Jamal al-Afghani and his teachings are one of the main pillars on which modern mass-consumed (by Muslims) Islamic movements are constructed.
While there are those that say whether or not he was a freemason is not relevant to understanding his message, what becomes necessarily relevant is the motivations for his actions and teachings. The Ottomans judged him to be a dangerous munafiq, and essentially held him captive, others heralded him and his students as their saviors.
“He belongs to the select band of men who have wielded the greatest influence on the rising Muslim generations in the modern times” – Nadwi, At-Talib Blog
“Dr. Muhammad ‘Emarah, answered these contentions stating: “Those who question his race and religious orientation would like to, in light of these accusations, establish his dishonesty, for indeed, he has stated about himself that “I am Afghani.” And his words and writings illustrate that he was a sunni. Thus, the objective of behind these accusations is to destroy the man who is cherished by all.” – suhaibwebb.com
“The result was that this school impacted every Islamic reform effort at whose forefront was the Muslim Brotherhood lead by Imam Hassan al-Bana. [May Allah have mercy upon all of them].” – suhaibwebb.com
Whatever his admirers may say, the reality is that questioning his race and religious orientation is a necessary result of reading Afghani’s own words. To understand what he wrote one must first understand the context of the time and audience to which Afghani corresponded.
In the days before mass media and mass literacy in the Middle East, it was generally safe to correspond with high class Europeans and their magazines rather freely. As long as these works were not being translated back to Arabic, there was really no practical chance of one’s words coming back to bite the author. There is also much evidence indicated Jamal ad-Din interrupted numerous translations of his letters back to Arabic in his lifetime.
This was how orientalists such as Johann Ludwig Burckhardt were able to report on Muslim activities while assuming Muslim identities. As time went on and the success of impostors such as Burckhardt and “Ali Bey el Abbasi” gave the West new ways to manipulate and reform the religion. Hence much of ‘revivalist’ thought from Wahabis to the movements supported by al-Afghani’s thought were backed by the West, particularly, Western intellectuals.
The Prophet (S) said “You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit, so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure (lizard) you would follow them.” We said “O Allah’s messenger (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?” He said “Whom else?”
So what did Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani write to the Europeans when he thought no one was ‘listening’? In a series of debates with Renan, Afghanis viewpoints became clear.
“If it is true that the Muslim religion is an obstacle to the development of sciences, can one affirm that this obstacle will not disappear someday? How does the Muslim religion differ on this point from other religions? All religions are intolerant, each one in its way. The Christian religion, I mean the society that follows its inspirations and its teachings and is formed in its image, has emerged from the first period to which I have just alluded; thenceforth free and independent, it seems to advance rapidly on the road of progress and science, whereas Muslim society has not yet freed itself from the tutelage of religion. Realizing, however, that the Christian religion preceded the Muslim religion in the world by many centuries, I cannot keep from hoping that Muhammadan society will succeed someday in breaking its bonds and marching resolutely in the path of civilization after the manner of Western society…No I cannot admit that this hope be denied to Islam.”
“Wherever it has established itself, this religion has tried to stifle science and it has been marvelously served in its aims by despotism”
(“Answer of Jamal al-Din to Renan Journal des Debats, May 18, 1883 in N. R. Keddie, An Islamic Response to Imperialism, p. 183)
Much of this letter speaks for itself. I find the last line most interesting. For all the discussions in the excerpt about religion being an obstacle and an impediment to progress, the article concludes with the hope that western style civilization and abandonment of faith not be ‘denied to Islam’. Through this language, Islam is redefined from a faith to a political movement, just as he redefines Christianity to mean “the society that follows its inspirations and its teachings and is formed in its image”.
And this is how faith began to be separated from the religion.
When Al-Afghani could speak of ‘Islam’ as a society, with a determined focus on rules, laws and ‘advancement’, while being completely separated from matters of spiritual faith itself, the ability to fool Muslims looking for a ’cause’ fell well into his grasp.
However, correspondence with Westerners was not the only means by which Afghani made his intentions clear. Numerous evidences exist of his hostile attitude towards faith and tradition.
Further facts and excerpts:
in 1871 he left Istanbul for Cairo because he was accused of heresy by the Ottomans.
In Egypt, the writer Abbas Mahmud al Aqqad tells us Afghani had a reputation for heresy amongst ‘the divines’.
In Cairo, he mixed with dogma, writes his contemporary Abdull al-Nadim, who was not an enemy
“what gave rise to criticism . . . and some of his disciples became known for their heresy and for their great opposition to religion, either through misunderstanding or perverse teaching, so that many of the believers turned away from him” (ref: Muhammad Ahmad Khalafallah (1956), Abdullah al-Nadim wa mudhakkiratuhu al-siyasiyya (A.N . and his Political Memoirs) p 52, Cairo.
Shaikh Abd al Qadir al-Maghribi recounts a story Afghani used to tell which concerned a believer and an unbeliever. The believer would exhort the unbeliever to pray by telling him:
“Try to pray regularly for forty days, and see whether you can give up prayer afterwards” to which the unbeliever retorted “Give up praying for forty days, and see whether you can ever resume the practice afterwards” – (ref Abd al-Qadir Maghribi (1926), al Bayyinat Vol I, pp 48-49. Cairo)
His friend and protege, Adib Ishaq wrote that Afghani
“He became expert in the study of religion, wrote Selim al-Anhuri, “until this led him to atheism and belief in the eternity of the world. He claimed that vital atoms, found in the atmopshere, formed, by natural evolution the stars which we see and which reolve round one another through magnetism, and that the belief in an all knowing First cause was a natural delusion which arose when man was in a primitive stage of evolution and corresponded with the stage which his intellectual progress had reached”
Sheykh Mustafa Abd al Raziq was to become the head of Al-Azhar in 1945 – 1947. He reported that after his arrival in Paris 1883, Afghani suffered a change in belief:
“(He) Became a rebel against religion, and came to believe it was the enemy of science, reason and civilization so much so that he gladly and deferentially acquiesced in Renan’s attack on Islam” - ref: Rashid Rida (1923), al-Manar vol XXIV, p 311
Finally in private letters between Afghani and his student Abduh, his student writes
“We regulate our conduct according to your sound rule: we do not cut the head of religion except with the sword of religion (nahnu al-an ala sunnatika al qawima la naqta ra’s al-din illa bi-saif al-din) Therefore, if you were to see us now, you would see ascetics and worshippers [of God] kneeling and genuflecting, never disobeying what God commands and doing all that they are ordered to do. Ah! how constricted life would be without hope!” (ref Documents, published: Tehran , Plates 138-140) also (ref: Kedourie (1966), Afghani and Abduh, London).
Now knowing the desire of such individuals in attacking the faith of Islam, using the pretext of Islam, a universe of questions opens up to us.
At a minimum, ‘modern Muslims’ need to ask themselves: to what extent has this corruption and redefinition of social ‘Islam’ entered their own psyche and thought?
The fact that Jamal ad-Din Afghani, who was at least a heretic if not apostate, is a noted influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, Jamaat e Islami, Hizb ut-Tahrir, the Indian Khilafat Movement, and basically every political Islamic reform movement today requires a major reconsideration of the fundamentals of reform itself.
Johann Ludwig Burckhardt fooled Muslims across the lands in his knowledge of the Arabic language and Islamic sciences. He assumed the identity of “Shaikh Ibrahim ibn Abdullah” and traveled across Middle East, even entering Makkah and Medina and performing Hajj, reporting all the details back to his European employer. It was in 1809 that he went to Aleppo Syria to study Arabic and learned Shariah.
During all of this he continued to send reports of his travels to England, to be published by the “African Association”.
By the following spring, in fact, he was able to report to the African Association that “I am now so far advanced in the knowledge of Arabic that I understand almost everything that is said in common conversation and am able to make myself understood on most subjects …” (ref: Saudi Aramco World, Volume 18, Number 5 )
This progress in Arabic and Islamic Law went to higher and higher levels:
Burckhard prompted steeped himself in Arab life and became so proficient in Arabic and the Koran that Islamic scholars proclaimed him an authority on Islamic Law. In 1812 he turned up in Cairo, having adopted the name Sheykh Ibrahim ibn Abdullah (ref: The Rape of the Nile. Fagan, B. pub 2004)
One of his works was about the Wahabis, entitled “Notes on the Beoudins and Wahabys”. What he really thought of Islam was exposed pretty clearly in the following passage. Reading this passage also emphasises the fact that the Wahabis were essentially an anti-Ottoman religious movement.
“The founder of this sect is already known : a learned Arabian named Abd el Wahab, who had visited various schools of the principal cities in the East (as is much the practice with his countrymen even now), being convinced by what he had observed during his travels, that the primitive faith of Islam or Mohammedism, had become totally corrupted, and obscured by abuses, and that the far greater part of the people of the East, and especially the Turks might justly be regarded as heretics. But new doctrine and opinions are as little acceptable in the East as they are in the West ; and no attention was paid to Abd el Wahab until, after long wanderings in Arabia, he retied with his family to Derayeh at the period when Mohammed Ibn Saoud was the principal person of the town..”
He mentioned other betraying munafiqs in his dealings. It is sometimes hard to imagine to what extent outright hypocrisy exists and was proven to exist within the Muslim community. Numerous ayats of the Quran address the aspect of hypocrisy at various levels.
Another famous hypocrite was “Ali Bey el Abbasi”, who Burckhardt speaks about:
“He (the Pasha) entertained a notion, suggested to him by some of his Frank counselors at Cairo, that, in some future account of my travels, I might perhaps boast of having imposed upon him, like Ali Bey el Abbasi, whose work had just been received at Cairo, and who declares that he deceived not only the Pasha, but all the ‘olemas‘ or learned men, of Cairo.
Interestingly enough, his travels and experience gave Burckhardt the context to see what was coming up ahead in history due to the Wahabis and Arab rebellions:
Whenever the power of the Turks in the Hedjaz declines, which it will when the resources of Egypt are no longer directed to that point by so able and so undisturbed a possessor of Egypt as Mohammad Ali, the Arabs will avenge themselves for the submission, light as it is, which they now reluctantly yield to their conquerors; and the reign of the Osmanlis in the Hedjaz will probably terminate in many a scene of bloodshed.
And blood was indeed shed, not just between Turks and Arabs, but Wahabi Arabs slaughtered hundreds of Sunni Arabs in the city of Taif.
Burckhardt’s agenda in this travels was not to change or reform Islam. He knew the futility of reform movements trying to grow under the authority of the Osmanli Khalipha, he was witnessing the Wahabi movement already. Rather, he used his Islam to provide a sympathetic cover identity to allow him to conduct exotic expeditions in areas Europeans previously had never entered.
However, while these people fooled the ‘ulema’, they didn’t fool everyone. One of his simple guides through these lands eventually exclaimed:
“I see now clearly that you are an infidel, who have some particular business amongst the ruins of the city of your forefathers; but depend upon it that we shall not suffer you to take out a single para of all the treasures hidden therein, for they are in our territory, and belong to us,” according to Burckhardt.
Final Thoughts
The basis of Islamic ‘knowledge’ and ‘scholarship’ falls apart when it can exist at the highest levels without sincerity. Sitting in association of people who are learning or teaching ‘knowledge’ who have not one ounce of faith in their heart demonstrates an inherent deficiency in the ‘knowledge’ they are discussing, learning, writing, and memorizing in the first place.
Real knowledge is that which has a fundamental prerequisite of faith and builds faith in the tradition of the Holy Prophet (S). The inheritors of the Prophet (S) are not those who know a worldly science, there are those who know the meaning and power of transmitting faith.
Excerpted from “Pluralism to Seperatism Qasbas in Colonial Awadh”
Mushirul Hasan – Oxford University Press
Born a year before the Indian National Congress’s founding session in December 1885, Wilayat Ali belonged to the Kidwai gentry that trace its descent to a Turkish immigrant, Kidwatuddin, who came to India in the wake of Shahabuddin Ghori’s invasions in 11-91-92 (1). Brother of the sultan of Rum and the kingdom’s qazi, Kidwatuddin’s conflict with the king drove him into exile with his wife and son. He wandered across many lands before coming to the saint of Ajmer, Khwaja Muinuddin Chishti (1142-1236). The Khwaja’s influence won him preferment in the Delhi sultanate. His descendants claimed that Ghori had received him with full honours on the outskirts of Delhi (2). Similar stories lend credence to the belief that he, and adventurer, managed to make his way up the social ladder.
Qazi Kidwa (Kidwai means ‘elevate in Arabic’, as Kidwatuddin had come to be called, led an expedition to Awadh against refractory Bhar chieftens (3). In 1201, he attacked the Bhar Raja of Jagdeopur, the modern Juggaur, seizing a large tract of fifty-two villages that became his jagir. These became known as Qidwara, and Masauli is one of them (4). In the early twentieth century this tiny village had a primary school, but nothing else of any significance (5). Today, it has a Rafi Memorial Junior High School, a railway station called Rafinagar, and an elaborately built mausoleum constructed over Rafi Ahmed Kidwai’s grave. From a few hundred in the early twentieth century, Masauli’s population has increased to approximately 13,000.
Qazi Kidwai reached Ayodhya in 1205. This is when his success story begins. He is said to have converted several Hindu groups to Islam, and settled in a locality later designated as Kidwai Mohalla. He died three years later; his tomb, now destroyed, stood close to Aurangzeb’s mosque. His descendants took advantage of Qazi Kidwai’s reputation, and used his connections to rise to high poisitions in the service of the Delhi Sultans and the Awadh Nawabs. His son, Qazi Azizuddin, married Qazi Fakhrul Islam’s daughter at the court of Qutubuddin Aibak (r. 1206-10). Burried in Satrikh, an area Azaizuddin administered, his tomb still exists in the mango grove known as Qazi Ashraf’s Bagh.
During the reign of Aibak’s successor Iltutmish (r.1211-36), contemporary sources recorded continuous ‘holy wars’ against the refractory tribes, and the overthrow of a chief named Bartu, ‘beneath whose sword about a hundred and twenty thousand Mussalmans had attained martyrdom’ (6). This was roughly the period when the Kidwai Sheykhs of Juggaur began moving into Bara Banki, occupied Dewa and other places in the west and acquired estates. Salar Ahmad’s family of Juggaur, fourth in descent from Qazi Kidwa, acquired the Gadia taluqa in 1843, and later extended its holdings in Dewa, Nawabganj, and Partapganj.
The Kidwais of Juggaur were related to the Jasmara families, who were descendants of Qazi Qeyamudding. Among them Qazi Abdul Malik, Muhammad Hamid, and Fakhrullah figure prominently under the Mughals. Their resilience and staying power was amazing. While many of their fellow taluqdars declined for one reason or the other, the Kidwai Sheykhs of Juggaur managed to retain most of their estates until the abolition of zamindari in free India (8).
(1) According to another version, he was Sultan Mahmud of Ghazna’s contemporary, came to India with one of his contingents, and settled in Ayodhya. A.M. Dariabadi (Aap-biti Lucknow, 1989 p24)
(2) Anis Kidwai, Ghubar-e karawaan p. 29
(3) An ‘aboriginal race’ which at one time dominated the eastern half of Awadh. Their earliest habitat was Bahraich, which is said to owe its name to them. Crooke, Tribes and Castes Vol 2. pp 1-11; Sleeman Journey Through the Kingdom of Oude pp.246-7) According to Faizabad’s district gazetteer, ‘they remained here and there till the days of the Janpur kingdom and then vanished, becoming either Hindus or proselytes to Islam’. H.R. Nevill, Fyzabad: A Gazetteer, Vol xliii (Allahabad, 1928) p 150
(4) Zarina Bhatty, ‘Status and Pwoer in a Muslim Dominated Village of Uttar Pradesh’, Imtiaz Ahmad (ed), Caste and Social Stratification Amoung Muslims in India (New Delhi, 1978) p 212.
(5) DG, Bara Banki 1904 p 231.
(6) ABM Habibullah, The Foudnation of Muslim Rule in India (Allahabad, 1961 2nd rev edn), p 104.
(7) DG, Bara Banki, 1904, p 103.
(8) DG, Bara Banki, 1904, p 155.
After Sultan Mehmed II conquered the territory in 1463, he issued the following firman:
“I, the Sultan Khan the Conqueror,
hereby declare the whole world that,
The Bosnian Franciscans granted with this sultanate firman are under my protection. And I command that:
No one shall disturb or give harm to these people and their churches! They shall live in peace in my state. These people who have become emigrants, shall have security and liberty. They may return to their monasteries which are located in the borders of my state.
No one from my empire notable, viziers, clerks or my maids will break their honour or give any harm to them!
No one shall insult, put in danger or attack these lives, properties, and churches of these people!
Also, what and those these people have brought from their own countries have the same rights…
By declaring this firman, I swear on my sword by the holy name of Allah who has created the ground and sky, Allah’s prophet Mohammed, and 124.000 former prophets that; no one from my citizens will react or behave the opposite of this firman!”
The original edict is still kept in the Franciscan Catholic Monastery in Fojnica. It is one of the oldest documents on religious freedoms. Mehmed II’s oath was entered into force in the Ottoman Empire on May 28, 1463. In 1971, the United Nations published a translation of the document in all the official U.N. languages. -wikipedia
The discussion about the personality of Sultan Selim II goes back centuries, he was most likely the center of discussion even in the period of time in which he lived. This would be understandable, as his father, Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent, would be difficult to surpass in greatness. It was with Sultan Selim that the office of the Sultan became immensely more private and reserved, hence the door to open speculation about his character was also widely opened.
Due to this, we also find with Sultan Selim an obvious departure of what is accepted as ‘history’ by Western students from reality. Once a few facts are examined and logical contradictions are exposed, the propagated history of Sultan Selim II becomes very clearly an invented tale. The extent of this false history is somewhat unbelievable to those who are accustomed to what has been bought as the idea of Western ‘impartiality’ when it comes to news and history. Similarly there is often a negative consideration to those who speak out against what is considered as established fact, left to be called ‘conspiracy theorists’.
Oddly enough for a Muslim community, which some may say loves conspiracies, there has been little or no call to rally around when it comes to a false Ottoman history.
As to why there hasn’t been much opposition, it is not difficult to come to some simple conclusions. The founders of the present secular state of Turkey had little motivation to promote an accurate view of history and sought to separate themselves from the Ottomans as much as possible. With no state backing and really no people identifying themselves with the Sultans in spirit, there has been really no organized state effort to provide even an emotional rebuttal, much less a factual one which requires research as in this post. At the same time the Muslim population which turned away from Islam and abandoned the Caliphate has now revitalized a new anti-historical Islam which avoids Ottoman contributions, and in some cases, even perpetuates these myths.
Further, most people have been cut off from the actual facts since the massive cultural shift from the Caliphate to present day. Not only was the entire Ottoman language obliterated and the script of a new language forced on the population, but even ancient religious traditions such as the Azan (Call to Prayer) were being outlawed in anything other than ‘Turkish’ [1]. Furthermore, for decades, the Ottoman archives were completely sealed shut, leaving only biased 18th century Western documents as sources of Ottoman history.
Sultan Selim II receiving Safavid Ambassador
The Ottomans were notorious record keepers, from the earliest days of the Empire. The Ottoman archives are estimated to hold more than 150 million handwritten documents. Only about a quarter of them are yet classified and computerized. It is estimated that only about 32 million records are currently accessible for researchers [2]. The Turkish state is extremely selective on who gets access and it is monitored carefully, being banned without notice is quite common. The Ottoman archives store treaties, border disputes, inheritance, titles and privileges, trusts, gifts, charitable and religious foundations (vakif), court documents, land deeds, applicable laws, historical demographics, tax, crops, military records, and official correspondence.
Only recently have researchers been given the ability to apply to access even the limited catalogue of the Ottoman Archives. With that in mind, this article will focus largely on accepted Western sources, and primarily Osman’s Dream by Caroline Finkel, one of the few books to use information from the Ottoman Archives in order to give a better picture of Ottoman history. The intention is to contrast this information with what is popularly retold as the biography of Sultan Selim II, largely summarized on Wikipedia as sourced from the Encyclopedia Britannica Eleventh Edition (public domain) and Ottoman Centuries by Patrick Balfour Kinross.
Ottoman Centuries is a particularly dastardly work when it comes to accuracy, being one of the most popular on the subject, yet containing only two pages of a bibliography for covering 700 years of history at 640 pages. Osman’s Dream, a much more scholarly work, has 30 pages of bibliographic references and 37 pages of cited notes for a total of 660 pages.
Kinross’s work, the encyclopedia entries, and nearly all Western books on Sultan Selim II’s personality start by painting a picture of an incompetent drunkard :
After gaining the throne after palace intrigue and fraternal dispute, Selim II became the first Sultan devoid of active military interest and willing to abandon power to his ministers, provided he was left free to pursue his orgies and debauches. Therefore, he became known as Selim the Drunkard or Selim the Sot. His Grand Vizier, Mehmed Sokollu, a Serbian forced-convert from what is now Bosnia and Herzegovina, controlled much of state affairs…[wikipedia]
As is commonly known, alcohol is forbidden in Islam, the professed faith of all Sultans (and by which authority they ruled). The attempt to portray certain Sultans as drunks seems to be rooted in a desire to demonstrate weakness of character and sincerity when it came to the faith of Islam. This accusation is repeated through most Western books regarding the Ottoman empire dated from the 18th century onwards (the Sultan ruled in the 16th century) however each case remains uncited as to its source. The most academically honest student might cite Kinross’s work, but that leads the student to a dead end since it is already noted how well referenced that work actually is.
How can we reconcile conflicting idea that the Sultan sought to escape a basic Islamic ruling yet for some reason promoted Islam itself, especially as strongly as Sultan Selim II did? It is difficult to accept this characterization in light of the numerous investments in Islam that Sultan Selim II made, sacrificing great personal wealth in order to leave a legacy of Islam which has stood to this day. Further, the appointments that Sultan Selim II made were of highly religious people, many writing deep loving poetry for God and His Prophet (S). One of the most notable poets of that time, “Fuzuli” was appointed Secretary of State, a sample of his poetry demonstrating a deeply religious character is available within Ottoman Poems by E J W Gibb. Some of that poetry has been available on yursil.com.
Actual imperial orders from the Sultan seem hardly able to fit within the uncited fictional character seeking to escape Islam’s commandments to pursue Western frivolities. On the contrary, imperial orders show firm resolve to ease the burden of those engaging in the strenuous Hajj pilgrimage, and special consideration for Muslims living under the subjugation of intolerant colonialists.
An excerpt of an imperial order from the Sultan below:
..because the accursed Portugese are everywhere owing to their hostilities against India, and the routes by which Muslims come to the Holy Places are obstructed and moreover, it is not considered lawful for the people of Islam to live under the power of miserable infidels … you are to gather together all the expert architects and engineers of that place and investigate the land between the Mediterranean and the Red Seas and report where it is possible to make a canal in that desert place and how long it would be and how many boats could pass side by side. – ref: Ottoman Archives: Muhimme Defteri Vol 7 No 721
Indeed, it was with Sultan Selim II that the first plans of the Suez Canal began, although it was not accomplished in his lifetime.
The second part of the introduction of Sultan Selim II’s character, by Western sources, is the common story that Sultan Selim II was actually controlled by his Grand Vizir. This theory has left out important information contained within Ottoman Archives where Sultan Selim II was often deciding between various Vezirs and creating his own hierarchies of authority:
In 1568 a strong expedition was sent to pacify the province under the command of Sultan Selim’s former tutor and confidant Lala Mustafa Pasha, a choice which showed that Selim was not entirely the pawn of his grand vezir, for Sokullu Mehmed resented Lala Mustafa’s place in the Sultan’s affections. To put down the uprising in Yemen Lala Mustafa needed men and supplies from Egypt but the provincial governor, another rival Koca Sinan Pasha, refused his requests and made it impossible for him to pursue the campaign. In a spate of petitions to the Sultan the two defended their respective positions. Koca Sinan proved the stronger and Lala Mustafa was dismissed from command of the Yemen campaign. To mark his continuing favour, however, Selim created for him the position of sixth vezir of the governing council of the empire. -Osman’s Dream by Caroline Finkel
Introducing another odd contradiction, after insinuating that Sultan Selim had really no care or control of the empire, Kinross’s account in Ottoman Centuries takes almost laughably ridiculous guesses as to motivations for various military campaigns. This is cited on Sultan Selim II’s Wikipedia entry:
Lord Patrick Kinross’ account of Selim’s reign is how he starts a chapter of his book called “The Seeds of Decline”. He sees the massive outlay for the fleet-rebuilding following the Battle of Lepanto as the start of the Empire’s slow decay. Kinross also says that Selim’s reputation for drunkenness was solidified in his decision to invade Cyprus rather than supporting the Morisco Revolt in Grenada as well as in the manner of his death; Selim died after a period of fever brought on when he drunkenly slipped over on the wet floor of an unfinished bath-house.
Other orientalist works from the 1800′s seem to hold the Sultan Selim II was so in love with wine that he wanted control of Cyprus to have fresh wine. On the other hand, Caroline Finkel notes:
Friction between the Ottomans and Venice was never completely absent but outright war was usually avoided. According to contemporary Ottoman historians, it was Venetian protection for the corsairs who plagued Ottoman vessels sailing the route to Egypt which drove Selim to mount a campaign to conquer Cyprus.
It is not difficult to see which theory seems more intelligently considered. Furthermore, a few different reports exist for Sultan Selim II’s death, some indeed say he died from complications from a fall in a bath, without mentioning drunkenness. Other versions state that he fell on way to perform a Khutbe at the new Mosque bearing his name. Oddly enough, for how widely present the idea of a drunk Sultan is within Selim II’s internet presence, Caroline Finkel’s work does not mention drinking or debaucheries within her 20+ page write up on the Sultan.
Selimye Mosque
Far from running from Islam, Sultan Selim II’s work for Islam is truly beyond impressive, the Selimye mosque he built is an architectural achievement which still causes emotional reactions. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu (d. 1762), wife of the English ambassador in Istanbul is quoted as saying the mosque which Sultan Selim II build was “The noblest building I ever saw.”
The seventeenth century traveller Evliya Celebi notes Sultan Selim’s justification for choosing Eridrne as a location for the mosque, relating that the Prophet Muhummad (S) came to to the Sultan in a dream and directed him to build it there.
As is also noted within Osman’s Dream, Sultan Selim’s work for Islam was carried far beyond Istanbul:
Sultan Selim also continued his parents’ involvement with Mecca, his work gave the great mosque the distinctively Ottoman appearance it retains today. The enclosure lacked the space for a monumental mosque like those in Istanbul, so the galleries surrounding the courtyard were remodeled in the Ottoman style and given domes in places of their original flat roof. These works were continued during Murad II’s reign, serving to impress pilgrims from the all over the world with the power and munificence of the new protectors of the Muslim Holy Places
That’s correct, all the structural beauty of Makkah itself in the grand Ottoman style came from the direction and resources of Sultan Selim II. All Hajji’s are witnesses to this. All this, and we have barely scratched the surface. Sultan Selim II was a Sultan for only eight years. This was a Sultan who ruled by the foundations of Islam such that they literally stand to this day, and that itself is testimony to the righteousness of Sultan Selim II. With all of the information of his personal pursuits such as his love of archery, his political activities, his architectural projects and plans, and considering the short time of his rule, it is impossible to buy into the Kinrossian picture of a disinterested drunk perpetuated by his book (Hasha Astaghfirullah).
Kinross’s work is cited in at least 86 other books on Ottoman History [3], and is clearly and fundamentally flawed in its depiction of this Sultan. The flaws, if not in structure then in reasoning, are so apparent that it casts huge doubts on what is commonly known about the Ottoman Empire in general. Britannica and other well considered sources of information make the same fundamental mistakes as Kinross.
Osman’s Dream by Caroline Finkel is a tremendous improvement to what has existed prior to it, however it suffers from a critical flaw: lack of understanding of the Ottoman Muslim culture. A reevaluation of Ottoman history needs to occur from parties with keen insight into the tradition and culture of the Ottomans. Until that occurs, what is currently available is little more than the retelling of enemy campfire stories.
A couplet from Sultan Selim II’s poetry:
We are loving nightingales that have got wretched because of the longing of separation,
The gentle morning wind becomes fire if it blows through our rosary.
[1] The Turkish Language Reform: A Catastrophic Success (Oxford Linguistics) – Geoffrey Lewis
[2] Turkish Cultural Foundation – turkishculture.org
[3] Amazon.com – Product Details, Citations
the truth on 
m.a.kidwai,CME/IND.RLY.(retd.) on 