Conversations On Sufism (3)

Our dear Prophet said: “The Caliphate will last 30 years after me”. The Four Caliphs had worked as a caliph for 29 and half years. Imam Hasan had been in charge of this duty for 6 months so the Caliphate lasted 30 years totally. He said“Sömme caelel melikün adud - Then a rapacious, tyrant “Melik” will come”. We call him as Sultan, Shah, the Europeans call him as King and Arabs call as “Melik”. In other words, the son takes the place of his father: “heir apparent”. There is no heir apparent system in Islam so there is no law of “Heir Apparent”. Why does it not take place in Islamic Jurisprudence? Hz. Muhammad (a.s.v.) does not have “the system of heir apparent”. He did not give the administration even to his own family. He had two sons. Did he give it to his sons? No!

When Hz. Ali was dying, he said: What do you think of the grandson of Hz. Muhammad? Do you have any objections? They said they did not, so he said he advised him to them. He was Ahl al Bayt, the grandson of the Prophet of Allah and the son of Mother Fatima. They said they would swear allegiance to Imam Hasan after he died. They were not forced to do it.

However, Muawiyah, the clown of Damascus whose identity was uncertain, raided Madina with 50-60 thousands of soldiers from Damascus. Among them, there were Christians, polytheists, impious people. They all attacked Madina. He sent his swordsmen to each Companion of the Prophet and told them to kill them if they did not swear allegiance to Yazid. He made them to swear fealty to Yazid by force, by compulsion. Mother Hz. Aisha, the wives of the Prophet, Hz. Husayn, Hz. Abu Baqir’s son Abdurrahman, Hz. Omar’s son Abdurrahman, Hz. Zubayr’s son Abdullah, who had not sworn allegiance with Yazid, hid themselves. Hz. Abubaqir’s son Abdurrahman took refuge in our Mother Aisha as she was his sister. He ordered his soldiers to catch Hz. Abu Baqir’s son Abdurrahman and cut off his head. This Abdurrahman was martyred in Karbala with Imam Husayn. He was martyred on the lines of Imam Husayn. Hz. Omar’s son Abdurrahman was also martyred in Karbala with Imam Husayn. If Hz. Abubaqir and Hz. Omar had felt enmity towards Hz. Ali, would they have followed Hz. Husayn? Did Muawiyah not have Hz. Abubaqir’s son Muhammad murdered for Hz. Ali in Siffeyn when he said: “Are you bringing the system of Kings? You are ruining the path of the Prophet”? Muawiyah ordered his men: “Cut off this cursed man’s head!” He said this for Muhammad, the son of Hz. Abubaqir. My God!

Finally, they had faith reluctantly at the Conquest of Mecca one and a half years before our Prophet’s death. Allah did not accept their faith. As it is the fact, why are they still showing them as the companions?

If these conversations had been made during the Ottoman Emperors, we would have been beheaded. They would have said that we were talking against the Companions. How nice!

Those clowns were the first class. They murdered and beheaded Ashara-i Mubashshara- the ten personalities who were rewarded by paradise before they died-. That is to say, although they were newcomers, they treated the old-timers rudely. They disregarded the Holy system of our Prophet. On the contrary of our Prophet Muhammad (a.s.v.), who lived on a dry rush mat, of his Four caliphs, of Imam Hasan and of Imam Husayn, the brought governors like Roman governors, built palaces in Damascus, they entertained themselves with belly dancers and alcoholic drinks. My God! Come to this view!

It had already turned into that state there 30 years later. The Abbasids wanted to correct it but they could not give up the Sultanate-to live in great splendor. It also fitted their interest. They wanted to remain it to the Sons of the Abbasids. Then this system was formed. Our people also continued it and it lasted for centuries. The Ottomans also lasted it. There are still some people who continue this system.

May Allah not separate us from Imam Husayn, Imam Hasan, from Imam Hasan’s father because the Prophet (A.S.V.) said: “The best person, the most scholar of my people after me is Imam Ali”. He is the gate of the Knowledge of the Prophet and he is his brother. (Hz. Peygamberin Dilinden Dört Halifesi, The Chapter about Hz. Ali, trans. by A. Fikri Yavuz, Sönmez Publ. 1981-İst)

Well, did the three caliphs serve as a sheikh for Hz. Ali? Yes, they did. When we search History we see that they did. However, we accept it in another way: remember how the sons of the Prophet Jacob treated their brother Joseph! They were brothers and they were reconciled with each other afterwards. Hz. Ali also tolerated them but he left them for six months. He went neither to masjid nor to Hz. Abubaqir’s. He who is interested in it may search for it. History is evident! They are written in history books. They are written in “Islam Tarihi” written by both M. Asım Köksal and Ibn Kesir. You can read and learn it.

They made peace afterwards. They did not draw swords against Hz. Ali. They did not tell any hard words to each other either. But, to say the truth, they did everything without having consulted to Hashim’s family. Even Necip Fazıl said in his book “İlim Beldesinin Kapısı Hz. Ali”: “They did not ask the opinion of the Hashim family. They made the Hashim family bow necks and put them into a risk.” Then our Master Hz. Ali said to Hz. Abu Baqr: “You did not confer with us!” He said that he was right they did not find an opportunity and explained to him why it happened in that way. If Hz. Ali was proved to be right, there must have been an “injustice”. However, believers may commit error. Believers may commit sins. Only Ahl al Bayt and the Prophet do not commit sins. Why not? Is Ahl al Bayt the Prophet? They are not the Prophets but Allah purified them Himself;

“İnnema yüridullahi liyüzhibe an kümürricse Ehlel beyti ve yütehhirreküm tethira – O, the Family of the Prophet! Allah willed to purify you and cleanse you thoroughly.” (Ahzab, 33)

Allah purified them. As Allah purified them Himself, they are not the Prophets but they are pure and innocent people. However, the Companions were purified by the Prophet (A.S.V.). There is a verse concerning this:

“Yüzekkiküm… - Muhammad is purifying you of sin.”

“Ve yüallimükümül kitabe ve’l hikmete… - He is instructing you in the Book and in Wisdom and teaches you that of which you have no knowledge.” (Al-Baqarah, 151)

So, Hz. Muhammad (A.S.V.) is not only a conveyor of divine messages, he is also the one who purifies, who intercedes, who teaches and the one who instructs you the Wisdom and the Book. He is a Murshid-Spiritual Teacher. They still say:

“Vema alerresul illel belağul mubin - An Apostle’s duty is but to explain clearly.” (Al-Anqabut, 18)

It fits to their advantage. That verse is for the unbelievers but not for us. He said to the unbelievers: “If you do not believe it, I am but an Apostle. I conveyed the message to you. Do not say that you have not heard it! Tomorrow you may be caught and become responsible and will be questioned that “Muhammad conveyed to you but you did not accept it”.

He always prays for us, he cares for us and he purifies us.

“O Muhammad! Show kindness to the faithful!” (Hijr, 88)

“Those faithful who swear fealty to you…” (Fath, 10)

Then, there were some other people who did not swear fealty to him. They swore fealty by hand but we wonder if they had sworn fealty with the heart, sincerely. Our Prophet knows who really swore fealty to him faithfully. He said:

“Vahfid cenaheke - Protect them!” (Hijr, 88)

It means to protect the believers. We hope we are also under his protection.

Allahümme Salli ala Seyyidina Muhammedin ve ala Ehi Beytihi ve Ashabihi ve bereketih ve milletihi. May peace be upon all of them!

About the hadiths I mentioned above: the Caliphate means to substitute the Prophet of Allah. The Four Caliphs and Hz. Hasan served for his place for 30 years after he died. 30 years is completed with Imam Hasan but they do not mention his name. The real caliphs are five persons: Hz. Abubakir, Omar, Osman, Hz. Ali and Imam Hasan. They had already murdered Hz. Husayn. Those cruel people did not give him caliphate.

Caliphate must bear the prophetic qualities. The caliph must bear the qualities of the Prophet. It should be with the consent of the People of the Prophet in order to be Prophetic. Swearing fealty cannot be applied by force. If it is done by compulsion, it is sovereignty and fascism then. Fascism, haughtiness starts there. Our Prophet said in the continuation of the hadith: “Sümme yekunu cebbarün - They become more and more haughty”.

Among the Umayyad, Hz. Omar bin Abdülaziz was saved. May Allah be pleased with him! The tyrant Umayyad made people curse Hz. Ali and His family (God Forbid!) for seventy years in the mosques and at pulpits. We like Omar bin Abdulaziz as he abolished this curse. We love him. The Friends of God love him and Shiis also like him. He has blood relationship with Hz. Omar. His mother was the granddaughter of Hz. Omar. She was the granddaughter of Marwan but she was also the granddaughter of Hz. Omar. His father Abdulaziz had taken Hz. Omar’s daughter by force. He was a disbeliever. That Abdulaziz killed our Master Imam Zaynal Abidin.

There is also an Imperial Caliphate. Muawiyah, the son of Abu Sufyan brought the Imperial Caliphate. It was applied by compulsion, by force. If anyone did not swear fealty to them his head would be cut off! He invented a royal sovereignty system. They started Sultanate- Sovereignty. They turned religion into sovereignty. A reform was made just there.

Philosophers, theologians also made a reform. This was also the dirtiness of Umayyad. It spread to Abbasids as well.

Therefore, in or religion, there is no “heir apparent system”. The heir apparent does not have jurisprudence in the Islamic Canonical Law. Why not? As there is no heir apparent system, there is not a law for him.

“Heir apparent” is the son who will take his father’s place in that family. This system is the Family Sovereignty same as in the Umayyad and Ottomans. This is not the Caliphate. It is a false caliphate.

Now I am going to stress on a subject:

When there is no Prophetic Caliphate, when there is no person as a caliph like Abu Baqir, Omar, Osman, Ali, Hasan and Husayn, Caliphate cannot be practiced but there is Monarchy. Shariat cannot be applied in a place where the Caliphate of the Prophet- the Prophetic Caliphate- does not exist. Why are they shouting: “We want Shariat”? Because they want Monarchy and Sovereignty. They want the System of the Umayyad to come back. Our Prophet had already said: “Caliphate is for 30 years”. If the real caliph of the Prophet is not there, Shariat cannot be mentioned there. People are tyrannized on behalf of Shariat then (May Allah forbid!). The cruelty is called as Shariat then. People are made to accept such a system as Shariat 30 years after the Prophet.

The Umayyad invented that tyrant system and the Abbasids made people accept it. The Seljuks and Ottomans also made people accept it. It was a system of Kings, of Caesars. What remained behind? Our mosques remained. Nothing was happened to our Koran. Prayer, ablution, fasting, pilgrimage remained. They brought down the articles of Islam to 4. There are not any other conditions. What does “condition-article” mean? Conditions or articles mean “imperative prerequisites”, the commands of Allah. Then Allah has only four orders: fasting, prayer, pilgrimage and Alms. How much they simplified Islam! The articles of Faith are also six. Read them with your tongue! That’s all! What do these articles mean, what are the realities of them? You do not need it. Just read: “Amentü billahi ve melaiketihi…” and that is all!

They never speak of “faith”. They always speak about Islam and the articles of Islam. There are only four articles of Islam. I ask some people: “Brother, are the articles of faith four? They say that it is true. The followers, the servants of the King or Emperor will do four of them and the others belong to the Emperor. If anybody says something against the King, his tongue will be cut off. You cannot ask any question about the Divine reason of Government. This is another specialty! Public order is perfect. The Governors of the states (called as Pashas) used to say: “My King or the Grand Vizier, the public order in Urfa, in Gaziantep, in Adana, in Konya is perfect! That is to say, make the public order perfect even if you apply force, oppression or tyranny! The Ottomans were despotic! The governors of Ottomans were Pashas. They were named as Pashas. What does it mean? It was like that in the Abbasids, it was the same in the Umayyads and it continued like this for centuries.

I am emphasizing again: There is no Shariat in the place where there is no Prophetic Caliphate and no people like the Four Imams and Imam Hasan. Then, there is catechism in that place. Perform your worship: perform you prayer, fast, go to Mecca for pilgrimage! Be silent! Do not interfere in the affairs of the state and government! Nowadays it is said: “Do not interfere in the government!” For example, they rebuke the supporters of secularism like that. I am a supporter of democratic secularism though. I show tolerance to them. They say religion should not be involved with the activities of the state. Did the Ottomans involve the religion with the state? No! The brothels came from them, from the Kings. The usury was remained from them; lending money on interest at banks was left from them. Wine shops, pubs, bars were left from them. The Ottomans had all of them. Why are they getting angry? Theatres were also left from them.

Abdulhamid had a theatre in his castle, in his palace. He used to watch Hamlet, Romeo Juliet. And this sir was the Caliph of our Prophet. Goodness gracious! They, these Sultans, Yavuz Selim had taken the false Caliphate from the Abbasids (in 1517) and they called it as Caliphate.

What shall we do now? The best system is democracy. People must consent to it. As I have emphasized at the beginning of my speech, people must agree sincerely as they had agreed to the Four Caliphs and Hz. Hasan. It cannot be done by force. Muawiyah made people swear allegiance by force, by war, by rebellion. He opposed to Hz. Ali. He opposed to the true Imam. This is also the opinion of Ashary. He said that he opposed to the true Imam. He was a rebellious. They know this but they do not tell this. Muawiyah and Amr ibni As were rebellious. They were against the true Imam. As I have said before, I like Ashary. We do not deny everything he said. Ashary said: “He is such a true Imam that Haq never leaves him -Ali-.” For, there is a hadith: “Elhakku maal Ali vel Aliyyün maal Hak”. Ashary made the decision depending on this hadith. Who did he oppose in that case if he opposed to the true Imam? He had opposed to Islam, to religion.

Said-i Nursi said: “Muawiyah fought for Sultanate, for world, however Hz. Ali fought for the religion.”

What shall we do now then? They tell me: Brother Kazim! You are making us pessimistic. Will it never be better? I tell them that our Prophet said that caliphate was for 30 years so shariat is also for 30 years. Shariat has not been practiced after him for 1350 years. In one respect, madrasa still exists. Have the Republicans abolished these four articles: fasting, prayer, pilgrimage and almsgiving so far? It becomes five with the formula of God’s unity “The Kalima Shahada” and it is related with faith. The articles of Islam is actually four. He who does not say “Kalima Shahada”, which is “La ilahe illallah Muhammedün Resulullah - There is no deity but Allah. Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah” is not accepted as a Muslim. They did not abolish “Amentü-the articles of faith” either. They did not abolish the four conditions either. Prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, almsgiving are still continuing.

Then the Ottoman system is still continuing. The Ottomans had already based Islam on four principles. It is also continuing. The other is the will of the Emperor-the palace-. Whatever will he had! However, in Islam, the will belongs to Allah, to the Prophet of Allah and to his heirs such as Hz. Ali, and Hz. Abu Baqir. What are we waiting for in this situation? We are waiting for the 12th Imam Hz. Imam Muhammad al Mahdi. He disappeared (became absent) in Samarra, in a cave in Iraq. This event is called as “The Biggest Absence”. Such a great person had disappeared. Unless he appears, unless Jesus the Messiah descends from the Heaven, unless Muhammadans (Muslims) and the Christians are united, those who say we are the supporters of Shariat upon the religion of Muhammad actually want sovereignty. They want to seize the treasury and spend it by themselves and superstitions will continue as Shariat.

The supporters of secularism should give up their claim and everyone must be free to perform their ceremony, their worship in any place they want: at home, at the meeting etc. They should not make people go only to mosques because in the Islamic World people are never obliged to offer prayers at mosques only. Here, going to a mosque is not imperative. Worships can be performed everywhere in Islam. However, in Christianity going to a church is imperative. One cannot perform his worship outside the church. We do not have temples. We have masjids-places of worship, mosques-. Anyone who likes can go there.

“Mesacidallah - The mosques of Allah” (Al Baqarah, 114 / Tawbah, 18)

We do not have temples because when there is a temple, there must be a god or an idol in it. However our God does not fit into anywhere. “I can fit neither into the world nor into the Heavens but I am in the heart of My faithful servant”. We look for Allah in the heart of the Perfect Man, in the heart of the Friend of God.

Our direction of worship is the Kaaba. We can worship wherever we are: in the fields, in the orchard or in the garden. We can also perform our prayer with congregation. That’s to say, mosque is not obligatory. Performing prayer in a mosque is not imperative but it is Sunnat. Why do Christians worship in the church? Because when they go to church they prostrate themselves before the statue of Hz. Jesus, before the cross. They offer their prayer in front of that symbol prostrating themselves before it because they regard Jesus as a god, that is why they made his statue. In other words, their god is in the temple.

Our God is everywhere.

“Feeynema tüvellu fesemme vechullah - Whichever way you turn there is the face of God.” (Al-Baqarah, 115)

“I can fit neither into the world nor into the Heavens but I am in the heart of My faithful servant”. The heart is important. We seek Allah in the Prophet, in the Apostle of Allah.

Therefore, they should give up imprisoning Muslims into mosques. They should not make Muslims a compulsion, a prisoner, a servant of Theologians. Madrasa is not the only place that knows the religion. The Faculty of Theology and Imam Hatip High Schools are not the only places that know the religion. Religion can be learnt everywhere.

There are such wise men among the people that they can be compared to neither a madrasa scholar nor a theologian. Yunus is a good example of it. Why I show Yunus as a sample? For, Yunus is a common Friend of God of Anatolia. He is anonymous. Nobody objects to him. He is not a sheikh of a religious order either. Yet, he is a saint, a value, a Friend of God of my people. He is not like Hadji Beqtash. He is not like Mawlana. Mostly Mawlavis support Mawlana. Mostly Beqtashis support Hadji Beqtash. However, when Yunus is mentioned, he is our common moral value, our holy person. May peace be upon Yunus and upon those who love Yunus!

Allahümme salli ala seyyidina Muhammed’in ve ala alihi ve sahbihi ve sellim.

“God! Do not make us far from the sons of Ali!

We have been the servants of Him since past eternity…”

Hu! For the sake of Al-i Aba, Ahl al Bayt, real Companions, real Saints…

Hu! For the sake of Four Great Divine Poles of Allah, for the sake of all the Prophets, for the sake of Friends of God and Yunus…

May peace be upon all of them!

Note: These conversations were made upon our brother Abidin Çalış’s question “What does ‘Seyr-i Sülük (Spiritual Journey or Progress on the Spiritual Path)’ mean in Sufism? How is it practiced? Would you explain it for us?”

You may also listen to it in our Turkish website using the link: “Sesli Tasavvuf Sohbetleri – Sound Conversations on Sufism”.