/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Mustafa Kemal Ata-Shirk



kashmirshazad
09-14-2009, 11:44 AM
Salam

Just wanted to enquire about the following person in Islamic history : Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.
I believe that he was responsible (not soleley, mind) for the disestablishment of the Khilafah in 1924. If he was then are we to take that the founder of an Islamic (or shoud I say pseudo-Islamic) nation is in fact a Munafiqeen.

What is eveyone else's views on this man?
Isnt it also true that he helped to translate the Q'uran into modern day Turkish?
What are the views people hold of him? ( a hero, an anti hero, or a Munafiqeenn who is suffering right now)?

Wsalam
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Muslim Woman
09-14-2009, 04:24 PM
:sl:

I heard that he banned Athan . If this is true , then surely he did the wrong thing.

And Allah knows Best.
Reply

convert
09-14-2009, 04:43 PM
He was kafir. May Allah curse him with hellfire for what he did.
Reply

yasin ibn Ahmad
09-14-2009, 05:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by kashmirshazad
Isnt it also true that he helped to translate the Q'uran into modern day Turkish?
What are the views people hold of him? ( a hero, an anti hero, or a Munafiqeenn who is suffering right now)?

Wsalam
he wanted a translation of Quran so as he could replace it the original in every ritual of the deen, such as salat, prays, everything related to islam.He aimed to brake the link between past and future.So it wasnt a help, it was an attack to islam.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
YusufNoor
09-14-2009, 05:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by kashmirshazad
Salam

Just wanted to enquire about the following person in Islamic history : Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.
I believe that he was responsible (not soleley, mind) for the disestablishment of the Khilafah in 1924. If he was then are we to take that the founder of an Islamic (or shoud I say pseudo-Islamic) nation is in fact a Munafiqeen.

What is eveyone else's views on this man?
Isnt it also true that he helped to translate the Q'uran into modern day Turkish?
What are the views people hold of him? ( a hero, an anti hero, or a Munafiqeenn who is suffering right now)?

Wsalam
:sl:

Maulana Imran Hosein has a great lecture on Imam Mahdi and The Return Of The Islamic Caliphate. it's in 3 parts and you can download it here:

http://www.imranhosein.org/audio/44-...y-maulana.html

the basis of the lecture is that Ata-Shirk assisted the British Government in destroying the Islamic Caliphate. it's also a nice video if you can find it.

:wa:
Reply

kashmirshazad
09-15-2009, 01:02 PM
Thank you brother, I just really didnt know much about him.
Apparently the Turkish Community really do love him, and it is an offence to degrade him. Was just wondering in this day and age how can you make an offence of degrading a Muslim (as that is the culturally accepted thing to do). But that was before I found out that he was quite possibly a Munafiq (astaghfirullaah).
Reply

Intisar
09-16-2009, 02:25 AM
:sl: He believed in secularism, and aimed for such a form governance to be in place for Turkey. If that's not borderline kufr, then I don't know what is.
Reply

kashmirshazad
09-16-2009, 02:09 PM
Ok, thanks.

A lot of leaders are like that today, but having done some reading this atashirk dude stands out. I mean how can anyone in Turkey not have led a revolution since the time of his death and reject his ideas of governance?

Are they all happy to accept it?
Reply

malayloveislam
09-16-2009, 02:20 PM
Not solely his fault too...... The Caliphs too had forgotten their responsibilities toward religion.... That's why Turkey become like today.... We did admire Turkey Othmaniah for their stronghold in Islam........

Attaturk, the father of Turkey nationalism..... He adore everything West... But looking to Islam as the source of the people being left in marginal.... That's wrong... Many Muslim leaders today are like him.... Including in my country :(
Reply

ژاله
09-16-2009, 03:11 PM
what do Turkish people say about this? i think they love him.
Reply

malayloveislam
09-16-2009, 03:31 PM
Not sure, but I've had heard that there are several movements or Tariket to revive Islamic life again there since the early time of the Cumhuriyet (Republic).... It's a crying shame when some Muslim countries had lost Arabic script for Roman or Western script..... My country too had done the same, losing Arabic script for our national language..... It's not interesting at all and made many youths leaving behind the Islamic identity and thinking that using Arabic script will made them being seen as Arab wannabes while in the reality it's just the same when they adopt Western or Secular theories developed in the West.
Reply

Güven
09-16-2009, 03:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaak
what do Turkish people say about this? i think they love him.
hmm.

not all of them.

I admire the Ottoman caliphates but not him.

most just blindly believe in whats written in the books and most just believe what their parents told them.

they have this feeling of betrayal. they believe that ataturk has saved them from their fall and after that Nationalism has taken over their hearts.

oh and He also made the arabic alphabet into the Latin Alphabet wich caused many problems for the turks to understand the Qu'ran etc. now a lots of turks are struggling to understand arabic and to understand the real meanings of the Qu'ran.

but most of them have imaan ill tell you. Their love for the Prophet(saw) and Allah(swt) is something I respect. Its only secularism and nationalism wich made most of them blind.

The problem doesnt lie only in Turkey, Its the whole ummah that became corrupted because of Nationalism.
Reply

yasin ibn Ahmad
09-17-2009, 01:13 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by kashmirshazad
Ok, thanks.

A lot of leaders are like that today, but having done some reading this atashirk dude stands out. I mean how can anyone in Turkey not have led a revolution since the time of his death and reject his ideas of governance?

Are they all happy to accept it?
No, not everyone happy with it.If a political party who dislikes him gets the authority, there is a military coup in Turkey.We have had several military intervention after caliphate went because many of the people arent pleased with the so called revolutions.The situation hasnt changed today.If the current gov. tries to make a counter revolution the military uses everyway to block it.they use media , some state establishments , even they publish declarations on their website.
Reply

malayloveislam
09-17-2009, 01:20 PM
I admire the Ottomaniah Turks..... Their influence reached South East Asia Muslim Sultanates and they had contributed a lot toward Islamic life development.... Too bad many Muslims were deceived by Orientalist propaganda about Ottomaniah Sultanate and the last Sultans too had been deceived from Islamic teaching because too much pampered in Palace.... The figure like Muhammad al-Fateh and Sultan Murad had shown us how Ottomaniah defended Islam.

Attaturk is a destroyer, not even a Father of Turkey in my opinion.... The father of Turkey is Islam...
Reply

Muslimlearner
09-28-2009, 09:00 AM
From a turkish ppl I know that Kamal Arturk let all the prominent turkish shaikhs go in a ship,wich sale far from the coast,then he told them:,,Those of you who disagrees with my reformation-to jump in the water right now.''

and the imams keep silant and what happened :no hejab,prayer only for the old ppl,legal alcohol,casinos,musik...real modern,,Europe,,

Some Camalist say that the practise to cover with hejaab its a ARABIC tradition,and not from Islam.........:omg:
Reply

believeByHEART.
09-28-2009, 05:59 PM
well im turkish but im not baised on this view, i look at it with an openmind:)

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/asmi...y19181923.html
(check out the website if you want more information)

^^read the link, you will understand why it was so important to make a republic of Turkey and the fact that 'disestablishing' the caphilate had to be done.
if it was left to them they would of been crushed and sure enough Turkey, where west meets east, would well have not have any ties towards its ancient culture or with Islam itself. maybe we would of all been speaking english or french or italian by now and maybe become converts to christianity? if the armies were successful in their missions of bringing down the downfall of the system in which Turkey was in.

However, because he wanted to save the people from the sultans who were ruining the country, even if they are muslim or in fact if they were pulled away from their religion by the slightest from the desire of westernized culture cannot surely make ataturk a hypocrit. I think the right idea would always be to save the people, the country from outsiders invading the land. or would everyone rather a state so near to the east converted because of the failed attempt of the 'islamic' caphilate on saving the country and winning the war?

wow im lost myself:)
Reply

Pomak
05-03-2010, 02:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by kashmirshazad
Ok, thanks.

A lot of leaders are like that today, but having done some reading this atashirk dude stands out. I mean how can anyone in Turkey not have led a revolution since the time of his death and reject his ideas of governance?

Are they all happy to accept it?
Let me relate to you a story

after the abolishing of the khalifah there were a few rebellions but one in particular stands out, this became know as the "shaykh Said rebellion" (Turks correct me if I got the name of rebellion wrong)

Anyways it began in the South East of Turkey (Kurdistan) and the people from there decided to ask an influencial shaykh called Said Nursi to support them. They met and when they asked him to join he replied
"Who will you fight"
"attaturk"
"Who will you kill"
"his soldiers"
"Who are his soldiers"
"Are they not Muslims?"

and he told them to go off.

format_quote Originally Posted by malayloveislam
Not solely his fault too...... The Caliphs too had forgotten their responsibilities toward religion.... That's why Turkey become like today.... We did admire Turkey Othmaniah for their stronghold in Islam........

Attaturk, the father of Turkey nationalism..... He adore everything West... But looking to Islam as the source of the people being left in marginal.... That's wrong... Many Muslim leaders today are like him.... Including in my country :(
I would say that when the Arabs fought for the British against the Ottomans, that it put Ottomans in a tough position.

format_quote Originally Posted by Malaak
what do Turkish people say about this? i think they love him.
Not all, but usually top scholars do not discuss who is in the fire. (They are too busy trying to get people out of the fire to care about dead people's inward state)

format_quote Originally Posted by Haqeeka'
From a turkish ppl I know that Kamal Arturk let all the prominent turkish shaikhs go in a ship,wich sale far from the coast,then he told them:,,Those of you who disagrees with my reformation-to jump in the water right now.''

and the imams keep silant and what happened :no hejab,prayer only for the old ppl,legal alcohol,casinos,musik...real modern,,Europe,,

Some Camalist say that the practise to cover with hejaab its a ARABIC tradition,and not from Islam.........:omg:
Somehow I doubt that, I think you will notice there are more hijabi sisters per capita in Turkey than in places like Bulgaria. My Turkish history is bad but I am pretty sure young people were never stopped from going to the mosque.

format_quote Originally Posted by believeByHEART.
well im turkish but im not baised on this view, i look at it with an openmind:)

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/region/asmi...y19181923.html
(check out the website if you want more information)

^^read the link, you will understand why it was so important to make a republic of Turkey and the fact that 'disestablishing' the caphilate had to be done.
if it was left to them they would of been crushed and sure enough Turkey, where west meets east, would well have not have any ties towards its ancient culture or with Islam itself. maybe we would of all been speaking english or french or italian by now and maybe become converts to christianity? if the armies were successful in their missions of bringing down the downfall of the system in which Turkey was in.

However, because he wanted to save the people from the sultans who were ruining the country, even if they are muslim or in fact if they were pulled away from their religion by the slightest from the desire of westernized culture cannot surely make ataturk a hypocrit. I think the right idea would always be to save the people, the country from outsiders invading the land. or would everyone rather a state so near to the east converted because of the failed attempt of the 'islamic' caphilate on saving the country and winning the war?

wow im lost myself:)
Yes it had to be done, the oppression that kamal and his cronies inflicted onto Turks would have been blamed on the Deen al Haqq if the khalifate was still around.
BUT the problem with that analysis is that it relies heavily on Turkish nationalist's narrative which frankly has many lies in it.
Reply

Zafran
05-04-2010, 12:33 AM
Salaam

aturk helped in destroying The khlaifa - as well as the arabs by rebellng against the Khlaifate and backing the western powers agenda

stupidity and nationalism destroyed the Khalfate

peace
Reply

gunjan
06-24-2010, 05:32 PM
I dont know how to make a new thread but i want to know that will khilafa b back?
Reply

Zafran
06-24-2010, 09:26 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by gunjan
I dont know how to make a new thread but i want to know that will khilafa b back?
Salaam

Only Allah swt knows

peace
Reply

aadil77
06-24-2010, 09:29 PM
Lanatullah Alayha Ataturk
Reply

boriqee
06-26-2010, 03:33 PM
Asalamu alaikum warahmatullah

Mustapha Kamaal Ataturk was a kaafir billah whom the whole ummah agreed to his apostasy. He was a secularist and secularism, its fundamental basis is the tabdeel of shariah and to replace it with man-constructed laws which is the very tabdeel of the shariah of Allah

we have from Imaam Muhammad Naasiruddin Al-Albaanee
Who said, in one of his earlier cassette recorded lessons, wherein he is describing an argument he had with someone about the Takfeer of Mustafah Ataturk, the secularist who converted the constitution of Turkey from the Hanafee code Sharee'ah, to the man-made laws. So Shaykh Al-Albaanee said:

"I made clear to him (i. e. his opponent) that the Muslims did not make Takfeer to Ataturk who was Muslim. No. (They did so) when he freed himself from Islaam when he implicated upon the Muslims an institution other than the institution of Islaam. And from that was the example of his equalizing between the inheritance of the male and the female. But Allaah says according to us, 'And for the male is the share of two females. ' And then he obligated upon the Turkish masses, the Qobah (i. e. a Turkish-style hat)."
– "Fataawa Ash-Shaykh al-Albaanee wa-Maqara'netihah bi'Fatawaa Al-' Ulaama", Pg. 263 from his cassette #171.]

Thus Ataturk is seen as the epitome of kufr for he is the key to the dismantling of the khilafa and from that tangent, the plight of Islam and its Muslims went down the drain, but none of this has happened by sheer luck, rather this plight is from what our own hands of brought upon ourselves that most of us always like to lie to ourselves and try to overlook. The reason why the khilafa was stripped from us because the muslims themselves stripped it from their lives, from all over the muslims world, palestinians, egyptians, morrocans, lebanese, turkish, pakistan, all over, everyone left the islamic guidance and adopted the guidance of the west, so Allah gave them what they wanted.

very few people realize or chose not to realize that the khilafa is something that is earned through Allah's pleasure, and not something that is ultimately worked for by our human efforts. that what all political groups fail to grasp may Allah guide them and us.

but as for Kamaal Ataturk, he was definitely a kaafir, may Allah put him as the leader of the munafiqeen residing lower in the hellfire than the lowest of the low.

asalamu alaikum
Reply

Ramadhan
06-26-2010, 06:56 PM
When I first studied world history in high school, I read in the history books that kemal Attaturk was the best thing that happened to Turkey, and he was a hero that modernize Turkey and Islam.

Years later after I learned much about Islam, world political history, etc, only then I realized that my highschool history books were adapted from the western ones, and that kemal attaturk was one of the worst things that happened to Turkey and Islam.

Laknat Allah on him, indeed
Reply

aadil77
06-26-2010, 07:46 PM
^You can't get more proof than this, that western nations are out to destroy true islam - they praise enemies of islam
Reply

Masuma
06-26-2010, 07:50 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by aadil77
Lanatullah Alayha Ataturk
LOL! :D brother!

Now you people are discussing about Mustafa Kamal Attaturk? Right? Sorry, just tried to find the shortest post first. :embarrass
Reply

Masuma
06-26-2010, 07:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by naidamar
When I first studied world history in high school, I read in the history books that kemal Attaturk was the best thing that happened to Turkey, and he was a hero that modernize Turkey and Islam.

Years later after I learned much about Islam, world political history, etc, only then I realized that my highschool history books were adapted from the western ones, and that kemal attaturk was one of the worst things that happened to Turkey and Islam.

Laknat Allah on him, indeed
Yeah this Kemal Ataturk abolished the Khilafah!!!

You know, we Muslims of Indian subcontinent constantly struggled to save the Khilafa. It was called the "Khilafat movement". As a result of this movement, 18000 people or even more lost their lives.

But Kemal Ataturk gave the final blow. HE SIMPLY ABOLISHED THE KHILAFAH!!! (all our sacrifices went in vain. Indians felt it like a slap on their faces from someone they were trying to save!)
Reply

Tawangar
11-28-2010, 04:25 PM
ATATURK=ATAKUFR

Kemalism/Kamalism = Kufr.
During the leadership of Mustafa Kemal due to the change in global politics, the politics of religion had changed in the Turkish Republic. Mustafa Kemal had been the applicator of the works on worship in the mother tongue (New Islamism=Kemalism) between the years from 1924 until 1934, hence after 1934 as a result of the adoption of the single party governing from important more modern western countries of the era such as Italy and Germany, the Turkish Republic had wrapped itself up with a more totalitarian structure. It has also intensified its works on transforming Kemalism into an ideology and relatively a religion alongside the publication restriction it has hindered different ideas and thoughts.

We could say Kemalism is the work of producing a form of religion or rather an Islam peculiar to the Turkish nation. With a more specific expression Kemalism is the process of “forming the new religion of the Turks” (Ducane Cundioglu, Turkce Kur’an ve Cumhuriyet Ideolojisi, 33)
Mete Tunçay’s formula for this particular change is “The New Islamism=Kemalism” (Hasan Huseyin Ceylan, Din Devlet Iliskileri, II, 154)
With this meaning Kemalism, has pushed aside the Orthodox Islam out of the borders of life and has tried to place it with the religious form of Kemalism along with an understanding of a new Islam shaped with secularism and nationalism. At the end of this time being as an official religion of the state, Kemalism has taken the place of Islam with a secular and national characteristic. Mustafa Kemal cared nothing about God; he was interested in himself and in Turkey. He hated God and made him responsible for Turkey's misfortune. It was God's tyrannical rule that paralyzed the hands of the Turk. But he knew that God was real to the Turkish peasant, while nationalism meant nothing. He decided, therefore, to drift God into his service as the publicity director of his national cause. Through God's aid, his people must cease to be Mohammedans and become Turks. Then, after God had served Mustafa Kemal's purpose, he could be discarded.(Emil Lengyel, Turkey, p. 134.1941, Random House)

Grey Wolf, Mustafa Kemal: An Intimate Study of a Dictator
H.C. Armstrong, 1934

He was drinking heavily. The drink stimulated him, gave him energy, but increased his irritability. Both in private and public he was sarcastic, brutal and abrupt. He flared up at the least criticism. He cut short all attempts to reason with him. He flew into a passion at the least opposition. He would neither confide in nor co-operate with anyone. When one politician gave him some harmless advice, he roughly told him to get out. When a venerable member of the Cabinet suggested that it was unseemly for Turkish ladies to dance in public, he threw a Koran at him and chased him out of his office with a stick.
p. 241:
"For five hundred years these rules and theories of an Arab sheik," he said, "and the interpretations of generations of lazy, good-for-nothing priests have decided the civil and the criminal law of Turkey."
"They had decided the form of the constitution, the details of the lives of each Turk, his food, his hours of rising and sleeping, the shape of his clothes, the routine of the midwife who produced his children, what he learnt in his schools, his customs, his thoughts, even his most intimate habits.
"Islam, this theology of an immoral Arab, is a dead thing." Possibly it might have suited tribes of nomads in the desert. It was no good for a modern progressive State.
"God's revelation!" There was no God. That was one of the chains by which the priests and bad rulers bound the people down.
"A ruler who needs religion to help him rule is a weakling. No weakling should rule.."And the priests! How he hated them. The lazy, unproductive priests who ate up the sustenance of the people. He would chase them out of their mosques and monasteries to work like men. Religion! He would tear religion from Turkey as one might tear the throttling ivy away to save a young tree.
p. 243:
Further, it was public knowledge that he was irreligious, broke all the rules of decency, and scoffed at sacred things. He had chased the Sheikh-ul-Islam, the High Priest of Islam, out of his office and thrown the Koran after him. He had forced the women in Angora to unveil. He had encouraged them to dance body close to body with accursed foreign men and Christians.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 112
    Last Post: 01-15-2017, 06:13 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-02-2010, 05:39 PM
  3. Replies: 240
    Last Post: 01-16-2009, 09:55 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-19-2006, 05:35 AM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!