On the three approaches to the condemnation of
wrongs: with the hand, with the tongue
and with the heart.
Once it has been established that the condemnation of wrongs [al-inkar] is a necessary duty, it should be noted that those who discharge this duty [al-munkirun] are grouped in three distinct categories:
1. The first group is made up of those who are in a position to give
effect to their condemnation through the use of physical force;134 that
is to say, it consists of the leaders of the community [a imma] and the
rulers in power [salatin].135
2. The second group is made up of those who express their condem
nation verbally rather than by physical means;136 in other words, it
consists of the learned scholars ['ulama'].
3. The third group is made up of those who can express their
condemnation only through their feelings;137 in other words, it consists
of the mass of ordinary people [amma].
This is borne out by a tradition [hadlth] that has been handed down to us, namely the report transmitted by Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (may Allah be well pleased with him), according to whom the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) once said:
If one of you happens to see something wrong [munkar], let him try to correct it with his hand. If he is unable to do it this way, then with his tongue. If he cannot do it this way either, then with his heart, although that is the weakest of faith [ad 'afu'l-iman].138
One of the Companions [Sahaba] (may Allah be well pleased with them all) is reported as having said: “If one of you happens to see something wrong, but he is incapable of taking action to correct it, let him say three times: “O Allah, surely this is wrong!” 139 If he does say this, he will actually be entitled to the spiritual reward that is earned by enjoining what is right and fair and forbidding what is wrong and unfair.”
134 Literally, ‘by means of the hand’[bi'l-yad].
135 The singular forms corresponding to a’imma and salfitin are imilm and sultan, respectively.
136 Literally, ‘by means of the tongue, not tbe hand1 [bi'l-lisani duna'l-yad].
137 Literally, ‘with the heart’ [bi'l-qalb].
138 Author’s note: Meaning, ‘the weakest act of faith” [ad 'afu fi'li'l-iman].
139 Allahumma inna hadha munkar
ref: Shaikh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (R) – Al Ghunya li Talibi Tariq al-Haqq Volume 1
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.
This is so correct, it seems to deserve the term ‘prophetic’.
To the Right Hon. A J Balfour, O.M, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
1. Sir – Referring to our memorial of Jan 1 respecting Constantinople, Thrace and the homeland of the Turkish nation, we beg to observe that we refrained from expressing our opinion with regard to the other parts of the Turkish Empire, reserving it for a further representation to his Majesty’s Government, as we were not acquainted at that time with the suggestions before the Peace Conference for their ultimate disposition.2. We now learn from the Press that it is proposed to form them into self governing States, under the protectorate of one or other of the Allied and Associated Powers. As there is no Mohammedan representative on the Conference to place before it the opinions of his Majesty’s Mussulman subjects concerning the vast problems affecting the whole Islamic world which form the subject of consideration by the Conference, we venture to take the only constitutional course left to us for acquainting his Majesty’s Government and the Allied and Associated Powers with our views – viz., to submit those views in this memorial.
3. We welcome the proposal to create self-governing institutions in the occupied Provinces of Turkey and in Armenia under the guarantee of the League of Nations, but we most strongly deprecate the suggestion to sever them absolutely from the Turkish Empire. Our reasons for this submission are not sentimental; they are founded on grounds of expediency and policy which we respectively venture to think deserve the serious consideration of his Majesty’s Government and the Allied and Associated Powers. The evidence as to the depth of feeling, not only among the vast Mussulman population of India, but also among the Afghans and the frontier tribes (who form the bulk of the Mussulman element in the Indian Army) against the dismemberment of Turkey, and in favour of the preservation of her prestige, is accumulating day by day.
4. We hope that, with the disappearance of the two Empires that had hitherto exploited Asiatic unrest and misgovernment to their own advantage with a view to final political or economic absorption, the new peace would assure the pacific development of Western and Middle Asia on durable lines. We have no hesitation in expressing our conviction that Turkey, under a Government such as she has now been fortunate enough to obtain, with her prestige among Mussulmans of the world, would be an immense source of strength to England and the Allied Powers who rule over large masses of Moslems.
5. We fear, however, that the complete and absolute severance from the Turkish Empire of the provinces whose future status is under consideration will give rise to a rankling sense of injustice.
6. In any event, we venture strongly to urge that these proposed new autonomous States should not be withdrawn from the spiritual suzerainty of the Ottoman sovereign as Caliph. Our reasons for making this submission are based, firstly, on our desire for the peaceable development of Western Asia; and secondly, on the necessity, in our opinion, of an endeavor on the part of his Majesty’s Government to meet, so far as possible, the wishes and legitimate feelings of the Mussulmans, who form fully one-fourth of the population of the Empire.
7. Under the Sunni system of jurisprudence, the investiture of a new ruler by the Caliph, the Chief Pontiff, regularizes his status in the eyes of his people and makes any rising against him illegal ; it gives him prestige in the Mussulman world, and places him in an unimpugnable position. This was the reason that led the Mussulman sovereigns of India, before the rise of the Shiah Empire, which divided them from the Western Sunnis, to apply and obtain investiture from the Chief Pontiff. In our opinion, therefore, if the Peace Conference were to leave the Ottoman Sovereign or Caliph with the prestige of conferring on the rulers of these propose autonomous States on their accession to their respective thrones the usual investiture, it would not only conciliate Mussulman feeling, but would add to the guarantees of peace and pacific development among the people of those countries. To sever them altogether, both secularly and religiously, from the Ottoman State would, in our opinion, lead to constant trouble, and leave behind, as we have already ventured to submit, a legacy of bitterness which we humbly think might be avoided.
8. With regard to the suggested creation of a Jewish State in Palestine, we desire to observe that if the Peace Conference were to decide to create that province into a self-governing State, the entire Mussulman world would resent its being placed under any but a Mussulman ruler, whatever other form the Government may take. Not only is Jerusalem intimately associated with the Mussulman religion and Mussulman religious traditions, but in the long course of fourteen centuries the land has become covered with the memorials of the Mussulman faith. To convert it into a Jewish State or to place it under a Jewish ruler would be most repugnant to Mussulman feelings, especially as only one-seventh of the population of Palestine is Jewish. History proves that the Jews can live in the closest amity with their Mussulman fellow-subjects under Moslem rulers, and enjoy exceptional privileges not conceded to them even now by many European nations.
9. Finally we venture to appeal once more to his Majesty’s Government and the Peace Conference that, in devising the new form of government for Armenia, the rights and interests, together with the religious institutions and places of worship, of the large Mussulman population inhabiting that province (who in many districts form the majority) should be safe-guarded and that they should be protected from persecution, and that they should be placed on an equal footing with the non-Moslem population in the enjoyment of all civil rights and privileges – We have the honour to be, sir, your most obedient and humble servants.
Shaikh MH Kidwai of Gadian
Khwaja Kamalud Din
Marmaduke Pickthall
S H Kidwai of Rampure
Ibrahim S Haji
Aga Khan
Ameer Ali
AA Baig
MH Ispahani
AA Mirza
A S M Anik
(Twenty other signatures)(ref: Samuel Marinus Zwemer, “The Moslem World” (1919), Harrisburg, Pa)
In 1538 there was a sea battle between the Ottomans and the Portuguese near the Indian port of Diu. Notable success remained elusive and, from the 1540′s onwards, expansion towards the Indian Ocean was pursued with rather less vigor. Nevertheless, the rulers of the principality of Atjeh in northern Sumatra, who wanted the sultan’s help in their own fight against the Portuguese, were granted military support in the form of cannons and gunners. Independently of such ‘military missions’, Ottoman firearms specialists also seem to have found their way to the Indian subcontinent. Moreover, the Ottoman sultans made occasional pious donations to mosques on the west coast of India, for instance in the town of Calicut. Since most of the merchants active in the Indian Ocean at that time were already Muslims, such donations may have been inspired partly by the desire to create a political basis for the Ottoman sultans among these people. In the end, however, it was not the Ottomans, but rather the Mughal rulers of Delhi and Agra who brought the trade center of western India under their control.
On both sides, the conflict between the Ottomans and the Portugese, who had themselves experienced economic and political difficulties in the second half of the sixteenth century, was seen as a religious matter. The Portugese saw themselves as the patrons of Catholic missions, and their settlement in the Indian port of Goa was soon used as the base for missionary activities in the Far East. During their expansion in southern Asia, the Portuguese kings and their officials always saw Muslim rulers and traders as their main enemies. Meanwhile, the Ottoman sultans, in their capacity as protectors of Islam, were approached by the rulers of Atjeh for support. Ottoman rulers also saw ‘religion and state’ (the formula used in many official documents) as indivisable.
ref: Faroqhi, S (2007). Subjects of the Sultan (pg 38-39) London: I.B Tauris & Co Ltd.
the truth on 
m.a.kidwai,CME/IND.RLY.(retd.) on 
