Gülen has not involved himself directly in partisan Turkish politics, although his message clearly has political ramifications. He believes in addressing issues and values through the democratic system, but not in aligning with a specific parliamentary party.

He has always opposed political Islam, helping to put a halt to its rise in Turkey. Gülen argues that religion is about private piety, not political ideology. In fact, he has worked to help people better understand democracy and the need for secular government. He supports democracy, but, like Thomas Jefferson, admits to the need for its periodic renewal and reform.

He was a strong public critic of Necmettin Erbakan, the pro-Islamic leader of the Welfare party, who in the late 1990s briefly led a coalition government with the conservative True Path Party. Gillen, in fact, seems to be helping push Turkey toward greater democracy.

After an initial period of tension between them, Gülen and the governing Justice and Development (AK) Party leaders have come closer in their approach to common issues, although they have different social bases: AK’s base is the urban poor; and Gülen’s, the provincial middle class. Encouraged by Gülen, the AK party softened a tendency toward Qur’anic literalism and embraced the need of expanding human rights. This, in turn, let Gülen become more critical of the role of the regressive elements of the Turkish military. Gülen -related media outlets, especially the best-selling newspaper Zaman, tend to give their backing to the legislative initiatives of the current AK government.

Gülen always has supported publicly the established order and its organs of state. However, many Kemalists do not trust him, and see his oft-times support for the AK government as vindication of their stance that he is a Trojan horse for political Islam. In fact, many people inspired by Gülen who work in government or civil service have undergone discrimination or termination from employment. Even though these workers have not shown any overt political agenda and even though all Gülen has done is exhort them to be good public stewards, a certain segment of society is preoccupied about them.

What actually may be going on sociologically is that economic and social integration is increasing and that growing numbers of less-well-off people, as they become educated, seek secure and better-paying employment in the police and military.

Gülen’s ideas will live on through his books, DVDs, publications, recordings, and websites in a score of languages. They will live on not because they are unique in and of themselves, but because they powerfully and profoundly articulate an Ottoman cultural tradition deeply rooted in Turkey and, in many respects, the soul of the Turkish people.

Source: Summarized from Wrestling with free speech. Religious freedom, and democracy in Turkey by James Harrington, 2011, University Press of America. Pages 16-17

The Gülen movement eschews politics in the belief that it leads to social divisiveness and distraction from the essential issues of values and principle. In fact, the movement opposes the creation of political parties founded on religion in general, believing that they end up compromising or contaminat¬ing religion and that they only serve to create social strife damaging to the position of religion in society. The movement is comfortable with living within the secular strictures of modern Turkish society—as long as “secularism” is not taken to mean state license to persecute the community’s mem¬bers or enact legislation hostile to religion.

However, Prof. Yavuz, among others, has suggested that the Gülen movement cannot really be described as “apolitical” at all and that the movement’s ev¬ery action is, in the end, intensely political. After all, the movement has huge communications enterprises, educational and financial institutions, and ma¬jor media outlets all able to influence society. There is no doubt that the move¬ment quite explicitly aspires to transform society through transformation of the individual, a process that could ultimately lead to collective calls for the creation of national and social institutions that reflect belief in a moral order. In a very loose sense, it is possible to call this a political project if we consider any attempt to transform society to be a political project. But I would argue that it is just as much a social or moral project. Indeed, the term “political” loses its meaning if applied equally to all efforts to transform society, regard¬less of means. Promotion of change through teachings, education, and infor¬mation does not really become political until it formally and institutionally enters the political process.

In this sense, it is correct to describe the Gülen movement as apolitical. But there can be no doubt that it is strong, influential, and active on the public scene and clear in its principles, which it publicizes broadly and transparently.

Source: Fuller, Graham E. 2007. “New Turkish Republic: Turkey As a Pivotal State in the Muslim World.” Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace.

Are all of life’s hardships worth enduring? The answer depends on what our goal is in living. In fact, understanding life’s purpose is a slow and absorbing process. We sense its mystery while reflecting upon our existence and humanity. Therefore, our concept of life evolves gradually throughout our lives.

The purpose of our creation is obvious: to reach our utmost goals of belief, knowledge, and spirituality; to reflect on the universe, humanity, and God, and thus prove our value as human beings. Fulfilling this ideal is possible only through systematic thinking and systematic behavior. Thought will provoke action, and thereby start a œprosperous cycle. This cycle will produce more complex cycles, generating between the heart’s spirituality and the brain’s knowledge, and thereby develop ever-more complex ideas and produce larger projects.

Carrying out such a process calls for strong belief, consciousness, and understanding. People with these characteristics can realize and analyze the unreflective lifestyles of others. Such people think, do what they believe to be right, and then reflect upon their behavior, thereby continually deepening their thoughts and acquiring new ideas. They believe that only those who reflect deeply are productive, and that the pain and suffering they endure makes their belief stronger and more acceptable.

They live a life of reflection by observing creation every day, sometimes reading it like a book or embroidering their minds with the wisdom they acquire. Believing that the universe was created to be œread and understood, the purpose of our creation must be nothing but that.
On its own, existence is the very bounty that leads us to a prosperous path of bounties. Given this, we should appreciate its value. Since we were created, as was a whole universe of bounties, we must use these gifts and benefit from them.

To reach this goal, we must use our willpower, a voice heard by the All-Powerful One, and develop our abilities and skills to their furthest extent, thus proving ourselves to be willful beings. Our duty is to reflect upon our place in life, our responsibilities, and our relationship with this vast universe. We should use our inner thoughts to explore creation’s hidden side. As we do so, we will begin to feel a deeper sense of our selves, see things differently, witness that events are not what they seem, and realize that events are trying to communicate something to us.

I believe that this should be life’s real purpose. We are the most important living creation in this universe. In fact, we are more like its soul and essence from which the rest of the universe develops. Given this, we should reflect upon and observe it so that we may realize and fulfill the purpose of our creation. Our duty is to hunt for insights and divine joys in our hearts and souls, for only this way of life can move us beyond the frustrating endeavors of a totally materialistic and painful life.

What makes this painful life worth living is the joy we feel while moving along the path and receiving the gifts we are given. Those who walk this path are constantly delighted with various insights. They run enthusiastically toward their final goal like a river flowing to the sea.

We do not believe that happiness comes from temporary outer sources. True happiness comes from within, deepens along with our relationship with God, and turns into an eternal life in heaven … yes, this is how joyful we are. Our inner world is a realm of Divine insights, and our consciousness is a follower of these insights. As we beckon and wait all our lives for the slightest glimpse, our souls sing in utter pleasure: œOur hearts are your throne, O King! Welcome to our hearts! (M. Lutfi).

Our generation needs guides to teach us how to achieve such belief, thought processes, and happiness. Their guidance will allow our youth to enjoy being young and living upright lives. They will experience existence and non-existence as the same thing once they feel immortality in their souls; realize that they can do more than they thought in only a couple of seconds; see the afterlife reflected in everything and thereby witness endless life; discover that life is worth living; witness that all creation rises and sets in their souls; and journey through the dimensions of their souls, just like travelling through galaxies, observing infinity within the dimensions they reach during this mortal life.

Source: Fountain Magazine Issue 33 / January – March 2001

Born into an Anatolian village family of considerable spiritual fervor within the Muslim tradition, Fwethullah Gülen’s parents raised him with a pervasive spiritual perspective on life. Gülen recalls that his mother “taught the Qur’an to all the village women and me at a time when even reciting Qur’an was prosecuted.”[1] It is possible that the rural environment of his childhood facilitated the life of prayer and meditation that marked his adulthood. “A pleasant silence and calm always dominated the old villages,” he remembers.

The morning sunlight, the mewing of sheep and lambs, and the cries of insects and birds would strike our hearts in sweet waves of pleasure and add their voices to the nature’s deep, inner chorus.

In this world – the next-door neighbor to the next world – the call to prayer and the prayer litanies, the language of the beyond would call us to a different concert and take us around in a deeper and more spiritual atmosphere.[2]

He memorized the Qur’an at a young age and testifies that he “began praying when I was 4 years old, and have never missed a prayer since.”[3] He dedicated himself early on to a simple lifestyle devoted to prayer, meditation, religious writing and teaching. Eschewing family life he chose an ascetic’s path devoting his life to prayer and religious pursuits and owning virtually no possessions. His ubiquitous writings cover a wide range of spiritual topics from questions put to the faith by the modern world to basic introductions to the teachings of Islam and Muhammad.[4]

Gülen’s work in Turkey was notable in that it was highly religious in a secularized context as well as apolitical in a highly politicized environment.[5] In this national context – as well as an international environment in which Islamic and other religious rhetoric took on the character of diatribe and ideological denunciations of others as infidels and traitors – Gülen managed to move back and forth between the religious and the secular, between the Islamic and the non-Islamic, promoting his Sufi-inspired emphasis on love of humanity and the compatibility of Islam with “modernity, democracy, and progress.”[6]

The Sufi Solution

One of the keys to Gülen’s ability to combine commitment and tolerance is his emphasis on Sufism as the spiritual side of Islam, or its “inner life.” [7] It is not surprising that Gülen’s vision of the Islamic tradition has a strong Sufi flavor – as that has been characteristic of much of Turkish Islam in general.[8]

Islam is seen as having various spheres – the institutional, the political, the personal, the spiritual, etc. The spiritual is viewed as the most important and equated with the widespread mystical tradition of Sufism. Because of these spheres, the Muslim path leads to a kind of openness to others that the institutional aspect of the faith cannot embrace. Whereas it is an institution’s task to set up boundaries and emphasize difference, it is a spiritual tradition’s task to open up the heart to a force that obliterates difference. From the height of spiritual experience the boundaries disappear in the same manner that national boundaries on earth become invisible when the planet is viewed from the moon. It is this aspect of Islam that Gülen highlights in his ubiquitous writings and lectures on the basis of the faith.

Spiritual practice and morality are, for Gülen, more important than ritual and dogmatism, an attitude that opens the way for dialogue with other faith traditions. The Sufi emphasis on love as a central attribute of a believer shifts the focus from institution and ritual to the diffusion of love for God and for others. Gülen insists that “Love is the most essential element in every being, and it is a most radiant light and a great power which can resist and overcome every force.”[9] Out of this burning passion comes an affection for the entire universe that minimizes the differences of creed. If you have the characteristics of a believer, “Whether you’re a Christian, a Jew, a Buddhist, or of another creed, you’re carrying a believer’s attribute.”[10]

As in the Sufi tradition, Gülen asserts that “believers are people of enthusiastic love; in fact, more of a pole of attraction.” Gülen refers to the metaphor of the famous Sufi poet Mawlana Rumi to explain how one can be both rooted one’s own tradition but open to others:

Using Rumi’s expression, such a person is like a compass with one foot well-established in the center of belief and Islam and the other foot with people of many nations. If this apparently dualistic state can be caught by a person who believes in God, it’s most desirable. So deep in his or her own inner world, so full of love so much in touch with God; but at the same time an active member of society.[11]

This Rumi-inspired duality of one foot in his own faith tradition while the other roams freely to the faiths of others is a starting point for Fethullah Gülen ‘s emphasis on dialogue.

The Theory and Practice of Dialogue

Interfaith dialogue is a must today, and the first step in establishing it is forgetting the past, ignoring polemical arguments, and giving precedence to common points, which far outnumber polemical ones. — Fethullah Gülen[12]

Gülen’s form of Islam begins with tolerance but it does not end there – what is more surprising than his advocacy of tolerance is the extent to which he acts on that principle. It is, in fact, his concrete actions in the implementation of dialogue that have attracted widespread attention to his efforts to define Islam as a force for peace. Most significantly, he initiated dialogues with Christians and Jews, as well as secular intellectuals and civic leaders in Turkey. Eventually he expanded beyond his own national borders to a celebrated meeting with the Roman Catholic Pope John Paul II and Israel’s Sephardic Head Rabbi Eliyahu Bakshi Doron.

It is not difficult to see why Gülen was able to obtain and sustain such a reputation for dialogue if we look at what he considers to be the “pillars of dialogue:’ love, compassion, tolerance and forgiving.”[13] Such attitudes provide the foundation for Gülen’s method of dialogue. He begins with love, which he claims is “the most essential element in every being, a most radiant light, a great power that can resist and overcome every force.”[14] He then moves on to compassion, claiming that “the universe can be considered as a symphony of compassion” and that a “human being must show compassion to all living beings, for this is a requirement of being human.”[15]

The final pillars are tolerance – “so broad we can close our eyes to others’ faults” – forgiveness, which together “will heal most of our wounds.”[16] They are basic principles Gülen finds in the Qur’an. He notes that the Qur’an instructs believers not to respond to meaningless and ugly words or behavior with similar words, but to pass by in a dignified manner, as the prophet himself did, showing tolerance and forgiveness even to his bitter enemies. In this sense, it is because of his commitment to Islam, rather than despite of it, that Gülen advocates tolerance toward others.

Muslims are bodyguards of love and affection, who shun all acts of terrorism and who have purged their bodies of all manner of hate and hostility. — Fethullah Gülen[17]

Because of Fethullah Gülen’s emphasis on love of humanity as characteristically Muslim and a sign of spirituality, he does not hesitate to condemn terrorism unequivocally and to set himself – and Islam – apart from acts of terrorism. “God’s Messenger preached Islam, the religion of universal mercy,” Gülen notes. “However, some self-proclaimed humanists say it is ‘a religion of the sword.’ This is completely wrong.”[18]

In an effort to set the record straight, as he saw it, Gülen made a strong public condemnation of terrorism following the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in a letter to the Washington Post, in which he insisted

I would like to stress that any terrorist activity, no matter who does it and for what purpose, is the greatest blow to peace, democracy, humanity, and all religious values. For this reason, no one-and certainly no Muslims-can approve of any terrorist activity. Terror has no place in one’s quest to achieve independence or salvation. It costs the lives of innocent people.

Although some will always exploit religion for their own interests, he boldly goes on saying: Islam does not approve of terrorism in any form. Terrorism cannot be used to achieve any Islamic goal. No terrorist can be a Muslim, and no true Muslim can be a terrorist.[19] He could not have been more blunt and yet he further explains that Islam does not allow the violation of individual rights, even for the community’s interests, and that ‘the Prophet Muhammad says that a Muslim is one who does no harm with his or her hand or tongue.”

Gülen’s compassion, it should finally be noted, extends not only to all of humanity, but also to Creation itself. One member of the Gülen movement told me of a time when he was camping with a group of young men inspired by him. When a snake was found entering the camp and was immediately killed by one of those with him, Gülen expressed deep sorrow at its death and fasted for three days in repentance, even though he was not the person directly responsible.

Similarly, in one of his volumes on the prophet Muhammad, Gülen recalls a story in which the prophet reproached one of his companions for deceiving his horse, saying, “You should give up deceiving animals. You should be trustworthy even in your treatment of them!”[20]

If humanity is to survive another century – and the twenty-first is beginning to appear capable of surpassing the records of violence of its predecessor – voices from the faith communities like those of Fethullah Gülen will no doubt play a role. His perspective is most notable because it comes from one of the two traditions most frequently called upon to legitimate the violence that pervades human politics, the Christian and the Muslim. Perhaps his innovations in cultural paradox will inspire others to help us find a way out of our global conundrum.

Source

Summarized from “Gülen’s Paradox: Combining Commitment and Tolerance” by Lester R. Kurtz, published on The Muslim World, Special Issue, July 2005 – Vol. 95 Issue 3 Page 325-471

References

[1] Quoted in Ali Ünal and Alphonse Williams, eds., Advocate of Dialogue (Fairfax Virginia: The Fountain, 2000), 10

[2]ibid., 11. Quoted and translated from Fethullah Gülen, Zamanin Altin Dilimi(The Golden Slice of Time) (Izmir, 1994).

[3]Ibid., 13. Quoted and translated from Fethullah Gülen, Küçük Dünyam (My Small World). Interviewed by Latif Erdogan, Zaman.

[4] See, e.g., M. Fethullah Gülen, Prophet Muhammad: The Infinite Light. 2 vols. (London: Truestar, 1995, 1998) and three volumes translated into English published in the United States in 2000 by The Fountain (in Fairfax, Virginia): Essentials of the Islamic Faith, Questions and Answers About Faith, and Key Concepts and the Practice of Sufism.

[5] See Lynne Emily Webb’s work, Fethullah Gülen: Is There More to Him than Meets the Eye? (Izmir, Turkey: Mercury International Publishing, Consulting, Import and Export Ltd., n.d.) which outlines the series of military coups and trends in modern Turkey that provide the crucible in which his spiritual perspective is formed.

[6] Comments by Turkish prime minister Bülent Ecevit in Eyup Can’s “A Tour of the Horizon,” Istanbul, 1996.

[7] See the interview with Gülen in Ünal and Williams, op. cit., 358. Said Nursi (1876-1960) was an influential Turkish intellectual who promoted interfaith dialogue long before it became popular.

[8] See Bulent Aras and Omer Caha, “Fethullah Gülen and His ‘Liberal Turkish Islam’ Movement.” Middle East Review of International Affairs 4 (2000). Available 2 December 2002 at http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2000/issue4/jv4n4a4.html. Aras and Caha note that “The main premise of “Turkish Islam” is moderation and that the Sufi-oriented Islamic movements influenced Turkish political history even during the reign of the Ottomans when the political system accepted a multi-religious state, “in which Christian and Jewish subjects would continue to be governed by their own laws.”

[9] M. Fethullah Gülen, “A Voice of Love: Love” Available at www.fgulen.org/articles/love.html 7 December 2002. Also in Gülen’s Toward the Lost Paradise, available 1 September 2003 at http://www.fethullahgulen.org/lostparadise/tlppg12.html.

[10] Ibid., 207. Quoted in and translated from Nevval Sevindi, “Fethullah Gülen Ile New York Sohbeti,” Yeni Yuzyil, August 1997.

[11] Ünal, Ali and Alphonse Williams. Advocate of Dialogue: Fethullah Gülen. (Fairfax: The Fountain, 2000) p. 207.

[12]Ibid., 244

[13] Ünal and Williams, op cit.,253.

[14]Ibid.

[15]Ibid.

[16] For Gülen’s ideas on the ideal human, see Fethullah Gülen. Toward a Global Civilization of Love and Tolerance. (New Jersey: Light, 2004) pp. 81-130.

[17] Fethullah Gülen , “True Muslims Cannot Be Terrorists,” Pp. 95-100 in The Fountain, op. cit., 100. originally an article in the Turkish Daily News, 19 September 2001.

[18] Fethullah Gülen, “Islam as a Religion of Universal Mercy,” Pp. 44-50 in The Fountain, op. cit., 45.

[19]Ibid.

[20] Fethullah Gülen , Prophet Muhammad, 94; originally from al-Bukhari, Iman 24.

Even though the essential dynamics of the Gülen movement look similar to those of the classical Islamic tradition of spiritual orders in certain aspects, its organization is different with regard to producing civil initiatives and its way of acculturation. Max Weber’s concept of “worldly asceticism” can help analyze the Gülen movement only to a certain degree. Instead, it is a movement that has been organized by civil dynamics. The Gülen movement is defined by modesty, self-sacrifice, altruism, devotion, togetherness, service without expectations, and by a depth of the spirit and heart with no anticipation for personal gain for any intention or deed. These are all concepts of Sufi culture, and these are also among the intellectual and active dynamics of the movement. But these concepts do not only relate to a person’s own inner world, as in some Sufi orders; they are also directed to the outside, to what is social, to the same degree. In that respect, the awareness of religious depth and servanthood to God has more all-encompassing and social aims. Weber views such action as a “rationalization of religious and social relations.” But even such a notion does not fully encompass the rational and social dynamics of the Gülen movement.

Religious orders are directed toward both the personal and the private. They make the individual grow cool toward the world and direct him or her to experience spiritual challenges at a personal level. Even though he or she is not removed entirely from social life, a religious order instills a rigid sense of discipline so as to allow little space for new openings. The Gülen movement differs in that it is inspired by a philosophy that is akin to that of Rumi (d. 1273), Yunus (d. 1321), and Yesevi (d. 1165), which is embedded in a wider social context. [1]

It is like a contemporary projection of the message of these historical Sufis. In this projection, “religious motive” and “social action” work in great harmony. Just as elements of self-discipline mature the person, they make him or her a participant in shared aims in the social sense. Gülen’s understanding of service requires a genuine spirit of devotion. This fits in with the ascetic definition of Weber, and yet it is a dynamic that is broader and has greater continuity.

Gülen invites Muslims to fulfill the pillars of Islam (daily prayers, fasting, charity, pilgrimage) by taking modern conditions into consideration. He instills a broad understanding of charity to include the gifts of time and effort, not just money; he similarly conveys the idea that prayer is not just for us, but also for others. Thus, taking these as his starting point, Gülen’s definition of “service” becomes both broad and continuous, extending to national, human, moral, and universal values. It adopts a rational attitude toward the basic values of state and nation. When one speaks of a “person of service,” one refers to a person with a vast heart who can embrace a wide perspective, selfless service, and devotion. And this requires a transcending love for religion, for nation, and for humanity. That is why Gülen frequently refers to those who are filled with such a transcendent love, and ready to face any challenges on this path, as “muhabbet fedaileri” (guardians of love).

[1] These Sufi figures of Turkish history are considered to represent the most welcoming interpretation of Islam. Their poetry and exemplary life stories have been narrated generation after generation.

Source: Ergene, Enes. 2008. “Tradition Witnessing the Modern Age.” New Jersey: Tughra Books

Fethullah Gülen (b. 1938), known as Hocaefendi (pronounced as “Hodjaefendi”) to those who respect him, was born to Ramiz Efendi and Refia Hanim in Korucuk village, Pasinler town, Erzurum province, Turkey. Due to the slow pace of village life, he was registered later in the official ledger. The official ledger entry lists his birthday as April 27, 1941. Encouraged by his family and pious acquaintances, he read the Qur’an and became a hafiz (one who has memorized the Qur’an). His parents, who detected a tendency toward the religious disciplines in him, made sure that he obtained a solid religious education from Erzurum’s renowned scholars. Beginning with Osman Bektaş Hoca, he continued to pursue religious knowledge by participating in the teaching circles of leading Sufis. After finishing his studies, Gülen began his official career as an imam, a civil service position, at Edirne’s Üç Şerefeli Mosque.

He served this congregation as an associate imam and preacher for four years after fulfilling his mandatory military service in Mamak, Ankara, and İskenderun. Other appointments soon followed: as an imam in a mosque in Kırklareli province for one year and in İzmir as a preacher (1966), first at Kestanepazari mosque and later at Bornova mosque. In addition to giving sermons, he supervised the government-owned and operated Kestanepazari Boarding Qur’anic Course. He was soon on his way to becoming a respected opinion leader to whom others deferred due to his public and private teaching circles. From about 1969 to 1971, he visited many cities and towns to give religious sermons and provide religious education. His activities were not limited to Izmir province. Until 1980, he served in Edremit, Balıkesir, and the province of Manisa. By this time, however, his reputation had transcended the country’s Aegean Sea region and reached İstanbul, Turkey’s largest metropolitan center. In 1989, at the insistence of its citizens, he began preaching voluntarily in its largest mosques. He continued this work until 1992.

The Aegean and Marmara regions, especially İzmir and İstanbul, respectively, had received a massive wave of immigrants from the interior recent years. These immigrants, coming from traditional backgrounds in Anatolia, had difficulty adapting to an urban lifestyle. Feeling an acute need to reinterpret their lifestyle in order to reconcile their traditional values with the expectations of this new urban environment, they began to search for a classically trained religious scholar whose learning and character they could trust. They found this person in Fethullah Gülen. In addition to waiting for the sacred texts to be purified of past social residues, namely, from the experiences of other nations and societies, they had been seeking an authentic understanding, one that was loyal to the core of the Islamic message and answered the real needs of the day. In fact, this need was felt by all Muslim nations. Gülen’s ability to meet it made him a sought-after opinion leader, and soon a title of popular respect – “Hocaefendi” (respected scholar) – was bestowed upon him.

Learning circles started to form around him, consisting of those who sought his leadership and who saw his interpretation of Islam as a compass by which they could orient their lives. As he began to draw larger and larger crowds, Gülen had to make a critical decision: Would he be a leader and govern the daily lives of people by playing a political role, even it were indirect, or would he limit himself to preaching a message of spirituality and thereby inspire others to make their own religious and ethical choices? Gülen chose the second option, and ever since sought to explain to people how they can establish a direct relationship with their Creator. Basing his philosophy on that foundation, he teaches that true faith is the key to discovering one’s true self in interpersonal relationships. When he says that loving one’s fellow human being is the other meaning of loving the Creator, he is suggesting that one can reach others through the bridge of love. He emphasizes that one can bring the “other” closer through tolerance and dialogue based on his belief that anyone who achieves this is a beloved servant of God.

In his teachings and suggestions, he always reiterates that the local and global do not contradict each other. As neither one of them can be abandoned, they therefore have to be in harmony and non-exclusive. His ideas, which are fully compatible with modern life, resonated with those urban middle-class Turks who considered themselves part of the modern world. But even though they led respectful lives and professions and had no problem making a living for themselves, they were nevertheless acutely aware that their spiritual lives were not rich enough to give their lives meaning. They wanted to see moral and ethical degeneration eradicated; they wanted the sense of trust and solidarity strengthened instead of weakened even further. In addition, they were looking for a way to connect with other people who felt the same way. Much of the urban middle class began to gather around Gülen’s teachings to enrich their spiritual lives and contribute more to society.

What is Gülen’s formal and informal education?

Gülen’s only formal education is elementary school. He explains some interesting episodes regarding his own education:

“There was no school in our village in those days. They used the madrasah (school of religious education) next to the mosque as a classroom. They used to teach reading and writing to the children during the day and to the older men and women at night. They did not let me into the school the first year because I was not old enough. When I attended I still was not old enough, but I attended anyway. I attended for two or three years. One of the teachers, an ardent enemy of religion, could not stand the fact that I was praying during the breaks. So I used to climb up on one of the desks and pray there. He called me ‘mullah’ (an Islamic scholar) just because I observed my daily prayers.”

His mother Refia Hanım had a great impact upon him. It could even be said that she was his first teacher. She taught the Qur’an to the village girls during the day and to Fethullah at night. According to her, “Fethullah finished reading the entire Qur’an at the age of four, in two months. Since then he never skipped his prayers.”

Gülen recalls some of his own childhood memories:

“Sibgatullah, my brother, is three years younger than me. That means that if I was 9, he had to be around 6. So, all of the footwork was left to me. Shepherding our cows and sheep was my responsibility. I used to spend my free time reading. I do not know how I learned it, but I was able to read Ottoman Turkish fluently. I read all of my father’s books. I inherited his admiration for the Prophet and his Companions. I had almost memorized their biographies. My father, my first Arabic-language teacher, taught me some portions of the classical books Amsila and Bina. Later on, some people suggested that he should have me memorize the Qur’an. At first he hesitated, but later on he decided to send me away for that purpose with a couple of other children. I used to memorize the Qur’an whenever I had time left over from performing my chores and shepherding. Despite these distractions, I put in as much extra effort as I could. I could memorize as much as half a chapter, that is to say ten pages a day. During the summer it was difficult to find time for memorization, but I finished memorizing the entire text during the winter.”

The foundation of Gülen’s informal education was his education in Erzurum’s madrasah. At the age of fourteen and having memorized the Qur’an, His father wanted him to go to Hasankale, a nearby village, to take tajweed (refined Qur’an recitation techniques) courses with Hadji Sidki Efendi. But he had no place to stay there, and so had to walk five miles every morning to participate in the study circle. He then walked the same distance back home.

Gülen’s father was uncomfortable with this arrangement, since his son was still a child, but at the same time he did not want to deprive him of this important religious education. He therefore sent him to the religious scholar Sadi Efendi in Erzurum. His madrasah education in the Molla Mosque became the foundation of his love of learning and discovery that continues to this day.

In summary, a religious family environment and parents who did their best to provide their son with a solid religious education determined his future. Since his childhood, Gülen has looked at life through the window of faith. This perspective enabled him to dedicate his life to thinking about how the needs of modern people could be reconciled with the requirements of faith, and how this could be accomplished without breaking away from the realities and diversity of life and without fear or worry. Gülen considers every day of his life to be a continuation of his never-ending education; the world is his classroom. This perspective has become the most salient feature of his personality.

What are the primary teachings – religious, historical, political, and social – that have greatly impacted Gülen’s worldview?

“In my opinion, although a person must realize the importance of religious introspection and training one’s soul, he must also see the value of the physical sciences, literature, history, and philosophy. He should learn everything from physics to chemistry, from biology to astronomy – at least their fundamental principles. He should also read the existential philosophers and primary texts from both the East and the West, like Camus, Sartre, and Marcuse. With this aim in mind, I have kept my range of reading a little bit wider than it might have been otherwise.

“It is safe to say that my religious development came mostly from the Qur’an and Islamic sources. In order to reach the depths of Islamic civilization, I have benefited from the classics of Imam Rabbani, Ghazzali, Rumi, Abu Hanifa, and other thinkers in the fields of kalam (Islamic philosophy) and tafsir (exegesis). As for contemporary thinkers, I read Elmalili Muhammad Hamdi, Mustafa Sabri, Ahmet Hamdi Aksekili, Babanzade Ahmet Naim, İzmirli İsmail Hakkı, İsmail Fenni Ertuğrul, M. Şemseddin Günaltay, and M. Ali Ayni. These teachers and a number of others have contributed new dimensions to my accumulated knowledge.

“During one Ramadan, I and some friends studied the largest hadith (prophetic sayings) collection – the sixteen-volume Kenzu’l Ummal of Muttaki’l Hindi – from cover to cover. These volumes contain more than 46,000 hadiths. Likewise, even if not with the same intensity, I studied some important works in the fields of Islamic fiqh [jurisprudence], tafsir, tasawwuf [Sufism], and balaghat [rhetoric]. I even read some of them several times. I have loved reading since I was a kid.

“My love of reading began during my childhood with the siyar (biography) of our dear Prophet and the stories of the Companions. In later years I pursued scholarly works dealing with various intellectual and philosophical topics. In addition to the Eastern classics, on the advice of one of my superiors in the army, I read almost all of the Western classics. As I tried to get to know such Eastern masters as Rumi, Sadi, Hafiz, Molla Jami, Firdawsi, and Anwari, I also familiarized myself with the works of Shakespeare, Balzac, Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant, Zola, Goethe, Camus, and Sartre. I also read Russell, Pushkin, Tolstoy, and some others. I researched many different subjects – from Bacon’s logic to Russell’s theoretical logic, from Pascal to Hegel’s dialectic, from Dante’s Divine Comedy to the relationship between subject and object in Picasso.

“As I read, I discovered the subtle relationships between thought and art, something in which I took great pleasure. Alongside the giants of our classical literature, like Fuzuli, Baki, Sheikh Galib and Leyla Hanım, I also read repeatedly – and with passion – the most significant writers of Turkish prose and poetry: Yahya Kemal, Necip Fazıl, Mehmet Akif Ersoy, Sezai Karakoç, Namık Kemal, Şinasi, and Tevfik Fikret.”

From his own words about the sources that shaped him, two ideas become clear:

- A person’s life does not consist of two separate compartments: the material and the spiritual. Therefore, one should have access to and benefit from both of them. This is the path to becoming an insan-i kamil (an ideal human being).

- If a man of religion’s mental framework is limited only to religious sources, he cannot benefit from the fruits of universal thought. As a result of this deficiency, he can never be a true guide for modern people who have to deal with the complex problems of modern life.

What makes Gülen the leader of an expanding movement of modernity rather than just another religious scholar?

Gülen does not accept the title of “a opinion leader” in any form and does not apply it to himself. However, in sociological terminology, he does fit the description of a “leader of a civic society.” When asked why people gather around him and expect to be guided, Gülen replies that reasonable projects embrace all of humanity, that people consider religious rewards and seek the pleasure of God. He categorically rejects the attribute of being “a religious leader,” for:

“I am someone who tries as best as he can to practice his religion; not someone who is able to practice, but someone who is trying to practice. Because I am unable to perfectly represent the religion, I cannot be considered a cleric. Secondly, a cleric’s status as an intermediary between the people and the Creator contradicts Islamic precepts. In Islam there are no clergymen. Everyone can be pious, and from this perspective all are equal in status. Some people might be better than others only in terms of practicing the religion and in the eyes of God. But people are definitely looking for a leader or an organization in the activities to be carried out or the services performed [in order to make them sustainable and reliable], just as millions of people gather together to perform the pilgrimage, as God commands, and as many people join a congregational Friday or festival prayer. Today, some services that are falsely attributed to me are, in fact, no more than services rendered to humanity according to the circumstances of our times. These are carried out by those who comprehend the value of serving humanity. Nevertheless, they might have been inspired by me. But somehow people are looking for a leader behind this, as they do in every other case.”

Gulen, who sees himself as only the bearer of a message, states that there are tens and even hundreds of individuals who are well aware of what needs to be done for humanity. He means to say that he only caused such people to come together and develop projects. He adds:

“There are many valuable, prominent scholars. I am not fit to hold a candle to them. Despite this fact, those who seek a leader for the activities and services directed toward the people, who are pulled together by the religion and the circumstances, have assigned a role to me. Otherwise, there is neither a considerable clergyman nor a leadership displayed.”

Gulen views his fame as:

I consider fame like a poisonous honey that kills one’s soul. I hope that my Lord allows me to serve. But I do not want my service to be known, because I fear that I will apportion a share of it for my own carnal soul. This is the consequence of my special relationship with my Lord. This might not be understood by everyone, for in order to understand it one has to believe firmly in God.

How does he understand hizmet (service)?

“Ever since I was a child I have believed that the greatest service to humanity has to go through education, that all of humanity has to be embraced, that pursuing tolerance and dialog are critical, and that everyone must be accepted just as they are. I believe in being tolerant and approving of everyone, as these are necessary ingredients for preventing internal social divisions and strong barriers against the outbreak of conflict. Many people who share the same beliefs have set out to serve others in this vein.”

Gülen is believed to have thought that his beliefs and goals would engender widespread approval for the work he wanted to undertake. In his own words:

“The services accomplished have caused some people to acquire groundless fears. As those who look at the world and events through their own viewpoints tend to see everyone in their own image, they became worried. Despots, those who seek to capture power or influence for themselves, began to regard those whose activities and intentions have nothing to do with this world as a threat. These latter people do not seek power; in fact, they actually run away from it. They think only of the pleasure of God and believe the only way to attain it is by ‘serving humanity.’ Even though they are presented as a threat to the state, in fact, they really are a threat only to those who pursue their own agendas. At least they should have realized that both groups would use their power in different ways. One would use it to bring about justice, mercy, compassion, love, and serving others; the other would use it to oppress, cause trouble, divide, exploit, and hate others. However, we have nothing to do with power, for we believe that the real power in faith, worship, ethics, living for others, and serving God. Those who perceive us in other ways are making our lives, as well as the lives of others, miserable because of their own fears and worries. Since they fear that which has no reason to be feared, they worry about that which has no reason to give rise to worry. They see things that have not occurred as if they had occurred and as if they could occur. They are making their own lives miserable.”

A new social leadership typology, one that has been observed in the leadership perspective of the Gülen movement, can be understood as an effort to present a new alternative to society; to what is often called “the world, which has lost its conscience”; and to the individual who lost his capability to understand and establish relationships with others that are not based on personal interests.

According to Gülen, we need people who will combine consciousness and mind, faith and science. Societal leaders will guide these people.

Source: Ergil, Doğu. 2012. Fethullah Gülen & The Gülen Movement in 100 Questions. New York: Blue Dome Press

Prof. Dr. Dogu Ergil has received his BA degree in Psychology and Sociology at Ankara University to be followed by an MA degree at Oklahoma University in Sociology (Social Psychology minor) and a Ph D in Development Studies, an interdisciplinary program composed of Political Science, Political Economy and Sociology, at the State University of New York at Binghamton.

He returned to Turkey to teach first at the Middle East Technical University and later at the Ankara University. He became a full professor and the chairperson of the Department of Political Behavior at the Faculty of Political Science of the latter University.

Dr. Ergil wrote twenty-two books, many of which in Turkish. He has contributed many book chapters and articles in many countries and prestigious international journals.

He has been awarded with British Council Fellowship that enabled him to be a visiting Professor at the London School of Economics, the Fulbright Fellowship that gave him the chance of being a visiting scholar at the School of Advanced International Studies (Washington DC). Additionally he was awarded with research fellowships by the Winston Foundation for World Peace and later twice (1999-2000 and 2005-2006) by the National Endowment for Democracy (Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship). The New School for Social Research University in New York has also honored him with the renowned “University in Exile” democracy and human rights award in 2000.

Prof. Dr. Doğu Ergil is currently teaching at the Department of Political Science and Public Administration at Fatih University in Istanbul. Ergil has worked with several NGOs on developing more effective leadership, conflict management, and creative problem solving.

In 1923 Kemal Ataturk and his comrades won sovereignty over eastern Trace and all of Anatolia and founded the modern Turkish Republic. The main goal of Ataturk was to forge a path that was very distinct from that of the Ottoman Empire, especially the creation of a secular and nationalist state run without the influence of Islam in politics. The new republican elite, with Ataturk as its leader and spokesman, favored complete modernization which they saw as an escape from backwardness and expressed as a dislike and distrust of all things associated with the ancient regime and the old ways of life. Most particularly, religion and religious institutions were suspect and deemed antithetical to contemporary civilization. Ataturk and his Kemalist followers sought to create a new Turkish nation-state founded explicitly on ethnic nationalism that would replace the multiethnic, multireligous and Islam-oriented values of the Ottoman Empire.

Ataturk introduced his reforms slowly and initially used Islam to unite and mobilize people, especially against the invading European armies.

It was only in 1924 that he declared that Turkish nationalism, rather than Islam, was to be the only factor in uniting Turkish people. The state used the army, schools and the media to consolidate Turkish national identity and break away from Islam and the Ottoman legacy. To achieve this and deemphasize the influence of Islam, he closed the dervish lodges and the Sufi orders, banned their ceremonies and liturgy and outlawed their dress. He denounced the fez as headgear of a backward people and the veil as representing the subordinate status of women. The call to prayer, ezan, was to be sung in Turkish rather than Arabic and imams were ordered to lead the prayer in Turkish, which was a clear deviation from mainstream Islamic doctrine. The Qu’ran was also translated into Turkish and reading this translation in the prayers was made compulsory. In order to be more westernized and modernized, he replaced the Arabic alphabet with the Latin one and adopted the Gregorian calendar, instead of the Islamic one. He also promoted equality of women and in 1934 influenced the right for women in vote in Turkey.

Between 1925 and 1928 a strongly Kemalist parliament enacted a series of measures to secularize public life. Ataturk believed that Turkey must leave behind its past and follow the example set by Europe. Therefore, he advocated eliminating all obstacles to creating a national, secular and western country. After achieving national independence the republic implemented a rigid secular rule by denying any role for Islam in the formation of the new polity.

The secular model that Ataturk introduced into the Republic of Turkey was that of laicism or laicite, the system modeled on that of Europe and France, in particular. Laicite expands the power of the state and restricts religion to the private sphere. It is antireligious and seeks to control or eliminate religion unlike the model of Anglo-American secularism that seeks to protect religions from state intervention and encourages faith-based social networking to consolidate civil society. Turkist secularism is based on the notion of transforming society through the power of the state by eliminating religion from the public sphere. In fact, in the system of laicite any attempt to use religious discourse in public debate, even in the Turkish parliament, can be used to ban that party or individual.

Laicism became the basic principle of the Kemalist endeavor of building a nation-state in which religion was relegated to the private realm and controlled by the state. With the influence of French positivism and laicism strong among the new leadership, the Kemalist’s only legitimate agent of change was the state itself. The nation and state were seen as one and the same and all religion, and Islam in particular, was excluded from the public realm. Any form of civil unrest or popular protest was a source of suspicion and worry to the state.

Kemalist laicism placed absolute faith in science and positivism and prioritized the restructuring of society according to these principles. Such a policy, therefore, prevented religious influence in the spheres of education, economics, family, dress code and politics. Secularism in this context meant excessive state penetration into everyday life and the exclusion of ethnic and religious differences. The Turkish republic established the Directorate of Religious Affairs to administer and regulate people’s religious needs and affairs in the public sphere. It thereby banned all civil society-based religious networks.

In 1937 these principles were incorporated into the constitution as basic principles of the state. The ideology and political system that resulted from these principles was and still is known as “Kemalism.”

Kemalism perceived modernization as Westernization and, in practice, became the ideology of eliminating class, ethnic and religious sources of conflict by seeking to create a classless, national (Turkist) and secular homogenized society. Thus, fear of differences became the guiding principle of the Kemalist state. Moreover, Kemalists saw change as legimate only when it is carried out by the state itself. Therefore, any form of bottom-up modernization of civil society was a source of suspicion and worry, especially when it was motivated by religious concerns which were a threat to the secular state.

The principle of laicism or secularism was based on the French model of laicism in which religion is placed under the control of the state and official religious expressions are removed from public life. Turkish secularism, while based on French laicism, went even further by establishing total control of the state over religion. Not only were imams placed by the state as civil employees, but even the content of their Friday sermons was determined by the state, control that continues into modern day Turkey.

The system of laicite (or laicism) dominated Turkish politics during the Republican Public Party years (1923-1950), years in which a single party ruled the country. The underlying philosophy was that the state knew best what was in the best interest of the people and that the RPP was protecting Islam from the influence of foreign languages and cultures.

Turkey’s shift to a multi-party political system in 1946 when the Democratic Party was founded constituted a turning point in Turkey’s political history, including the role of Islam in the Turkish state. By this time Islam was under the control of the state but remained an effective social and moral force in Turkey. The Democratic Party criticized the RPP’s total control over Islam. In order to pacify the DP the Prime Minister began to soften policies on Islam, including the addition of courses on Islam to the educational curriculum. When the DP party was elected to office in 1950, it maintained a similar approach to secularism even though it allowed a return to Arabic for the call to prayer, removed obstacles prohibiting religious practice and teaching, and built new mosques. However, it opposed political Islam and challenges to the secular nature of the state.

A military coup in 1960 overthrew the DP government. This coup constitutes a benchmark for the history of Turkish democratic experience. The first party ever came to power through democratic means was overthrown by the military under accusations of being Islamic reactionaries who allegedly aimed at undoing Ataturk’s revolution and founding an Islamic regime instead. It is ironic that the Democratic Party leadership was raised within the RPP ranks, and among the accused were Ataturk’s close friends such as Celal Bayar.

Military coups became a tradition in Turkey after 1960. Whenever the ruling elite felt that they were losing their grip on power, they resorted to the same old techniques their predecessors used by playing the ‘reactionary’ card once again. 1971, 1980 and 1997 were the successful coups among numerous military intervention attempts. The leaders of the coups would come to power with promises such as ‘restoring the order and transitioning back to the democratic regime as soon as possible,’ but in the meantime they would usually make themselves untouchables through enacting new laws or totally changing the constitution.

As the Gulen movement flourished in the 80s it is necessary to study the 1980 military coup in detail in order to understand the circumstances under which Gulen and the movement continued doing their activities. The military coup of 1980 brought a military government first and called for elections in 1983. The Motherland Party (MP), a newly established political party under the leadership of Turgut Ozal who emphasized open market economy, democratic values, freedom of religious education and morality as a force against socialism. Ozal embraced Islam as a source of morality but rejected political Islam. It was under Ozal’s administration that Turkey moved to an open market economy and began to introduce democratic reforms. Likewise, the economic liberalization and growth of the Ozal period allowed the creation of a dynamic entrepreneurial class and opportunity for the existence of independent newspapers and television channels which could not be silenced by a political elite.

It was under Prime Minister Ozal that economic policy became a driving force in Turkish foreign policy. He stressed an export oriented program that opened the country to foreign investment and allowed the entrepreneurial skills of the Turkish businessmen to blossom. Subsequently, the collapse of the Soviet Union opened up new economic options for Turkey in the newly independent republics of the former Soviet Union, especially in the important energy field.

Ozal argued that restrictions on freedom of conscience breed fanaticism, not the other way around. He introduced classes in Islam in all schools.

The members of parliament and the cabinet were visible in attendance at mosques. The veil was allowed in public, based on citizens’ civil liberties that were guaranteed in the constitution. Opponents of the veil argued that Ataturk had made the veil the most famous symbol of the Islamic order and that to allow it in public was a direct threat directed against the secular state guaranteed by the constitution.

Ozal’s policies of bringing more freedom to Turkish society paved the way for the expansion of Islam in public spaces. This resulted in the pluralization of the religious sphere and to the expansion of religious networks in the economy, the media and charitable endeavors. The deregulation of broadcasting, for example, has empowered people’s voices such as those in the Gulen movement to express themselves on diverse radio stations and television channels and in newspapers and magazines. These new spaces created under the Ozal administration have served to empower the civil society in Turkey, including those inspired by Gulen.

The expansion of Islam in the public realm and the relative boldness of the leadership of the Islamic party, the Welfare Party, invoked the laicist military once again. In 1997 a top-level military commission, known as the “Western Working Group”, launched an investigation into the Islamic Party of the time, the Welfare Party. The result was a statement issued by the National Security Council (NSC), which saw itself as a guardian of the Kemalist reforms and especially secularism, that said that “destructive and separatist groups are seeking to weaken our democracy and legal system by blurring the distinction between the secular and the anti-secular.” As a result of the report of the working group promoted by the NSC, the Welfare Party government was forced to resign in what was called a “post-modern coup” and Prime Minister Erbakan, along with other political leaders in the party, were banned from office for five years and the party was closed.

The NSC outlined an 18 point plan that would have to be agreed upon before it would support a new government. This plan aimed to reduce the influence of Islam in Turkey and included proposals that enforced a ban on certain faith communities and religious organizations, the purging of “reactionary” personnel from governmental positions, tighter restrictions on “politically symbolic garments like women’s head scarves” and the purging of military officers for so-called Islamic activities and sympathies.

In short, Turkey lived a life for decades under constant military intervention threats. It was a well known fact that the military regimes did not have a good human rights record. So in times before the military interventions people were terrorized by the fight between militant camps killing each other; they were oppressed under the military regimes right after the coup was executed, or they were forced to live an obedient life in fear of military intervention.

Gulen movement emerged under these circumstances. To keep people checked the military and civil bureaucrats of the regime kept people under constant surveillance through intelligence services, made civil and religious gatherings unlawful, prohibited any sort of protest, banned signs that may refer to any movement that was deemed anti-regime. Laws, such as infamous 141, 142 and 163 allowed the government to raid into people’s houses and prosecute them without due process. They regulated religious services by dictating imams even what they have to say at a sermon. Teaching Quran at mosques or Sunday schools to the kids under the age of 15 was prohibited. Army officers who showed any kind of inclination to Islam –even performing very basic prayers were considered as a sign of inclination- were expelled from the service. In short an ‘assertive secularism’ was made the official religion of the state in expense of Islam and minority religions.

Nevertheless, performing basic religious duties and gatherings under government supervision and censorship were allowed. Gulen was a preacher first in Thrace and later in Izmir area in late 1960s when he started training students.

Source: Answer to the question of this article has been derived with minor changes, additions and omissions from Helen Rose Ebaugh’s book The Gülen Movement: A Sociological Analysis of a Civic Movement Rooted in Moderate Islam, Springer, 2009. The article is retrieved from the website HizmeteSorulanlar.ORG.

Gülen offers his followers a Turkish renaissance. The caveat for this renaissance, however, is that it can only happen in a society, which has achieved peace and tranquility. Most people are attracted to the idea of civil law through consensus rather than imposing; ethics and morality based on acceptance, not forcing; and an understanding of solidarity, not based on favor but working hard, producing, and sharing; and the suggestion on top everything that the individual is responsible for the entire society as well as for himself. What is offered is not “a nation of the state,” but the idea of an [social] order and a nation based on the citizens’ partnership. (1)

According to Gülen, the chaos and turmoil has spread on earth because of the lack of morality. High quality education is needed for this reason: to eradicate the seeds of discord spreading in societies and to make the climate of love dominant again; to teach goodness, beauty, and truth, in addition to knowledge. What is needed are “men of ideal.”

Gülen then names the people around him with this title [men of idea] and adds:

“We have been searching for the ways to form this ideal society [awaited for centuries] and we have been resorting to every possible avenue. We have been struggling desperately in order to realize it. Let us see how long more we will struggle?” (2)

The message and the work of Fethullah Gülen [and the Gülen movement] should be assessed within this framework. And, what is the secret of his success?

The answers may be found in interviews with him, in his writings as well as books and articles by researchers, which are results of sociological and other scientific analyses. This website tries to offer excerpts from such analyses.

(1) Ergil, Doğu. 2012. Fethullah Gülen & The Gülen Movement in 100 Questions. New York: Blue Dome Press. Page 18.

(2) ibid. Pages 186-187

Prof. Dr. Dogu Ergil has received his BA degree in Psychology and Sociology at Ankara University to be followed by an MA degree at Oklahoma University in Sociology (Social Psychology minor) and a Ph D in Development Studies, an interdisciplinary program composed of Political Science, Political Economy and Sociology, at the State University of New York at Binghamton.

He returned to Turkey to teach first at the Middle East Technical University and later at the Ankara University. He became a full professor and the chairperson of the Department of Political Behavior at the Faculty of Political Science of the latter University.

Dr. Ergil wrote twenty-two books, many of which in Turkish. He has contributed many book chapters and articles in many countries and prestigious international journals.

He has been awarded with British Council Fellowship that enabled him to be a visiting Professor at the London School of Economics, the Fulbright Fellowship that gave him the chance of being a visiting scholar at the School of Advanced International Studies (Washington DC). Additionally he was awarded with research fellowships by the Winston Foundation for World Peace and later twice (1999-2000 and 2005-2006) by the National Endowment for Democracy (Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship). The New School for Social Research University in New York has also honored him with the renowned “University in Exile” democracy and human rights award in 2000.

Prof. Dr. Doğu Ergil is currently teaching at the Department of Political Science and Public Administration at Fatih University in Istanbul. Ergil has worked with several NGOs on developing more effective leadership, conflict management, and creative problem solving.

The Gülen Movement provides educational opportunities to youth, who otherwise could not attend higher educational institutions. What inspires them to eventually volunteer as educators themselves throughout the world?

Since they were raised within the movement and since they were extended hands during their education by the movement, many youth internalized Gülen’s teachings regarding human, society, and “right conduct” and shared his ideals. For the sake of their beliefs and nation, by pushing far beyond the borders of time and space, they became volunteers, in order to share with others what they learned. They have learned that, in order to do something for one’s nation, country, or ideals, voluntarism does not require having great titles or positions. According to Gülen, those who are not seriously involved with faith and the hereafter cannot understand these motives, but they can be excused for not understanding. Below are Mr. Gülen’s own words about these educators:

These people, without knowing anyone, went to strange countries. They have gone to Malaysia and Indonesia; they have gone to countries the names of which you are unaware of. They went to countries in Africa. They have said, “In our religion, migration is a very important factor. Our ancestors took advantage of this dynamic as well.” They went with this thought. One went, another took him as a role model, learned a lesson, he/ she also went. Another and another went. But wherever they went, they were able to find only one address [of a familiar person] or perhaps none at all. I presented this at different occasions. …… I did not know the name Tuva. I did not know its place, either. If you told me to mark its place on the map, I couldn’t. We knew the Mongolians a little but I could not mark its place on the map.

It is understood from this statement that the people who come together with the responsibility of citizenship derived lessons for their own life, society, and humanity. As a result of these lessons, they utilized the [service] opportunities that they were presented. They were convinced that what they did would increase the quality of life of others, and they were not stingy in extending a hand. They convinced Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and others in far away countries that the reason they were in their countries was only to develop a common culture of living and to contribute to world peace. When they saw that others believed in them and accepted them as one of themselves, they worked with extra diligence and passion. Their passion and their actions have generated an international circle of volunteers around the movement. The children that they raised and the youth that they educated expanded that circle and solidified and strengthened it. This resulted in the movement taking roots in many countries.

Source:  Summarized from “Ergil, Doğu. 2012. Fethullah Gülen & The Gülen Movement in 100 Questions. New York: Blue Dome Press. Pages 175-176.”

Fethullah Gulen

We have long been awaiting a generation, with hearts as pure and kind as angels, with will-power strong enough to overcome the most formidable obstacles, and minds keen enough to solve all the problems of the age. Had it not been for the persistence of our hope for the coming of such a blessed generation, we would long ago have been a thing of the past.

We live in the darkest of nights until they appear on our horizon with radiant faces promising the breaking of dawn. Once they have appeared on our horizon, this land of the wretched and the miserable, resembling a gloomy graveyard, will begin to be cheered by flowers of every kind. If our hopes are not blighted by a poisonous wind, this land, changing into a flower-garden through the reviving water that generation brings, will be a place of happiness and spiritual recreation’ for all the world’s people, a place of peace, harmony and serenity. The world of the future will be so enlightened by their light that the moon and the sun will be dim in comparison. In their enlightened ethos, the universe will be studied as a meaningful book and the music of brotherhood will be played everywhere. Art and literature will be refined of coarseness and vulgarities of all kinds and find their practitioners.

This world will indeed be built anew when they sound the note of revival, and those who fell into a kind of winter sleep will wake up. The music of despair composed by Satan and played by some indolent persons will stop; people will be exhilarated with melodies of hope and activity which they compose and play.

The awaited generation are successors to the mission of the master of the Prophets, and therefore have inherited the loyalty and faithfulness of Adam, the resolve and steadfastness of Noah, the devotion and gentleness of Abraham, the valour and dynamism of Moses, the forbearance and compassion of Jesus. When found together in a group, these qualities are such a great source of power that those who have them will inevitably seize the ‘reins’ of the world, provided they remain loyal to the covenant God has made with them.

The world is to be saved by that ‘golden’ generation who represent the Divine Mercy, from all the disasters, intellectual, spiritual, social and political, with which it has long been afflicted. The world will come back, through their efforts, to its ‘primordial’ pattern, on which God created it, and be purified of all kinds of deviation and ignorance, so that people may rise to ‘the highest of the high’ on the ladder of belief, knowledge and love, supported against the heavens by the Divine Message.

Humankind have never been so wretched as they are today. They have lost all their values: the ‘table of art and literature is vandalized’ by drunks; thought is capital wasted in the hands of people suffering from intellectual poverty; science is a plaything of materialism; and the products of science are tools used in the name of unbelief. Amid such disorder and bewilderment, the people neither know their destination in the world nor the direction to follow to reach that destination.

In order to awaken the people and guide them to the truth, the awaited generation those young people who implant hope in our hearts, enlighten our minds and quicken our souls, will suffer with the sufferings of humankind and ‘water’ all the ‘barren lands’ with the tears they shed over centuries-old miseries. They will visit every corner of the world, leaving no-one not called upon, and pour out their reviving inspirations into the souls of the dumb-struck people. Having so long awaited those holy ones, sound-minded, saintly and trustworthy, who have dedicated themselves to humankind, the people will at last feel able to wing their way into the depths of the heavens and reach eternity.

O long-awaited generation. Rise, for the love of the Creator to your sacred task, and replace the darkness choking us with the light of your love, hope and nobility! Rise and force back the `monsters` of the age to their dens! Even if the world unites against you in the form of a terrible bomb; even if they upset your plans and systems; even if they make concerted attacks upon you from all sides, you will never quake; rather, with undiminished hope, you will continue to pave the way for the happy future. You will, like the Prophet Solomon, ride the winds and bring rain to the barren lands in order to change them into flower gardens. You will put an end to injustice all over the world and run to the aid of the oppressed; be so forbearing towards people that there wil1 be no soul you have not embraced, no vengeance or rancour you have not removed.

O you who have been waiting for centuries; look! Darkness is disappearing from your horizon and different melodies are being heard from beyond it. Those melodies, reaching us in the early hours of the ‘morning’ will spread throughout the world in the coming days. If you suspect that this is ‘false dawn’-though it is not really-do not be grieved as a false dawn promises the ‘true dawn’.

Rejoice and sing the praises of the happy future! Let your souls overflow with the glad-tidings of that future, and let your eyes be filled with tears of happiness! I hope that your centuries-old longings are about to come to an end, and you are at the mysterious door opening to a spiritual world. Now you should bow before your Lord humbly, acknowledging your innate powerlessness, then set out for eternity with love, zeal and energy, so that you may deserve His help and exhilarating company during your journey, and watch the beauties displayed by Him.

When you reach, in such spirituality, the door of the Eternal World, the angels will welcome you, saying, ‘Peace be upon you! Well have you done! Enter you here, to dwell therein forever!’ You will respond to this welcome with gratitude and say: ‘Praise be to God, who has truly fulfilled His promise to us, and given us the earth to inherit, and that we may dwell in Paradise wherever we desire.!

Source: Fountain Magazine, Issue 9 / January – March 1995