Are the religious institutions to be considered as a social phenomenon and should be taken as independent from the political authority namely the state? Or is there a role for the state in this field?

According to Fethullah Gülen, the status of a clergyman, which is seen as an intermediary between God and His servants, is opposed to the spirit of Islam. In Islam, there are no clergy. Everyone can be pious; and at this point, no one would be different from anyone else in terms of status. Only in terms of practicing religion some might be ahead of others and, of course, that is in the sight of God:

Again in Islam, the duties and positions like imam and müezzin are not official positions. However, after the establishment of the Republic of Turkey, in a sense, as a continuation of how it was during the Ottoman State, the religious affairs were taken under the control of the state, and the duties were transformed into an institution. But in fact, such a thing does not exist in the essence of the religion; this is not an understanding derived from the foundational sources of Islam. It could only be considered as a convenient organization in order to manage some of the ceremonies of the pious Muslims. But no one would need an organization of religious affairs in order to practice religious life.

A Muslim can perform all the acts of worship and ceremonies, including the burial of the dead, chanting of mawlid ^{[a eulogy recited to celebrate the birth of the Messenger of God], and the recitation of the Qur’an. For these, one does not need an intermediary, a vehicle, or an organization.[1]}

Regarding this matter, when he is asked whether he himself can be characterized as a “man of religion,” he replies:

In this sense, I have to say that I am not a “man of religion.” However, since I had given sermons for a long time in the mosques, as a member of the Presidency of Religious Affairs, I could be considered as a “man of religion,” as the title commonly used and understood in Turkey. But in terms of its real essence, this is officialdom [civil servant] in the state, rather than being a man of religion.

Secondly, in Turkey, as is in all other countries of the world, not an insignificant number of people are seeking an organization, an association, or a leader, in terms of provision of religious services expected.^[2]

I do not find reasonable the criticism that the Presidency of Religious Affairs is determining what kind of a Muslim we should be. On the part of the Presidency there might be coercion and pressure on us in different matters like our family life, economic life, and our transactions in the market. … It could be stated that 90 percent of these are practiced freely. We are practicing our own religion. No one is telling me you have to live like this, or like that. … Some people at the extremes who say that there should be no government are also saying that there should not be the Presidency of Religious Affairs. But they do not try to predict what would happen if this institution does not exist. As I had just mentioned, there would be different “provinces of mosques.” There would be different provinces following different müftis [local administrators of religious affairs, again a government employee] Maybe, according to the ideas and judgments of people from different backgrounds, there would be different Sufi orders, but not for the purpose of reaching God. People would take to the streets in order to spread their methods and sects, and sectarian ideas. For this reason, although there may be some aspects of the Presidency deserving criticisms, I personally approve its existence. I am in favor of it. Some might consider the “position of approving the Presidency” to be in favor of an organization which is behind the official religion. This would not make any difference for me, because it is false.^[3]

After this, he comments on the position of leadership attributed to him:

I say it sincerely, if I had given such an impression, through my conduct or behavior, if I had usurped leadership or respect that I do not deserve, then I would ask for forgiveness from God as well as the public. There are tens, even hundreds of people who represent Islam very well, who are aware of what should be done for the benefit of humanity. There are worthy scholars in the departments of theology. I am not fit to hold the candle to them. In spite of that fact … in the activities of the people who are drawn to a common point under the circumstances and requirement of religion, those people who look for a leader or persuader behind these activities have instigated a curiosity among the public to find one. Those who have animosity toward these activities have done this partially deliberately, in order to weaken the movement by discrediting a person. Otherwise there is neither a respectable leadership nor a man of religion in all these.^[4]

[1] The interview given to Nicole Pope, Le Monde, 28 April 1998.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Can 1997, 136–137.
[4] The interview given to Nicole Pope, Le Monde, 28 April 1998.

Tweet

Whatsapp