“Committee of Union and Progress”
It should be remembered that the ulema, as a class, did not form a homogeneous but a fragmented body, members of which defending somewhat contradictory theses. Many high-ranking members of the ulema strongly supported the Hamidian regime and policies implemented by the sultan for different reasons. In retrospect, however, it would not be inaccurate to comment that those who wholeheartedly supported the aforementioned regime were of a negligible quantity. This comment might seem contradictory, given the policies implemented by the sultan. The examination of a host of memoirs, pamphlets, and newspaper and journal articles published by members of ulema in exile and after the reinstatement of the constitutional regime unequivocally reveals this significant fact, however.
The idea of creating a political opposition movement was born in 1889 among military medical school students, but similar or identical ideas had entered the minds of a grater mass of people. Since there was no other influential authority apart from religion that could legitimize the opposition, the sympathizers of CUP discovered that clamorous opposition, shrouded in religious motifs, was the best way of guaranteeing the future of their movement, of legitimizing it and of delegitimizing the regime of Abdulhamid II. This became more urgent as Abdulhamid II and the palace increasingly labeled members of the opposition as ‘irreligious’ ‘traitors’, ‘intriguers’, ‘immoral’, ‘lacking in patriotism’, and ‘bandits’, this increasing tension by appealing to religious sentiments. So the ulema, who had not yet gone into action, were urged to do so through celebrations, persuasion, threats, satire and contempt.
….
It is strange that a member of the Ottoman ulema should question the legitimacy of the title of caliph of Sultan Selim I, but the real aim of this discussion is to establish an historical framework that would delegitimize the titles of caliph and sultan held by Abdulhamid II and diminish his reputation. If the author could establish that the title of caliph held by the Ottoman dynasty was an usurpation obtained by massacring thousands of Muslims then the caliphate and sultanate of Abdulhamid II would be null a pirori. Similar ideas, and the notion of the caliph as a member of the Quraysh tribe were first created as a political maneuver by English functionaries in India and developed by London newspapers in order to weaken the power and influence of the Ottoman state over the Islamic world. That such ideas questioning the legitimacy of the Ottoman caliphate were adopted after a decade by the ulema and presented as if they constituted a local and religious question illustrates the ulema’s political situation and the loss of their ability to use their own judgment to follow and interpret political developments.
The conclusion expounds on the subjects touched on in the introduction of the pamphlet. It reiterates the need to weaken absolute obedience to the caliph and, consequently to Abdulhamid II, and the need for outright disobedience; it reinterprets the verse of the Koran ordering obedience to established authorities in a way that excludes sultans and emirs and includes ‘learned mystics with the capacity of governing people’; and it includes a defence of a constitutional, even republican, regime in place of the caliphate-sultanate. It also stresses the need for consultation and to found a parliament, which is considered as a synonym for ‘a council of the Muslim community and a national council, both of which are a religious necessity’. The final ‘personal comment’ frequently points to the affinity between the ulema and the CUP opposition.
..
As in the case of Imamet ve Hilafet Risalesi, the author remains anonymous, but to increase his legitimacy, credibility, influence and also his potential threat, he is described as ‘the most virtuous scholar’. The Egyptian branch of CUP published this pamphlet twice in 1896. It must have been one of the first joint acts (or the first) by the recently formed CUP, the opposition and the ulema. The fact that – to our knowledge – it is the first pamphlet in which the CUP is mentioned by name increases its importance. The cover states that the publication was made in conformity wit hthe CUP regulations (Article 21).
The aim of this publication was to incite the ulema to revolt against the authorities, while at the same time asking the authorities to grant a constitution, and attempting to politicize the Muslim community. Its political aims were important and clear. It was successful in using cherished symbols and in playing on common sentiments in a provocative language.
(Late Ottoman society: the intellectual legacy (2005) By Elisabeth Özdalga)
Sharia Law or One Law for All
D Rosser-Owen 2009
Excerpt:
These relate to the legitimacy of the British Crown in appointing qadis and imams, and an Office to oversee these people and their professions. Although such legalistic niceties are commonly derided in fashionable circles and their newspapers, for this to be acceptable to Muslims in the UK, let alone world-wide, under their Shariah such a competence would have to derive directly from the Caliphate.
And, as a matter of fact, this is actually the case.
Towards the end of the 19th Century, two significant events took place.
One was, in 1889, when the Caliph, Sultan Abdul Hamid II jannat makan, appointed Abdullah Quilliam to be the “Sheykhu-l Islam of the British Isles”, and this was endorsed by the Emir of Morocco, the King of Afghanistan, and the Qajar Shah of Persia. The Office of Sheykhu-l Islam was the adminstrator of the system of qadis, imams, and muftis in the Ottoman Empire, and the implications of using this title for the bestowal on Quilliam cannot have been missed. It is legitimate to speculate that it was, in fact, intentional.
At about the same time, the Caliph, conscious of the vast Muslim population of the British Empire, appointed the Queen-Empress a beylerbeyi: in essence a tributary ruler over Muslims under the Caliphate.
The authority to make Islamic religious appointments, and to regulate the administrations of mosques and tribunals, including the appointment of the Office of the Sheykhu-l Islam, in the United Kingdom and Crown Dependencies rests with Queen Elizabeth II as the great-great-granddaughter of Queen Victoria. And, by residuary sovereignty, in the Republic of Ireland with the President.
Yahya Birt on Abdullah Quilliam
http://www.yahyabirt.com/?p=136
This message of Abdul-Hamid Khan, the last Sultan having real power over the Ottoman Empire, was written in the times when the Sufi knowledge was so authoritative that each Islamic Ruler/Sultan/Governor and most of his subjects had their own Murshid (Spiritual Teacher). Unfortunately today not only the rulers, but also a great part of the Muslims, do not even know that it is the duty of every Muslim to follow the Sufi Sheykhs, according to the words of the great Imam Al-Ghazali.
In the name of Allah the Compassionate, the Merciful! Let Allah, the God of the Worlds, be praised. Let there be peace and blessings upon the Prophet Mohammad, Messenger of Allah , Lord of All the Worlds.
I address the respected Sheykh of the Shazali Tariqat Mohammad Efendi Abu Shamat, the healer of the souls and the flasher of the hearts, the outstanding man of his times. After the greetings I want to say that I got your message of this May 22 and I thank Allah that you are in good health
My lord, God being my helper, I devote days and nights to reciting wirds and I ask to always remember me in Your prayers. Let me share with You, and with lucid-minded people, my worries in respect of one very important question:
I left the post of the ruler of Caliphate only because of the obstacles and threats on the side of people who call them “Young Turks”. “The Committee of Unity and Progress” (Ataturk was one of its leaders, the comment of the translator) obsessively insist on my agreement to form a national Jewish state in the sacred land of Palestine. But in spite of their obstinacy I strongly refused them. In the end they offered me 150 mln English pounds in gold, but again I refused and said the following to them.
” If you offer me all the gold of the world adding it to your 150 man, I won’t agree to give you the land. I have served the Islam and the ummah of Mohammad, peace and blessings be upon him, for more than 30 years, and I won´t cloud the Islamic history, the history of my fathers and grand fathers Ottoman sultans and caliphs”.
After my definite refusal they decided to remove me from power, and after that they told me that they would transport me to Salonika and I had to resign. I praise my benefactor who didn´t let me bring shame on the Ottoman state and the Islamic world. I want to stop at this. I praise the Almighty once again and finish my letter.
I kiss your noble hands (my Sheykh) and hope that you won´t refuse my respect for you. Greet all our brothers and friends, oh, my Excellent Teacher.
Forgive me for such a long letter but I wanted you to be informed.
Peace, blessings and mercy of Allah upon You.
Chief of the Believers,
Abdul-Hamid ibn Abdul-Majid.
29 Ramadan 1329.
September 22 1911.
All the evidence shows that Abdulhamit II was a master carpenter who, had he not been a sultan, could have become extremely rich from plying his trade. It would be no exaggeration to say that his designs were unrivaled. For proof of this, one can go and examine examples of his craftsmanship still on display in Istanbul: some cabinets he made, which today are used to store court records at the office of the Provincial Director of Religious Affairs for Istanbul; some tables in Topkapi; a bookcase in Istanbul University; and some items in a certain section of the Yildiz Palace which can be regarded as the first step in the development of a city museum.
ref: Ortayli, Ilber (2009). Discovering the Ottomans. pub: Kube Publishing Ltd. Leicestershire
T.E. Laurence “Laurence of Arabia” – His report of January 1916:
“Husayn’s activity seems beneficial to us, because it marches with our immediate aims, the break-up of the Islamic bloc and the defeat and disruption of the Ottoman Empire… The Arabs are even less stabled than the Turks. If properly handled they would remain in a state of political mosaic, a tissue of small jealous principalities incapable of political cohesion. – (ref: Finlayson, Contemporary Political Thought (2003). NYU Press)
The Arab Revolt began in June 1916, when an Arab army of around 70,000 men moved against Ottoman forces. They captured Aqabah and cut the Hejaz railway, a vital strategic link through the Arab peninsula which ran from Damascus to Medina. This enabled the Egyptian Expeditionary Force under the command of General Allenby to advance into the Ottoman territories of Palestine and Syria.
–
Commentary:
Some have heard of ‘Laurence of Arabia’, but few Muslims know exactly what he did or what his impact was, and how directly he schemed to tear apart Muslim unity. One of the key steps to the Formation of Palestine was the Arab Revolt of 1916, where Muslims rose up against the Calipha looking for ‘independence’ and separate states.
the truth on 
m.a.kidwai,CME/IND.RLY.(retd.) on 
