Showing posts with label Ottoman Empire. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ottoman Empire. Show all posts

Friday, 22 July 2016

Turkey – Murky History but Clear Future (1/2)

For those who have some kind of confidence in me, I fear that I shall disappoint you if you seek clear direction on recent events in Turkey, i.e. the “attempted coup” of Shawwāl 1437 [July 2016]. Nevertheless, I shall share some knowledge Allāh may have given me, and some thoughts. Allāh may use it for some benefit. Yet I would declare at the outset, that there will be people who will not be pleased with what I say.

The Anti-Christ Murkiness in Turkey goes back four centuries


 

To me the cause of the murkiness, confusion and lack of direction in Turkey is ultimately due it being a known future stage of the Anti-Christ’s operations. This we know from the teachings of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ which I shall discuss later, if Allāh so wills. However, the historical seeds were already planted four centuries ago.

 

The ‘Uthmānīyah Khilāfah (Ottoman Empire – the predecessor to the current Turkish Republic), had been a haven to Jews seeking protection from Christian Europe. Even some oppressed Christian sects would prefer sanctuary in Turkey, rather than face the not so tender love of their Christian brethren who sought their eradication. (“Turkey” here, may be technically incorrect, but some might find the Arabic too cumbersome, whilst I dislike the distortion of a beautiful Arabic name).

 

Jews and Christians who are true to their faith are welcome in the Islāmic State, which is obliged to protect their lives and property. (I shall not allow “ISIS” to hijack the term “Islāmic State.”) Those who are guided to Islām, become our brothers. The problem that arose in Turkey, and which I believe continues to permeate Turkey to this day, was the birth of a third group – hypocrites pretending to embrace Islām, whilst remaining false to Islām and working tirelessly towards the destruction of the faith which had provided them with sanctuary.

Sabbatai Zevi


 

Rabbi Sabbatai Zevi was born in Izmir, Turkey, in 1626. In 1648 he proclaimed himself the Messiah. The tumult he caused was not limited to the Empire, but spread through Europe. Three years later the rabbis expelled him and his followers from Izmīr. Eventually he was sentenced to death for sedition, with the option of redemption through conversion to Islām. He chose conversion and 300 families of his followers thereupon followed suit.

 

Yet this was the beginning of a disease most vile which penetrated the soul of Turkish Islām. A cancer which ultimately overthrew the Empire, abolished the Khilāfah from the memories of the Muslims, paved the way for the loss of Palestine, and Allāh alone knows best what is its true extent and activity today.

 

Zevi never embraced Islām in his heart. He continued preaching amongst the Jews and claimed to receive revelation. He thus assumed the lead of those who then outwardly converted, but simply used their new position as ostensible Muslims to act in secret against the state and the faith.

The Donmeh


 

These hypocrites were called Donmeh (converts) in Turkish. The full record of their secret conspirative deeds may never be fully known amongst men, except themselves. I suspect that a researcher, fluent in Turkish, Greek, Hebrew and Arabic; having full access to all public records for the past four centuries, would not learn one part of a hundred of the full story.

 

On the other hand, it would be foolish to blame every cause of the rotting of the Empire on them. Every people in history reached a peak and then declined. Yet where the rot manifested as the Turks becoming confused and rudderless as many appear today, where the issue is loss of identity and mental incapacitation, rather than simple military, political and economic collapse, I smell a whiff of Donmeh stench in the air.

 

Headgear – an example of how easily Muslims are confused


 

I do not point the example I am about to discuss as the direct handiwork of the Donmeh, but I do use the example of the confusion and ignorance Muslims so often display as amongst the general achievements of the Donmeh.

 

The primary and distinctive headgear of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ was the turban. The Turks wore their turbans as the Sunnah [way] of Allāh’s Messenger صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  and as a display of their Islāmic identity.

 

In 1839 Sultan Mahmūd II imposed the Tanzīmāt reforms. Whatever the merits and demerits of the details of his reforms might be, and which we can debate about at length, what I cannot abide of this man, is the mentality that everything European was superior to the Turkish and Islāmic heritage. His supporters lie when they claim that Tanzīmāt was mere modernisation. How is actively making alcohol fashionable modernisation? And then returning to the original example, how is banning the Sunnah Turban and replacing it with the “more European looking” Fez modernisation? Yet it is not his “reforms” I wish to highlight, but rather the fact that less than two centuries after Zevi, the Turks had somehow come to accept that aping Europe, up to and including what they wore on their heads, would restore them to greatness.

 

Now I do not know whether to call it ironic, sad or funny, but when Ataturk banned the Fez in 1925, the outcry was made to defend the “symbol of Islām” whereas the Fez was originally intended to make Turkey look less Islāmic.

 

This is comparable to the story of the ‘Iqāl (camel-string) of America’s agents, the Sa‘ūd. They did not wear turbans. Instead, they would wear a cloth over the head for protection against the hot Najd sun. When stopping on a journey, a string was used to tie a camel’s legs, or park it, as we might think of it. Somehow the idea arose that it would be convenient when not “parking” the camel, to use the same camel-string to tie the cloth to their heads. This eventually became their cultural attire. When the Sa‘ūd conquered and pillaged Makkah, Muslims began aping their costumes as the symbols of Islām, just as the turban replacing Fez had had its century of glory. We now witness Muslims proudly tying their camel-strings on their heads, especially on Eid days.

The Last Great Sultān


 

Sultān Abdul Hamīd II was overthrown in 1908 and then finally removed in 1909. He had to be punished for being the last true Turkish Khalīfah and Sultān with backbone and a zeal for Islām. In 1901 the Jewish banker Mizray Qrasow and two other Jewish influential leaders had come to visit Sultan Abdul Hamid II. They offered to:
1) Pay the entire debt of the Empire.
2) Build the Navy of the Ottoman state.
3) 35 Million Golden Liras without interest

In exchange for:
1) Allowing Jews to visit Palestine anytime they please, and to stay as long as they want “to visit the holy sites.”
2) Allowing the Jews to build settlements where they live, and they wanted them to be located near Jerusalem.

Sultān Abdul Hamīd II refused to even meet them, he sent his answer to them through Tahsin Pasha, and the answer was, “Tell those impolite Jews that the debts of the Uthmāni state are not a shame, France has debts and that doesn’t affect it. Jerusalem became a part of the Islamic land when Khalīfah Umar bin al-Khattāb took the city and I am not going to carry the historical shame of selling the holy lands to the Jews and betraying the responsibility and trust of my people. May the Jews keep their money, the Uthmānis will not hide in castles built with the money of the enemies of Islam.”

He also told them to leave and never come back to meet him again.

The Jews did not give up on Abdul Hamīd, later in the same year, 1901, the founder of the Zionist movement, Theodor Hertzl, visited Istanbul and tried to meet the Sultan. Sultan Abdul Hamid II refused to meet him and he told his Head of the Ministers Council, “Advise Dr Hertzl not to take any further steps in his project. I cannot give away a handful of the soil of this land for it is not my own, it is for all the Islamic Ummah. The Islamic Ummah that fought Jihād for the sake of this land and they have watered it with their blood. The Jews may keep their money and millions. If the State is one day destroyed then they will be able to take Palestine without a price! But while I am alive, I would rather push a sword into my body than see the land of Palestine cut and given away from the Islamic State. This is something that will not be, I will not start cutting our bodies while we are alive.”

The Masonic Young Turks


 

Freemasonry provided a convenient vehicle for the Donmeh to achieve their aims and thus İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti or The Committee of Union and Progress or the Young Turks was born in 1889. In 1909 the Young Turks removed Sultan Abdul Hamīd. From that day on, Turkey was a Masonic state with a figurehead Sultān. Here is a who’s who of the Turkish Masons:

Talaat Pasha: A Donmeh. Interior Minister of Turkey during WW I. Chief architect of the Armenian Genocide.

Djavid Bey: Donmeh. Talaat’s Finance Minister.

Messim Russo: Assistant to Djavid Bey.

Refik Bey: Editor of Young Turk newspaper Revolutionary Press; Prime Minister of Turkey in 1939.

Emanuel Qrasow: Jewish propagandist for The Young Turks.

Vladimir Jabotinsky: Russian Bolshevik who moved to Turkey in 1908. Editor of the newspaper Young Turk.

Alexander Helphand: Liaison of the Rothschilds. Editor of The Turkish Homeland.

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk: A Jew of Sephardic origin. Ataturk attended the Jewish Elementary school known as the Semsi Effendi School run by the Jew Simon Zvi. This Satanic entity basically banned Islām from Turkey. I’d rather not mention him further. Please read up yourself. Here is a simple but good starting point http://lostislamichistory.com/how-ataturk-made-turkey-secular/

 

سليمان الكندي
Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi

Sunday, 6 July 2014

Islamic State & Khilafah - Allah does not need pious instruments





Q: would it be too much for me to ask you for a blog post on the Islamic State and this establishment of the caliphate?


My reply:

Khilāfah [Caliphate] was established from the beginning of Islām, so it is nothing novel, but yes it is novel to our era. We have completed a full 9 decades of the first time in the history of Islām when the world has not seen Khilāfah. As such, it is understandable that Muslims think of this as something new and expect guidance. I regret that I cannot provide clear cut answers to a situation that is so nebulous, but I do hope to share some food for thought that this declaration entails.

 

An Essential Institution of Islām


في حديث عبد الله بن عمر عن نبي الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال [من خلع يداً من طاعة لقي الله يوم القيامة ولا حجة له ومن مات وليس في عنقه بيعة مات ميتة جاهلية

Abdullāh ‘Umar رضي الله عنه narrates that the Prophet صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  said, “He who withdraws a hand from obedience [to the Khalīfah] will meet Allāh on the Day of Resurrection without any proof [for his disobedience] and he who dies without the pledge of allegiance [to the Khalīfah] around his neck, dies the death of pre-Islāmic Ignorance .” [Muslim]

If nothing else, the declaration on 1st Ramaḍān 1435, has at least broken the silence and apathy of Muslims on the essential institution of Khilāfah, abolished by Jewish Ataturk on Monday 28th  Rajab 1342 (3rd March 1924) and aided by the Satanic Saudi regime at the Makkah Conference two years later. This institution’s importance can be gauged from the actions of the two greatest, most pious and most learned Muslims upon the departure of Muammad Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  from this world, i.e. Abū Bakr رضي الله عنه and ‘Umar رضي الله عنه. It would be expected that these two distinguished personalities who bore him such love as we can never imagine, would have attended to the following as ultimate priorities:
·         Washing the body of Muammad  Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  
·         Shrouding the body of Muammad Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم .
·         Arranging the funeral prayers for Allāh’s Messengerصلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  .

However important these may be, the command of Allāh’s Messenger صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  took precedence to their personal feelings. They hastened to establish the Khilāfah before any of the above three stupendously important deeds. In my view, no amount of academic wrangling can match the singular example of Abū Bakr رضي الله عنه and ‘Umar رضي الله عنه in their haste to establish the Khilāfah.

If nothing else, at least the symbol


The Khilāfah of course did not remain in its pristine  form, and did not always fulfil the functions of succession to Allāh’s Messenger صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم . Let alone all the duties of tending to the political, spiritual, social, welfare, military, education etc needs of the Muslims, there were times when the Khalīfah functioned in nothing but name. Nevertheless the Muslims recognised the command of Allāh’s Messenger صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  and the practical benefit for a single symbolic leader. Notably when the Mongols massacred Baghdād and the last ‘Abbāsī ruler, al-Musta‘im, in 1258 (with Rāfiḍī collaboration), a relative of al-Musta‘ṣim fled to Egypt. There the generally accepted greatest living scholar, ‘Izzuddīn bin ‘Abdis Salām  - Allāh’s mercy be upon him – pledged allegiance to him as the new Khalīfah. Understand that this Khalīfah had zero political function. His only function was to continue the office so that it would continuously run for 13 centuries. The Khalīfah only gained practical powers when the Turks assumed the office in 1517.

Not that it can be claimed that we were united before, but the degree of pettiness our fights have gained would have been tempered by the unifying figure of the Khalīfah. Thus when scholars of the Indian subcontinent sensed the danger the Khilāfah faced a century ago, they initiated the Khilāfah Movement to defend the institution by their word, deed, blood and wealth. On the other hand, ask why the Rawāfi have never raised this issue since their 1979 revolution in Iran. Anything which will lead to the victory of the Sunnah (Islām) is not in their interests.

Allāh is not in need of the perfect pious to implement His will


I have not pledged allegiance to Abū Bakr al-Baghdādī, for want of information and direction. Yet I must say that the objections that the declaration is invalid and must be recanted, appear to me to be nothing more than one-liners giving no theological references.  Some statements seem tinged with panic, ego and personal interests.  It might be that the declaration is in fact invalid. Yet I want substance and not ego when making a religious argument. Furthermore, where were these scholars when they allowed the Jewish and Saudi plan of eliminating Khilāfah to go unchallenged for almost a full century?

What can the possible scenarios be?
·         The declaration is valid. The Islāmic State is composed of the righteous and must be assisted. The CNN reports of atrocities are lies and it is immature of certain Muslims to condemn without verifying the facts on the ground, in a land they have never been to.
·         The reports are correct, but distorted, not explaining actions for which there may be validity only comprehensible to those living there.
·         The Islāmic State folk are really bad guys.


Even if the third scenario is true, and we are to disassociate from them, I would ask Muslims to reflect on the possibility that since they have done nothing to restore the Khilāfah for almost a century, might it not be that Allāh choses His instrument to wake us up, even if the instrument appears wrong to us? A good deed is not nullified because the performer is bad. A charity worker is indeed a hypocrite if he abuses his wife, but can we deny that he was the instrument to fill the bellies of the hungry? Consider the following:
عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه …. لا يدخل الجنة إلا نفس مسلمة وإن الله ليؤيد هذا الدين بالرجل الفاجر
Abū Hurayrah رضي الله عنه  narrates that Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم  ordered Bilāl رضي الله عنه  to announce, “None but a Muslim soul will enter Paradise, but indeed Allāh can strengthen this religion via the sinful man.” [al-Bukhārī]

Rather than our favourite pastime of fault finding, I would say that Muslims should instead discuss their forgotten obligation of restoring the  Khilāfah. Indeed in Sūrah al-Isrā, Allāh calls Rasūlullāh صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم , ‘abd, “His Slave”. Four verses later He refers to the pagan Babylonians by the same word, in plural form, “Our Slaves,” simply because they were His instruments of punishing the rebellious Israelites. So let us not lose track of the real issue, simply because the instruments are imperfect or even bad people.

A more recent example is Tanzania. Oman ruled her with a harsh hand and treated the land as nothing but a means of acquiring slaves. Thus the name of Oman, Arabs and Islām stank in the nostrils of the locals. Germany expelled Oman, ended slavery and built infrastructure making transport to the interior possible. Muslims were no longer slavers and travelled to the interior to preach Islām. Islām spread more rapidly under Christian German rule than under Muslim Omani rule! Allāh fulfils His will as he wishes, not as we think to tell Him.

Mahdī


Allāh alone knows the future, but from the signs the adīth mention, it seems that time is running out. The adīth commands us to join with the Syrians when such time comes. Are we witnessing the preliminary events in our lifetime? Allāh knows best.

سليمان الكندي

 Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi









  


















سليمان الكندي

 Twitter: @sulayman_Kindi

Monday, 19 March 2012

"Shiah" - Jewish alliance inevitable from history


In his article Azerbaijan-Israel: A Shia Jewish Alliance, Mr Roy Tov, A Jewish convert to Christianity asks, "Can this unlikely pact be explained?" Whilst the realpolitik he presents as explanation is certainly relevant, Muslims of the Sunnah should not be surprised and should not find anything "unlikely" about this. This topic cannot be fully covered in this short article and only certain points are presented for the reader's further study.

What is surprising about a pact which was forged from day one? Firstly, we of the Ahlus Sunnah are the real Shiah [partisans] of Ali [may Allah be pleased with him]. They who attribute false claims to him were labelled by his descendant, Zayd, as, "Rawāfid," Dissenters. That Rifd was initiated by a Yemeni Rabbi, Abdullah bin Saba, is known and admitted even by the Rawaafid, e.g.Rijal-i-Kashi, p.71. What many need further education on is how Jews further fostered Rifd ideology through the centuries. Arabic readers should avail themselves of the book لله ثم للتاريخ كشف الأسرار وتبرئة الأئمة الأطهار (For Allah then History, Revealing the Secrets and Exonerating the Pure Imaams). The author, as-Sayyid Ḥusyan al-Musawī was a Rāfidi scholar and confidante of the exiled Khomeini. Allah guided him and he exposed  the truth behind Rifd. May Allah grant me the opportunity to translate this much needed book into English.

This book is not the only one to discuss the prophesies of the Rawāfiḍ:

  • The Rāfidā Mahdi will rule with the Law of David.
  • He will speak Hebrew.
  • His reign will initiate a massacre of Arabs and Sunnis.
  • He will demolish al-Masjid an-Nabawi and revere Karbala instead.
 - so... is he Shiah Mahdi, Jewish Messiah or ad-Dajjal? Clearly all three rolled into one! The aim of the Rabbis whom al-Musawi exposed,   was to deviate as many Muslims as possible to accept Dajjal, their Messiah, as the Mahdi. To a great extent they have succeeded.


Examine history and know that they are not our brothers.

  • They joined hands with the Crusaders against Islām.
  • Their plots drew in the Mongols who massacred hundreds of thousands of Sunnis in Baghdad whilst sparing the Rawaafid. [A study comparing contemporary Baghdad might be in order].
  • Persia was majority Sunni (Shaafi'ee). The Rawāfiḍ enforced conversion at the point of the sword in 1502. This is why the borders, where the army's reach was weaker, are still Sunni.  Again , the hundreds of thousands of Sunnis butchered meant nothing to them.
  • To this day, Sunnī Masājid are demolished in Iran, whilst Jews are accorded full respect. "Khomeini" was one of the greatest deceptions of the past half century. A good starting point to discover the truth would be this link.    
  • Many more events expose the Rawāfiḍ. It should also be mentioned that if one examines the ancestry of the "Young Turks" whose coup was directly designed to destroy the Ottoman Empire and hand over Palestine to the Zionists, everyone of them will be found to be descended from the elder brothers of the Rawāfiḍ, the Jews.
In conclusion, consider why did Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم say that 70,000 Jews from Isfahaan (Iran) will follow ad-Dajjal as narrated by Muslim, but also "70,000 from my Ummah" as recorded in Sharhus Sunnah? Who are the only ones who can be "Jews" and "my Ummah" at one and the same time? A group initiated and nurtured by the Jews but who also claim to be Muslim. A group which came to control Ifahaan 500 years ago. A group also in control of Azerbaijān.  

A pact unlikely on the surface, but absolutely unsurprising in the light of history.



سليمان الكندي

"Shiah" - Jewish alliance inevitable from history


In his article Azerbaijan-Israel: A Shia Jewish Alliance, Mr Roy Tov, A Jewish convert to Christianity asks, "Can this unlikely pact be explained?" Whilst the realpolitik he presents as explanation is certainly relevant, Muslims of the Sunnah should not be surprised and should not find anything "unlikely" about this. This topic cannot be fully covered in this short article and only certain points are presented for the reader's further study.

What is surprising about a pact which was forged from day one? Firstly, we of the Ahlus Sunnah are the real Shiah [partisans] of Ali [may Allah be pleased with him]. They who attribute false claims to him were labelled by his descendant, Zayd, as, "Rawāfid," Dissenters. That Rifd was initiated by a Yemeni Rabbi, Abdullah bin Saba, is known and admitted even by the Rawaafid, e.g.Rijal-i-Kashi, p.71. What many need further education on is how Jews further fostered Rifd ideology through the centuries. Arabic readers should avail themselves of the book لله ثم للتاريخ كشف الأسرار وتبرئة الأئمة الأطهار (For Allah then History, Revealing the Secrets and Exonerating the Pure Imaams). The author, as-Sayyid Ḥusyan al-Musawī was a Rāfidi scholar and confidante of the exiled Khomeini. Allah guided him and he exposed  the truth behind Rifd. May Allah grant me the opportunity to translate this much needed book into English.

This book is not the only one to discuss the prophesies of the Rawāfiḍ:

  • The Rāfidā Mahdi will rule with the Law of David.
  • He will speak Hebrew.
  • His reign will initiate a massacre of Arabs and Sunnis.
  • He will demolish al-Masjid an-Nabawi and revere Karbala instead.
 - so... is he Shiah Mahdi, Jewish Messiah or ad-Dajjal? Clearly all three rolled into one! The aim of the Rabbis whom al-Musawi exposed,   was to deviate as many Muslims as possible to accept Dajjal, their Messiah, as the Mahdi. To a great extent they have succeeded.


Examine history and know that they are not our brothers.

  • They joined hands with the Crusaders against Islām.
  • Their plots drew in the Mongols who massacred hundreds of thousands of Sunnis in Baghdad whilst sparing the Rawaafid. [A study comparing contemporary Baghdad might be in order].
  • Persia was majority Sunni (Shaafi'ee). The Rawāfiḍ enforced conversion at the point of the sword in 1502. This is why the borders, where the army's reach was weaker, are still Sunni.  Again , the hundreds of thousands of Sunnis butchered meant nothing to them.
  • To this day, Sunnī Masājid are demolished in Iran, whilst Jews are accorded full respect. "Khomeini" was one of the greatest deceptions of the past half century. A good starting point to discover the truth would be this link.    
  • Many more events expose the Rawāfiḍ. It should also be mentioned that if one examines the ancestry of the "Young Turks" whose coup was directly designed to destroy the Ottoman Empire and hand over Palestine to the Zionists, everyone of them will be found to be descended from the elder brothers of the Rawāfiḍ, the Jews.
In conclusion, consider why did Rasūlullāh صلى الله عليه وسلم say that 70,000 Jews from Isfahaan (Iran) will follow ad-Dajjal as narrated by Muslim, but also "70,000 from my Ummah" as recorded in Sharhus Sunnah? Who are the only ones who can be "Jews" and "my Ummah" at one and the same time? A group initiated and nurtured by the Jews but who also claim to be Muslim. A group which came to control Ifahaan 500 years ago. A group also in control of Azerbaijān.  

A pact unlikely on the surface, but absolutely unsurprising in the light of history.



سليمان الكندي