Can Islam Respond to Our Age?

Is Religion an End in Itself or a Means?

This question can also be phrased as follows: When an Islamic movement or a political group that refers to Islam comes to power in the Islamic world, why do news agencies and newspapers publish headlines like, “Sharia law has been declared in Afghanistan, women are forbidden from going out in public, and men are forbidden from shaving their beards.” Or “Sharia constitution has been adopted in Chechnya. A woman who committed adultery was stoned, a person caught stealing was punished with flogging,” “Islamic constitution in Pakistan: thieves’ hands will be cut off.”

Similar reports apply when religious Jews or Christians raise their voices and make various demands. For example, in Israel: “Radical religious Jews protested such-and-such meeting held on Saturday,” or “The Pope lifted the ban on debate regarding the theory of evolution.”

Why is the image that divine religion presents to modern humanity always identified with prohibitions and oppression? So much so that even voluntary or born members of these religions do not approve of the interpreters of their faith who produce such images, and these interpreters remain a “minority and fanatical group.”

As the level of Islamic awareness increases in Türkiye, why do fear and anxiety prevail among a broad segment of society? Why does the majority of society look with a strange suspicion at people who adopt and live by embracing Islam and keep their distance from them?

The question “Is religion a means or an end in itself?” essentially enables us to question why ideas and policies that answer this question with “It is an end in itself” produce images that lead to the questions above.

In general, the “true believers” of divine religions, and Islam in particular, share a common perspective that all people and all of life should be shaped and regulated by religion. This approach, which perceives religious rules as unchangeable and unquestionable due to their divine origin, argues that all human problems will be solved when these rules prevail and that therefore establishing the dominance of religion is the fundamental duty of every believer.

However, it is debatable whether this approach is truly what religion itself desires. For new questions and uncertainties arise, such as which interpretation of religious rules will prevail and how it will be established. Jews and Christians have partly overcome this uncertainty due to the existence of a clerical class. For Muslims, however, this uncertainty still applies; which interpretation of Islam is the single true one, and according to whom? What will be the status of those who do not approve of this single correct interpretation? This approach almost inevitably leads to the conclusion that whichever interpretation becomes powerful and gains authority will be implemented as the one true interpretation. Thus, throughout Islamic history, the interpretation of Islam held by scholars close to power has prevailed. For the same reason, rulers have supported interpretations they found close to themselves. As a result, the discourse of establishing religion’s dominance has gradually become a means for supporters of a particular interpretation to gain power. The debates over the caliphate during the Umayyad period, the Mu‘tazilite-centered controversies during the Abbasid era, and the conflicts between the Sunni/Hanafi interpretation and Safavid Shiism and esoteric interpretations during the Ottoman period were all manifestations of this struggle for power.

So, what is the meaning of religion in the contemporary world? Since Islam does not possess the characteristic that Christianity experienced of “withdrawing from life” and “renouncing worldly claims,” and on the contrary sets forth principles and rules concerning every dimension of life in terms of its beliefs and rulings, how will the question of Islam’s sovereignty be resolved in the modern world? In other words, how will the followers of this religion, first and foremost, experience hope, peace, and security instead of fear and anxiety in the face of Islam’s dominance?

In our view, this issue can be resolved by removing Religion and religious rules from being an end in themselves and, following the method put forward by the Andalusian scholar al-Shatibi, determining the purpose of these rules within the framework of Maqasid al-Sharia (the Objectives of the Sharia).

This means that God is putting humanity, whom He created, honored, and entrusted with responsibility, to the test of making the right choice in the struggle between evil (Şer), represented by Satan, and divinely ordained good (Hayr). This test represents an opportunity and a chance for the essence of being ‘human’ to earn a true and eternal existence through goodness in this limited, mortal, and potentially evil-laden world. For this purpose, God has spoken to mankind through divine revelation, enabling them to distinguish between right and wrong (furkan), to choose what is right and good (hidayet), to walk on the right path (rehber), and to stay away from evil (öğüt). The purpose of revelation is to enable humanbeings to choose goodness and justice, to remind them of what they have forgotten, to keep them away from evil and oppression, and to ensure that they return to where they came from (ileyhi raciun) by living the test of life in the way that God desires (iman). God’s word, not in itself but in the path it shows and defines, is religion. In the Qur’an, the word şir‘a (determining the path) is used 5 times, din (the content of the path) 85 times, and Islam (entering or following the path) 161 times. These words themselves do not express an ultimate purpose; rather, they present to humanity as a purpose the “path” to establishing the dominance of monotheism (Tawhid), justice, goodness, morality, and peace. However, over time, this original path and purpose, has been replaced by the “Book” itself which serves as a guide, a criterion, guidance, and advice (i.e., a means) to reach the ultimate goal on this path and purpose. Defending and establishing the dominance of the institutionalized body of rules regarded as “religion” itself has become the “purpose.” Religion, the Messenger, and the Qur’an he conveyed show people a path; yet instead of walking on that path, people regard attachment to the finger pointing to the path as “piety.”

For example, the Qur’an says, “When you judge, judge with justice,” yet some interpreters advocate “judging by the Qur’an.” In other words, “making the Qur’an sovereign” has become a psychological expression treated as an end in itself and detached from its content. However, upholding justice and goodness and preventing evil and oppression is already, in the broadest sense, making the Qur’an sovereign. Instead of thinking about how to judge justly, how to uphold goodness, and how to determine what is right and beautiful, and striving to find diverse and concrete answers to these questions under contemporary conditions, Muslims prefer merely to speak of, or impose, ‘making the Qur’an sovereign’ or ‘judging by what God has revealed.’ This situation appears clearly in debates concerning governance and law. Whereas early Muslims conducted their discussions on these matters in a more relaxed psychological atmosphere and did not perceive them as issues of “creed,” today debates about democracy or law are carried out within a psychology of “lest religion be lost” and through theological concepts such as faith, disbelief, and polytheism. Yet at no period in Islamic history (except for the Kharijites) were state-and governance-centered debates handled within such a framework by any school. During the time of Caliph Umar, the Sasanian “Divan” tradition was adopted as the consultative model known as “Ehl-i Hal ve’l Akd”,  and no one accused it of being a system of disbelief. Likewise, during the conflict between Ali and Muawiya, the parties did not accuse each other with theological concepts but conducted a political debate around justice and oppression. Moreover, nearly all the rules and principles today regarded as the Sharia system are products of Arab Islamic practice during the Umayyad period and represent a particular Arab interpretation of Islam. Similarly, many interpretations and practices originating from the Ottoman or Iranian context should be understood as practices produced by Muslims under different conditions in line with the objectives of Islam.

Because of this reversal of purpose and means, Muslims have come to display a “constructed behavior” of seeking answers to all their questions from their religion, expecting it to solve all their problems, and imposing this on others. However, religion is a means to uphold goodness and justice. Therefore, the aim is not to establish religious dominance, but to uphold justice and goodness at both individual and societal levels, as religion itself advises.

Have Religions Completed Their Lifespan?

After the scientific and technological discoveries and inventions that began in the 19th century, anti-religious ideas gained strength in Europe following the crisis Christianity experienced due to religious and sectarian wars and practices such as the inquisition. The churches and clergy’s use of dogmatic beliefs and practices as a tool of social oppression, their opposition to scientific discoveries, their resistance to innovation, and their inability to answer new questions have alienated people from religion and even led them to question their beliefs. From the beginning of the 20th century, the strengthening non-religious, secular (non-church-aligned), philosophies and ideologies influenced the masses with their harsh criticisms that refuted religious dogmas and exposed the political and social pressures of religion, as the new industrial society, cities, factories, and schools that shaped people’s lives replaced religion. In this sense, Christianity in Europe, to a certain extent, completed its lifespan and was institutionally removed from political and social life by secular administrations.

Judaism, meanwhile, has always been the faith of a relatively closed and narrow community, and it underwent a similar process internally. Many Jews adopted new secular or anti-religious ideas and ideologies, preserving Jewish identity as an ethnicity while abandoning it as a faith.

Islam, however, did not experience a similar fate. For it has neither an unquestionable clerical class like Christianity nor an institution such as a sacred church of God. Moreover, Islam does not categorically oppose scientific discoveries and new technologies at the level of belief. In the Islamic world, these innovations were met with concern mainly because they altered traditional habits and raised fears that they might lead to unbelief as in the West. Despite these concerns, from the end of the 19th century onwards, through movements and organizations such as scholars like Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, the Jadid movement in Central Asia, the Usulis in Iran, and the New Ottomans and the Islamism of the Committee of Union and Progress in the Ottoman Empire, interpretations of Islam that did not conflict with modernity and science were brought to the agenda, and in parallel with developments in the West, discussions on renewal while remaining within Islam were carried out in the Islamic world. These debates and searches continue to this day. For this reason, Islam has not met the same fate as other religions; its dynamism of renewal has continued through its inherent tradition of rational reflection.

In this sense, religion, that is, the path of tawhid (monotheism) will never complete its lifespan until the Day of Judgment. No matter how much the world changes, humanity will always seek the path of its innate nature and conscience, and religion will continue to show that path again and again.

Is the Subject of Religion God or Human Beings?

The owner of religion is God, and its subject, that is, its fundamental concern is the human being. Yet in contemporary interpretations that have developed as Islamic thought, this has been reversed; and Muslims have become the owners of religion, and God its subject. As a result, Muslims have assumed the position of people who “fight for religion,” act in the name of religion, try to preserve and protect religion, and attempt to organize life on the basis of religion. However, religion belongs to God; Muslims have neither the problem nor the duty of protecting and preserving it. The One who will protect religion and sustain it until the Day of Judgment is God. Muslims are merely followers of the Path. By walking on that path, they make choices that will be beneficial for them in this world and the hereafter and strive to resolve their problems in favor of goodness and justice. Since the Path itself is not the ultimate aim and belongs to God, what falls to Muslims is simply to walk on it and try not to deviate.

Within this framework, the subject of Islam is the human being; it takes the human being as its foundation. It looks at events from the human perspective, and centers on human salvation and happiness in this world and the next. Yet in the minds of many Muslims, this has been reversed; by turning “God” into the subject, God and humanity have been placed in opposition to one another. Thus, by making a distinction between the divine and the human, everything produced by human beings has been positioned separately and in contrast to what is considered “divine.”

This perspective has led to belittling human beings, distrusting them, and, by placing God opposite them, almost setting up a competition between the God and humanbeing. The source of debates such as pitting “Islam” against certain ideologies (socialism, nationalism, liberalism, Kemalism), contrasting the sovereignty of Islam with the sovereignty of God, or opposing revelation and reason, lies precisely in this mistaken conception of religion, God, and humanbeing.

However, in the verses of the Qur’an describing creation, it is not God versus human, nor even God versus Iblis, but the human (Adam) versus Iblis that conflicts, where God took human’s side and exalted him as the noblest of creation (Eşref-i Mahlûkat), whereas Iblis disparaged the human and did not sujood to him, claiming he was created from clay. For this reason, Satan was expelled, yet was granted respite within the context of the “test” in order to attempt to prove his claim of superiority over humanity.

Thus, the one who belittles humanity, who tries to set it against God, who distrusts them and is disturbed by their existence, is Satan. The One who created and honored humanity, who defends and trusts it, and who made it superior to other creatures, is God.

Despite this clear conception of existence, the fact that people who claim to read and implement the Qur’an interpret it in a completely opposite manner, as a narrative of contradiction and confrontation, can only be explained by sociological, political, and psychological reasons. It can never be explained by the Qur’an itself.

The subject of religion is the human being, and humanity’s adversary is not God but Satan, that is, evil. Human existence is understood as a struggle to purify (Berae) oneself from Satan (from evils) and to choose justice, goodness, and peace arising from the divine spirit within, thereby liberating oneself from evil. The test is given within this very effort of liberation (Tawhid—La ilaha illallah).

This human-centered perspective, which reserves ownership of religion exclusively to God and restores God, humanity, and religion to their proper places, has detailed and practical testimony in the entire life of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), as the “walking Quran,” is a teacher from whom one can learn the meaning of life itself and the effort to walk the path advised by God. “God, the Most Merciful and Compassionate,” demonstrated through the lives of the prophets the struggle to establish and uphold goodness and justice and to overcome evil and oppression, placing humanity at the center. That is why, when the Messenger of God made Medina his home, meaning when “Islam/Sharia was declared in Medina,” no one feared except the oppressors, and all the people of Medina, whether Muslim or not, welcomed the Prophet with excitement and love because “peace, tranquility, justice, and goodness” were coming to Medina. Similarly, when the Islamic armies entered Iran with the aim of ‘liberating it from the oppression of religions,’ the Iranian people voluntarily embraced Islam, saying they were freed from the oppression of their shahs and their assistant clergy, the Zoroastrian magi-mullas. The reason the first Islamic conquests established Islam as dominant from the Adriatic to the Great Wall of China within 30-40 years was not through the sword, but rather because the peoples, liberated from the oppressive rulers cut down by the sword, voluntarily submitted to Islam.

In the contemporary world, Muslims must strive (fiqh, effort) to purify themselves from interpretations that have turned their religion “into a dungeon and a burden for themselves and for humanity,” and to truly comprehend it as a path of “mercy and salvation.” The way to do this is primarily to stop seeing religion as an end in itself, but rather to regard it as a “path” that, through justice and goodness, will make man the noblest of creation, truly elevate good over evil, humanize him by overcoming evil, and absolve him of evildoing; and to demonstrate examples of solving problems by centering on man, trusting him, and ensuring the proper functioning of reason.

Otherwise, religion will not be able to escape becoming a “dangerous instrument of power” that, in the name of God, is identified with “laws and prohibitions,” fails to encompass and explain lived reality, attempts to impose the practical rules and principles of the agrarian age upon the information age, and under whose banner oppression can be committed in the God’s name.

Yes, Islam has set forth principles and values addressing all of life and every dimension of it. However, what is essential is to determine the purposes of these principles and values and to understand that upholding them means “following Islam,” “being devout,” and “seeking God’s pleasure.” Misinterpreting these principles and values for sociological, psychological, or political reasons and imposing them upon humanity is unfortunately not being devout, not being a better Muslim, nor establishing Islam’s dominance; it is simply oppression committed in God’s name. Sadly, the Islamic world is filled with examples of practices born of this logic. Therefore, a political or social project should be produced or discussed from a Muslim perspective only on the basis of whether or not it conforms to the aims of Islam, such as goodness, justice, peace, and freedom. The measure, then, is not to produce a project by starting from Islam as a slogan, but to produce ideas and practices grounded in real life that are compatible with (or at least not clearly opposed to) the purposes of Islam’s principles and values. Those who will determine this are scholars possessing different interpretations and methodologies. Those who will approve or reject it are the people, society, or nation. In this sense, “icma-i ümmet” (consensus of the community) can be redefined not as a legal principle of agreement among scholars, but as a political philosophy, where a society, through its free will, listens to various views and interpretations and ultimately lean to one of them.

In the contemporary world, the path for Islam and Muslims to produce political, economic, and social ideas and projects that can serve as an example for all of humanity lies primarily in reconstructing the understanding of religion, God, and humanity on a libertarian basis, free from the influence of interpretations made by those in power during the agrarian society era. This cannot be achieved by Shiite Iran, which resembles Catholicism and perpetuates a historical struggle with the Sunni world; nor by the Salafi Arab/Islamic world, a product of Bedouin Arab mentality. Likewise, it cannot be accomplished by the anti-Hinduism of Pakistani scholars that shaped by British imperial policy to divide India or by the understandings of Islam in Afghanistan, Sudan, and Algeria that remain intertwined with agrarian social structures and political conflicts. It can only be realized through the coordinated efforts of Muslim politicians and intellectuals who are both heirs to the legacy of Islamic civilization and aware of the problems of modernization.

Ultimately, religion is a means for becoming truly human. Through religion, a person can purify themselves from the evil-prone human side and enter the path shown by God, that is, the path of goodness and justice.

This path is certainly not easy; it is burdensome to the human ego and requires constant control over human instincts and impulses. However, there is no other way to be human, to be Adam/man. Without forgetting the temporariness of worldly life and the eternity of the hereafter, living a moral life with the awareness of the maturing quality of this effort is less burdensome than turning one’s back on oneself, others, and the mercy of God, and committing oppression.

When human beings forget their consciousness of existence and purpose in life, or fail to adopt a purpose valid for all humanity, they become oppressive, and a brutality and destructiveness found in no other creature emerges. Wars, oppression, torture, exploitation, lies, corruption, theft, and other evils are the result of forgetting the consciousness of God and Adam. Embracing the love of God and the concern of distancing oneself from Him, together with the awareness and responsibility of being Adam, is the only way to discipline these savage tendencies. Throughout history, humanity has attained civilized order thanks to these divine messages; yet the periods in which exploitative and oppressive ruling classes, who also abused these messages, held sway have brought bloodshed and tears. Even if material civilization advances, when the consciousness of God and Adam is lost, more refined forms of enslaving humanity prevail at that same level of civilization. In this sense, religion is a guide to being human that shows, reminds, and teaches the path of goodness and justice for all people, regardless of lifestyle or sociological differences.

The transformation of religions over time into parts of the status quo, their institutionalization becoming the foundation of a conservative culture that freezes lived life, and their turning into a source of internal tension and political conflict instead of human peace and happiness, is an example of a deviation abundantly seen in history.

For this reason, the awareness that religion is a means for the effort to become human and that its sole owner is God will prevent both the exploitation of religion and its institutionalization in ways contrary to its true purpose, turning it into a superhuman power.

In this context, it is essential to establish a libertarian understanding of religion that emphasizes its essence and primary purpose and eliminates exploitation, oppression, servitude to other humans, and all forms of discord that set people against one another.

In this sense, tawhid (divine unity) expresses the core consciousness necessary to transcend the capitalist world in which humanity is drowning, to establish another world where people can live humanely, and to overcome evils. The declaration There is no god but Allah means abandoning all superhuman constructs, all thoughts and behaviors that degrade, oppose, or annihilate humanity. The rejection of servitude to other humans will give rise to a just state, an economy based on justice and equality, and a dynamic culture grounded in a liberating worldview. All the differences among people-ethnic, religious, sectarian, and philosophical divisions-will cease to be causes of conflict only through the consciousness of monotheism; these differences can transform into natural human riches through the understanding of a single human essence and the existence of a single creator. Instead of capitalist competition and social Darwinist mechanisms of survival of the fittest, dynamics of competing in goodness and solidarity will prevail; instead of favoritism and patronage, performance, competence and merit will come to the fore.

Islam is the means for a human to become fully human, that is, to mature themselves as a dignified being, to preserve this state, and to help their fellow human beings in this cause; it ensures that the state and all forms of authority cannot restrict human freedom, that the economy and culture cannot enslave people, and that superstitions, myths, lies, and false knowledge and beliefs cannot dull the human mind. For the essence and purpose of religion is “La ilaha illallah (There’s no god but Allah).” Everything else is the interpretation of this faith.

Can Islam Respond to Our Age?

The Islamic world has been in decline for the last three centuries. After the Siege of Vienna in 1699, the Muslim world began to regress, while the West sought ways to eliminate the Islamic threat directed at it, and from that date onward the rise of the Western world began.

Western societies made a major leap by carrying out the Industrial Revolution, implementing a series of political, military, and ideological transformations connected to it, and ultimately developing a superior civilization. The Islamic world, however, was unable to make this leap. In this sense, backwardness essentially means failing to make the necessary breakthrough. The reasons for the Islamic world’s backwardness lie in the very dynamics that enabled the West’s advancement.

Specifically, after the geographical discoveries, the Western world encountered the “whole” of the globe, which broadened the vision of Westerners. Western people learned to look at the world more expansively and emerged from the narrow world surrounded by the Islamic/Andalusian and Ottoman/Turkish threat. Furthermore, encountering new geographies and societies awakened the idea of ​​“new, innovative, and endless new things waiting to be discovered,” thus fostering the sense of “curiosity,” the golden rule of modern science. This intellectual development brought about scientific and technological discoveries, and through new inventions, a comprehensive and interdependent trend of progress was achieved. This process gave rise to the modern worldview of Western man, composed of Greco-Roman culture, Christian missionary work, and the idea that a new world could be built.

Why Did the West Advance?

Behind this chain of developments lie three fundamental dynamics:

1 – A Revolution in Mentality: Westerners gained a global perspective and began to see the entire world and all of humanity’s accumulated knowledge as its own. At the core of this idea lay the belief in the superiority of the Western Christian white man. With this conviction, Westerners sought not only to explore and utilize nature but also to discover and benefit from all societies. Another important dimension of this revolution in mentality was the idea of change.

The fixed, geocentric cosmology of Ptolemaic astronomy collapsed, giving way to the understanding that “the Earth rotates, everything is in motion, and all things change.” This notion of “change” permeated even the details of daily life, fostering the idea of progress. At the center of the concept of continuous forward change stood human reason.

Ultimately, a new worldview has matured, one that places the human being at the center and is constantly changing and in need of being changed. The self-confidence, courage, and curiosity for discovery gained from crossing oceans have instilled a habit of rediscovering, defining, interpreting, and changing the entire world and the universe, starting from daily life.

2 – Institutional Autonomy: Another reason for Western advancement was the idea of institutional autonomy. The triple power model involving the Church, aristocracy, and state enabled Westerners to develop a dialectical thinking method encompassing the processes of “conflict-compromise-transcendence” to solve problems; furthermore, it allowed different, new, and alternative formations to emerge. The cumulative outcome of historical conflicts in Europe between religion and state, bourgeoisie and aristocracy, monarchy and bourgeoisie, and finally bourgeoisie and working class has been the mechanisms of modern civilization summarized as democracy, secularism, human rights, and the free market system. In other words, Western societies owe their dialectical line of progress to institutional divisions and conflicts, particularly in England and France. In this way, the social sphere became conducive to creative tensions that continuously generated new centers of power to achieve balance.

The idea of institutional autonomy materialized at the level of mentality with Descartes, Kant, and other Enlightenment philosophers, and the notion that religion, science, and art are three distinct realms-each autonomous within itself and possessing relative values in relation to one another-matured.

This separation allowed reason, faith, and emotion to develop independently while minimizing their conflicts. The concept of tolerance, in this sense, expresses the limits of acceptable interaction among these three distinct spheres. As a result of the tradition of institutional autonomy, Western societies came to regard the separation and balancing of domains such as religion and state, public and private, military and civilian, politics and civil society, bourgeoisie and bureaucracy as a criterion of civilization. Today, if we set aside the crimes it has committed, Europe still possesses more stable systems compared to the rest of the world, thanks to its theoretical principledness, autonomous institutions, and the democratic values grounded upon them.

3 – The Ideal of Civilization: In the development of Western societies, the idea of “spreading civilization to the entire world,” based on the belief in the superiority of the “white man,” also became a significant dynamic for progress. The universalist aspiration and missionary mechanism of Christianity were secularized and transformed into the expansion and dominance of Western civilization. This effort became a powerful “psychological” driver in Western progress, fostering self-confidence, ambition for success, the desire to prevail, and the mission of guiding humanity. Thus, for the average Westerner, ideals such as universal civilization, universal values, and universal peace remain goals yet to be fully realized, and these ideals continue to play a motivating role behind Western development. Supported by a high standard of living, this sense of superiority and confidence still grants European societies the consciousness of being the modern pole of the world.

The Conditions for Resurrection

The “backwardness” of the Islamic world stems from the absence of these three fundamental factors. The self-confidence and universal outlook that existed between the 7th and 12th centuries gave way, from the 17th century onward, to the trauma of decline, defeat, and collapse. Furthermore, the developments and innovations in fields such as knowledge, science, technology, art, craftsmanship, and literature, which were in some way encouraged, supported, and organized during the Abbasid, Andalusian, and Seljuk periods, and even under some Mongol khanates and a steppe conqueror like Timur, lost their transformative and reformative dynamism as a result of the stagnation and dogmatization in recent centuries. As a result, today the Islamic world lives several centuries behind Western civilization. And struggles to survive largely by attempting to be a good imitator of the West.

The absence of these three fundamental factors, which are the cause of decline in the Islamic world, also contains the formula for overcoming the problem of historical backwardness. In other words, eliminating these three still-unresolved deficiencies is the foremost condition for the Islamic world to rise again.

In summary:

1 – A Change-Oriented Understanding of Islam: Minds that have remained frozen since Imam al-Ghazali must be reactivated, and the tradition of ictihad (independent reasoning) must be revived. More precisely, the ictihad mechanism, which is already being implemented in practice, should be applied in all religious sciences as a clearly named and legitimate system of renewal, problem-solving, and innovation.

The habit of ictihad in the religious sphere will motivate Muslim minds toward novelty in other areas of life as well. For nearly the last 800 years, the Muslim mind, which has greeted almost every new development with unease and a sense of decay, believing that as time progresses it moves towards doomsday, that is, towards something worse and which has coded the present as a necessity, the past as an ideal, and the future as a catastrophe, has been under the influence of a religious sentiment that views innovations as bid’at (innovation not conform to tradition) and sin. This sentiment, reinforced by the disasters, defeats, and traumas of recent centuries, has led to a similar defensive reaction towards the West and modernity, shifting from an attempt to understand to a defensive stance. Even the Westernist secular segments, perhaps due to the nature of the same habitat, contrary to all their claims of being progressive and contemporary rationalists, have fallen behind even the segments they have coded as conservative-reactionary in the face of many new developments, and have developed extremely dogmatic and conservative reflexes. This deep-rooted status quo mentality dissolves only in the rapid adaptation to Western technologies, while in other areas all segments of society maintain, in their own ways, anxiety about renewal and resistance to the new. The tension produced by viewing religious matters as sinful or blasphemous to change has become such a deeply ingrained habit that it influences even non-religious segments. Therefore, in Muslim societies, beginning with the religious sphere, it is necessary to establish the conviction that all possible forms of renewal, change, development, and progress are legitimate, necessary, and even religiously obligatory.

2 – Institutional Autonomy: For this idea to flourish, the entrenched status quo described as “orthodox society, totalitarian state” must be dismantled and replaced with a concept of differentiated spheres and creative tensions. In this sense, two fundamental reform efforts-the democratization of the state and the renewal of the understanding of Islam-should be brought to the forefront in a way that mutually reinforces each other.

It is essential that the dictatorial regimes dominating the Islamic world are overthrown, that democratic orders-whether universal, European-style, or original/indigenous-are established, meaning the formation of strong individuals and societies where peoples and individuals freely participate in and are represented within the political process. Such a political system would generate a dynamic of development and progress based on the fair representation of economic, social, and cultural differences and on the equal competition of multiple autonomous spheres.

Such a democratic environment would also provide the foundation for debates that enable the renewal of Islamic thought. Instead of a situation where the state and society are mutually repulsive, a genuine national willpower will emerge, where the state is appropriated by society and society is a component of the state. Islamic values, the heritage of Islamic civilization, Muslim intellect and morality would then become the shared culture and common value of all citizens-Muslim or not-and a guarantee of the protection of life, property, lineage, intellect, and honor. Islam’s command to ‘uphold justice and goodness’ and its theology that regards all people as brothers and sisters through Adam would serve both as an antidote to injustice and as a shield for all freedoms. Institutional autonomy means a pluralistic governance structure embedded within the state, between state and society, and within society itself and religion, in this framework, should be among the most autonomous spheres. In this context, institutions such as the Presidency of Religious Affairs should gain autonomous status; faculties of theology should enjoy a freer intellectual climate; and the civil religious sphere should be freed from monopolies and left to the voluntary initiative of individuals. What matters is not a false religiosity imposed by state pressure or socioeconomic necessity, but the ability of religion, through its liberating esence, to motivate just and moral practices in the face of individual and social problems. If religion does not fulfill this function, it is not Islam.

3 – The Ideal of Resurrection: Ideals such as rising again, attaining a respected and influential position in the community of nations, and contributing to universal peace and human progress must be revived. At the national level, these ideals should be reflected in the construction of a just order based on equality, freedom, and brotherhood, and contemporary political perspectives should be grounded in these ideals.

This ideal must be a common aspiration shared by all segments of society. While social, ideological, intellectual differences or political disagreements compete within democratic maturity, the shared ideal should function as an overarching mission that unites all groups. Both Islamic societies and Türkiye should have common goals, values, and ideals that nourish and balance one another and collectively express a regional and global vision. Beyond the rational, interest-based relations of nations and international politics, there should exist a kind of invisible spiritual network binding societies together.

In the final analysis, national ties that continue as economic, military, or socio-cultural relations during good times can, in bad times, such as during regional or global wars, result in undesirable polarizations or hostilities for various reasons. In contrast, enduring, genuine, and organic spiritual bonds would at least preserve relations among societies and provide a solid foundation for rebuilding the future after difficult times. The ideal of resurrection is, at least in the context of our own society, the insurance for a common national consciousness and a shared sense of destiny. As a country, as a nation, as a society, existence and continuity, development and progress, and becoming a more just, free, and strong nation must be common ideals. Whether the aim is to achieve an honorable, respected, and effective position within the global system, or to pursue rational foreign policies, or to employ ideological approaches such as Neo-Ottomanism, Pan-Islamism, Turanism, regional power rhetoric, or solidarity with oppressed nations, in any case, every language and discourse must converge on a common goal of power and prestige. For our history has been shaped by the trauma of losing a grand global and regional imperial vision, shrinking, and eventually disintegrating. To overcome this and assume a more confident collective spirit, it is essential to embrace common aspirations and ideals.

 Which Islam Will Provide the Answer?

At present, the answer to the question “Can Islam respond to our age?”, a question raised in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, during times of great defeat and collapse, and posed especially by Western Orientalists and their local collaborators as an attack slogan before and after the First World War, the last Crusade, depends on change in these three fundamental areas. But first, ‘which Islam’ will provide this answer? Here, the word ‘Islam’ refers to lived Islam, that is, the dominant religious understandings and the practical Islamic life within Muslim societies. Of course, the essence and origin of religion belong to God. And it is not for anyone to debate on His behalf. However, Islam in its lived form is a historical, sociological, political, and cultural phenomenon. It is this reality that we discuss when we use the word Islam.

Realistically speaking, unfortunately, the claim propagated a century ago by Westerners, that Islam is an obstacle to progress, and internalized by local Westernists produced a self-colonizing psychology and in response, Islamist thought went on the defensive, arguing that true Islam is progress, and that backwardness belongs not to Islam itself but to Muslims, that is, to experienced Islam. Even today, a century later, Islam in its present lived form does not possess the dynamism to respond to our age, precisely because of the backwardness of Muslims. In other words, for Islam, as a religion with its Book, Sunnah (the sayings, actions, and approvals of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)), rules, and values, to once again embody the spirit of the times and undertake a founding, salvific, and revitalizing mission for the nation, the ummah, and all of humanity, depends on Muslim societies rectifying their deficiencies, errors, and mistakes and beginning to walk towards the future with self-confidence once more.

Islam’s, meaning the Divine Religion’s, answer is clear not only for our age but for all ages: To prioritize goodness, justice, virtue, and reason under all circumstances, so that the human being’s worldly side can be disciplined, the substance of Adam can be purified, and he can rebuild the world with this substance and adorn it with God’s light; thus, he can achieve his salvation, future, peace, and security; that is, pass his test… This effort must be carried out with self-knowledge and knowledge of one’s Lord, with awareness of one’s limits, in a consciousness of servanthood (worship); it must be sustained with sincere and voluntary devotion (taqwa, faith, sincerity); and the struggle against evil (jihad) must be regarded as part of this duty, continuing in solidarity with fellow believers (prayer and charity)… To strive to change the world, knowing that one is not the master or lord of the world, but merely to endure a journey on the straight path (Sırat-ı Müstakim). This entire philosophy of life must be pursued in coordination and organized activity with other beings sharing the essence of Adam. This is to be achieved by producing and overseeing political, economic, social, and cultural projects, ideas, works of art and literature, and scientific and technological discoveries that place this cause above the state, money, lust, positions, property, and possessions, destroying their satanic domination and reducing them to the level of simple tools for humanity. The faith, cause, meaning of life, and consciousness of the hereafter for believers is this and Islam is simply the name of this final and universal divine faith. The periods in which Muslims take pride in their civilization were precisely those in which these principles, values, orientation, and sensitivities were upheld. Periods of decline, corruption, and collapse were those in which this authentic Islam was neglected, distorted, frozen into an outdated ancestral religion, turned into a cover for trade and privilege, reduced to empty rituals, and exploited for political ends. Unfortunately, this condition persists today in every aspect of life.

As for living Islam, meaning that as a result of a serious effort by Muslims and Islamic societies to eliminate the causes of historical backwardness, there will certainly be various answers that living Islam provides to our age and to all the problems of humanity. However, attempting to answer the challenges of the modern and postmodern age with understandings and rules shaped in agrarian societies of the past will result in nothing but tragedy. Therefore, such responses must consist of contemporary interpretations of Islam’s divine and universal values.

Ultimately, religion is not a magical key or box that automatically solves humanity’s problems. On the contrary, it is a tool, a roadmap, a measure, and a guide that invites people to use their reason to solve their problems, advises them to learn from history and nature by looking to the future, and for this purpose reminds them of universal and historical human values and shows the way. In this respect, Islam is an eternal message not only for Muslims but for all humanity. It does not provide ready-made prescriptions for political, economic, or social problems. But it offers wise criteria for diagnosing problems and seeking solutions; a macro- and microcosmic perspective; a sense of responsibility as the noblest of creation; and a future-oriented consciousness grounded in the hereafter. In this sense, Islam is a truly natural, universal theological vision that expresses humanization, with its creed of Tawhid that invites people to freedom, enabling them to gain dignity and personality by rejecting servitude to anyone other than God; with its belief in the afterlife that in all circumstances makes one contemplate the future, meaning not just the end of life but the outcome of every matter and the consequence of every action; and with its dignified consciousness that being human entails responsibility towards other living beings, objects, and the entire world and universe.

There are individuals, communities, and cultural traditions that possess these qualities and this vision; even if they are not formally Muslim or have never heard of Islam, and in terms of meaning and mission, these too may be considered “Islam.” In this sense, traditional-institutional Islam and Islam as this authentic, universal monotheistic vision stand in different positions regarding their response to our age. Of course, those born into Muslim culture have at least a cultural inclination toward this consciousness. But unless this inclination becomes active awareness, unless the vision of Islam’s essence rises to consciousness, knowledge and habits related to Islam remain mere cultural sociology. Indeed, most Islamic societies today are culturally Muslim but lack a profound existential consciousness on a historical, universal, and human scale. As a result, institutional religiosity, living as a bundle of traditions and habits, a collection of rituals detached from their purpose, has taken Islam captive, much like Judaism and Christianity, turning it into a kind of ghetto religiosity where only its adherents will attain salvation, others are marginalized, and it is closed to all forms of development.

As is known, the monotheistic (Hanif) tradition that founded the Sumerian-Akkadian-Assyrian-Egyptian-Greek (Ionian) civilizations was, over time, unable to resist the animist-pagan habits of political and economic orders, monarchies, merchants, migrants, and slaves; it either became syncretized with them or was eliminated. The Abrahamic monotheistic tradition, which is the name given to the rebellion against Akkadian-Babylonian paganism, has suffered many times throughout history from corruption, decay, and the loss of its essence through mixing with other beliefs. Through the Persians, it was transformed into a heretical religion via a corrupted Zoroastrianism and later Magian syncretism with Indo-Aryan Mithraism. The Religion of Moses was then deconstructed by Persian merchants of Indo-Iranian origin named Jews and reshaped into a religion aligned with their political and economic interests, Judaism. Christianity, born in reaction, was eventually synthesized with Roman paganism and institutionalized as a religion.

Against the danger of this corruption and heretical interpretations being synthesized with pagan-animist habits and turning into institutionalized religion, Islam, from the very beginning, adopted an extremely strict attitude towards Şirk, that is, the pagan-animist belief and lifestyle, and also carefully preserved the Qur’an, insuring it against possible additions or deletions. Nevertheless, throughout history, various heretical, esoteric, and deviant movements emerged, and beginning with the Umayyads, rulers promoted interpretations that emphasized form over essence.

In fact, institutional religion is a millennia-old animist-pagan tradition, and the monotheistic Hanif tradition is the name of protest against such religions. Because these religions are the most cost-effective and legitimate mechanisms for subjugating and enslaving people, for easily making them work or fight on behalf of the ruling classes by enchanting them. The majority of people have been made servants and slaves of these unjust, unfair, and tyrannical orders for thousands of years, and even people living today carry fragments of the genes of these masses of servants and slaves. Thus they easily revert to their animist-pagan habits, reshaping even the most liberating faiths into their own ritualistic molds. Sadly, this reality applies to Islam as well. Although Islam is so sensitive about şirk (the pagan-animist belief and lifestyle), its historical journey has also involved various mixtures and syntheses, though not to the same extent as the Religion of Moses and the Religion of Jesus Christ traditions. Today, some so-called Islamic movements or sects worship individuals-sheikhs, shahs, pirs, leaders, scholars, hodjas-idolize their own order or community, and even associate partners with God, making these their primary deities. This pagan deviation, contrary to Islam’s essence, presents itself as Islam and even claims to be the truest and purest Islam. As a result of such profound distortion and corruption, the Islamic world today finds itself in a state of distress and helplessness.

Many so-called Islamic movements, communities, and sects, which have not a single word or stance on the genuine problems faced by humanity and Islamic societies such as serious crises, issues, hardships, poverty, corruption, inequality, individual and social suffering, civil wars, ethnic-sectarian conflicts, exploitation, and oppression, but instead cause great uproar by clinging like idols to rituals, clothing, women, or other insignificant details, are herding millions of people. This picture alone is enough to describe the point Islam has reached.

Yet Islam, as a guide that teaches human beings to rise with dignity and personality by freeing themselves from servitude and slavery, should mean standing guard over justice, goodness, virtue, conscience, and compassion in the face of concrete personal and social problems. Instead, for hundreds of organizations that occupy positions of representation in the name of Islam today, religion has become an institution for supposedly protecting sexual morality through women, exaggerating and displaying religious rituals to an almost pornographic degree, imposing them on others, and ruling through religious charisma. Islam, however, defined and rejected the attempt to rule over people as a deviation. There is no deity, sovereign, or absolute owner other than Allah. To rule in the name of God is an even greater deviation. Today, Islam must first be purified of this internal corruption and deviation; cleansed of these carcinogenic parasites that have seeped into the religion; and freed from deviant theologies and political, economic, and social mechanisms that have turned it into an institutionalized religion like Judaism and Christianity.

Saving Islam from the ‘Islamic Churches’

A fundamental Islamic renewal is necessary, paying no heed to the condemnation of these various ‘religious churches’ which, with their conservative reflexes against all innovation and change, enter ‘religion is being lost’ mode, act as if they own the religion, and render problems undiscussable by using pre-emptively accusatory terms like ‘reformism, modernism, bid’at, non-denominational’ for every different pursuit and view they cannot comprehend. It is necessary to liberate Islam by taking the monopoly of religion out of the hands of this ignorant and bigoted bunch, many of whom are village preachers and town tradesmen living off religion, and entrust it to truly enlightened people who deserve it, indeed to reformat it as a universal theology of salvation addressing all the reasonable, virtuous, and moral people of the world. Islam, reduced to a survival tool for decayed communities, sects, organizations, and parties, or to a refuge and enchantment mechanism for poor and uneducated masses, must be rescued from this vortex.

It is a fact that Islam, subjected to such treatment, runs the risk of becoming an archaic identity for small communities, remaining outside of history like Judaism and Christianity, and is condemned to representation by extremely backward, primitive, bigoted, and equally fraudulent elements in the face of current world realities. However, the owner of Islam is Allah. No one is the owner of Allah, the religion, the Qur’an, the Prophet, the verses, the hadiths, the sects, or the ways simply because they were born as Muslim.

All people on earth have the right to freely discuss, seek to understand, interpret, critique, accept, or reject Islam and other beliefs. Those who call themselves Muslim have no inherent superiority or privilege over others. Any claim of collective superiority already reflects a distorted, exclusivist reading of Islam through the Judaic mentality. Every human being, Adam, man or woman, young or old, regardless of ethnicity or philosophical beliefs, is addressed by Islam and has the right to engage with its messages as they wish. This includes rejecting it or interpreting it in a different way. Except for attempts to insult, demean, deny, or destroy Islam or any other religion, belief, or anything considered sacred, people are free to believe and live as they wish. The attitude of insulting, degrading, or trying to destroy religions, sacred things, beliefs, values, or people is, in any case, a crime against humanity. Aside from this stance, all forms of criticism, comment, acceptance, or rejection are equally respectable, legitimate, and a right. Each person will answer to God, the Owner of ‘the Day of Judgment’ and of ‘religion’ itself. At least, this is what true Muslims believe. Therefore, the first task must be to dissolve and dismantle all forms of religious churches that position themselves as the gendarmerie of faith, as angels of interrogation, or as traffic police on the bridge to salvation. Islam must first be liberated from those Muslims who have besieged and captured it.

In Islamic societies, every major problem and its solutions can no longer be discussed freely due to fear of these rabbis disguised as Muslims and churches masked as Islamic institutions. A kind of invisible inquisition mechanism operates under the claim of protecting religion, values, morality, and tradition, while Western powers support and promote these groups that appear Muslim in form but are essentially mostly pagan or animist; indeed, no sensible Islamic tendency, movement, or group is allowed to survive or gain strength. However, during many phases of the 19th and 20th centuries, numerous forward-thinking, enlightened, profound, and innovative Islamic movements emerged in almost every Islamic society, and many scholars, intellectuals, and thinkers made efforts in this direction. At the point reached, these movements or intellectuals have been liquidated in one way or another, neutralized either by being excommunicated by bigoted religious churches or by being suppressed by states.

This situation alone demonstrates that pagan-animist fanaticism, disguised as Islam, is a cancerous growth that is corroding Islam from within. Therefore, it is essential to disband all Islamic churches who, regardless of who they are, speak as if they own the religion, live off religion, trade in goodness, and run political, social, and economic schemes using religious values, symbols, and practices. All polytheistic-hypocritical gangs, schemes, and institutions that turn Islam into a tool for sultans, kings, and leaders to enslave the masses; make it a means for cunning peasants or town merchants to exploit ignorant crowds; or turn it into a war drug for murderers for whom they have committed vile massacres in the name of state interests, like in Iran and Saudi Arabia today, must be smashed to pieces.

Can Islamism Survive in Our Time?

It is clear that Islamism, which over the last century has been more an expression of Islam reacting to the age rather than responding to it, has, in all its variations, completed its mission, and that it is now time for various intellectual, literary, artistic, political, and cultural movements, carrying different language, style, content, and meaning, to take the stage with original agendas and functions.

Even if it retains the name Islamism, it should no longer be a totalizing ideological movement, but rather a more complex, heterogeneous cultural code and a set of values and reflexes. In the 21st century, a deeper, newer initiative is required, one that nourished by Islam’s universal values and capable of removing the causes of backwardness and opening the path to revival in the Islamic world.

Such an initiative will undoubtedly develop on the ground of intellectual effort. Yet it will only become meaningful as a true transformation when embodied through political willpower and structural change.

This political willpower must rest on four pillars; a freedom-oriented understanding of Islam, a modern rationality, a transformative perspective, and a universal vision.

Islam will either decay in the hands of animist-pagan religionists masked with religion and turn into a source of problems, like other forms of religiosity, bigotry, Zionism, and the Crusaders, which are a plague upon humanity, and all sensible believers will rapidly distance themselves from these. Or, by somehow cleansing itself of these pagan, barbaric bacteria within, it will be breathed into humanity once more as a divine breath, a source of many values that will be a mercy to humanity, principles that will humanize people and protect them from all kinds of enslavement and corruption.

Today, humanity has no other breath of goodness and justice to take refuge in, to stand up against, or to resist in the face of so much brutality, occupation, massacre, exploitation, inequality, poverty, lies, perversion, corruption, and decay. Therefore, this problem, which concerns Islamic societies, ultimately concerns all people and all of humanity.

Islamism, with this very awareness, represents the dignity of responding to these problems by leaning on Islam, as long as Islam and Muslims remain under threat and attack. As long as such conditions persist, it will not disappear. But it can only endure by renewing 19th- and 20th-century Islamism and equipping it with intellectual tools suited to the realities of the 21st century.

 

Source: Ahmet Özcan, Yeniden Düşünmek-İman ve İslam, Yarın Yayınları, 2020.