, Erdoğan has accused Gülen of masterminding the coup and his followers of carrying it out. The government has undertaken a “McCarthyite” witch-hunt, resulting in the dismissal and arrest of university presidents, police chiefs, military officers, and newspaper editors, and the imprisonment of an estimated 60,000 Turkish citizens.

Erdoğan’s anti-Hizmet campaign has even affected U.S.-Turkish relations. The Turkish government has demanded Gülen’s extradition to Turkey, while Secretary of State under President Obama, John Kerry, noted that the United States does not extradite residents on the basis of unsubstantiated requests, even those made by Heads of State. He noted that the process of extradition must begin with the presentation of hard evidence of wrongdoing and that no evidence of the involvement of Gülen or Hizmet associates in the failed coup attempt has been forthcoming.

Unsatisfied with the Obama administration’s refusal to bow under pressure, the Turkish government looked to the future: they discussed, with retired US Army General Michael Flynn, ways that judicial processes might be bypassed in order that Mr. Gülen might be “removed” from the United States and sent to Turkey. The fact that such actions could violate U.S. laws does not seem to have been a deterrent either to Flynn or to the Turkish authorities concerned. Flynn was at the time an advisor to presidential candidate Donald Trump, and he later briefly served as National Security Advisor to President Trump before being fired for lying about his relations with Russian officials. It is evident that the Turkish government was willing to engage in underhanded and apparently illegal activities to get Gülen extradited from the United States.

Guilty or not guilty?

For those who know Mr. Gülen personally or have had contact with the open-hearted and idealistic members of the Hizmet movement, claims of subversive “terrorism,” (in Erdoğan’s words) seem incongruous. I have known Mr. Gülen for over 20 years and find the retired, soft-spoken Qur’an-teacher to be preaching and living a particularly attractive interpretation of Islamic faith. His bedrock concept is that of ikhlas, which means doing everything, no matter how modest or unassuming, wholly for God’s pleasure. This spiritual principle, which is hardly original or unique to Islam, has motivated Gülen’s followers to commit themselves to administering and teaching in schools in places as diverse as Phnom Penh, Brussels, Accra, and inner-city Milwaukee and Cleveland. They are digging wells in Somalia and Mali, running clinics in Kenya, and establishing interreligious dialogue programs in more than 200 locations in the United States.

Many Americans have come to know the Hizmet movement personally through the well-organized cultural trips to Turkey sponsored by these local dialogue associations. For many non-Muslims, the trips are their first direct encounter with an Islamic community devoted to peacebuilding and being a living expression of God’s compassion and mercy.

I greatly admire these Hizmet members, of whom I know hundreds, and many of whom I count among my personal friends. I have been to their annual retreats, where they encourage one another to live up to their lofty Islamic ideals. I have heard the testimony of Catholic leaders in Turkey and Turkish Jews that the Gülen followers are their partners and allies in striving to build a truly inclusive Turkish society. I have talked to Christian students from Mozambique and the Philippines, graduates of Hizmet schools, who are grateful for the excellent educational foundation they received. Could all this good work simply be public posturing, a façade to hide a conspiracy aimed at achieving domination and power? I suppose that it’s possible, but it seems pretty far-fetched and unlikely.

One might say that an outside observer’s positive opinion of the Hizmet movement begs the question of whether members of the movement, with Fethullah Gülen as mastermind, were in fact behind the July 2016 coup. Despite all his bluster, threats, and posturing, Erdoğan has not been able to produce any credible evidence linking the coup attempt to a Hizmet plot. The most he has been able to offer are a few statements by implicated generals, obtained under duress, which could be interpreted as suggesting a tenuous link with Gülen. For his part, Mr. Gülen has categorically denied any involvement in the coup, which he condemned, and called for an international impartial investigation into the coup and its background, a suggestion which Mr. Erdoğan has summarily rejected.   One must ask which of the two would like to see the truth come out, and which is trying to keep the facts from coming to light.        

I originally published a version of this article in Commonweal magazine in November 2016. Since then, Mr. Erdoğan has continued to make unsubstantiated claims about Hizmet involvement in the coup. He is not talking about the possible sympathy of one or another military officer toward Fethullah Gülen, but a centralized, organized effort conceived and directed by Gülen and carried out through the institutions and networking of Hizmet members. This scenario has been investigated with the professional expertise of the intelligence services of the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and NATO, who have clearly expressed their views of who they believe to have been behind the coup. None of them has been convinced by Erdoğan’s noisy but empty accusations.

I am not alone in asking Mr. Erdoğan, “Please produce evidence, if you have any, for your claims. Otherwise, why should anyone take your word for what appears to be a slander of this conscientious religious leader and a community that is doing much good in the world? Could your anti-Hizmet campaign be an act of revenge for the whistle-blowing against your family members, or a distraction aimed at preventing a continuing investigation of the corruption charges?”

“At the beginning of the empire, the tax rates were low and the revenues were high. At the end of the empire, the tax rates were high and the revenues were low.”

Former US President Ronald Reagan proudly referred to Ibn Khaldun’s above quote in an article for the International Herald Tribune in 1993 titled, “Excuse me Mr. Clinton, I must have misheard you” (February 21, 1993, p. 4). Reagan did not quote Ibn Khaldun first time in 1993. Actually he quoted him many years earlier, at the beginning of his term in the White House, as a support to his economy politics, so called Reaganomics. Although, some historians [1] saw no connection between Reaganomics and Ibn Khaldun’s theories, Reagan caught people’s attention with his reference to this notable, but mostly forgotten (at least in the West), scholar. The name was foreign to many ears, and for many Americans, it was the first time they had heard of him.

Who was Ibn Khaldun, really? Was he an economist? According to many accounts, he came up with many economic concepts 400 years before Adam Smith. Ibn Khaldun was the inspiration behind the concept popularly known as the “Laffer Curve.” Nevertheless, he was not an economist, per se.

Was he a historian? The famous historian Arnold Toynbee declared that Ibn Khaldun’s book, Muqaddimah, is the greatest book of its kind. But still others contend that he was mainly a philosopher and a political scientist.

Today, the consensus among scholars is that Ibn Khaldun was all of those things, yet today, he is primarily known for being the founder of sociology. In fact, Ibn Khaldun’s own accounts confirm this view. In his ground-breaking book, Muqaddimah, often translated as “Prolegomenon,” he declared that he had established a new science. In his own words:

“It should be known that the discussion of this topic is something new, extraordinary, and highly useful. Penetrating research has shown the way to it.” (Baali 1988)

This article is a tribute to Ibn Khaldun, the great fourteenth-century Muslim scholar. It briefly introduces his life and the sociological perspective of his contributions, specifically his ideas on luxury and its impact on the weakening of asabiyyah, or group solidarity. This is one of the most important concepts in his writings and is regarded as the seed of his famous cyclical theory of the rise and fall of the nations.

Ibn Khaldun

Abd al-rahman ibn Muhammad, generally known as Ibn Khaldun (the name came from a remote ancestor), was born in Tunis (North Africa) on May 27, 1332, to an upper class family who had fled from Seville, in 1248, to escape the Christian conquest of Andalusia. His family had witnessed the rise and fall of Muslim power in southern Spain.

As a privileged child, Ibn Khaldun had a thorough education in Aristotelian physics and philosophy, as well as mathematics, religion, geography, and poetry. His teachers were prominent scholars of their time. In the fourteenth century, in an era of unrest and political instability, he began his carrier as a seal bearer and then became a political official. He worked as a statesman, ambassador, and jurist in cities from Fez to Granada.

In 1375, growing exhausted of the politics of his time, Ibn Khaldun confined himself to the Salama Fort, near Constantine, for four years. From this seclusion, he emerged having written one of the greatest studies on history, his magnum opus, Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History.

Drawing on both his personal experiences and the regional history of North Africa, he identified a cyclical pattern of the rise and fall of civilizations, and he then analyzed the factors contributing to such patterns. He studied the dynamics of group relationships and argued that asabiyyah, or group solidarity, is vital to political power and to the ascent of a new civilization. He maintained that the sedentary lifestyles of urban city life introduce luxurious habits into people’s lives, thus gradually causing a deterioration in the asabiyyah and creating the conditions for civilizational collapse. According to Ibn Khaldun, a particularly strong ruler can delay this destruction; nevertheless, the asabiyyah will decay – generally within five generations – as events inherently follow a cyclical process. Every nation contains within itself the seed of its own destruction.

Possessing a keen eye for human behavior and a rare capacity for organizing his observations, Ibn Khaldun changed history by merely recording events and telling stories which could explain and predict human behavior. His methods grew from his belief that scientific research requires: (1) accurate observations; (2) logical and objective methods; (3) gathering data from the present and the past; (4) careful recording; and (5) the courage of careful description and reporting (Faghirzadeh 1982). Unlike most writers before him, he emphasized societal, economical, psychological, and environmental factors that governed events. This revolutionary approach laid the foundations for a new science: Ilm Umran (the science of society), as Ibn Khaldun called it in Muqaddimah. Explaining societal factors almost five centuries before nineteenth century classical social thinkers such as Comte, Marx, Durkheim, and Weber, he is considered the forerunner of sociology. And his profound insights and observations about the society in which he lived still inspire the sociological studies of our times.

Having written his book, Ibn Khaldun grew tired of seclusion, went to Cairo, and adopted a teaching role at Al-Azhar University. His reputation had preceded him there: Al-Azhar was crowded with students and many distinguished scholars who came to listen to his theories on social phenomena. While he was in Cairo, he learned the devastating news that his entire family had been lost in a shipwreck as they were coming from Tunis to join him. Except for his pilgrimage to Mecca in 1387, and a few trips to Damascus, he remained in Cairo for the remainder of his life, serving as a chief justice. He died in 1406 at the age of seventy-four, shortly after his sixth nomination for the judgeship.

He continued to write until the end of his life. Alongside Muqaddimah, the other volumes in Kitab al-Ibar, his book on world history, dealt with the history of Arabs, Persians, Europeans, Romans, Jews, and Greeks. In the last volume of his book, he initiated a new tradition by writing an analytical autobiography, known as Al-Tasrif.

Over the last two centuries, following the first complete French translation of the Muqaddimah by de Slane in 1863, Ibn Khaldun has been discovered by scholars in the West and acknowledged as one of the great thinkers of the Muslim world. Yet it was Franz Rosenthal’s first English translation in 1958 that allowed the Muqaddimah to achieve the most acclaim in the United States and abroad.

Asabiyyah and the cyclical pattern

Let’s look closer at asabiyyah. Derived from the Arabic root asab (to bind), the concept of asabiyyah is one of the most significant concepts in Ibn Khaldun’s writings. Although some suggested keeping the Arabic term, because it cannot be translated adequately, the English translation “group solidarity” comes close in meaning to the original term. Asabiyyah, in Khaldunian terminology, then, is a social bond of cohesion that is used to measure the stability and strength of social groups. The solidarity among group members is mainly due to the constant cooperation and interdependence of its members. In this respect, an individual’s identity is fused into the group of which he or she is a member, and they thus become “one of the others” (Ibn Khaldun 1967, 277).

According to Ibn Khaldun, this bond, asabiyyah, is the most important factor in the development of a society or a civilization from a nomadic tribe to a state. He argued that asabiyyah is strongest in the nomadic phase, and decreases as a civilization advances. The concept of asabiyyah fit under his general scheme of the cyclical process and the rise and fall of civilizations.

From his perspective, every cycle has 5 stages: 1) invasion; 2) summit; 3) tolerance; 4) tyranny; and 5) decadence (decline). In other words, every society is created, approaches perfection, declines, and is replaced by another society. It is a strong sense of asabiyyah that leads to conquest, then to the sedentary urban life; it is, finally, a taste for luxury that leads to societal collapse. Thus, nomads, who once had a strong solidarity among themselves and were known for their bravery and hard-work become less brave, less hard-working, and far more individualistic urban city dwellers under the influence of luxurious habits. Ibn Khaldun summarized the whole process as follows in Muqaddimah:

As a result, the toughness of desert life is lost. Group feeling and courage weaken. Members of the tribe revel in the well-being that God has given them. Their children and offspring grow up too proud to look after themselves or to attend to their own needs. They have disdain also for all the other things that are necessary in connection with group feeling…. Their group feeling and courage decrease in the next generations. Eventually group feeling is altogether destroyed. … It will be swallowed up by other nations. (Ibn Khaldun 1967, 107)

Ibn Khaldun placed emphasis on the power of religion to keep asabiyyah strong in a society. In his view, religion is not merely a set of moral laws, but determines all relations in a society. He maintained that if piety is replaced by ambition, and if the latter takes over human behavior in a society, then the treacherous desire to gain wealth will permeate people’s hearts. This will make a society and its people capricious, hence the corruption and eventual decline. As an example, he pointed to the time of Harun al-Rashid, and how after it passed, pleasure-seeking and corruption destroyed the strong asabiyyah of earlier Islamic civilization. They had abandoned the path of piety.

Luxury and the cyclical process

Luxury constituted a fundamental theme in the sociology of Ibn Khaldun, for to him it was the main factor distinguishing urban city life from nomadic life. He maintained that luxury in the cities follows certain economic factors. In cities, surplus labor is available to produce luxuries; thus, city people have higher incomes than people in rural areas, and this leads to higher standards of living in housing, clothing, etc.

Although a luxurious lifestyle initially causes prosperity in the city and adds to the civilization’s strength, Ibn Khaldun argued that such luxurious customs eventually become drawbacks. They create many demands and impose so many needs that the individual cannot earn enough to satisfy them. Furthermore, as a result of the additional taxes imposed by the government on such goods, the price of the various goods increases, and this in turn contributes to the cost of living, which consequently reduces the majority of people in the city to poverty. Thus, luxury increases the expenses of both the people and the state and leads, according to Ibn Khaldun, to the bankruptcy of the state.

Ibn Khaldun argued that luxury not only weakens the state economically, but also causes other physical, moral, social, and political disadvantages. Physically, it makes people weak and less immune to diseases, especially “when a drought or famine comes upon them” (Ibn Khaldun 1967, 177-182). Morally, luxury is destructive in the sense that it convinces people to value material comfort above all else and prefer their individual interests over the interests of others. Luxurious practices become indispensable. Desiring and obtaining luxuries eventually results in a degradation of the soul and breeds dishonesty and other immoral behaviors.

Moreover, it also destroys asabiyyah in the group since the pursuit of material comfort becomes the essential aim of most individuals. As a result of the disintegration of the group feeling, the group becomes easy prey for the next conqueror. The state’s leaders become increasingly lax and less disciplined, while also becoming more concerned with maintaining their power and lifestyle. Their ties to the peripheral group loosen, and asabiyyah turns into individualism and factionalism, and thus their political power diminishes. Under these conditions, they are susceptible to political disintegration, especially by the groups at the periphery. Thus, conditions for a new conqueror are ready and the cycle begins anew. Through this center-periphery model, Ibn Khaldun explained how each civilization has within itself the seeds of its own downfall.

Conclusion

Some may consider Ibn Khaldun’s approach to be a very deterministic perspective on history, and others may find nomadic invasions irrelevant to our age. His idea is obviously a theory, and every age and society have their unique social dynamics. What history is teaching us is that no civilization lasts forever, and certain aspects like group solidarity, religion, obsession with pleasure, and luxury do have roles in the ebbs and flows of nations. However, these dynamics and aspects have manifested in different ways across different times and cultures. Today, nations and cultures are interacting in different ways: through travel, the internet, immigration, etc. Ibn Khaldun’s theories do give us a perspective on how we can observe, contribute to, and be prepared for these ever-changing dynamics.

Note

[1] Daniel Snell, a professor of history at the University of Oklahoma was one of them. For his criticism, see, http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/07/opinion/l-reading-reagan-s-favorite-arabic-sage-943993.html.

References

Baali, Fuad. 1988. Society, State and Urbanism: Ibn Khaldun’s Sociological Thought. State University of New York Press, Albany.

Faghirzadeh, Saleh. 1982. Sociology of Sociology: In Search of Ibn Khaldun’s Sociology Then and Now. The Soroush Press, Tehran.

Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History. Translation by Franz Rosenthal. 1967. Princeton University Press. Vol I