While Fethullah Gulen is revered by many for his authority as a scholar and for his achievements in education and intercultural dialogue, his views on language should earn him equal renown as a philosopher of language. Linguistics offers an analysis of a language’s system – its structure, sounds, grammar, and semantics – but the philosophy of language describes the way language creates meaning. Gulen is anchored in the optimistic tradition of the philosophy of language that establishes the relationship between language, belief, truth, and the meaning of life.

Gulen draws insights on the nature of language from the Qur’an. For Gulen, God has created with a purpose; such is also true of language. He echoes the Qur’an in this sense, in which glad tidings of paradise are given to believers who, “will hear therein neither vain talk nor falsehood” (78:35). In Gulen’s writings there is always a conscious effort to awaken in his audience an awareness of our relationship to God and of our duties towards humanity and the world.

He writes that his concept of “speech” is an effort to expound on the following verse in the Qur’an: “The All-Merciful. He has taught the Qur’an. He has created the human. He has taught him speech” (Rahman 55:1–4). In his book Speech and Power of Expression, Gulen writes, “In creating humankind, the Most Merciful gave us the ability to speak of the human essence, our inner depths, the entire cosmos, and the truth beyond material existence before sending us to the dimension of external existence” (p. 1)

The “Referential paradigm of language” that was an offshoot of Positivism’s exclusive reliance upon rationalism and science looks at language as an empirical object of investigation only and limits meaning to the word-object relation only, reducing reality to mere physical phenomenon that can be quantitatively measured and explained (Medina, 2005:40). However, Gulen writes that language is not only a tool for describing facts and performing vocative functions – it also defines and constitutes our humanity. It “gives voice to our thoughts, it is the rhythm of our feelings, and the excitement of our hearts; it is the interpreter in our communication with God Almighty. Language is a reflection of the Divine Archetype and is the repository of divine knowledge. By virtue of the faculty of language, humankind has been elevated to the rank of vicegerent on this earth” (p. 8).

In this sense, Gulen argues that language not only reveals and expresses the Divine and the Transcendental; it can also establish a relation between the Creator and the created. Gulen writes, “It is through speech that human beings have become the addressee of God and it is thanks to this faculty that they can address Him” (p. 1).

This constructive and creative view of language is a counter to the extreme form of postmodern philosophy of language that presents a pessimistic view of language, denies the divine origin of language, and reduces language to empty signs and elusive images – turns it into chimeras unanchored in any reality or purpose or meaning. This reductive view of language that looks at texts as auto-referential only turns language into a closed system of self-referring signs that endlessly defer meaning. The result is nihilism, solipsism, and the coarsening of the values that define our humanity. Virtues like duty, love, sacrifice, and the idea of the sacred are dismissed as mere linguistic projections.

Gulen, on the other hand, presents an optimistic view of language and writes, “By means of the faculty of speech bestowed in our nature, the facility has been afforded for humans to express and interpret everything at their discretion… Speech is an instrument by way of which truth is acknowledged as the highest reality and all beings become a musical instrument as if in a symphony, thereby removing the veil over things, enabling them to express themselves” (p. 2).

The “Luciferan thrust” of Postmodernism dismisses the ideals of beauty, sacredness, duty, sacrifice, the truth of the heart, and virtue as mere flattering words that mask and hide selfish motives. Freud dismissed the idea of the sacred as “infantile fantasy,” the hangover of the primitive mind, and Karl Marx described religion as the opiate for the masses. The result is a shuddering collapse of all the values that define our humanity, reducing the universe to a “Wasteland,” a “Flatland” inhabited by alienated, depressed “hollow men” who can “connect nothing with nothing.”

But Gulen does not look at beautiful language as mere simulacrum, as empty of meaning. In his account, language is “one of the most precious of gifts” from God, and words are underpinned by ideas and values. Language can inculcate moral values. There is a relationship between language, belief, meaning, and understanding. Language nourishes our aspirations, which arise from “our distinctive foundational essence”; language lends a wing “to our ideals” and takes “their feet off the ground to the heavens”; lifting us to “the upper reaches of a spiritual ascension and preparing for us thrones in realms beyond the material world.” Gulen repeatedly highlights the higher spiritual function of language. He says, “Responding to our desire for eternity, speech enriches our feelings in an indescribable manner and gives our souls a depth that cannot be bound by the dimensions of corporeality” (p. 7-8).

The reductive and degrading views of human nature put forth by the pseudo prophets of modernity, who define the essence of humanity in terms of libido, monetary profit, or class struggle, cannot explain how good literature stirs the soul and uplifts the heart. According to Gulen, literature that wells from, and voices what is in, our hearts will always remind us of the Divinity that was breathed into human beings and forms the quintessence of humanity. The constructive use of language is like “a strong gust” of wind that lifts people up “in the sky where kites wander,” “and they enjoy the freedom and ease of a bird taking wing in the spacious sky…they experience constant transformations and perceive the magnificence of transcendent life through the colorful dimensions of speech…” (p. 6).

Gulen cites the Holy Qur’an as an excellent example of the zenith of language that has an immense depth of meaning, and whose “voice is heard beyond ramparts and echoes in even the most obstinate and bigoted of hearts. There is such dazzling magic in the presentation of its themes that it is impossible not to be impressed upon hearing it.”

According to Gulen, language that embeds lofty ideals and noble goals “is as expansive as the skies, as full of vigor as the earth, as lustrous as silk, and as comforting as a mother’s embrace. It articulates to us the glory of our faith, the riches of our society, the purity and integrity of our fellow companions, the struggle of our ancestors, and our values that make us unique. Good speech that originates directly from, and voices what is in, our hearts will always remind us of our Divine origin. To the extent of the sacredness of its color, wealth, and goals, good speech will echo in our hearts like celestial voices providing us with proofs of its origin” (p. 8).

Western literary theory and Positivist epistemology support each other in looking at literature as auto-referential; they view literature as self-reflexive and not referring to any meaning outside it. It is parasitic and, in the words of the French poet Valery, it is like a dance that leads nowhere.

On the other hand, Gulen establishes a relationship between literature and axiology. He says that literature not only describes and creates beauty, it also tells us about our relationship to life and the purpose of life. He rejects the concept of Art for the sake of Art, which is exclusively concerned with creating elegance of form only.

Equally emphatic is his rejection of naturalism in literature that, in the name of realism, puts the emphasis on the sordid, mean, and brutal aspects of life. He advises that literary people should “put their language skills and artistic talents at the service of the right, good, and beautiful, instead of hurting the souls of the masses…by describing what is corrupt, or contaminating people’s pure thoughts with dirty images, and condemning them to the slavery of materialism with descriptions of carnal desires” (p. 15-16).

Gulen exhorts artists to take the prophets and writers of Sufi literature as role models, because all of them have, “acted in cooperation and are united in building prosperous cities from speech, weaving lace from the silken threads of language, and stringing exquisite necklaces with the jewels of words” (p. 5).

Language is an instrument given exclusively to humankind. It has tremendous power and can perform diverse and contradictory functions. In this context, Gulen quotes a hadith that says that a believer must guard his speech because it can be equally used as a remedy and as a weapon. The range of its power can extend in opposite directions: it can revive and kill, establish peace and start war, disclose and hide, liberate and imprison, construct and destroy, exaggerate and downplay. It is therefore necessary to keep watch that one’s language is not misused. When the use of language is yoked to an agenda of self-aggrandisement, or the acquisition of power or monetary profit, it is severed from its divine purpose of pursuing Truth and serving humanity. It degenerates into the rhetoric of hatred and misrepresentation, and generated suspicion, deception, competition and aggression. It becomes an instrument of manipulation and exploitation. Gulen emphasises that we need to use language in a constructive way. He argues for promoting interfaith and intercultural dialogue, because language has tremendous power to make people understand others and to change their perception. It can persuade people to work for peace. It is, in the words of Gulen, “the sword of humankind,” and, “wherever the flag of speech waves, the most powerful armies are defeated and scattered. In the arenas in which speech shouts out, the sounds of cannon balls become like the buzzing of bees. From behind the battlements on which the banner of speech has been raised, the sound of its drums are heard. In the precincts where its march reverberates, kings shake in their boots” (p. 2).

Good speech influences people to make the best of their potential, removes misunderstandings and false consciousness, helps them expand tolerance and promote cooperation, encourages collaboration, and establishes peace. Gulen expresses the educative value of language in these words, “foxes take their leave of deception, and lions are terrified, seeking shelter in their dens.” No “combatant has ever possessed a weapon mightier than speech” (p. 5).

Cognitive linguistics postulates that language is inseparable from thought, and Gulen writes, “Speech is the key that opens the locks on the doors of the treasury of thought” (p. 2). As the famous linguist Wittgenstein said, “My world ends where my language ends.” In Gulen’s view, since language is intertwined with thought, it should be developed and enriched to empower a nation intellectually and morally. He notes and cautions that nations which do not think and speak become dependent on others: “Societies which do not think and speak will find others speak and think on their behalf” (p. 18). Imported views estrange us from our own rich heritage. It is of supreme importance for a nation to be respectful towards the history of its language.

However, language has to go beyond historical value and respond positively to every positive new development. For, as Gulen says, “reaching out to the future at full speed requires catching up with industrialization, global commerce, and technological warehouses.” If language and thought, both living phenomena, do not evolve with the times, they will become stagnant, as solidified as rock, and will lose their soul. Nations that can manage to develop their language and make it accommodating, while at the same time staying faithful to the roots of it, are the most dynamic in thought and influence.

Language can serve both genealogical and teleological functions. As a symbol making activity, language not only embodies, but also preserves, all of our core values and cognitive and intellectual reserves. It also renews our link with our origins and traditional heritage. With its new developments and transformations, language looks to the future – just as our heritage of wisdom, ethics, and ideals can give direction to future, too.

Gulen compares the teleological function of language to a “golden-winged turtledove released by our hopes to the future” (p. 8). The core values of every society are embedded in the symbols of its language. Gulen argues, “Language is not only a means of speech and thought; it is a bridge with the significant function of bringing the wealth of the past to our day and conveying today’s heritage and our new compositions to the future” (p. 17).

Language is an important tool for humankind in our efforts to better understand the cosmos and events both holistically and analytically. The relationship between language and thought comprises cognitive and intellectual reflections on existence and events, transforming these reflections into sources of information, and becoming productive while forming links between the cosmos and our knowledge. The future prospects of a nation are very much dependent on evaluating these relationships. Language is one of the fundamental dynamics in the composition of a culture. We should not cast everything that is old into oblivion, nor turn our face to the past and close our doors to what is new. Let us embrace the past with the utmost sincerity and at the same time salute the coming days with their open, new developments and transformations.

I will conclude with summing up Gulen’s message – Let us use language as a bridge between different cultures and religions to establish peace. Let us use language as a beacon house to illuminate minds and souls, and as a bond to bring people together on the basis of shared human values: compassion, tolerance, harmony, and peace.

References

• Gulen, M. Fethullah. 2010. Speech and Power of Expression: On Language, Esthetics, and Belief, NJ: Tughra Books.
• Medina, Jose. 2005. Language: Key Concepts in Philosophy, Continuum.

A planet that revolves around another star outside our solar system is called an Exoplanet or Extra solar planet. Ongoing studies involving this field are carried out via simultaneous ground and space based missions and observations. Scientists are searching a small portion of the Milky Way galaxy, approximately 3000 light years away, by using ground and space telescopes, along with various other astronomic methods (1). Despite all this technology, the observation area is too big when compared to the size of the object of interest.

It has been calculated that the Milky Way, a disc shaped galaxy, consists of 200 billion stars spread over a diameter of nearly 100,000 light years and a thickness of 1000 light years. When we consider the amount of stars in a single galaxy, and the fact that there are between a hundred billion and one trillion galaxies in the universe, the number of possible exoplanets is likely much larger than those we currently know of.

Classification of exoplanets

Exoplanets are classified according to their physical, chemical, and other characteristics, along with their diameter and mass: Jupiter like; greater than Jupiter; Earth like; greater than Earth

Classifications according to surface and atmospheric temperatures are as follows: Hotter than Jupiter; colder than Neptune; colder than Jupiter; small blue dots or twin Earths.

The presences of free-floating planets which have lost their parent stars because of different formation processes or other factors have also been discovered.

One of the common features of the exoplanets currently discovered is their short distance to the star they revolve around, which is usually less than half the distance between the Earth and the Sun. The known exoplanets are also defined by their faster revolutions in much shorter periods. Therefore, larger planets that are closer to their stars can be observed easily. When these planets are passing in front of their stars, a decrease in the brightness of the star is detected via spectrometers (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Passing of a planet in front of a star and a spectrum of this event.

Radial velocity, one of the methods used to discover exoplanets, relies on the observations of a star’s kinetic fluctuations. The proximity and size of a revolving planet leads to slight changes in location and velocity of a host star. As a result of this, the star gets closer to earth and then becomes more distant, which is observed as the Doppler shift of spectral line color waves. 75 % of all known planets have been discovered using this method (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Doppler shift – radial velocity

Earth-like planets or habitable places

In an official NASA report in December 2011, the discovery of an Earth-like planet was announced for the first time. This planet, named Kepler 22b, is 600 light years away and remains the most similar one to Earth among the known heavenly bodies. The distance of Kepler 22b to its star shows a high possibility for the presence of a habitable zone.

So what does this mean?

Earth is such a special home for us humans that everything here has been assigned to serve us with delicate calculations. Factors such as the Earth’s mass, gravity, distance to the Sun, rotational and revolution velocity, chemistry, thickness of the atmosphere, magnetic shield, hydrosphere/land ratio, ecological balances, and average temperature are all perfect for biological life.

Earth revolves in such a region and position that a majority of the planetary water is in a liquid state and is not ice or vapor.Thedistance of the habitable zone to our Sun is between 135,000,000 – 225,000,000 km. Earth revolves at a 150,000,000 km distance to the Sun. The value of a habitable zone for each planet depends on the diameter, mass, heat and radiation strength of the host star. In other words, aside from the similarity of an exoplanet to Earth, a classification of its host star with in terms of size and age is also important.

Kepler 22b owns the title as the first planet to match the criteria above with its following features:

• Has a radius 2.4 times bigger than Earth
• Revolution time is 290 days (365 for Earth)
• 15% closer to its star compared to the Earth-Sun distance
• The size and surface temperature of Kepler 22b’s host star is very similar to that of the Sun’s
• The surface temperature of the planet is 22 C
• The size of the habitable zone for Kepler 22bis 133,500,000 – 240,000,000 km (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Comparison of the solar systems of Kepler 22b and Earth.

Aside from these similarities, it is noteworthy to report the problems that scientists encountered regarding Kepler 22b:

• The unknown presence of water on the surface
• No information on the gaseous contents of the atmosphere.
• The gravitational force is 2.5 times greater than on Earth.
• Rocks constitute the surface instead of soil.

The hardest part is that Kepler 22bremains 600 light years away from us. This means it would take us 11 billions years to get there with today’s fastest spacecrafts. Who knows when we will be able to decrease this time with the advent of superior technology.

What do religious scholar say about life in outer space?

Among His manifest signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and that He has dispersed in both of them living creatures. And He has full power to gather them together when He wills. (Ash-Shura 42:29)

While interpreting the Qur’anic verse above, Fethullah Gülen notes the following:

“Since the earliest times, this verse has been taken as a proof for the view that there are living creatures, whether resembling human beings or not, in the places other than the earth. This view may be true. The second part of the verse, ‘He has full power to gather them together when He wills,’ has been understood that these creatures and human beings will possibly come together either in this world or in that of the other creatures. … there may be earth-like globes in the heaven where creatures resembling earthly ones live.” (Gülen 2012, 272-273)

“Perhaps people will not be able to reach those places individually or as a whole generation, but this can be achieved by mankind as a species. In other words, when the Divine Will manifests itself in that direction, humans here can encounter those other life forms.” (Gülen 2007, 232)

This commentary reflects what Bediuzzaman Said Nursi had said decades ago:

“The earth, although much smaller than other heavenly bodies, is so densely inhabited by living creatures that even its grossest and most rotten parts are full of living things, such as micro-organisms. This shows that those infinite firmaments, with their numerous stars and constellations, are inhabited by conscious, living beings …” (Nursi 2010, 530-531) 29th Word, First Aim, First Fundamental)

Nebiyev is a professor of physics in Azerbaijan.

References

• http://kepler.nasa.gov/
• http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitable_zone
• Gülen, M. Fethullah. 2007. Kendi iklimimiz, Istanbul, Nil Yayinlari.
• Gülen. M. Fethullah. 2012. Reflections on the Qur’an: Commentaries on Selected Verses, NJ: Tughra Books.
• Nursi, Bediuzzaman Said. 2010. The Words, (29th Word) NJ: The Light, Inc.
• Chris Kitchin Exoplanets: Finding, Exploring, and Understanding Alien Worlds- (www.springer.com/series/6960)-2012
• Mercy, G., P. Butler et al. 2005. “Observed Properties of Exoplanets: Masses, Orbits, and Metallicitie”.. Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement, Vol. 158, No. 24-42.

This particular kind of freedom is presented as one of the causes of war in the book Muhammad: The Messenger of God by Fethullah Gülen. If one approaches the problem from a partial analysis, rather than a holistic one, then one can easily come to the conclusion that “war can be waged to ensure spiritual guidance and communication.” In the aforementioned book, Gülen basically says that force is allowed if there is a resistance against the preaching of Islam and others are prevented from listening to its message.

Viewing the issue from this aspect, it is not correct to reach a conclusion that Gülen, thus Islam, does not recognize freedom of religion and conscience. Those who reach such a conclusion means, they are disregarding Islamic verses and the literature on the traditions of the Prophet that pertain to the freedom of religion and conscience, as well as the important interpretations made by Gülen in this issue. There are also some circles who never tire of spouting their biased discourse, manifested by slogans such as, “Islam is the religion of the sword,” “Islam is an oppressive and coercive religion,” or “either Islam or death.”

In contrast, it is very clear in Gülen’s message that no war can be fought in order to communicate one’s faith. A war can be fought when faith, Islam in this case, is prevented from teaching its message “in peaceful ways.”

In my opinion, restriction of the communication of any religion is a violation of a birthright and rights agreed upon in international human rights declarations. In other words, the prohibition in question, if one indeed exists, is a sheer atrocity that has been imposed on people living in a particular social system. Living in the West, where such debates have occurred, I have two alternatives: either to investigate the written and oral literature of Fethullah Gülen in order to examine the accuracy of this approach, or to ask him directly. I preferred to take the easier way and directly asked him my question: Here I give you his reply:

“It is possible to categorize all the battles the Prophet fought, when analyzed thoroughly with their basic characteristics, within the concept of defense. If there is an attack by an enemy, or if there is evidence acquired by a very reliable intelligence that there is going to be an attack, then war will be necessary. The Qur’anic evidence that supports this is Baqara 2:191: “fight against them, if they fight you.'”

Another remark by Gülen, made at another time, confirms this:

“Take a close look at his battles at Badr, Uhud, and the Trench. All of them took place in the vicinity of Medina, while the enemy, the polytheists of Mecca, were living 500 kilometers away. What could the Muslims do? Should they welcome the enemy forces, who had come to the front line and inside the town, trying to kill them? The Battle of Haybar, on the other hand, was fought because previously signed treaties were violated, and these treaties stipulated violation as a cause for war. While emphasizing the fact that the Prophet only fought defensive battles, there is no need to claim “there is no war in Islam by any means,” evoking some kind of an inferiority complex. On the other hand, Islam does not give the right to any nation to clamp on another nation for no reason, or just for the sake of her national sovereignty. This critical balance was maintained in the eras of the Prophet and the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. But it is not possible to state that the same sensitivity has been preserved by some Islamic states after the Abbasids until today-the Ottomans included. Several wars were waged for the sake of gains, or to extend territory. They treated their enemies with justice during and after the war; but this is a different issue.”

The issue is crystal clear: war is the very last thing to do, when other solutions are exhausted, in order to eliminate an injustice that restricts the freedom of communication and guidance for teaching one’s religion. Thus, from where does this confusion stem? There are two reasons for this. The first is the inability to delineate the Prophet’s actions as the Messenger of God-which bind all Muslims until the Day of Judgment-from some of his actions as a statesman, which were basically formed in keeping with the policies of the day according to the prevalent context.

The second reason is that some concepts that pertain to war are predicated in their religious rather than political connotations, arising from the fact that war is a sphere where religion and politics intermingle; in other words, the “literalist” approach is adopted.

These two reasons, in the final analysis, give rise to misinterpretation of some of the concepts in a far distant meaning than what they were originally constructed for. Take the concept of “fi sabilillah,” as an example. This concept, which is repeated many times in the Holy Qur’an and the sayings of the Prophet, literally means “in the way of God.” However, the role that this concept plays in the field of religion differs from that which it plays in politics in the Arabic language. “Fi sabilillah” in the field of religion covers all the good deeds aiming to acquire merit, whereas it signifies to ensure the rule of law in the field of politics.

In conclusion, fundamental rights and freedoms are not issues that are open to question. All people are free to choose their religion. No state should be able to revoke this right from her citizens. The ordinances of the Qur’an and the Sunnah which pertain to this issue are clear enough. Regulations and applications that inhibit these freedoms should not be allowed. Restrictions may be exercised by the authority of a legitimate state only if an encroachment of the rights of other people is in question, particularly in the fields of public security, common order, public decency, and health. As regards the case of war, a war can only be declared in keeping with the will of the legitimate political authority. The fact that people prefer to believe in a religion other than Islam is not considered to be a cause of war. On the other hand, if a state does not allow its citizens the freedom to choose their religion, whichever religion that may be, this is oppression. To prevent this kind of atrocity is a legitimate cause of war if all possible means of peaceful settlement have been tried and failed.

For many, math is the most difficult class. Is it because of our own laziness, or is much math too abstract to comprehend? Ali Unver says, “educators who see the beauty at the center of mathematics and can make their students see it that way, are more likely to be able to get their students’ attention and teach them more effectively.” He explains in “Mathematics and the Universe” that mathematics is not only for keeping track of our checkbooks.

Mary and Jesus, peace be upon them, are the subject of a considerable amount of Islamic literature. Ahmet Cetinkaya contributes with a thesis on the question of whether Jesus had any brothers and sisters. Drawing on sources of Islamic tradition and the Bible, Cetinkaya lays out interesting information on the topic, which is also a matter of debate between some Christian denominations.

“Romania – Dar-ul Sulk” discusses how historical truths are sometimes forsaken for the sake of political interests. Victor Nitelea presents an exemplary account of the mutually beneficial centuries-long relationship between the Ottomans and Romania and how the positive image of Turks as a tolerant society was replaced by an image of barbarians. This account also explains how the school curriculum can be manipulated according to political trends at the expense of causing intolerance and conflict between East and West.

“Can I Be Your Baggage?” Barney Zwartz, a journalist from Melbourne asks Abdullah Aymaz, who spoke about the emergence of the Gulen Movement in an international conference organized by the Australian Catholic University back in July. Whose baggage did he want to be? Zwartz was referring to the educational movement started in the 1960s among a small circle of young people like Mr. Aymaz who were inspired by Fethullah Gulen. In this issue, Aymaz shares with us his observations of the conference with some flashbacks to his first encounters with Mr. Gulen and how the movement started to take shape.

As I gave my ears to the speakers, my mind took me all the way back to 1966. I realized that throughout the years I had witnessed many different developments without understanding what they really meant. A historical incident came to my mind: following the discovery of electricity, an exhibition was set up to present it to the public. At the exhibition, a guest asked Benjamin Franklin, “What is this new energy good for?” He replied with a question: “What is a newborn child good for?” It was obvious that human beings could not appreciate innovation very quickly. Yet, today we realize the importance and potential of this wonderful energy source.

Similarly, I had no idea that meeting Fethullah Gulen forty-three years ago would be the turning point of my life. He was a unique teacher who constantly astonished us with his extraordinary ideas. He was a person who did not limit his ideals to suggestions but acted upon them; hence, he was practicing what he taught. Gradually, I realized that his teachings, manners and unique behavior were no different to the teachings of the Holy Qur’an and the Messenger of God. In actual fact it seemed as they were a carbon copy of the Qur’anic doctrines.

Although we were aware of such Prophetic traditions as fasting on Mondays and Thursdays and also staying vigil at night, we had never witnessed anyone practicing these until we met Gulen. He would observe this Prophetic fast even in the tremendous heat of the summer in Izmir. Inspired by his total commitment to Prophetic tradition, we would hand him a list of the names of those of us who also wished to practice their faith as he did. Like an affectionate father, he would wake us up in the night so that we could perform the voluntary prayers (tahajjud) and join him at Suhoor (the pre-dawn meal to sustain us through the all-day fast). It was not easy to control the carnal self but the self-discipline and the feeling of tranquility that originated from this Prophetic tradition made it a unique experience.

During our stay at the boarding facility in Izmir, we also received additional lessons in our dorms. We were supported with supplementary classes which helped our education at local state schools. Our teachers were also experts on Islamic studies. They would work additional hours to help us with our studies, and even during lunch they would sit with us in the canteen to eat. Of course, they were all paid something for their efforts. However, Gulen was different. Salary meant nothing to him because he would spend most of it on students who were so poor that they did not even have pocket money. He refused to take any money for the additional work he did. There were times when he had given ten lessons in a day and then he took on the duty of staying at the dorm throughout the night. We were shocked to find out that he even paid for the food, electricity and water during his stay there. Talking about the notion of self-sacrifice is one thing, but witnessing it with your own eyes was an extraordinary experience which planted many new seeds in our souls.

We were amazed by the way he explained incidents that had occurred over one thousand four hundred years ago. He would explain stories about the Companions of the noble Prophet as if he had been among them at that very moment. His sermons were all about the practical interpretation of the Holy Qur’an. Everything we experienced felt like an original event. It was as if we were hearing the revelations from the Holy Qur’an for the first time in our lives. He was encouraging us to follow the example of the Prophet and his beloved Companions, and we were making the effort to do so. With every effort we made, a new door opened before us. It was as if we were entering into an entirely different realm as we tried to emulate the actions of the Companions. Eventually, there was no room for indolence or lassitude in our lives. As the famous Sufi poet Yunus Emre said, we enjoyed the gratification of being reborn with each new day.

Then came the day when we were encouraged to engage in educational activities that would benefit the whole of humanity. In all of us there was a unique sense that persuaded us to open a new era in the field of education. People who observed our dedication from outside were fascinated by our enthusiasm. One after another they came running to lend a helping hand. Students, teachers, merchants, shop owners and businessmen were all united in the goal of establishing educational facilities. Before long, private schools were established all over Turkey, followed by hundreds of schools all over the world. At the same time we started publishing educational materials, beginning with a bulletin titled Zuhur (Emergence). Eventually, this led to the establishment of magazines, journals, newspapers, radio and TV stations. These efforts, encouraged by Gulen, became so popular that a new horizon had opened before us of a global dialogue between cultures and faiths.

As dedicated volunteers of education and dialogue carried the welcoming smile of Anatolia around the globe, many sincere souls were attracted by its warmth. They began to visit Turkey, the home country of these self-sacrificing educators. Their visits were not like those of tourists. They had come to observe and understand the source of the enormous sincerity and the unique hospitality of the Anatolian people. On returning to their homelands, they explained what they had witnessed. You could see the excitement on their faces even after many months had gone by since their visit. This was another fruit of global dialogue.

As the conference continued at the Catholic University in Melbourne, my memories confirmed the significance of the work that had begun in Izmir many years before. Speakers constantly emphasized the praiseworthy efforts of these extraordinary educators and champions of dialogue. Silently, I said to myself, “What a great distance has been covered.”

One of the speakers was Orhan Cicek, Executive Advisor of the Australian Intercultural Society. He stressed that this conference was a great opportunity to strengthen Muslim–Christian relations. He said that this event, in which prominent academics from Australia and overseas were explaining their views and suggestions in relation to the vision of Gulen, was also paving the way to strengthen the multicultural structure and harmony of Australian society. He concluded with a wish that the event would become an important step towards cooperation that would attend to the common problems of humanity.

It was a wonderful event that gathered academics from Australia, Turkey, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria and Indonesia. The conference dealt with the different aspects of the Gulen Movement and its practical approach to intercultural and interfaith dialogue.

During my visit to Australia, I also had the pleasure of meeting Barney Zwartz, a renown columnist from one of Australia’s biggest newspapers. In our conversation, he asked me about the future of this education and dialogue movement. He wondered how far it would go. I explained that we wished to reach every human being in the world and become true friends with them. He smiled and asked if such a dream was possible. I replied with an analogy. I said there is a story about an ant that decided to make the holy pilgrimage to Mecca. When they asked him, “How do you plan to reach Mecca with those tiny feet of yours?” the ant answered, “I am aware of the fact that I will never get there, but the least I can do is to die on the way.” On hearing this, Barney asked me, “Can I be your baggage?”

Abdullah Aymaz is an author of numerous books in Turkish. He is also a columnist at Zaman, a leading newspaper in Turkey.

Note

1. On 21 July 2009, Barney Zwartz article analyzing the Gulen movement appeared in The Age newspaper.

“There were no lovers left for me in the world, I used to think,
Then I took leave of my self and saw all were nothing but lovers.”

The above couplet from Niyazi Mýsri describes the state of a “perfect human,” or insan al-kamil in Sufi terminology. Departing from glorifying our own virtues at the expense of fair judgment of others, is an important challenge for anyone who seeks truth in this transient life. For a true believer who has managed to “take leave of” the carnal self, the universe is a palace, all things in existence are servants welcoming him or her in, and every event in the cosmos is an entertainment glorifying its Owner, Who deserves all praise. For those who cannot attain this level, this life is a horrifying tunnel of darkness, and far from being a true lover, every object and person is a potential threat to their security. The recent Gulen conference in Germany in May, the Turkish festival in Turkey in June, and the coming conference in Melbourne this month have made me ponder this couplet once again. An attraction on this scale with such wide-reaching global reach could only be possible for a person if he can represent insan al-kamil, in the true sense, with an all-embracing love for the whole of humanity.

Reflecting this summer’s busy schedule of activities related to the Gulen Movement, this edition of The Fountain features articles by two scholars who study this civil society movement. Kerim Balci of Today’s Zaman shares with us his observations of the conference “Muslims between tradition and modernity-the Gulen Movement as a bridge between cultures,” jointly organized by the University of Potsdam’s Institute of Religion and the Forum for Intercultural Dialogue, Berlin. He mentions the paper of Dr. Bekim Agai of Halle University, Germany, who commented that thanks to the activities of the Gulen Movement, Turkish migrants in Europe are no longer a part of the problems of Europe, but are problem solvers, and not only on issues relating to migrants themselves.

The second article comes from Maimul Ahsan Khan, a professor of law in Bangladesh, who introduces Gulen as a “modern-day Rumi.” For Khan, “Gulen has brought [Rumi’s] glorious tradition [that cut across the lines between nationalistic and sectarian differences] back to the minds of millions of modern and religious Turks.” Professor Khan notes that for Gulen the question is how well Muslims can represent the universal message of Islam to build a global society based on equality, tranquility, and humane treatment for all.

Also in this issue comes a thought-provoking interview with Dr. Lynn Mitchell, a Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Houston. Having taught a course titled “The Bible and Modern Science” for many years, Dr. Mitchell offers noteworthy insights into the history of the relationship of science and religion.

“The work of Gulen’s followers in Turkey shows that Islam-as taught by Gulen-seeks tolerance, not conflict; it aims for a better society, not political power; and it manifests itself in prayer and concrete local action.”

“As early as the eighteenth century, Goethe knew that the East and the West were inseparable. However, today’s society has not been able to fulfill Goethe’s dream, although plenty of time has passed since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Societies remain trapped in prejudices and stereotypes that strengthen the view of a separate East and West. European enlargement has made this even more pronounced and overwhelming. But fortunately, today there are voices in the world which inspire courage; voices which are not given due attention, voices which, nevertheless, have for years promoted a different world view and have successfully served people and the public good,” read the invitation to a Potsdam University conference about the renowned Turkish scholar Fethullah Gulen and the movement named after him. The conference, titled “Muslims between tradition and modernity-the Gulen Movement as a bridge between cultures,” was jointly organized by the University of Potsdam’s Institute of Religion and the Forum for Intercultural Dialogue, Berlin and was supported by the German Orient Institute, Abraham Geiger College, and the Protestant Academy of Berlin.

Attended by thirty-two academics who presented papers and about 500 observers from all over the world, the conference was the first of its kind in that it had no Turkish or Muslim scholars on its editorial board, which instead featured academics such as Professor Karl-Josef Kuschel from Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Professor Christina von Braun from Berlin’s Humboldt University, and Professor Markus Witte from the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University of Frankfurt. Judging by this fact only, it may be said that the conference was a platform of outsiders looking at and discussing the Gulen Movement.

An outsider’s observations are always fruitful for a social movement, both when they are affirming and when they are critical. An outsider’s eye is the mirror where a social entity, whether it be an individual self or a collective personality, watches and re-defines its self. There were both admiring and critical presentations in the Potsdam Conference. Participants in the Gulen Movement must have recorded both the “commendations and condemnations” and will probably act to strengthen the former and correct the latter.

Strikingly there was a common point between the laudatory and critical presentations: both groups believed that the Gulen Movement offers the Western world a series of opportunities that should not be missed. Both affirmed that the principles of the Gulen Movement may help the Western world to deal with its problems, not only when they relate to Muslims, but also when they relate to the very roots of Western civilization. This point necessitates further discussion and may even open new “zones of activity” for the Gulen Movement and other similar Muslim social entities.

Professor Dr. Leonid R. Sykiainen, a professor of Islamic law and comparative legal studies as the State University–Higher School of Economics in Moscow, suggested, for example, that the Gulen dialogic approach should be adopted to the comparative study of Islamic and Western legal systems. Sykiainen claimed that at developed levels of dialogue the universal language of law should be utilized. “A comparative study of Islamic jurisprudence, which is on its own a magnificent art, should be one of the topics of a future Gulen conference,” he said. This call was important in the sense that it digressed from the established conference mode of “speaking about Fethullah Gulen and the Gulen Movement” and suggested “speaking about a legal issue through the Gulen paradigm.”

A similar suggestion came from Professor Dr. Reverend Simon Robinson, a professor of applied and professional ethics at Leeds Metropolitan University, UK, who underlined that the work of Gulen provides a basis for expanding the theory and practice of corporate responsibility. Robinson related the Gulen Movement’s sense of responsibility to the strong creation theology that develops a complex view of responsibility in terms of accountability, imputability, and moral liability. He observed how this core view of responsibility reinforces and validates plural responsibilities, including civil and global responsibility. “Hence, a conceptual bridge is established between religion, corporate responsibility, citizenship, and sustainability,” he said. Robinson called on the Gulen Movement to become involved more explicitly in the ongoing dialogue about global responsibility and to extend further the dialogue and practice of responsibility in business beyond its present networks to include, wherever possible, other faith networks and secular corporations.

Dr. Sylvia Powels-Niami, a lecturer in the Religious Studies and Jewish Studies departments of Potsdam University, claimed in her paper that with its focus on intercultural and interfaith dialogue, the Gulen Movement has assumed the important task of continuing the ancient Islamic dialectical tradition that gave birth to the development of Kalam as speculative theology by bringing reason and religion into harmony. Powels-Niami observed that the Gulen Movement’s activities are not only building bridges between the East and the West, faith and science but they have also the potential to revive the abandoned religious sciences of Islam and even develop new ones.

A suggestion for furthering Muslim–Christian–Jewish scholarly contacts and thus facilitating the emergence of new multi-disciplinary studies came from Professor Dr. Admiel Kosman, an organizer of the conference from Abraham Geiger College. Urging that the findings of the conference should be conveyed to the general public, Kosman suggested that a “joint study house” should be founded in either Berlin or in Istanbul where Muslim, Christian and Jewish texts and traditions can be studied and a new generation of imams, priests and rabbis can be educated with the kind of openness and tolerance Gulen promotes. Kosman was also the person who read the greeting letter which Fethullah Gulen sent to the conference.

In his letter Gulen reaffirmed his conviction that dialogue will bring about universal peace and the good nature of the human being is going to come to the fore sooner or later. “What we need to do in order to reach this hopeful day is to set off on the journey. In this journey, every single step is important and is worth respect and praise. On this way, each step has to be based on mutual respect and understanding and this is not true only for states and nations, but also for individuals. Leading this dialogue is not a duty that falls only on the shoulders of governments or governmental organs. In order to light this torch of respect and peace, voluntary services run by civil society and individuals are at least as important as official ones. Humanity needs people that will carry that torch,” Gulen wrote in his letter.

A paper that received much applause from the audience was that of Dr. Rainer Hermann, an academic and a journalist with Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Dr. Hermann has been observing the Gulen Movement for more than ten years. He was the very first western intellectual to realize that the Gulen Movement did not offer an alternative to the secular-democratic system, but to the politicization of Islam. At Potsdam, Hermann skillfully placed the Gulen Movement on the social map of modern Turkey: “The Republic of Turkey is not a secular state with a separation between religion and state, but rather a laicist state whose elites have long attempted to banish religion from society. Indeed, the ruling Kemalist elites still believe that the moment a religion expands beyond the private domain, it must necessarily become political and impose a theocratic order upon the state and society. Fethullah Gulen deserves the credit for overturning these prejudices. Gulen has made Islam into a social force that has fuelled much of Turkey’s democratization and modernization. People, and not politics, form the focus of his sermons and ideas… All this is new for Turkey, where the official discourse has never focused on the individual, but rather on the perceived need to fight the motherland’s inner and outer foes to preserve national security,” he told the conference. “Gulen’s work has fostered a form of Islam in Turkey that lives in harmony with the West and modern ideas without sacrificing any precepts of its faith. The work of Gulen’s followers in Turkey shows that Islam-as taught by Gulen-seeks tolerance, not conflict; it aims for a better society, not political power; and it manifests itself in prayer and concrete local action,” he said.

Dr. Rainer Hermann focused on the activities of the Movement in Turkey only. Hermann had seven points for the audience: (1) the Gulen Movement is a social and apolitical movement; (2) Gulen is a modern Muslim who looks for a synthesis of Islam and science and of Turkish culture, a culture of dialogue and tolerance, and Western civilization; (3) Gulen has promoted science as a means to understand the creation and as a means to prosperity; (4) Gulen leaves no doubt that Islam and democracy are compatible; (5) Gulen’s interpretation of Islam fits to Europe; (6) Gulen owes his success to various reasons, including the elevated social position of preachers; (7) Fethullah Gulen makes a crucial contribution to the modernization of Turkey.

Hermann was not the only one who expressed appreciation of the work of the Gulen Movement. Dr. Bekim Agai of Halle University, Germany, told the audience that thanks to the activities of the Gulen Movement, Turkish migrants in Europe are no longer a part of the problems of Europe, but are problem solvers, and not only on issues relating to the migrants themselves. Ercan Karakoyun, a PhD candidate at Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, and a participant in the Gulen Movement himself, informed the audience about the activities of the Movement in Germany and the contribution these activities have made to the integration of Turkish migrants into the general German society.

A controversial paper was presented by Swedish academician Dr. Klas Grinell. Though he accepted that the Gulen Movement is not engaged in party politics and is not attempting to gain political power, Grinell claimed that the Movement has a political stance: “This Movement supports democracy, human rights and EU membership for Turkey. This is a political position,” he said. Grinell said that having studied Gulen textually he regards Gulen as a conservative leader. But on the other hand he named Gulen as a perfect match for decolonial political theory. “Gulen is looking for dignity from within and not from outside when it comes to producing knowledge,” he said. This is a revolutionary position in epistemology indeed. Grinell had no explanation for labeling Gulen as both a conservative and a revolutionary, but his contribution underlined the fact that the Gulen Movement should not be studied in reference to the Jesuits, Opus Dei, or the Focolare Movement. If decoloniality is a party of Gulen’s revolutionary epistemology, it should be studied in reference to its own dynamics only. This should be the theme of a future conference.

Thus, the conference ended with the clear conviction that further studies need to be done on the Gulen Movement and on the solutions it proposes for the problems of the modern world. Though several questions were left untouched, the conference was a great success in the sense that it not only clarified certain reservations of the participants, but it also managed to reach the general public through media attention to the issue.

Kerim Balci is a columnist at Today’s Zaman, a leading English newspaper published in Turkey. He is also a PhD candidate on Philosophy of Language, Durham University, UK.

Gulen and those inspired by him have presented a new kind of Islamic intellectualism and altruism coupled with a deeper sense of activism and spirituality that has been missing from many contemporary Muslim movements of the twentieth century. The failure of many politically oriented Muslim movements around the world finds no reflection in the preaching and writing style of Gulen. The revival of other religious groups or non-Islamic religious traditions has not discouraged Gulen in any way from shaping his own ideals of spreading value-based education and people-oriented spirituality and cultural activities.

With the appearance of Muslim nation-states on the political map of the world, different kinds of extreme religious indoctrination have harmed the genuine revival of universal Islamic values. Gulen’s preaching demonstrates that he is quite aware of this intellectual weakness of the political movements of his many predecessors to uphold the moral and ethical values derived from Islamic scriptures and traditions. A good number of Muslim countries have based themselves on the nationalist ideals of the people concerned in order to try to prosper politically and economically. Like many Arabs and Persians, in the early years of the Republic many Turks also seemed to want to build a prosperous modern state based solely on nationalist ideals and thus tended to show a discriminatory attitude toward all kinds of religious traditions and phenomena based on religious beliefs. Many Islamic religious symbols were either misused or attacked disproportionately in the political games of capturing and upholding state power. Gulen’s voice of moderation surfaced at this juncture of dichotomous Muslim polity and the ideological struggles between extreme forces in the Muslim world. Gulen preached the path of moderation, honesty and sincerity to protect the interests of the masses, irrespective of the ethnicity or the religious practice of particular groups of people.

Unlike some religious leaders and clerics in other parts of the world who are his contemporaries, Gulen has never aimed to overthrow a secular government and replace it with a religiously oriented political party. He has never considered this as an option to eliminate corruption within the state and political system. Gulen finds this unacceptable as it contradicts the core principle of the non-compulsory character of Islamic religious practice and no state or society can be truly transformed merely by such partisan politics. Thus, Gulen has always preferred to promote sound education based on universal values in order to generate a virtuous society.

Modern-day Rumi

Many analysts and authors have called Gulen the modern-day Rumi of Turkey, the land where Rumi was put to rest for eternity in the city of Konya. A thirteenth-century poet, philosopher, and mystic, Rumi is celebrated by both Turks and Iranians, but he is also a matter of contestation between the two nations regarding his ethnic identity. But Rumi’s Sufi traditions cut across the lines between nationalistic and sectarian differences, and the truth of the matter is that eight hundred years ago national and ethnic identity played a very insignificant role determining someone’s contribution to Muslim civilization. In practice, Gulen has brought that glorious tradition back to the minds of millions of modern and religious Turks.

Gulen is neither a poet nor a mystic in its traditional or typical sense, but perhaps his series of writings on Sufism has earned him the title of Sufi. Gulen’s preaching is full of compassion for all, and none of his writings ignite any kind of hatred against anyone. That might be one of the reasons why Gulen has been considered seriously as a Sufi. A second reason could be his lifelong personal piety and austere lifestyle.

Muslims would probably not call Gulen a Mahatma Gandhi of Turkey or the Muslim world, though some Westerners have started to call him a Muslim Gandhi.¹ In the substance of his preaching and writing, Gulen is a voice very close to both Rumi and Gandhi; he has always sought truth in bringing people together for the causes of peace and humanity for all, irrespective of race and religion. Like Rumi, Gandhi also never abandoned any of his own religious traditions. However, both of them were disliked, if not hated, by many of their orthodox co-worshipers for their extraordinary humility towards the followers of other religions. Gandhi was killed in 1948 by a Hindu fundamentalist who, like many other orthodox Hindus, believed that Gandhi was betraying the cause of the Hindu religion and that he was influenced by the Muslim intellectuals of British India and the Sufis of South Africa. Away from the persecution of false accusations of igniting religious hatred in Turkey, Gulen lives in the USA where he has proven himself a champion of the cause of inter-faith dialogue and bringing people of all races and religions together to work for peace and harmony between nations and religions.

Spirituality and the Anatolian spirit

Many Muslim authors seem to believe that the modern Western mind is too materialistic to favor the core universal spiritual message of Islam. Thus, many Muslim analysts tend to conclude that it is useless to preach Islamic values to Westerners. Gulen does not accept this simplistic presentation of Western materialism as a barrier to spreading the peaceful message of the Qur’an and Sunnah upon which a compassionate society can be built. He does not believe that Westerners have any inherent problem in appreciating and accepting the spirituality derived from the fundamental sources of Islam; for him the question is how well Muslims can represent Islamic spirituality and the universal message of Islam so as to attract Westerners to build a global society based on genuine equality, tranquility, and humane treatment for all, irrespective of gender, race, and religion.

Gulen advocates a compassionate and brotherly form of Islam that emphasizes inner spirituality rather than an aggressive, outer expression of religious beliefs and coercive propaganda. In rediscovering this fine line of spirituality, Gulen has skillfully avoided the tendency to overemphasize a particular set of characteristics that might be seen as belonging to western or eastern, northern or southern people. He is critical of any kind of nationalistic or ethnic confrontational policies which lead to discriminatory attitudes to others, or dividing people between “us” and “them.”

His definition of nation does not compromise one race or ethnic group; Anatolia has always been a land of diverse ethnic groups and forms one united nation today. Free of any chauvinism, he addresses the colorful mosaic of Anatolia as “a crucible for peoples that have come from Central Asia, the Balkans, and Mesopotamia.”² Extrapolation of this notion automatically leads to the principle that the whole of humankind is the offspring of Adam and Eve. Gulen insists on seeing the potential for good in all peoples and religions. He stresses the merit of good deeds, and rejects the empty words of hostile propaganda and ways of terrorizing others.

Gulen believes that all human beings have an urge and need to achieve spiritual salvation expressed in their ability to appreciate the heavenly attributes which surround everybody in this world up to the end of physical existence on this planet. Gulen sees the world and human existence on earth as an open book of God Almighty, and the Qur’an is the glorious reflection of the process of the revelation of truth to the whole of humankind. Reading such thoughts in Gulen’s books or hearing them from him directly, many observers have believed that he is ultimately a Sufi and mystic and therefore his messages will not attract the younger generation of Muslims in secular Turkey and elsewhere whom they assume to be hot-blooded and radical. This assumption has found no ground in reality, however, as most of those inspired by him are young people.

Gulen and politics

Gulen is very active religiously and socially, while apparently very reluctant to play any part in the political moves of particular political parties or forces. As a non-political entity Gulen has become something of a center of gravity for many millions of Turkish people from all walks of life. Thus, even secular political parties have tried to use his style of preaching and argumentation to reach out to the voters. However, in his own life he is quite secluded from all kinds of political activities.

Some Westerners view Gulen’s way of life as monastic in the Eastern style. They may even see him as a Muslim Dalai Lama seeking nirvana throughout his entire life. However, even in his self-imposed exile in the USA he has never aspired to any media attention or publicity or popularity of any kind. He is deeply involved in interfaith activities and devoted to his Islamic duties as a true Muslim sacrificing every moment and everything quietly for the benefit of others.

Not sectarianism, but dialogue and diplomacy

Gulen does not devote much time to explaining the differences between Shi’as or Sunnis, Hanafis or Hanbalis, Malikis or Shafis, whereas many contemporary Muslim scholars give the utmost importance to these differences of sect and madhhab. According to such scholars, focusing on these distinctions is the right way to purify the Muslim nation from shirk (that is, any belief contrary to tawhid, the oneness of God), bida (illegitimate innovation in religious affairs), or just deviation from the siratul mustaqim (the straight path) demonstrated by the Prophet of Islam.

For Gulen, however, the most important thing is to establish a close relation between the human self and the sifats (Attributes) of God Almighty. Only when a great number of people are selflessly and honestly devoted to the higher spiritual cause prescribed by the holy ideals of Islam of making the entire human race preserve and protect its own dignity and surroundings for the benefit of all, can we hope to regain the lost glory of the Muslim civilization and the generosity and liberality of the Muslim nation for which we hope. Gulen does not believe that much can be achieved for these noble causes through military or political means. Dialogue and diplomacy is the better option for all sides in any ongoing conflict. Welfare-oriented governance is the best alternative to the corporate greed for profit and deception of all kinds aimed at making money for a tiny group of people in society.

Unlike most Muslim nations, Turks have never experienced direct foreign colonial rule of any kind. This unique feature of the Turkish nation has made Turks better prepared to accept the universality of Islam that has been expressed or reflected in thousands of Gulen’s sermons and in the numerous speeches delivered to Muslim congregations and interfaith meetings both in Turkey and the USA. Those ideas are crystallized in dozens of books written by Gulen. Alongside his preaching about universal values, Gulen has always been mindful of the troubles afflicting the hearts and minds of Turkish people. Knowing very well the risks of alienating himself from some of his own people, he has nevertheless shown great enthusiasm for reform of the education system in Turkey. In doing this, however, he has never allowed any sect, group, or political party to own or disown him completely. His strategy is very clear: whoever does good and honest work as a Muslim I should be with him, and I must avoid all kinds of bad or wicked works.

Opposition to Gulen

Ultra-secularist forces have tried unsuccessfully to use Gulen for their own political ends in various ways. One attempt was to characterize him as an innovator of religious reforms with little compatibility with the preaching and life of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Having failed in that, some anti-Islamic forces inside and outside Turkey are now trying to portray Gulen as the future Khomeini of Turkey. But Khomeini’s year-long stay in the city of Bursa in Turkey, once the capital of the Ottoman Empire, and his exposure to the Sunni communities in Turkey and Iraq did not make him Sunni, and Gulen’s exposure to the USA will not make him a revolutionary or worldly Islamic preacher. Gulen’s beardless face and modern dress do not make him less Islamic, but he is neither a fanatic nor a so-called modernist incapable of appreciating the attributes of God Almighty. Comparing Gulen’s educational and cultural movement with Khomeini’s revolution in Iran is either a reflection of ignorance about the many diverse methods of social reform with wide-ranging ramifications for the revival of Islamic values, or shows a complete lack of knowledge about the many dissimilarities between these two great Muslims nations.

In Gulen’s writing, Islamic revolution and jihad with its detailed rules and regulations are either absent or he limits himself to a clarion call for spiritual jihad that has nothing to do with war, violence, or even aggressive ways of spreading the religious message.

Our interest in our environment and our love for humankind – that is, our ability to embrace creation – depends on knowing and understanding our own essence, our ability to discover ourselves, and to feel a connection with our Creator… Humanism is a doctrine of love and humanity which is articulated recklessly these days, and it has a potential to be easily manipulated through different interpretations. Some circles try to impose an abstract and unbalanced understanding of humanism by confusing people about jihad in Islam and awakening suspicion in their hearts… Jihad can be a matter of self-defense or of removing obstacles between God and human free choice…”³

For many years now, Western commentators have asked why world-renowned Muslim and non-Muslim authors fail to demonstrate any clarity in the complicated issues related to Islam and jihad. In this area, Gulen is a voice of complete clarity and consistency in his presentation of Islamic issues and their correlation with universal humanitarianism. Thus, Gulen has filled, at least to some extent, an intellectual gap between the Muslim world and the West. His message is very clear for any careful reader, not least on matters like terrorism: “Terror can never be used in the name of Islam or for the sake of any Islamic ends. A terrorist cannot be a true Muslim and a true Muslim cannot be a terrorist. A Muslim can only be a representative and symbol of peace, welfare, and prosperity.”⁴

Questioning or challenging the universality of Western concepts of human rights is rather an easy job. However, to present a comprehensive and better alternative to a Western consumption-based society is a gigantic task that has been initiated by the Gulen movement in the areas of educational and cultural exchange between religions and nations.

Even Gulen himself may not even be able to imagine the impact he is having now on the Turkish public psyche and beyond in formulating a new and completely peaceful strategy to bridge the East and West or the Muslim world and the rest of the world. This is truly a huge intellectual advance wrought almost single-handedly by Gulen and based on his convincing arguments for peace and dignity for the whole of humankind. His emphasis on a value-based educational system without indoctrination is shown clearly in all his books. This emphasis has led to the founding all around the world of hundreds of schools sponsored by Turkish educators and businessmen where teachers are trying to implement Gulen’s ideals.

There is still more to say about the Turkish and Sunni features of the Gulen movement as it has been spearheaded by Sunni Muslims of Turkish origin. One might inquire into how an ultra-secularist state such as Turkey could have produced a social, cultural, and educational reformer like Gulen. However, it seems life-long dedication to the universal causes of Islam and humanity may ultimately produce such a result. Gulen’s followers never indulge in nationalistic, sectarian, or chauvinistic agendas in propagating Islamic values or an educational and cultural system within Muslim communities and beyond. This is the key to the remarkable success of the Gulen movement today. That is what has made him a living legend and, of course, the world’s most influential intellectual of 2008.

Maimul Ahsan Khan is a professor of law (Islam, Human Rights and International Commerce) at the University of Dhaka in Bangladesh.

Notes

1. Mark Scheel, “A Communitarian Imperative: Fethullah Gulen’s Model of Modern Turkey,” The Fountain, 61st issue, January–February 2008.
2. Gurkan Celik, Kate Kirk, Yusuf Alan, “Gulen’s Definition of Peace,” in: Dialogue: Asia-Pacific, Issue 15, January – March 2008, p. 8.
3. M. Fethullah Gulen, Toward a Global Civilization of Love & Tolerance, The Light, New Jersey, 2006, pp. 6, 8, 59.
4. Ibid, p.8.

The events of November 2008 will definitely remain in the memory not only because of the American elections, but also for the hopes that arose almost simultaneously from a successful international conference at Georgetown University-Islam in the Age of Global Challenges: Alternative Perspectives of the Gulen Movement. Participants from different parts of the world discussed for two full days how to deal with problems from poverty and education to gender issues, problems that are posing ever greater and more global threats to humanity. With schools and cultural centers over 110 countries as well as relief and charity organizations with a global outreach, the Gulen movement offers an interesting field of research for social scientists. I would like to draw readers’ attention to an essay in this issue by Farid al-Ansari of Morocco, who presents an insightful portrayal of this movement with which the author reveals he has deep resonance himself.

We are also proud to present in this issue an exclusive interview with Professor Ahmed Zewail. Conducted by Dr. Nuh Gedik, this wisdom-filled interview gives analytical insight into the decline of Muslims from the pinnacle of human civilization which they achieved and maintained for long centuries.

For The Fountain, this past November was also exceptional for something that happened for the first time: a women writers workshop. In order to encourage more female writers to activate their potential or blow the dust off their writing skills, a writing workshop exclusive to women was organized jointly by The Fountain and volunteers in Pittsburgh. Eighteen authors from different states participated. They brainstormed on various issues, ranging from how to be an effective writer to the aspects in which The Fountain is different from other periodicals. Former contributors shared their writing experience with beginners, while previous issues were comprehensively evaluated and analyzed. We are very grateful to the organizers, and we hope this volunteer spirit, without which The Fountain would not have become what it is, will continue to generate quality material for our readers across the globe.

Variation in forms of democracy

Although it is common to discuss democracy as if it is problematic only in the Muslim world, in reality democracies all over the world have to deal with a number of controversial issues about the diverse forms of government, varieties of representation, the types of freedom citizens require or demand, the unlegislated distribution of political power, uneven separation of powers, and the breach of the system of rule by the accumulated powers. (Diamond, 2008: 17-24, 30-33)

Gulen’s intellectual contribution to the global discussion of democracy, which is determined by his adherence to Islamic values, is not limited to an analysis of democracy’s value and meaning for individuals and societies. In addition, he examines how democracy is affected by the crises which people and systems undergo, as well as the complexities of life in modern industrialized societies, and the contraction in the space available for individual and collective expression of cultural, moral and spiritual values. (Cetin, 2008: 226-30)

According to Gulen the understanding of democracy and human rights within the theoretical heritage of Islam is not dogmatic but it centers around values such as compromise, stability, the protection of the life, honor and dignity of the human being, justice, equity, dialogue, and consultation. Islamic political theory is flexible and does not bind Muslims by any rigid limits in the choice of concrete forms of government and political system. The main principle in Islamic political theory is the implementation of three fundamental values: equality, justice and consultation. The forms and means of enactment of these are vested in the hands of the community. Thus, the actual realization of the three pillars can and must take into account the conditions of Muslims’ lives, their traditions, cultural preferences, and other factors. Gulen argues that the social, cultural, political and historical aspects of societies, should be taken into account in the development of democracy in the entire world.

Observers discussing the compatibility between Western and Muslim perspectives on democracy and human rights sometimes make the error of attacking “Islam” and demanding its reform, instead of commenting on the approaches or methods of particular activists, regimes or countries and reforming those. Some observers even claim Islamic principles and institutions directly contradict democratic values in their modern meaning, and so any step by Muslim societies towards the establishment of democracy must be accompanied by rejecting Islamic political and legal traditions. At the other extreme, ideologically motivated Muslims claim to have the only correct understanding of Islam, and that Islamic fundamentals of power, politics and believers’ rights have nothing in common with Western democratic institutions. These extremists often argue that “the power of the people” is alien to Islam, which puts forward the principle of the supremacy of Islamic law instead. (Sykiainen, 2007: 122-3)

In fact, the concepts advanced in this type of argumentation are taken out of the whole context of Islamic thought and its socio-political heritage and are addressed to less well-educated Muslims (and others) in order to justify political extremism. Nevertheless, within both traditional and modern Islamic political and legal thought, there are several different perspectives on government which are more genuinely representative of the Islamic legal tradition and which do not justify extremism. (Gulen, 2004:220; also <http://en.fgulen.com/a.page/press/interview/ a1203.html>).

Islamic jurisprudence embodies the divine revelation, the art of lawyers, local and global cultures, and global relationships. Islamic law and the legal system, its common principles and the majority of its concrete norms are similar to the fundamental ideas and particular provisions of other legal systems. Islamic legal culture has always cooperated closely with and been receptive to other legal cultures. In this sense, Islamic law is of benefit not only to Muslims but to the whole of humanity. Over many centuries a great variety of views on the fundamentals of the executive and the legislature have developed within Islamic culture, and diverse notions of the relations between the state and the individual have been elaborated. (Sykiainen, 2007: 119-132)

One of the key features of the Islamic understanding of democracy is the concept of shura (collective and community consultation). Without any qualification or limitation, all members of a community are eligible to give or request consultation on any matter, except one covered by a clear-cut revelation from God. Consequently, all political matters concerning the selection of the ruler, the structure and shape of the government, the form of political system, the running of the government and of the various affairs of the state, and all other related matters are to be decided by consultation through the participation of all the members of the community. (Gulen, 2005: 43-58)

In public and government affairs collective consultation is concerned with two main issues: the selection of the head of state and running of the government together with reviewing the legality and propriety of governmental and presidential actions. On the selection of the head of state, collective consultation is flexible and adopts various forms. Elections, whether direct or indirect, are considered to be an Islamic method of selecting the head of state or members of the legislative body which satisfies the consultation process. With regard to the running of the government and control over the legality and propriety of the executive’s actions, Islamic law is also very flexible. The establishment of a representative body through direct or indirect elections is compatible with Islam and is a good application of community and collective consultation. In addition to their reviewing authorities, representative bodies may be empowered to legislate on different matters provided that such regulations do not violate any unambiguous and clear-cut principle or rule of Islamic injunctions. If democracy is the government of the people by the people for the people, shura is a process which guarantees that all affairs of the people are decided by the people and for their interests. So, the basics of democracy and the fundamentals of shura in the political field are not opposed. (Gulen, 2004:223; Sykiainen, 2007:110, Cetin 2008: 218; Gulen, 2005: 43-58)

This genuine Islamic idea is one of the most basic human rights and a means of protecting and preserving all other human rights under Islamic law, especially the right to equality, the freedom of thought, and the right to express oneself freely in order to correct or demand the correction of what is not right, even if it is something committed by the highest officials, including the head of state. State officials and authorities do not have political immunity while in office in Islam. (Gulen, 2006)

Law, order and, human rights

Gulen analyzes the different rights recognized in Islam, including freedom of religion and belief, thought and expression, to own property and the sanctity of one’s home, to marry and have children, to communicate and to travel, and the right to an unimpeded education. He underlines that the principles of Islamic jurisprudence are based on these and other rights, all of which have now been accepted by modern legal systems, such as the protection of life, religion, property, family life, and intellect, as well as the basic understanding of the equality of people, which is based on the fact that all people are human beings, and subsequently, the rejection of all racial, color, and linguistic discrimination. (Ünal and Williams, 2000:135-8)

Every single right must be respected in Islam. In particular, the right of an individual cannot be violated for the interest of the community. This idea is central to the concept of human rights in Islam and the interpretation of Islamic tradition with regard to this issue. Gulen recalls that if there are nine criminals and only one innocent person on a ship, in order to punish the criminals, Islam does not permit the sinking of that ship because of the innocent person. Though this may sound utopian today considering the mass and “collateral” damage caused by modern nations at war, Gulen argues that the bar should be set at the highest possible level for democracy and every effort to reach that level should be attempted. (Gulen, 2006; also personal correspondence, 08.11.2008).

Gulen underlines that people everywhere always demand freedom of choice within their beliefs, that is, in the way they run their affairs and in their expression of spiritual and religious values. He stresses the separation of the eternal and the evolving judgments (ijtihad) of Islamic jurisprudence. Specifically, political affairs in general and democratic institutions and human rights in particular are covered by Islamic legislative provisions which can relate and respond to the needs of changing circumstances and times. Gulen points out that democracy will continue to evolve and refine itself in the future. Islamic principles of equality, tolerance, and justice can help in this regard, provided that the injunctions of the Qur’an and the Sunna as well as any definite judgments of Islamic law are re-examined and restored in the light of advancing knowledge and changes in societies. (Sykiainen, 2007: 129-30)

It is possible to envisage a kind of democracy with a spiritual dimension. It is a democracy which contains respect for and observance of human rights and freedoms, including freedom of speech, expression and religion, a democracy which prepares the necessary conditions for people to live and practice as they believe, which renders people able to fulfill their wish and need for eternity, and which takes or deals with human beings as a whole with regard to their all material and immaterial needs. For, human life does not start and end with life in this world; the world is only a temporal, transit station, and people are ceaselessly moving toward their eternal abode. The system that governs them must not ignore or neglect this crucial matter. We therefore have to seek ways to sophisticate and humanize democracy. No such stage or democracy has been attained yet, in east or west, north or south, but we can aspire to and work for such an aim. (Gulen, 2006; Gulen in Saritoprak and Ünal, 2005: 452)

Democratic culture

In Gulen’s view, therefore it is vital to encourage the building of a strong civil society in order to have and retain a ‘culture’ of democracy, and this can only be done through sound education. In a democracy, where people are entitled to freedom of speech, expression, religion, and the right to sell their labor, and other such rights, every individual should know what kinds of rights they have and what authority, weight and say they have in state and government affairs. (Gulen, 2006; Cetin, 2008: 216-20)

In all societies on some occasions, or even for extended periods, some interests will not be happy about all individuals being aware of their rights; they may see such education as an obstacle to their gaining political or economic power or even arbitrary rule. Consequently, they may attempt to limit citizens’ access to information and institutions and try to guide them in directions which do not serve citizens’ own true interests. (Gulen, 2006)

However, it is impossible to enjoy and practice democracy in a society where people are unaware of their rights and freedom, where people do not know how to seek and pursue their rights, where, in short, they do not have a developed democratic culture. In such societies occasional openings or temporary freedoms might be enjoyed, but it is always possible for special interests to come up with further impositions and undemocratic interventions. In many parts of the world we see tyrannical, authoritarian and dictatorial leaders who exploit or manipulate, for example, the electoral process, the legal system or the constitution not in the name of the progress or development of the country but for the continuance of their own power or in pursuit of self-interest or the interest of a select group around them. (Gulen, 2006)

To counteract the activities of vested interests, while individuals are being asked to fulfill their rights and duties in democratic system, in addition to knowledge they also need to have the self-confidence and the civic courage to own and defend their rights (Gulen, 2006). Here Gulen’s contribution to the development of democracy around the globe lies not only in his intellectual contribution to debate, but also in his ability to inspire action; this practical ability has led to the development of schools, universities, intercultural and interfaith dialogue groups and other institutions throughout the world.

Conclusions

Gulen’s approach is powerful proof of the democratic ideas propagated by Islam, as he is convinced that Islamic democracy and secular political liberalization are not two separate phenomena. He points out that the dominant Islamic culture in the Muslim world co-exists with democratic arrangements on the global level. So, the concept of modernization and democratization does not inevitably mean Westernization but can involve the possibility of adoption of many Western democratic achievements within the Islamic framework. Thus, political culture and democracy practiced among Muslims develop not by their isolation from or opposition to others but by giving of their own achievements and taking the best from others. Gulen proves that Islamic intellectual heritage and political culture must be revisited and respected and that Muslims’ progress depends on the development of knowledge in Islamic sciences (‘ilm) and contemporary technical education (fen). Finally, Gulen life’s work has shown that there is no inherent conflict between Islamic thought and tradition and modern democracy. He has contributed positively to the understanding of democracy, civil society and human rights. (Cetin 2008: 219; Hunt, 2007:8-9; Barton, 2005: 43; Eickelman, 2002:4.)

Muhammed Cetin is the Publications Co-ordinator of the Institute of Interfaith Dialog (IID) and also writes weekly as a columnist in the international daily Today’s Zaman. He has a PhD in sociology.

References

• Barton, G. (2005) “Progressive Islamic thought, civil society and the Gulen movement in the national context: parallels with Indonesia.” Presented at the conference “Islam in the Contemporary World: The Fethullah Gulen Movement in Thought and Practice,” Rice University Conference, Houston, Texas, November 12-13, 2005, pp.51.
• Çetin, M. (2008) “Reductionist Approaches to the Rise and Aims of the Gulen Movement,” at the conference “Islam in the Age of Global Challenges: Alternative Perspectives of the Gulen Movement,” November 14-15, 2008, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., pp. 204-40.
• Diamond, L. (2008) The Spirit of Democracy: The Struggle to Build Free Societies Throughout the World. Times Books.
• Eickelman, D. F. (2002) “The Arab “Street” and the Middle East’s Democracy deficit.” Naval War College Review, LV(4), p.10. Available from: <http:// nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/2002/autumn/pdfs/art3-a02.pdf> [October 9, 2006].
• Gulen, M. F. (2004) Toward a Global Civilization of Love and Tolerance. Somerset, New Jersey, The Light Inc.
• Gulen, M. F. (2005) The Statue of Our Souls: Revival in Islamic Thought and Activism. Somerset, New Jersey, The Light Inc.
• Gulen, M. F. (2006) “Demokrasi Yokusu”, 02.01.2006 [Herkül online] http://www.herkul.org/kiriktesti/index.php?view=article&article_id=2846
• Hunt, R. (2007) “Challenges in Understanding the Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World.” In: Hunt, R. A. & Aslandogan, Y. A. eds. (2007), 1-10.
• Hunt, R. A. & Aslandogan, Y. A. eds. (2007) Muslim Citizens of the Globalized World: Contributions of the Gulen Movement. Somerset, New Jersey, IID Press & The Light Inc.
• Saritoprak, Z. & Ünal, A. (2005) An interview with Fethullah Gulen. The Muslim World Special Issue, Islam in Contemporary Turkey: the Contributions of Gulen 95(3), 447-67.
• Sykiainen, L. (2007) “Democracy and the Dialogue between Western and Islamic Legal Cultures: The Gulen Case.” In: Hunt, R. A. & Aslandogan, Y. A. eds. (2007), 121-32.
• Ünal, A. & Williams, A. (2000) Fethullah Gulen: Advocate of Dialogue. Fairfax, VA, The Fountain.