Problems with the Reformist Translation
-
Problems with the Reformist Translation
18 September 2007CHRIS AND DIANNE Dear Dr. Yuksel,
I purchased your Quran a Reformist Translation because I earnestly believe that there will be no rapprochement between Muslims and non-Muslims until some of the harsher commands of the Quran somehow go away. Your translation makes great strides in that direction. I have learned a lot from your footnotes and commentaries, particularly regarding Surah 66.5. They will continue to be a resource in understanding the Quran, because they are a fresh view of the original Arabic untainted by Sunni or Shiite orthodoxy. I also agree that the Hadith and Sharia Law are clearly man-made additions to the Quran which have been used to stifle the natural maturing of the religion.
Because of your fresh and original insight into the Quran, I have disseminated information on how to acquire the reformist translation, even with contacts inside Saudi Arabia. I hope the translation will stimulate others to re-think some of the calcified tenants of Islam.
Having said all of that, I do not believe the reformist translation went far enough in dissolving the corrosive elements in the Quran. For example, your translation still endorses unequal treatment of women, death for apostasy, "battle" against non-Muslims, racial hatred, and the taking of hostages. All of these are violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. When the Mormon (LDS) Church faced the problems of polygamy and racial discrimination it reluctantly decided to change its doctrine, even though the words of the Book of Mormon were God's revelation inscribed on sheets of gold and protected by the Angel Moroni. Somehow the church survived and grew -- minus the harsh doctrines that were against the law. In India, Hindus no longer burn the wives of diseased men, a custom that was centuries old, because the custom was deemed barbaric.
As a minimum, true reform of Islam will sooner or later have to discount or ignore the commands in the Quran that violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This could be accomplished via the approach similar to the one advocated by Taha in the "Second Message of Islam" or by simply separating the religious content of the Quran from the political and declaring that the political elements were temporal and instant, while the religious elements were eternal and universal. One way or another, the world will just not accept a religion that advocates killing people who do not belong to that religion or who have decided to leave it.
I sincerely wish you success in your project and in gaining a wider acceptance of your reformist translation. It is a modest start, and it may lead to further reforms or a greater readiness for universal reform within Islam.
Best wishes, Chris Chrisman, Los Angeles
EDIP Dear Mr. Chrisman. Thank you for your compliments and encouraging words.
I would like to briefly address to your concern"Having said all of that, I do not believe the reformist translation went far enough in dissolving the corrosive elements in the Quran. For example, your translation still endorses unequal treatment of women, death for apostasy, "battle" against non-Muslims, racial hatred, and the taking of hostages. All of these are violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."
-
Unequal treatment of women Indeed there are only a few cases where men and women are treated unequally. Inheritance when there is no will. Witnessing financial transactions? Men paying women dowry and wage... I do not recall any other case. A close and objective study of these rules will teach us that it is not intended to put down women. For instance, women's testimony in all other cases is considered equal to of the men. The Quran promotes (not forcefully or legally, but through implicit recommendation) women raising kids and taking care of household. It does not prohibit women from working or having their own businesses; but the ideal is mothers feed and raise the kid not other women. Looking at many complex problems related to the family structure in modern times, I find the Quranic ideal being the best for children and the society.
-
Death for apostasy. This contradicts many Quranic verses. Where in the translation you found any justification for such a rule?
-
"Battle" against non-muslims. The Quran does not promote religious wars. Nowhere the Quran asks Muslims to attack non Muslims because they are not Muslims. To the contrary, it promotes to have peace treaties with non Muslims. For instance, Muslims were asked not to help a group of Muslims who attacked pagans who had treaty with Muslims.
-
Racial Hatred. I wonder whether you are talking about another book. Where in the world you see such a thing? The Quran in many verses, especially in chapter 49 categorically rejects racism and consider it as evil. No wonder, in more than a dozen verses it addresses us with the expression, "Children of Adam."
-
Taking of hostages. Again, the Quran specifically reject this action, by prohibiting of taking hostages when there is no war. Muslims are allowed to capture the enemy only during the war. They are considered POW and they are later used for exchange.
Peace, Edip
CHRIS AND DIANNE Dear Dr. Yuksel,
Please don't take my remarks as hostile. I do not want to get into a debate with you, as clearly, you are much more knowledgeable about the Quran than I am. I am merely trying point out some problem areas that would give non-Muslims concern. Also, I am approaching this from the point of view of the UDHR which you have posted on your 19.org website. (I guess I would have to also include the Fourth Geneva Convention regarding taking of hostages.)
- Unequal treatment of women -- Even if the only issues are inheritance and witnessing, the provisions of the Quran do no provide kind of equal rights and freedoms contemplated by Article 2 of the UDHR. I agree that there is a division of labor between husbands and wives, but without equal rights before law women will always lose out when push comes to shove.
EDIP Again, the Quran does not stop someone from leaving all his/her inheritance to his/her daughter. In fact, the Quran give priority to the will over the Quranic distribution, which is suggested where there is no will. This default distribution system is fair within the context of the Quranic system, in which women are supported by men for their hard work at home in raising children. I personally support the feminist movement in many of their causes, but that does not mean I will accept every assertion or demand suggested under the "feminist" label. I strongly believe that undermining women's importance in raising children and devising laws that create financial support and incentives to promote such a task is harmful to the society.
So, can you please tell me where you find a Quranic rule that would do unjust to women?
CHRIS AND DIANNE 2. Death for apostasy -- My reading of Surah 489 may be different from yours, but this has been used to justify killing apostates. Yes, there are other verses which are more tolerant, but all the militants need is one verse. Apostasy is a capital crime in seven Muslim countries today. This is a violation of Article 18 of the UDHR.
EDIP Like the followers of hadith and sunnah you are taking a verse out of its context and distorting it. I am not talking about an obscure context or another verse far away, just look at the following verse and you will learn that those who might be subject of violence are those who already committed act of violence against muslims.
The verse is about those who joined the enemy rank during a war that was initiated by the enemy. I do not think that UDHR is promoting "turning right cheek" against violent aggressors.
CHRIS AND DIANNE 3. "Battle" against non-Muslims -- Here, again, we are going to disagree, because we would disagree on what constitutes aggression. From the very first successful raid at Nakhlah, God decreed that "persecution is worse than being killed." (Surah 2217) This verse is used by Muslims to justify fighting in retaliation for almost any kind of offence which is considered "repelling from the path of God." In that context, you might be able to say, "Nowhere the Quran asks Muslims to attack non-Muslims because they are not Muslims." But fighting unbelievers (kuffari) commanded by Surah 912, 9123 and elsewhere. The ninth surah was one of the last Surahs revealed. You have substituted some milder words for kuffari, but the fighting is clearly because the enemy doesn't embrace Islam. This is a violation of Article 2 of the UDHR.
EDIP We have two options 1) Consider the book full of contradiction and do not bother to study all its verses on a particular subject. 2) With good faith giving it the benefit of doubt, and study all its rules on a particular topic. As it seems, you are picking the first option.
I too believe that persecution is worse than killing. We should not try to ignore and standby if we find a group of people torturing or imprisoning others just because of the difference in their opinion. We should do our best to save them from the oppressors. If you check our translation and the references in the footnote, you will find that your accusation has no merit.
CHRIS AND DIANNE 4. Racial Hatred -- While we agree that certain animals were despised both in the of the Bible and the Quran, it is only the Quran that specifically connects them with Jews, as in Surahs 560 and 7166. The Quran had unkind things to say about some Arabs, too, in 997. Again, this violates Article 2 of the UDHR.
EDIP This is another classic example of reading a book with kaleidoscope. How in the world, you think that Muhammad, an Arab, himself would promote racial hatred against Arabs. How in the world, stating that "some Arabs who are doing this are bad and some who are doing that are good" can be considered a racist remark? How can you consider Quran promoting racial hatred against Jews, while the same Quran lists many of the Jewish prophets as role models? In fact, praises Jews in many verses. The Quran is not condemning a PARTICULAR Jewish or Arabic group because of their race, but because of the ACTIONS. Not to see these important distinctions shows a blinding prejudice on your part. It is a mystery to me that you ignore all the verses reminding us that we are all children of Adam that there is no superiority of one race above another. Pleas read verses 4913 and 3020-22.
CHRIS AND DIANNE 5. Taking of hostages -- During Mohammed's time hostages were taken from the very beginning, at Nakhlah, and then in most of the other raids. Often the men were killed, and the women and children were held for ransom or kept as slaves. The most recent example of this was in Afghanistan where the Taliban took 23 South Korean aid workers, killed two men, and held the rest for ransom. Surah 47.4 specifically ordains holding captives for ransom, a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, article 3 (b) which forbids taking of hostages. Your translation of Surah 870 uses the word "prisoners," but they were not prisoners of war to be returned after the fighting. They were part of the spoils, and Mohammed received his 20% share of not only the goods, but also the captives -- including some of his wives or concubines -- Rayhana, Juwayriyya, and Safiyya.
EDIP You know that I do not trust those books of stories. I bet you do not trust them either. Thus, you cannot pick and chose from them.
As for 474, it provides two options freeing them for nothing, or get ransom from the aggressive party, UNTIL THE WAR ENDS. When the war ends, the prisoners are exchanged. Obviously, the verse is NOT about hostages, but about those who were in war against a peaceful community who left their hometown and sought refuge in another land.
As for 870, again the problem is in your kaleidoscope. You are making up a false context for a verse that is SANDWICHED between 867 and 872. So those verses clearly put the 870 in the context of an ongoing war. So, the Quran does not justify "taking hostages" as you claim.
As for wives and concubines, I have more than enough reason not to believe those stories about Muhammad's life. As I argued from the Quran, islam rejects slavery and considers it as the biggest violation against God, since making another human being a slave is the zenith of arrogance as Pharaoh has done. (See 7924; 9013; 1239-42; 425). You will find my reasons discussed in numerous pages of the Reformist Translation.
CHRIS AND DIANNE There was a time in the West when Islam was just another religion practiced by people who lived far away or who were a numerically insignificant minority in Western countries. People in the West were accommodating, tolerant, and neutral regarding the tenants of the faith. People had only a cursory interest in Islam, or Hinduism, or Buddhism. I don't say these things to belittle any of these beliefs, but to point out that little attention was paid to what people of those faiths believed because they didn't effect people in the West.
All that changed with the Munich Olympics hostage crisis in 1972, the hostage crisis in Iran, and then the attacks six years ago.
EDIP Well, I find this ONE SIDED preaching appalling my friend. Before 1972 and since, the number of civilians, children, men and women, killed by the WESTERN world are in MILLIONS. You go back to 1972 for the death of 11 innocent Israeli athletes but you tend to ignore the tens of thousands of Muslims killed by the western world, directly or indirectly by the support of many Christians. If violence is our biggest problem, then we should focus much more attention on the WEST, my dear friend. Just look at Iraq!
I will not let any a Westerner preach me about peace and non-violence if that person does not preach ten times to the Western world about their violence. I hope that you are an anti-war activist and you do indeed condemn the Western imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism.
CHRIS AND DIANNE People are investing time and effort to understand what Islam is all about, why some of them engage in heinous acts, and to try to figure out who are the "good Muslims" and who are the "bad Muslims." People are coming to realize that some Muslims can make statements that are demonstrably false, but in their minds the statements are somehow true. Most people in the West value intellectual honesty -- where truth is truth, even if it is unpleasant or shameful. (Larry Craig would be an exception.)
EDIP Watching the American media, I came to just the opposite conclusion. Western world is much sophisticated in hiding its atrocities and barbarism, which is 666 times more than Muslims. It was not Muslims that terrorized and destroyed two cities with its entire population by atomic bombs. It was not Muslims that killed millions in Philippines, Korea, and Vietnam. It was not Muslims that supported Pinochet, Shah, Marcos, Sharon and many other butchers. It was not Muslims that produced Hitler and his supporters.... The list is long...
Please read the last sections of the Manifesto for Islamic Reform. There you will see my position.
CHRIS AND DIANNE That is probably why you and I will disagree about certain interpretations of the Quran. You know the Arabic, but I know what some Muslims are actually doing and justifying by verses in the Quran. Like it or not, there is today a certain consistency between "words" and "actions." That will be the biggest challenge in disseminating your Reformist Translation, popularizing new "words" and ensuring that the "actions" are consistent with those "words."
Best wishes, Chris Chrisman
EDIP The reform that I am promoting will have little chance to succeed my dear friend if the WEST, with all its military and financial might, with its infinite greed, commits all kinds of atrocities in Muslim land. Muslims are not invading the lands of Christians. It is the Christendom that is doing that. Sure, Christians got smarter. They are now doing the killing and torturing by their VOTES. They vote for Bushco so that there will be jobs for the 40 million Americans who are making living on Weapon Industrial Complex, which is why the USA is the number one killing machine and merchant of death in the world.
As long as you ignore the barbarism of the Western world, and as long as you put them in a high pedestal because they produced UDHR or Geneva Convention, which are ignored at will, you will be supporting the violent elements in Muslim world.
Peace, Edip
-
-
Excellent! bravo
Peace
-
Edip,
When are you planning to update your webiste http//islamicreform.org/category/the-quran-a-reformist-translation/ ?Peace
-
Salaam Edip,
While I applaud your responses to this Chris person, I for one would have left it alone after your first response to him.
It is painfully obvious that he is a 'typical' westerner who holds the UDHR above and beyond not only the quran but quite possibly the idea of revelation and divinescripture in general. His mind is already made up as to what he will accept and what he will reject and his point of reference is what has been written and compiled by men in the form of UDHR.
He obviously relies strictly on translations and what has been taught and continues to be taught by traditional muslims. He cannot and will not seek to understand the quran based on it's own merits and internal systems of clarification.
Instead of judging the quran by it's own merits, he prefers that YOU as a translator of the quran will be willing to bend and twist it to suit his whims and what is considered by man to be the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. He reveals his true colors in his initial letter to you as well as his reaction to your responses to him. In the end Edip you must learn to let people be who they are determined to be and do what they are determined to do. Only GOD can guide. At the end be content in knowing that not everybody is going to believe in the quran no matter how great a translation you or anyone else may present to people. Unto them their way and unto me my way. GOD Will judge us all in the end.
SAY "O YOU unbelievers,
2. I do not worship/serve what you worship/serve,
3 Nor do you worship/serve who I worship/serve,
4. Nor will I worship/serve what you worship/serve,
5. Nor will you worship/serve who I worship/serve
6. To you your way, to me my waySalaam 'Aleikum,
Damon. -
Does this "Chris" also go by the name of "Iris89"? ;D
-
peace all
Thanks for the post Edip
I just wanted to ask you all something while i'm here,
Can you have Muslim Christians???
What i mean is that in 385 it is said that "And whoever follows other than surrender as a system, it will not be accepted from him, and in the Hereafter he is of the losers."
but in 569 it is said that
?Those who believe, and those who are Jewish, and the Sabiens, and the Nazarenes; whoever of them believes in God and the Last Day and does good works, then they will have nothing to fear nor will they grieve.?So are those who are jewish, sabiens and so on actually following the deen of Islam. Does this mean that jewish, sabiens and so on are not deens and that they are sects thus can we conclude that those who are righteous have submited to God and hence they are Muslims but they may have different sects such as Christianity.
Peace,
Nyma -
"So are those who are jewish, sabiens and so on actually following the deen of Islam. Does this mean that jewish, sabiens and so on are not deens and that they are sects thus can we conclude that those who are righteous have submited to God and hence they are Muslims but they may have different sects such as Christianity."
Dear Nyma
According to the Quran, islam, submission to God in peace, is the only way to salvation. Some specific laws relating to people and some rituals of Islam has changed with time. However, those differences are considered different applications of the same universal principles. See 548.
Peace,
Edip -
CHRIS AND DIANNE Dear Dr. Yuksel,
Please don't take my remarks as hostile. I do not want to get into a debate with you, as clearly, you are much more knowledgeable about the Quran than I am.
In english Clearly I hadn't read the whole book, but I just thought I'd bring up some phantom issues anyway... erm, just to test you. -\ -
Thank you for your encouraging words. But, when I read my article after I post it past midnight, I discovered some grammatical and spelling errors. I made the corrections and I improved a few statements here and there. Unfortunately, I missed the window of opportunity to edit the article (
Peace;
Edip -
Thank you for your encouraging words. But, when I read my article after I post it past midnight, I discovered some grammatical and spelling errors. I made the corrections and I improved a few statements here and there. Unfortunately, I missed the window of opportunity to edit the article (
Peace;
EdipWhat is this beef between you and Harun Yahya?
Not to change the subject, but its something I have been wondering about.
-
Salam Edip,
Perhaps you should have used specific examples to show the atrocities that Christians have committed. This person was definitely living under a rock. From the crusades to Hitler (of course religion isn't mentioned there! ), to all the lives destroyed at the hands of Christians this last century.
-
When was the UDHR ever held up when the situation called for it, any way?
-
Bigmo
There is no beef between me and the so-called playboy Mahdi Adnan Oktar. There are many of his former victims who are in contact with me since from the beginning they know me and my relation with him.
If you are interested in the story, plesae visit
There you will find an English article of mine titled
Harun Yahya or Adnan Oktar The Promised Mahdi?
Peace,
Edip -
Bigmo
There is no beef between me and the so-called playboy Mahdi Adnan Oktar. There are many of his former victims who are in contact with me since from the beginning they know me and my relation with him.
If you are interested in the story, plesae visit
There you will find an English article of mine titled
Harun Yahya or Adnan Oktar The Promised Mahdi?
Peace,
EdipCan you link directly to the article? Are the comments originating on Wordpress true?
-
Harun Yahya or Adnan Oktar The Promised Mahdi?
Adan Oktar, who later started using the nickname Harun Yahya, was my apprentice in mid 1980's. In our first meeting, I was a famous Sunni author and political activist, and he was an unknown Sunni zealot influenced by the books of the Kurdish Mullah, Said Nursi. At that time, my books were making editions after editions and I had hundreds of thousands readers, yet I had no special group of mine. He was not famous then, but he had a few dozen followers among university students. He was in his late twenties, a college drop-out, unemployed, and was living with his mother in an apartment located in a middle class neighborhood at Ortakoy, Istanbul. He had a long black beard, soft voice, smiling face, childish jokes, and most importantly a well calculated plan for his assumed mission.
Edip Yuksel
The following article is mostly a personal criticism of a public figure. However, I am not committing the logical fallacy known as ad hominem, since the attack is relevant to the argument and is justified. After reading the article, you will decide it for yourself.
Adan Oktar, who later started using the nickname Harun Yahya, was my apprentice in mid 1980's. In our first meeting, I was a famous Sunni author and political activist, and he was an unknown Sunni zealot influenced by the books of the Kurdish Mullah, Said Nursi. At that time, my books were making editions after editions and I had hundreds of thousands readers, yet I had no special group of mine. He was not famous then, but he had a few dozen followers among university students. He was in his late twenties, a college drop-out, unemployed, and was living with his mother in an apartment located in a middle class neighborhood at Ortakoy, Istanbul. He had a long black beard, soft voice, smiling face, childish jokes, and most importantly a well calculated plan for his assumed mission.
Adnan was mixing mysticism with scientific rhetoric and presenting it gently and in a modern fashion to the children of the privileged class, without intimidating them. He was a refined and urbanized version of Said Nursi. Ironically, unlike beardless Said, he was fond of his well-groomed stylish beard. (Religious clerics, on the other hand, managed to grow ugly-looking beards by cutting their moustache short and shaving their hair, resembling Franciscan monks). This proved to be a magic solution. He would always keep a certain distance between himself and his followers and would treat them as if they were his children, though he was only seven or ten years older than them. He would pat the heads of his young pupils and encourage them to work for the mission and they would accept this charming and patronizing treatment with delight. He was targeting the university students and especially the handsome children of the rich and affluent. They would pull each other to the circle.
Meanwhile, when I was doing my mandatory military service in Samsun in 1986, I started communicating with Rashad Khalifa. After several rounds of hot snail-mail discussions and upon reading his landmark book, Quran, Hadith, and Islam, I decided to dedicate my religion to God alone. I shared my newly discovered faith with my close friends, including Adnan Oktar. He was very receptive. He would frequently ask me questions and convey the information to his followers. He was trying his best to keep our meetings secret from his followers. Then I did not know the reason, and I did not care much. I thought he was considering my style too bold and my culture too rural. He was right when discussing political or religious issues, I did not care much about people's cloths, wealth, or their personal feelings. But in retrospect I know the real reason behind this secrecy he was thinking that my presence would jeopardize his charisma and dilute his influence over them. He wanted his followers to think that he was receiving a special information or inspiration from God. He did not know Arabic but he was clever enough to dupe the unquestioning gullible followers and give them the impression that he knew a lot. He was considering me as a potential rival in his mission.
To my dismay, later I discovered that his interest in the message was not prompted by his philosophical quest for truth but by his pragmatic strategy for his political ambitions. He thought that he could use it easily to attract the children of the rich people who had modern life style and culture that was incompatible with the medieval Arab culture which was promoted by the teachings of Hadith and Sunna. He was extremely obsessed with recruiting the handsome children of the rich people wearing expensive cloths. He was not interested in guiding poor people.
After discovering his intention and his deep belief that he was the promised MAHDI, I cut my relationship with him in 1988. Soon after this, he turned back to his Sunni roots and market. To expose his real face, I had secretly recorded one of my last conversations with him, but later I gave up releasing it. I just did not feel comfortable with the secrecy of my act. I had given the tape to Mustafa and Yelda Sahin, two of his former followers. However, after I was forced to immigrate and start a new life in America, I learned that the tape was handed to Girisim, an Islamist magazine directed by Mehmet Metiner. The magazine published the transcript to warn Sunni Muslims against Adnan's Machiavellian politics. In the taped conversation I was reprimanding him for cooperating with Sheikh Nazim of Cyprus who had influence among some wealthy British Muslims. He was apologetic and was justifying his relationship for purposes of using Nazim's influence. I warned him against for such tactics, since I always believed that honesty is a necessary characteristic of being a Muslim. The transcript of this conversation is available on the Internet and was also posted in Turkish forum of www.19.org or at http//www.kurannesli.org/bilgibankasi/yazi.asp?id=441 A funny portion of the conversation reveals the childish tactics used by Adnan Oktar to recruit members for his cult. In that portion I was criticizing him for preferring the wealthy. (The transcript refers to Adnan Octar with acronym A.H. for Adnan Hoca, pronounced Hodja, meaning religious teacher)
A.H.- For instance we purchase a shirt, paying five times more. When the guys see the shirt they come after us.
E.Y.- Alright, I understand; but a person coming because of a shirt will escape because of another shirt.
A.H.- No, they cannot escape; they cannot escape!
Unveiling Adnan's secret relationship with me and his hypocrisy in his relation with Sunni leaders, in a normal world would mean that he would too be the target of a major attack, threats and excommunication. Surprisingly, despite this scandal, he continued to become a rising star in Sunni market. He was once secretly teaching his followers that Mustafa Kamal Ataturk was the prophesized DAJJAL (deceptor) and later he embraced him for political reasons and declared him a great hero. He is now playing a double game to appease the Turkish oligarchy he is exploiting Ataturk-worship, and to exploit the Muslim market he is indirectly giving the message that Ataturk was a disbeliever. He played the game of double-speak pretty successfully so far. Adnan has danced among many contradictory positions, but the single conviction he has maintained since early 1980s is "Adnan Oktar is the promised MAHDI."
When I was trying to convince him about the message of the Quran Alone he did not insist nor even defended any traditional Sunni precepts, with the exception of hadiths about Mahdi. It amazed me for a short while to see him trying to strike a compromise with me regarding this issue. He wanted me to accept his conversion to the Quran Alone together with his belief about the promised Mahdi. I tried to tell him that the Hadiths about Mahdi were among the most fabricated and unreliable Hadiths, even according to the lousy standards of Hadith experts; they were fabricated by the supporters of Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties to promote the interest of the sultans. To him MAHDI (that is his leadership) was the most important subject. His take on Masons and Zionists is just a strategy to get him an international fame and popularity to finally announce his mission to the world. His cult resembles the modus operandi of Moon or Scientology cult targeting affluent people and exploiting their resources.
We met each other in prison too. In December 3, 1986 I was imprisoned second time for promoting a theocratic revolution in Turkey via the first volume of my best-selling book, Interesting Questions. Though I had written that book before my conversion from Sunni Islam to monotheistic islam, the book was not reflecting my hard core revolutionary ideology; it contained some mild hints and innuendos. But, this was sufficient for the government to imprison me since (unaware of my radical transformation) they were trying to deter me from engaging in open and underground political activities.
I met Adnan in the prison clinic. I was taken there by the doctor who happened to recognize me from my books and conferences; he wanted to save me from the crowded ward which was filled with convicted murderers and burglars. Adnan was there for a different reason, a much different one. He was acting like a paranoid schizophrenic in order to get medical report to dodge the draft. It was ironic, since he was indeed mentally sick; he was a delusional megalomaniac, yet he was cunningly acting for another mental illness. He was successful; he dodged the draft and since then he has been found lacking mental capability to be the subject of criminal law. So, he is getting away with sexual abuses, fraud, libel, blackmailing schemes, and other criminal activities. If Adnan has demonstrated a miracle as a Mahdi, this must be his miracle he is officially insane and criminally teflon!
Though Adnan is a lay person by academic standards, he is a gifted manipulator, a patient and highly skilled team manager he uses various highly efficient psychological devises and marketing gimmicks to depict his image as a divinely ordained leader with a great mission. It would be in the best interest of the na?ve and young pupils to join his cause, since soon he will be ruling the entire world and they would be his lucky and powerful aids. Besides, the cult provides a holy club for the children of the rich and well connected; they also get second-hand girls as a fringe benefit. In turn they lose their freedom and part of their identity; but we know that millions of people are ready to trade those precious rights and values to join a cult or a religious organization. Though the dates for victory he has given have been extended several times, who would not be the secretary or the spoke person of the long-awaited great ruler of the entire world? If it is not in 1999, then the victory would come in 2005, or in 2014.... The Jehovah Witnesses have extended the end of the world several times in a century, and Adnan, as I know him, is no less talented than them. After his death, his followers will have enough experience to keep the enthusiasm of the army of the Mahdi until the end of the world! An army comprising of rich, educated and devoted cult members who are experts in cutting and pasting, clipping and editing, in putting together the plagiarized pieces like a jig saw puzzle, and are generous in presenting them to masses under the name of their leader, yes this army is a powerful force. But, there is always the risk of getting into a holy fight for leadership after the Mahdi.
Adnan's relation with me became the topic of articles and political analyses in Turkish media, books and magazines (for instance, see Ayet ve Slogan by Ru?en ?ak?r, a prominent Turkish journalist), and his frequent turns and twists have been well documented in Turkish media, such as Hurriyet, Milliyet, Radikal, Sabah newspapers. Many of his followers left him with disappointment; but each time a group left him, he was somehow able to maintain his cult by attracting fresh blood from gullible youth ready to become the future rulers of the globe as Mahdi's close assistants. His former followers were intimidated and blackmailed in sophisticated ways and occasionally in Mafia style. They work like a professional intelligence agency with covert operations and misinformation campaigns. Their habit of getting what they want via blackmail, slander and libel put them in trouble with high ranking Turkish politicians several years ago. As I said above, Adnan showed his miracle his medical report regarding his mental illness not only saved him from mandatory military service but also from the criminal prosecutions.
Adnan is not formally educated, neither in science nor in religion, and he is not capable to understand the depth of subjects that are presented in books and videos carrying his nick name. Therefore, you never see him in public debating with experts. A single public discussion on a TV channel would be enough to turn him to the proverbial Naked King. And he may consider this article as my challenge for him I am ready to meet him in a live debate on TV.
Adnan uses proxies and gets credit for everything. He uses his medical report and gets away for any criminal charge. There are a lot to learn from Adnan Oktar or the exploiter of the names of two messengers of God, Harun and Yahya! His followers, mostly educated and rich, yet gullible youngsters, work day and night to prepare books and videos mostly plagiarized from works of western scientists and artists. In the end, those collaborative and plagiarized works are all together credited to Harun Yahya. Thus, Harun Yahya is a brand name, an artificial name aimed to boost the personal agenda of Adnan Oktar. For instance, in 1990's many of the books credited to him were written by his former follower Metin Kimildar who also used the nick name Cavit Yal?in. (Where are you Cavit Yal?in now?! Are you now renting your nick name as a portal for Harun Yahya's websites or is it taken away from you?). His former student MA, who has long time declared his freedom from the Adnan Oktar wrote most of the books on Evolution. Unfortunately, MA's books are published under the pen name Harun Yahya and credited to Adnan Oktar. Like many of Adnan's former students who know well the dirty tricks of their former master, MA too is trying to forget the days when he was a young and naive university student.
Adnan Oktar strongly believes that he is the MAHDI (the Sunni and Shiite imitation of Messiah) and he has a powerful charisma, the pool of unlimited gullible rich people and a market of more than a billion individuals easily impressed by the work of his followers.
Knowing him before 1990s, I could not believe that he would be indulging in promiscuous sexual activities, since at that time he was a devout Sunni who was very scrupulous about interacting with women. He would not even shake hands with women. However, according to the media reports and published confessions of his former followers, Adnan has evolved and transformed since. His sexual abuse of girls around him has been the frequent topic of Turkish media and acknowledged by the defectors. He reportedly claims right to have sexual intercourse with every female member of his cult. He has even invented a name for those females MOTOR (engine). Reportedly, his male followers are feeling lucky in letting him taste their girl friends first.
For recruiting new members and promoting his brand name, he uses sex, money, popular symbols, and famous people. But the main tool he uses is deception, yet I think he does the deception "righteously", that is for a good end! He justifies his deceptive propaganda by the abused Quranic word TAQIYYA (this holy hypocrisy is a part of belief system of Shiite sect!) After learning Rashad's claim of messengership and his argument regarding the definition of Rasul and Nabi, Adnan assumed to be a messenger and expressed this belief to his closest circle. I think later, to be able to access the one-billion-head Muslim market, he went back to his original claim of MAHDI. There he could exploit to the bone. (But, his picking Harun Yahya as his nickname indicates his deep belief in his messengership. Why? Well, here is a clue because of his ignorance of the Quran, he thinks that Harun was not given any book, so according to him Harun was a messenger but not a prophet!)
It is a shame to see modern Muslims are duped by this cult leader like their ancestors duped by Ebu Hurayra and the ilk, and it is a shame that the books and videos falsely attributed to him are so popular in Muslim bookstores like the hadith books falsely attributed to Muhammad are so popular. These books and videos are mostly plagiarized collections of western work that mixes truth with falsehood. Science is mixed with pseudo-science, such as ignorant criticisms of the theory of evolution. The message of the Quran is mixed with fabricated hadith, such as the identity and adventures of the Mahdi.
Knowing the history and the success of many delusional people among the gullible, the popularity and success of this man is no surprise.
(The Turkish version of this article is available at http//19.org/index.php?id=66,193,0,0,1,0 )
PS Adnan Oktar has sued me in a Turkish court for defamation. Through his attorneys he asked me to delete this article from the world of Internet. I rejected his request, since I can prove every claim in this article through media and live witness testimony.
-
Interesting. However there seems to be an inclination on your part that YOUR Islam is correct and others are not. YOUR Islam is monotheist while Sunnis are not. If this is unable to sell itself in this humble forum, how can it do so in the wider Muslim world and non Muslim world.
The Koran should be a uniter, and not a divider. The hadith has divided the Ummah into sects, we don't want to see the same happening with the Koran. To each is his own, If God accepts the Jew and Christian so long as they are monotheist and doers of godd and believers of a purpose for creation, why can't he accepts Sunnis or Shias?
This is why I told some people here, the thing i fear the most is this monotheism and shirk business. Once you only accept a certain definition of monotheism and equate anything else as shirk, as the wahhabis done, then there is no way you can be a unifier. Shirk nullifies the other's faith. I have always said this, its not the salaat and haj and qibla thats going to bring destruction on the body of believers, its the narrowing down of this definition of monothesim and accusing others of shirk. So much so that some now have started calling themselves God aloners as if the others are not God followers.
Shirk is believing in other deities, it has nothing to do with ka'aba or tawassul or visiting shrines or superstition and using the prophet in the shahada or claiming he will intercede for us.
As i said before
Those who accuse others of abandoning the Koran and following conjectures and applying Zoraostrian and pagan rituals and following shirk are the same ones when asked a few questions have no answers. Yet they expect people to accept their way of thinking. Just any question about basic things like salaat and haj and ramadan and you will have ten different answers.
Then you have those who accuse others of abandoning and disobeying the prophet and deviating from the path and rejecting the consensus of the Ummah and have apostated from Islam yet are never able to come up with any evidence from the Koran to support their claims and accusations. They will say the ummah unanimously agreed on the 5 prayer rituals yet they can not count on the Koran to support this unanimity of theirs. How can there be a unanimity in Islam without the koran voting for it? confused
-
Interesting. However there seems to be an inclination on your part that YOUR Islam is correct and others are not. YOUR Islam is monotheist while Sunnis are not. If this is unable to sell itself in this humble forum, how can it do so in the wider Muslim world and non Muslim world.
The Koran should be a uniter, and not a divider. The hadith has divided the Ummah into sects, we don't want to see the same happening with the Koran. To each is his own, If God accepts the Jew and Christian so long as they are monotheist and doers of godd and believers of a purpose for creation, why can't he accepts Sunnis or Shias?
This is why I told some people here, the thing i fear the most is this monotheism and shirk business. Once you only accept a certain definition of monotheism and equate anything else as shirk, as the wahhabis done, then there is no way you can be a unifier. Shirk nullifies the other's faith. I have always said this, its not the salaat and haj and qibla thats going to bring destruction on the body of believers, its the narrowing down of this definition of monothesim and accusing others of shirk. So much so that some now have started calling themselves God aloners as if the others are not God followers.
Shirk is believing in other deities, it has nothing to do with ka'aba or tawassul or visiting shrines or superstition and using the prophet in the shahada or claiming he will intercede for us.
As i said before
Those who accuse others of abandoning the Koran and following conjectures and applying Zoraostrian and pagan rituals and following shirk are the same ones when asked a few questions have no answers. Yet they expect people to accept their way of thinking. Just any question about basic things like salaat and haj and ramadan and you will have ten different answers.
Then you have those who accuse others of abandoning and disobeying the prophet and deviating from the path and rejecting the consensus of the Ummah and have apostated from Islam yet are never able to come up with any evidence from the Koran to support their claims and accusations. They will say the ummah unanimously agreed on the 5 prayer rituals yet they can not count on the Koran to support this unanimity of theirs. How can there be a unanimity in Islam without the koran voting for it? confused
Its tough when both sides think their way is better -\
-
Interesting. However there seems to be an inclination on your part that YOUR Islam is correct and others are not. YOUR Islam is monotheist while Sunnis are not. If this is unable to sell itself in this humble forum, how can it do so in the wider Muslim world and non Muslim world.
The Koran should be a uniter, and not a divider. The hadith has divided the Ummah into sects, we don't want to see the same happening with the Koran. To each is his own, If God accepts the Jew and Christian so long as they are monotheist and doers of godd and believers of a purpose for creation, why can't he accepts Sunnis or Shias?
This is why I told some people here, the thing i fear the most is this monotheism and shirk business. Once you only accept a certain definition of monotheism and equate anything else as shirk, as the wahhabis done, then there is no way you can be a unifier. Shirk nullifies the other's faith. I have always said this, its not the salaat and haj and qibla thats going to bring destruction on the body of believers, its the narrowing down of this definition of monothesim and accusing others of shirk. So much so that some now have started calling themselves God aloners as if the others are not God followers.
Shirk is believing in other deities, it has nothing to do with ka'aba or tawassul or visiting shrines or superstition and using the prophet in the shahada or claiming he will intercede for us.
As i said before
Those who accuse others of abandoning the Koran and following conjectures and applying Zoraostrian and pagan rituals and following shirk are the same ones when asked a few questions have no answers. Yet they expect people to accept their way of thinking. Just any question about basic things like salaat and haj and ramadan and you will have ten different answers.
Then you have those who accuse others of abandoning and disobeying the prophet and deviating from the path and rejecting the consensus of the Ummah and have apostated from Islam yet are never able to come up with any evidence from the Koran to support their claims and accusations. They will say the ummah unanimously agreed on the 5 prayer rituals yet they can not count on the Koran to support this unanimity of theirs. How can there be a unanimity in Islam without the koran voting for it? confused
Correct. Anyone who believes in one God and nothing else equal to that one God is a monotheist, period. But the shahadah has been attributed to hypocrites in the Quran (631).