What's new

Secularism: Another face of Masonic Lodges? PART I

Spring Onion

PDF VETERAN
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
41,403
Reaction score
19
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Secularism: Another face of Masonic Lodges?

PART I


By:Naveed Tajammal

To understand the implications of secularism, if ever implemented in Pakistan and it’s results, the best analogy can be of the Turkish Ottoman empire (Osmanli). As presently, most of our modern intellectuals are influenced by secularist thoughts. The result, no doubt of studies and findings written by a western mind, which has absolutely no grasp of issue at hand. By this, I also mean our own people, who think as per the perceptions of the alien, yet remain Pakistanis, by virtue of a citizenship. It is their schooling and lack of in depth study which leads them astray, as I have repeatedly written, that, the change of educational pattern has been the root cause of our intellectual decline. An almost similar phenomenon was found in the Turkish Empire too.

A study of history or a past, lays bare the mistake of others, a rational mind must study and analyze these faults, and try and steer himself of similar problems and, voice them for an inbuilt dangers, it brings, to an old historically established entity, with it’s culture, custom, traditions and language. All, totally battered, yet the spark still remaining which can be rekindled. Hence this discourse, or article.

To give an insight on the Turkish dichotomy, in all aspects especially after the, “Tanzimat “edicts of 1839 and 1856, I will extensively quote from the little remaining works of ,”ZIYA GOKLAP”, also known as Zia Keuk Alp, a Turkish writer(1876-1924),the recurrent theme in his writings, was the question of how, the Turks should adopt the western civilization, and how this effort should be harmonized with the Turks. That is, the two historic traditions, their Turkish, and Islamic backgrounds, or in other words, what the Turk as a nation and Islam as their religion would look under the condition of contemporary civilization. Goklap, was not the only one, who had raised this issue, others too had anticipated or influenced him. Although, he had died in the early phase of Mustafa Kamal’s drastic reforms, from which the Turk is still reeling from and slowly, reverting back to his roots(Islamic).Which shows, that in the end, you cannot impose, “ideas” which have no bearing on a nation which has old foundations/roots and a past history, infusion of new races is, but, a process, but as long as the base of the pyramid remains and retains a dim memory and still retains it’s old language, a revival can always take place.


A nation devoid of roots, is like a ship without a rudder, to steer it in the high seas, which being uncharted too. It is thus, the job of a writer, to show his reader a path or give some directions and then, leave it to them, to decide to adopt it, or not, as they deem it proper.

Mustafa Kamal’s extreme and drastic secularism cost the Turk his true identity ,and he lost his roots, his dress and insignia, but the laws of Allah are eternal, you always revert to the original at one epoch of time or the other, under a new leadership and for the better.

Though Ziya, was guilty of adding in the new Constitution, the clause of secularism, as he was the member of a committee which had prepared the new Constitution in 1924. He, for this is held and blamed by the critics for Turkey’s political misfortunes. The bulk of Zia’s work suffered and were lost as, the root was a change of script to the Roman mode of alphabet, a process started later, after the death of Zia by Mustafa Kamal and Ismet Pasha.

We too, today find ourselves on the crossroads, our intellectual harps and argues for the western mode of education, the funds are unlimited and by now, we have people trained to implement these policies, a major effort and implementation has already been done in guise of modernization and rooting out the mode of Urdu medium education is on the anvil to be hammered into oblivion. By assent of powerful people, clueless of our past.

In the Turkish history, in the mid 19Th century when Freemasons were taking roots, our lands were being annexed by the British and, we were to face a despotic English Rule for another 100 years. Freemasons cultivated and launched Mustafa Kamal Pasha to secularise Turkey. A rule which ransacked and destroyed our society and has made and left us with many a breaches or divides in our nation. By leaving open the Pandora’s box filled with creations of the British Policies which unfortunately, we still, unwittingly adhere to.

The Turkish intelligentsia, was beset with European ideas as they strove for a change, for the sake of change, hence developed various pressure groups with vested interests as will be explained in the subsequent articles, which forced, “The Sultans”, to bring changes but here it should be borne in mind that it was not the actual Turk, who was actually clamoring for the change, but various alien races which then composed more than half the population of the Turkish Empire ,led by various schools of thoughts with different ethnic backgrounds and religions too. So attempts with the help of the then super powers were started, to reorganize the political, legal and administrative structure of the Turkish Empire.

To understand the background of this agitation, termed as “Tanzeemats”, or reforms, one must first understand the composition of the Turkish Empire. At the start of the 1900s, the Osmanli Turks numbered only ten million out of which one and a half million lived in the western lands i.e. the Balkans, the Arabs numbered seven million and three hundred thousand were Jews.

The rest of the population was composed of various Aryan races, the Slavs, Serbs, Bulgarians, Pomaks and Cossacks, Greeks, Albanians and the Kurd who were Muslims. Muslims in the Empire in the above mentioned time were just 50% and the rest 41% were Greek Orthodox Christians, 6% were Catholic Christians and the rest 3% were jews, Druses, Nestorians etc. In the European provinces, two third of population were Christians, and only one third were Muslims. The total population of the Turkish Empire in 1910,including Egypt and other regions nominally under the Sultan’s sovereignty was 36,323,539.Averaging 25 to the square mile in the Wilayats (Provinces), however, directly under the Turkish Government were only almost 26 million people.

In view of the above, to understand the secular movement as stated earlier, one has to understand the pressure groups, by virtue of which, the population of various cities then was, Istambul (1,150,000),Izmir (250,000),Baghdad (145,000),Damascus (145,000), Alleppo (122,000),Beirut (118,000), Adrianople (81,000), Brusa (76,000), Jerusalem (56,000), Kaisarieh (72,000), Karbala (65,000), Monastir (53000), Mosul (61000), Macca (60000), Homs (60000), Sana(58000). These were the cities with above 50000 population. In the first decade of the 20th century the possessions of the Sultan in Europe were stretching continously across the Balkan Peninsula from the Bosphorus to the Adriaticc lying on the East mainly between 40 degree and 42 degree and in the West between 39 degree and 43 degree north. It corrosponded roughly to the ancient, Thrace, Macedonia with Chalcidice, Epirus and a large part of Illyria which construed the administrative divisions of Istambul or the previous HeadQuarters of the Eastern Byzantine Empire of the Romans.


However, in December 1898,Crete was granted independence under the protection of none other but Britian,France,Italy and not to miss Russia the old foe of the Turks.In fact these were the outer pressure groups which were instigating and had also instigated and forced the then Sultan fifty years back when the reforms were first announced. Egypt,though still, nominally,under the Turkish Empire was almost independent since 1841 and the British had become it’s big brother since 1881. Hence the independence of the egyptians from the Turkish Empire was no independence at all as they had gone from a muslim rule,under the Sultan, to the Christians,under the British. In Africa,the two remaining main cities were Tripoli and Ben Ghazi. So we see the reforms which were the forerunner of the eventual secularism had started almost 75 years before the clause of secularism as it was, inserted in the Constitution of the Turks. The bulk of the cities above quoted had the population of various sects of Christians which were the standard bearers of the eventual turn of the events.

(The author is a historian. He is researching in history for over 26 years.His area of focus is Indus Basin and the Muslim History ).

Secularism: Another face of Masonic Lodges? PART I | Farzana Shah
 
Sounds like a hack who's mad that Turkey's a secular republic and not an Islamic Republic like the rest of the Muslim world.

Most annoying is these people claiming Turkey and the Ottoman Empire are one and they same implicitly. They were and are not. Turkey today is more powerful economically and technologically than the Ottomans ever were yet people still find ways to bash it.

Saying the Ottomans fell because they weren't Islamic enough is like saying the British Empire collapsed because they weren't Christian enough. It makes no sense and is only believed by extremists or hacks. The end game of any colonial empire is collapse.
 
Sounds like a hack who's mad that Turkey's a secular republic and not an Islamic Republic like the rest of the Muslim world.

Most annoying is these people claiming Turkey and the Ottoman Empire are one and they same implicitly. They were and are not. Turkey today is more powerful economically and technologically than the Ottomans ever were yet people still find ways to bash it.

Saying the Ottomans fell because they weren't Islamic enough is like saying the British Empire collapsed because they weren't Christian enough. It makes no sense and is only believed by extremists or hacks. The end game of any colonial empire is collapse.


The author is not commenting upon the fall of ottoman empire due to secularism rather he is narrating historical prospective of movements and reasons for secular tendency .
 
tactical_facepalm.jpg
 
dark first read and then comment otherwise dont pain yourself without knowing what has been discussed in the write up.

Read what? Another conspiracy crap & a free mason demonology who is seeing Secularism as a Grand Masonic Conspiracy? I don't know why people are so insecure about secularism when the very fact is that Muslims around the world enjoy all rights in the world under a secular government...
 
Read what? Another conspiracy crap & a free mason demonology who is seeing Secularism as a Grand Masonic Conspiracy? I don't know why people are so insecure about secularism when the very fact is that Muslims around the world enjoy all rights in the world under a secular government...

I would suggest again first read and then speak. Otherwise dont take pain to post crap
 
Last edited:
I would suggest again first read and the speak. Otherwise dont take pain to post crap

The point remains, you took some pain for copy pasting it form your site & as usual you are seeing a grand Masonic conspiracy in Secularism, I am not saying anything crap its you, the first Para shows the writer is seriously worked up with idea of secularism & in the end Freemasons cultivated and launched Mustafa Kamal Pasha to secularise Turkey. huH!

its funny how worked up you are with simple conspiracy theories, I think Turkish members can tell you a lot better how happy they are with Secularism which has made Turkey a progressive state not a rag tag third world Arab Monarch or a miserable Pakistan
 
Last edited:
The author is not commenting upon the fall of ottoman empire due to secularism rather he is narrating historical prospective of movements and reasons for secular tendency .

That's because his writing style is obtuse and he is indirect rather than stating what he honestly feels.

He claims that Mustafa Kemal has made Turkey forget its heritage and the reason Turkey is secular is because of imported Western values. This is wrong. Did Kamal go to school in the West? Did he have any Western friends? Did he have any Western influence at all besides fighting the West? No, no, no. Just imagine how ridiculous it would sound if you said Mao and Stalin were "alien races" "beset with European ideas" and "cost the x their true identity" etc., because they were extremely secular. Kemal was true Turkish 100%. The idea that secularism arose from a purely Turkish source is inconceivable to him.

Nevermind any real historian would not make value judgments such as Turkey returning to Allah is for the better and people are clueless of the past. Maybe he doesn't like Turkish girls walking around with open bellies and jeans.
 
Sounds like a hack who's mad that Turkey's a secular republic and not an Islamic Republic like the rest of the Muslim world.

Most annoying is these people claiming Turkey and the Ottoman Empire are one and they same implicitly. They were and are not. Turkey today is more powerful economically and technologically than the Ottomans ever were yet people still find ways to bash it.

Saying the Ottomans fell because they weren't Islamic enough is like saying the British Empire collapsed because they weren't Christian enough. It makes no sense and is only believed by extremists or hacks. The end game of any colonial empire is collapse.

Quoted for truth.

Interestingly too, since the author wishes to rubbish secularism as something "alien" to his own people then surely, given that he is a Pakistani, he should by the same token rubbish as "alien" to his part of the World the two ‘western’ concepts upon which his very own country was based on and which allowed it to even come into existence; nationalism and self-determination. Both of which are as "western" as is secularism, yet two concepts which Pakistan owes its existence and articulation to.

So this person has no right at all to bash Turkey for something that applies just as much as, actually even more so, to his own country, and to his own identity as a "Pakistani". An identity and a country that could not have been possible without “western” political and philosophical discourse, and direct “western” (read British) backing.

(The author is a historian. He is researching in history for over 26 years.His area of focus is Indus Basin and the Muslim History ).

After 26 years of “researching history” this article is what he produces? That’s terrible…
 
There really needs to be a rule on this board about conspiracy theories. Secularism is the way to go imo. Just look into the progression of secular nations.

& compare it with the God's Islamic countries, the difference will be evident BUT hey no lets still delude ourselves & believe that its all a BIG CONSPIRACY, did Ataturk used to twist his fingers? If yes then he was a Satanic Mason but don't tell any one I am also a satanist, Satan visits me regularly

The amalgamation of state & religion is equivalent to disaster, there are living examples of this, when ever a progressive state's Gov is integrated with religion the result has been disastrous & that country has gone from progressive nation to dark depths of bigotry, hate, intolerance & delusion. The day the Zia mixed both entities was the day Pakistan pushed itself off the cliff & the situation right now is that every freaking person in our country sees things from a lens of religion & there's a Infidel conspiring every where, the end result is we don't even know what we are & where are going & we are in now in pit of endless misery but, no, this nation won't leave aside its delusions after its all a conspiracy!
 
That's because his writing style is obtuse and he is indirect rather than stating what he honestly feels.

He claims that Mustafa Kemal has made Turkey forget its heritage and the reason Turkey is secular is because of imported Western values. This is wrong. Did Kamal go to school in the West? Did he have any Western friends? Did he have any Western influence at all besides fighting the West? No, no, no. Just imagine how ridiculous it would sound if you said Mao and Stalin were "alien races" "beset with European ideas" and "cost the x their true identity" etc., because they were extremely secular. Kemal was true Turkish 100%. The idea that secularism arose from a purely Turkish source is inconceivable to him.

Nevermind any real historian would not make value judgments such as Turkey returning to Allah is for the better and people are clueless of the past. Maybe he doesn't like Turkish girls walking around with open bellies and jeans.

He went to Ottoman military school. People think that Ataturk is anti religious but that is completely false the man understands religion and knows where it should be kept and where it shouldn't be integrated into. He saw first hand what happened in the ottoman empire. Some people just can't understand a modern turkey. They think something is wrong with it when it is actually the guys thinking that is completely wrong.

He pretty much summed up all Islamic governments imo in his quotes.

"I have no religion, and at times I wish all religions at the bottom of the sea. He is a weak ruler who needs religion to uphold his government; it is as if he would catch his people in a trap. My people are going to learn the principles of democracy, the dictates of truth and the teachings of science. Superstition must go. Let them worship as they will; every man can follow his own conscience, provided it does not interfere with sane reason or bid him against the liberty of his fellow-men."-Ataturk 1928


"It is claimed that religious unity is also a factor in the formation of nations. Whereas, we see the contrary in the Turkish nation. Turks were a great nation even before they adopted Islam. This religion did not help the Arabs, Iranians, Egyptians and others to unite with Turks to form a nation. Conversely, it weakened the Turks’ national relations; it numbed Turkish national feelings and enthusiasm. This was natural, because Mohammedanism was based on Arab nationalism above all nationalities. " -Ataturk
 
Back
Top Bottom