He was one of the many, though often ignored, Muslim thinkers who sought to rework the vision of classical Islam in a modern context, placing humanity at the center of its focus. Gülen called on Muslims and non-Muslims alike to embrace an ethical life that surpasses mere legalism, urging a deeper commitment to humanism and science. Consequently, he proposed an educational system in which science and religion should not conflict with each other but should support one other, envisioning a utopian harmony where thought and action are brought together.

Gülen foresaw a revitalized Islam, open to dialogue and capable of contributing meaningfully in a constantly evolving global world. His unwavering stance against the secularist fanaticism of the Kemalist era and his opposition to the authoritarian and fundamentalist drift of Erdoğan’s regime made him one of the strongest and bravest voices in the Islamic world. He identified the primary evils of our time as poverty, lack of solidarity, and ignorance, and he dedicated his life to combating them.

The Islam he proposed was one open to modernity and universal dialogue, firmly opposed to any form of radicalism that distorts the true essence of a religion that has significantly contributed to humanity’s cultural and social progress. In the face of such distorted interpretations, even among Muslims, Gülen was unafraid to speak clearly and decisively. He once stated: “Terror can never be used in the name of Islam or for the sake of any Islamic ends. A terrorist cannot be a Muslim, and a Muslim cannot be a terrorist. A Muslim can only be the representative and symbol of peace, welfare, and prosperity.”

His life, works, and the movement he inspired were deeply rooted in the religious and political context of his time. From his youth through his mature years, he navigated the challenges of the Kemalist regime, where Islam was tightly controlled and administered by a secular state. Despite this, the local Turkish population generally remained tolerant and connected to the spirituality of the Sufi brotherhoods in their daily lives.

While often referring in his writings to the tradition of classical Sufism and its most prominent figures—drawing extensively from the lives and works of great Sufi saints—he never identified himself as a Sufi or as a member of any of the Sufi fraternities in Turkey. Instead, he offered a personalized and individual interpretation of Sufism. From the Sufi tradition, he drew values that he embodied in his own life—through his personal asceticism, lack of interest in worldly wealth, and meek character, which harmoniously blended with his strong leadership qualities.

Fethullah Gülen was a man of the people, thanks to his modest origins and the difficulties and sufferings he faced throughout his life, from which he drew the ability to deeply understand the needs of ordinary people, with a profound sense of empathy and altruism.

This quality of being a “man of the people,” however, did not prevent him from possessing a rich culture, which he acquired through hard efforts and daily commitment to studying and reading the classic texts of Islam, as well as numerous works by Western authors, ranging from literature to science, poetry to philosophy.

In his life, he devoted himself primarily to preaching and communicating the fundamental values of his religious beliefs. At the same time, he remained open to modernity and science and was a passionate advocate for dialogue with people of other faiths, with whom he sought to build a better world grounded in high moral values. This attitude led him to focus particularly on fundamental human values, which, when lived by each individual, form the foundation of an authentic reform of social life. In this context, Fethullah Gülen emphasizes the need for self-reform, urging believers to become better practitioners of their faith.

In Gülen’s view, contrary to what one might assume, such an approach does not restrict the interests of individual Muslims or their communities. Instead, it broadens their horizons to include civil society and the entire world, which, from his perspective, is in search of a new humanism—one in which religion can and must play a vital role. He was particularly invested in young people, encouraging them to become active members of society without neglecting their responsibilities. He believed they should be present in every institution—schools, the judiciary, bureaucracy, the military, media, arts, literature, and even business and finance—to contribute to the welfare of both society as a whole and individual citizens.

For Fethullah Gülen, it was essential that faith play a positive role in society, fostering a constructive synthesis between religion, modernity, patriotism, democracy, science, and the arts. He envisioned a form of positive secularism where religion and modernity could coexist harmoniously. He opposed all forms of pietism and religious intolerance, consistently striving to build bridges of communication—whether between faith and science or among different cultures and worlds.

Referring to the traditional Turkish understanding of Islam, which has often been characterized by exclusion and isolation, he advocated for inclusion and integration. He viewed intercultural and interreligious dialogue as a powerful tool for fostering peace and fraternity among peoples.

Gülen’s view of Islam is based on a solid faith in the tradition and its fundamental texts, while remaining open to the advancements of philosophy and science, as well as the critical thinking of individuals. This faith centers on the profound relationship between God and the universe, embodied in the Islamic concept of the unity of God (tawhîd). In Gülen’s view, tawhîd encompasses both God’s transcendence and His immanence, which is expressed through the emanation of His “Beautiful Names.” These Names manifest throughout the cosmos, leading to the knowledge of God and allowing humanity to explore the mysteries of the universe.

However, it is humanity—its nature, characteristics, and potential—that lies at the heart of Gülen’s thought. He sees humanity as the most important being and the essence of creation itself, as each person carries within them the mystery of the universe. This enables every individual, regardless of religion, race, wealth, or social status, to manifest the Divine, particularly love, which is the fulcrum of the Divine Essence. For Gülen, love is the foundation of true humanism, as exemplified by the lives and teachings of prophets and sages across all religions. These figures have strived for a just, compassionate, and peaceful world, rooted in the mercy of the “Most Merciful” and His universal plan.

However, the world around us is not always a reflection of the divine: wars, massacres, conflict, and suffering often seem to overshadow a humanism rooted in understanding, tolerance, and love. Thus, Gülen tries to uncover the roots of these evils and identifies the lack of knowledge as the primary source of humanity’s afflictions. Consequently, he places significant emphasis on the educational process, viewing it as essential for raising new generations who can integrate secular education with a deep, personal religiosity, fostering the authentic formation of character and personality.

Offering guidance to teachers, Gülen views their role as that of a “pedagogue” who imposes nothing but assists and supports the development of the student’s personality. Their aim is to help students forge their character and cultivate the qualities of self-discipline and self-control necessary to face life with courage and dedication. It is, therefore, an educational process grounded in persuasion and dialogue, designed to provide a comprehensive education for tomorrow’s professionals—equipping students not only with knowledge and skills but also with moral integrity and universal ethical values.

His enduring dream is to nurture a young generation—”a golden generation”—where enlightened intellectualism, deep and sincere spirituality, wisdom, and continuous activism coexist. He particularly sees in Prophet Muhammad, whom he calls “the pride of humanity,” the model for this new generation. In him, they will find the example of a compassionate father, a great spiritual leader, a wise statesman, a courageous commander, and a loving husband—in short, an absolutely trustworthy and upright person. For Gülen, Prophet Muhammad is both the “ideal man” and the “ideal of every man,” embodying in his life and teachings the ethical pinnacle of humanity.

Gülen was deeply committed to shaping new generations, dedicating himself to supporting poor students in various schools across cities and villages in Turkey. The movement inspired by his teachings and personality, often referred to by Western scholars as the “Gülen Movement,” is known by its members as “Hizmet” (voluntary service). It lacks formal hierarchical structures or networks of connections and is instead composed of men and women of “good will” who share Gülen’s passion for humanity.

This movement has given life to numerous educational, cultural and social service institutions not only in Turkey but also in many other parts of the world (from Central Asia to the Balkans, Mongolia and Bangladesh, from North Africa to sub-Saharan Africa, as well as in many European countries and North and South America.) These institutions operate without discrimination based on religion, gender, or ethnic and cultural background.

What characterizes this Movement is not its activities, nor a specific form of organization but the shared values and ideals rooted in the principles expressed in the thought and work of Fethullah Gülen. And it is precisely for this reason that, educational institutions hold a central place among the Movement’s activities, fostering a new way of interaction among teachers, parents, and entrepreneurs who support various educational projects.

The main goal of this approach is to foster a direct and continuous relationship between teachers, students, and families, ensuring that the educational process becomes a synthesis of heart and mind, tradition and modernity, spirituality and rationality. Financial sponsors are also encouraged to engage in a spirit of altruistic service by interacting with students, families, and teachers, visiting institutions, and building a familial connection with everyone involved.

During my various visits to schools of the Movement, from Albania to Senegal, I have witnessed this climate of mutual understanding and collaboration between students, families and teachers. There is a shared pursuit of an education that provides models of behavior and moral conduct for all students, regardless of their creed, political views, or cultural background. In fact, although most of the teachers are Muslim, I have not seen a great concern to propagate Islam. The deepest desire of those teachers seems to be that of living and communicating those values which, according to Fethullah Gülen, are inherent in Islam but are ultimately the shared heritage of all humanity.

It is a movement in which women are very active, not only as teachers in various educational institutions but also as promoters of ideas and new initiatives at various international conferences organized by the Movement.

The financial aspect is approached with a deep sense of solidarity and a strong commitment to preserving the independence and voluntary nature of the Movement’s projects, avoiding reliance on government aid or financial contributions from foreign foundations. As a result, funds are collected voluntarily in an atmosphere of fellowship and mutual support, strengthened by frequent interpersonal connections.

It is almost impossible to provide a complete picture of the countless institutions inspired by Gülen and carried out by the Movement. However, it is important to note that the service (Hizmet) is not limited to the field of education but extends to many other areas of social life worldwide, including aid for the needy and the promotion of interreligious and intercultural dialogue, as well as world peace.

It is thanks to these flourishing initiatives that the spirit and thought of Fethullah Gülen have spread globally, offering a vision of society and civil coexistence rooted in responsibility and the pursuit of a more equitable and just world. This vision is realized through the efforts of people of good will, who provide a model of life and community that stands as an alternative to the selfishness and injustice prevalent in today’s society.

Only he can be a leader who never loses hope.
Bapu Ke Ashirwad
February 12, 1946

What could be a more accurate, and simpler, definition of a leader than this? Bapu – more commonly known as Mohandas Gandhi – both believed in, and embodied, this statement. His hope to bring about change in society never waned, even after he was thrown out of a train at Peitermaritzburg Station in South Africa. He did not give up hope after the outbreak of violence by Satyagrahis in Chauri Chaura, during the first Civil Disobedience movement in 1920, which he suspended despite the fact that most of his colleagues felt they were on the verge of victory. Only Bapu was confident that he could suspend the movement and revive it later, when he was more assured about the readiness of his people and their discipline.

It is all too easy for leaders to become hostages to their followers, especially if they are fearful of possible backlash that could result from admonishing or criticizing them. Movements and protests can spiral out of a leader’s control and further devolve into chaos and violence. This lack of control, and discipline, is the opposite of leadership. A leader is one who has the ability to navigate the actions of his or her followers, ensuring they do not violate their principles: he or she should not succumb to populism. Bapu exhibited this ability throughout his entire life, both as a public entity and in his Ashram (religious) life.

Bapu founded one ashram in Ahmedabad, India, in 1915. He performed many Ashram rituals himself, and made these into a daily practice, which the Ashramites saw and emulated. He eventually went on to develop a system of virtues which he called the “11 Vows” (Ekadashi Vrat):

1. Ahimsa (Non-violence)
2. Satya (Truth)
3. Asteya (Not stealing)
4. Bhramhcharya (Celibacy or Fidelity)
5. Aparigraha (Non-possession)
6. Sharira-Shrama (Physical labor)
7. Aswada (Control of the Palate)
8. Sarvatra Bhayavarjana (Fearlessness)
9. Sarva Dharma Samanatva (Respect for all religions)
10. Swadeshi (Using local produce)
11. Sparshabhavana (Abolishing practice of untouchability)

He lived by these principles without preaching them or making a show of doing so. “An ounce of practice is of more significance than a ton of preaching,” Bapu believed, and so it was easy for his followers to believe him and follow suit. Today, leaders thrive on preaching and confusing their adherents. They also frown upon and discourage the habit of asking questions or allowing their followers to express discontent or dissent.

When Bapu announced the next Non-Cooperation Movement, he declared that he would march from Sabarmati to Dandi, which was a distance of 341 miles, and that he would pick up a fist full of salt from the sea shore and declare that he had broken the draconian Salt Monopoly that so hurt India. The British Imperial Regime had imposed a barbaric 3500% tax on the production and consumption of domestic salt. This act of defiance was meant to help declare India to be independent; however, many senior leaders of the Indian National Congress (INC) were not convinced and were opposed to his proposal. Sardar Patel, a senior leader of the INC, was one of the people who disagreed and argued about the foolishness of the proposal. Bapu gave him a patient hearing and finally convinced Sardar, who then took responsibility for organizing the protest. It was Sardar who actually finalized the route of the march and spread the message of the Salt Satyagraha (form of nonviolence resistance). Sardar was the first Indian leader who was arrested and imprisoned, even before Bapu began the Salt March, which explains why Sardar Saheb was absent while Bapu marched to Dandi.

Another senior leader of the INC to voice his dissent, was Motilal Nehru. He wrote a twenty-two-page letter to Bapu, with a point by point explanation of why Bapu’s proposed move would fail and put his future leadership in danger; he also explained how the INC would lose the people’s trust and support. In his reply, Bapu wrote:

“Adarniya Motilalji, Kar Ke Dekhien – Respected Motilalji, please give it a try.”

Any other leader would have taken such a short reply as an insult and rejected Bapu’s leadership; however, Motilalji accepted Bapu’s decision. After Bapu had symbolically broken the Salt Law at Dandi and asked the people to follow, Motilalji declared that he would help break the Salt Law by leading his own satyagraha in the city of Allhabad.

By then, the Viceroy had ordered that all satyagrahas must be crushed by any means and its leaders must be immediately arrested, so that the movement would become leaderless and flounder. After announcing his intention to perform satyagraha, when Motilalji reached his home, the Police Commissioner was waiting for him with an arrest warrant. The last thing Motilalji did before going to prison was to send a telegram to Bapu stating the following:

“Adarniya Gandhiji, Karne se Pehle hi Dekhliya! – Respected Gandhiji, I have realized its power even before trying it out!”

This was the confidence of a true leader and such was his honesty and humility that his subordinates and contemporaries had the freedom to question his decisions and seek that he convince them before they obeyed. This also illustrates the fact that a great leader had the resolve and confidence to go it alone without becoming a hostage to the opposition of those who disagreed with him or defied his decision. As Gurudev wrote:

“Joki tor haak shunee koi na aashe tomi ekla Chalo Re…: When no one heeds your call, oh unfortunate one, walk alone.”

Bapu had the courage to tread a lonely path.  This is a hallmark of a great leader.

Bapu never aspired to become a leader. His ambition was always to serve the people and the cause to the best of his ability, and the honesty of his method was always of paramount importance, even more so than his desired objective. This sets him apart from the majority of other leaders.

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.