« Turkey Is Getting More Secular, Not Religious | Main | Insulting Kurdishness (And Even More Than That) »
September 30, 2008
A Mosque Reform On The Way?
[Originally published in Turkish Daily News]
Turkey's official religious institution, the Directorate of Religious Affairs, took a bold step two years ago by launching a project cleansing the Islamic tradition from misogyny. What the institution did was to employ a team of religious scholars to prepare a new collection of hadiths (the deeds and sayings attributed to Prophet Muhammad), and remove the degrading remarks against women, which represent not the original message of Islam but the male-dominated culture of the past. With that project, the Directorate, which is called Diyanet İşleri Başkanlğı" or simply Diyanet in Turkish, had shown that it was not just open-minded but also brave.
Libraries, Cafes, and Worship
That meticulous revision and recollection of the hadiths is still ongoing in Ankara and it might take several more months to complete. Meanwhile, another bold project by the Diyanet is on the way. The institution now plans to bring a set of regulations and reforms that will modernize Turkey's 80-thousand-or-so mosques. According to a news story that daily Hürriyet ran Sept. 19 with the headline, Revolutionary Step from Diyanet, some nice novelties are on the road:
- Mosques will be turned into places used for not only worship but also social activity. In the year 2010, libraries, cafeterias, public halls and classrooms will be added to some 200 mosques throughout Turkey. Some will have computer rooms. The long-term goal will be to have at least five such multi-purpose mosques in every town whose population is bigger than 20 thousand people.
- To decide on the structure of these new mosques, a competition for projects will be held. All new ideas will be considered.
- Personnel of the mosques, the imams and the muezzins, will be educated to handle such tasks. Foreign language courses will be arranged for them. Moreover the institution will try to employ its new personnel mostly from among graduates of theology faculties, and especially those with PhD's.
- Imams will get feedback from the local community by distributing questionnaires that will ask, How can we serve you better?
The Diyanet will also conduct research on puzzling questions such as euthanasia for hopeless patients and abortion for disabled embryos. (One should add that the Diyanet has already found that stem cell research is deemed OK from an Islamic perspective. When compared to those of Christianity, Islamic views on such biological matters are generally less rigid.)
Another reform that the Diyanet will introduce, according to Hürriyet's story, is to arrange the time of Friday prayers according to work hours. Currently the time of this prayer, to which all devout Muslim men are expected to join, rotates the whole year around noon hours depending on the Sun's position. If this rescheduling takes place, then it will mean that not just the traditional timer, the sun, but also the modern one, office hours, will be taken into consideration. They can't start the prayer before Sun reaches its climax, but they can postpone it a bit.
Maybe these reforms are not revolutionary, as Hürriyet called, but they are definitely meaningful. (By the way, let me note that Diyanet officials don't like the term reform, which, in Turkish language, implies a more fundamental change than those they are introducing.) The Diyanet is actually daring to modify the structure of a well-established Islamic institution according to the needs of modern society. The underlying logic here is absolutely imperative.
By moving on from that logic, much bigger steps can be taken in the future, too. The current mosque culture we Muslims have -- in which men and women are segregated; one can sit only on the floor; no sound except the human voice is heard -- is built on tradition, not revelation. Tradition has its merits, to be sure, but it was formed in an age that was very different from ours. At that time, the society's common lifestyle was not too different from the one we find today in mosques. But now, while we still keep the mosque in the same old way, society has changed enormously. In this age, members of a modern family would prefer to go to a place of worship in which they can sit together as family. Yet since there are no such mosques around, such families often avoid it all together. One reason for the excessive secularization of Westernized Turks is this.
Modern Mosques
So, perhaps Islam needs a totally new form of mosque, along with the classic ones, in order to appeal to modern people. Perhaps a place which has post-modern architecture, a smiling receptionist, and a conference hall… Conservative Muslims often abhor such ideas, because they see them as a plot to dilute religion. The real plot might be though to keep Islam forcibly in a medieval form that will make it less and less relevant to our contemporaries.
The fine line, as usual, is in a third way that is different from both the secularist and the ultra-conservative positions. For the secularist, the mosque should be an irrelevant relic for 21st century society. For the ultra-conservative, it should be a place which should keep people in the 7th century. But what we really need is a lively mosque which will speak to the minds of the 21st century.
I am glad to see that the Diyanet officials -- and especially the institution's wise president, Dr. Ali Bardakoğlu -- get that. They should be welcomed and encouraged.
Posted by Mustafa Akyol at September 30, 2008 1:55 PM
Beautiful article. We Turks continue our role as the forward thinkers of the Islamic World.
Posted by: Muratcan at September 30, 2008 9:58 PM
Instead of adjusting our religion to our life style, we must adjust our life to our religion.
It's as simple as that.
Posted by: Yusuf at October 1, 2008 4:52 AM
"Instead of adjusting our religion to our life style, we must adjust our life to our religion.
It's as simple as that."
Does it matter? Everyone chooses to live their lives differently. It is called diversity and it is wonderful and I am proud we have it in Turkey.
Posted by: Muratcan at October 1, 2008 9:47 PM
Thank you for another great article Mustafa. But, I would like to add that while these ideas seem may seem revolutionary they really are not. If you look at the life of the Prophet PBUH and his companions the mosque was never simply a place where people only prayed the five daily prayers but it was the center of life, it is where people socialized, where they were educated and even where politics and diplomacy took place. In addition, all of the famous mosques built in Istanbul and other Turkish cities by the Ottomans were built as complexes with multiple uses for the community. So in this sense these reforms are returning the Mosque back to being the centers of the community which they have always been since the beginning of Islam and not simply places where the five daily prayers take place.
We can also see examples of these ideas in the Islamic Centers built in the west where they not only hold daily prayers but house schools, classes and other community and social functions.
Posted by: Ahmed Amonette at October 2, 2008 3:23 PM
Ahh what you say is true Ahmed, the Ottoman mosques were a hustling bustling places.
Well the revolution is computer rooms then :)
Posted by: Muratcan at October 2, 2008 6:02 PM
I'm not disagreeing with Mustafa or you, Muratcan. It's just that some rules are rules and changing them is not the way to go.
Like bringing the whole family into one prayer area. There's segregation for a reason and not for no reason. Also, there is not a lot of room in many mosques already and putting the two areas togehter would complicate things. Plus, the reason of a mosque it to be in contact with God and not so much to be with your family.
Posted by: Yusuf at October 3, 2008 11:57 PM
This article is another piece of Islamist propaganda, disguised as "modern", "progressive", "liberal" thinking. At the core of the matter is the attempt to make mosques a centre of all social life. What Akyol defends and promotes is a "soft" form of theocracy. But it is a theocracy nonetheless. Akyol does not accept that people can live without religion. No, religion must be imposed on everybody! If you don't like traditional, conservative mosques, we will build new, "progressive" ones for you. This is his thinking. It's just another expression of the same totalitarian, Islamofascist mindset, of which Akyol is a prime exhibit.
Posted by: Parviz at October 4, 2008 2:09 PM
Parviz:
Maybe we should forbid religion in Turkey? Let us close down all the mosques, churches and synagogues in Turkey!
You sound like a hardcore communist and ofcourse you are a kemalist.
Posted by: Osman§ at October 5, 2008 1:20 PM
No one should be forced to practice any religion. Religion should also be kept private, so that people maintain their own choice instead of being pressured to practice religion.
Posted by: A. A. B. at October 6, 2008 7:16 AM
This article has been Mecchoed!
Posted by: Fareed at October 6, 2008 11:34 PM
Osman reacts in a typically hysterical way. If someone objects to excessive prominence of religion in public life, it means that he/she is "a hardcore communist who would forbid mosques" in Turkey. What a pathetic fanatical mindset!
Posted by: Parviz at October 7, 2008 9:53 PM
Parviz:
I am not even religious. But there is something called freedom of religion in democracies. The headscarf ban is sick.
Posted by: Osman at October 8, 2008 12:37 PM
Osman, you are deliberately confusing things. There is no such a thing as headscarf ban in Turkey. Women in Turkey are free to wear headscarves. But they cannot do so in universities, schools and state institutions, because the public space has to be neutral, not religious. This is the definition of secularism in Turkey. And actually it has been endorsed by the European Court of human rights (ECHR). Is ECHR sick?
Posted by: Parviz at October 9, 2008 8:37 PM
Parviz:
411 of 550 MPs abolished this sick ban.Then the Kemalist Constitution Court abolished the Parliamentary decision.
And you think that this is democratic?
Does ECHR have a higher status that the turkisg Parlament?
Posted by: Osman at October 11, 2008 4:42 PM
Yes, ECHR is higher than 411 hands raised for chaos. Women in headscarves cannot go to universities. Full stop. Nothing to discuss here.
Posted by: Parviz at October 12, 2008 6:35 PM
Osman,
Do you really believe that democracies work on a simple arithmetic? Did you know that perhaps 90 percent of the population during the late 1970s believed that military take over was a good move for the political system at the time. Do you think they were right?
Do you seriously think that the Turkish electoral system and inter-party system is truly democratic so that the outcome of any decision would reflect the true "public will"? Let me remind you that the threshold for parties to be elected to the Parliament in Sweden is only 3 percent. Do you know the percentage in Turkish system?
There are no correct answers to these questions. My concern is that you are freely lecturing on democracy (which I advocate) but your reasoning borders tyranny. Be careful with numbers...you seem to be fooled by them. They are not a good indicator of the level of democracy a country practices.
Posted by: cingoz at October 12, 2008 11:08 PM
The threshold for parties to be elected to the Parliament in Sweden is 4%.
The threshold for parties to be elected is 10% in Turkey? But why do we have this high threshold and when was it introduced in Turkey? You are right, Turkey must lover this threshold.
Posted by: Osman at October 15, 2008 5:50 PM
Parvis wrote:
"Yes, ECHR is higher than 411 hands raised for chaos. Women in headscarves cannot go to universities. Full stop. Nothing to discuss here. "
What? Are u serious? Do you Parviz have a higher status than the turkish parlament?
Why can PKK supporters go to unis but not headscarf wearing women?
Why can members of extreme leftist groups go to unis but not headscarf wearing girls?
Why can ultra-nationalists go to unis but not headscarf wearing women?
Why can radical islamists with long beards go to unis but not "headscarfed" women?
Posted by: Osman at October 15, 2008 6:01 PM
Positive Developments, and a lot of innovation.
But there is a fear that looms, is that of too much innovation may not deviate the actual religion.
Postponing time for solat.. I dun think is a right idea to be accpeted universally - may be in turkey, where social life if even harder to modify with looney secularists thugs around.
But in my country, Malaysia - social life can more easily adapt to Prayer times than prayer times actually altered.
We here dont have too many secularist thugs like in turkey - noises only come from non-muslims.
Posted by: Shafee at November 1, 2008 5:12 AM
Shafee,
What is the "actual religion" you are referring to? Malaysian style? Saudi Arabian style? Afghani style? Iranian style? Egyptian style?
At what point does a religion deviate from the "fundamentals"? Do you think Islam is such a monolithic religion that we would all know when we deviate from the "ideal" point?
I can list almost hundreds of Islamic practices that are archaic and primitive. Just have a look at some of the comments of Islamic writers in Turkey regarding the Uzmez case. It is shameful how they justify a relationship (I would like to call is abuse) between a 14 year kid and a 76 year old guy. The argument is that since the girl is at her puberty, this relationship is perfectly legitimate according to the Islamic beliefs. How would Malaysia deal with this issue? If Malaysian authorities penalize such a relationship would they be deviating from their "fundamentals"? Or should we ask to some kind of a semi-illiterate qadi so that he can try to make sense of almost 1500 year old writings, and rule on the basis of it?
Or we can go the Malaysian way. "Lets go with what the majority says". And as long as we socialize our children in a way that these practices are perfectly fine then which 14 year old kid would complain about it? Which child would say they do not want to wear a headscarf? All thugs are eliminated from the getgo. Brilliant...Problem solved.
Posted by: cingoz at November 1, 2008 10:12 PM
Pay attention to the hatred of religion and religious people flowing from the keyboards of secular-minded people in this discussion. They think that secular humanism should not be kept private but should be imposed on all people in the society while God-centred real religion must not be given the same rights as the "secular humanist religion" and must be confined to the private lives of individuals.
Revolting double standards and an oppressive, intolerant mindset coming from the secular-minded people. They target our lifestyle with impunity and try all types of official bans on religion and every kind of propaganda to restrict our practice of religion while they practise their secular humanism everywhere within the society and while furthermore they impose it on us through the coercive and propaganda powers of the nation state and the mass media. Unfortunately they do hold the coercive and violent power of most states in the world, including the US and Turkey and use it to infringe on our rights. But do not forget that we religious-minded people have the power of God behind us and He will protect us from your violent and non-violent designs and policies against us.
Posted by: Mehmed Mustafa at November 8, 2008 9:43 AM
Mehmed Mustafa,
Is that the way you legitimize the sexual abuse of a 14 year old child in Turkey?
Instead of legitimizing some of the primitive Islamic practices against women by creating invisible enemies (secular humanism in this case) and pathetically calling for an Islamic crusade against ghosts, I think the Islamic mindset needs to reform its interpretation of Islam over certain issues, including the rights of women and the freedom to chose - which again the Islamic mindset shamelessly abuses. Democratic regimes are not based on "tolerance", and religious rights should not legitimize child abuse. This is not some kind of a battle of concepts; conflict of interpretation; or clash of civilizations. Simply think outside of your box, try to free yourself from dogma and wisely utilize the ability to reason (a gift of God if you wish) in your search for the right. But apparently God was not even handed when he was distributing this ability.
Posted by: cingoz at November 8, 2008 6:50 PM
Mr. Cingoz,
I have not legitimized the sexual abuse of any child. What audacity of you to accuse me of doing such a thing when you don't know anything about me. No religious person can legitimize such a thing either.
It is another evidence of your pathological animosity to religion and religious people that you distort people's viewpoints in this way. And it is your dangerous enmity which drives you to assert that since I am one of those bad, oppressible Muslims, I, a complete stranger to you, must be thinking in one unacceptable, outrageous way about something. This is your calumnious way of discussing.
Indeed you are confirming with every one of your new statements that you indeed hold a horrible amount of hate, intolerance and enmity against people who live in the same society as you. Oh my Allah, what kind of hate-filled people we are living with! What kind of a terroristic secularist danger is so close to us!
I return your pseudo-advice to you. Get out of your secular humanistic dogmas, icons and idols. Think only a little open-mindedly. Then you will find new peace. It is the irony that contrary to your insults to me, you hold little ability to reason wisely yourself but boast that you are wiser than other people.
Stop this hate culture of distorting and/or inventing religious people's opinions and putting words and opinions on the mouths of these people and then blaming them for these outrageous opinions! Try to love your neighbours and stop planning to burn their houses. In this way you will find new peace and will let other people have peace.
Posted by: Mehmed Mustafa at November 9, 2008 12:44 PM
Mr. Mehmed Mustafa,
Please read the previous treads to understand what I have been talking about. I have no intolerance or hate towards any religion. I have been simply referring to the "abuse" of Islam (in particular, the abuse of a 14 year old kid in Turkey; how the Islamic media protected him - not all I must admit), and the extent to which Islam needs to reform itself. But your comments just argue how "secular minded" people oppress your practices, rights, and etc. and how much I hate religious people, how smart I think I was and etc.
I am missing your point. I will make mine clear, however. Some of the Islamic practices are primitive (due to interpretation, and etc. the details of which does not concern me - especially in terms of women rights), and Islam needs to reform itself in order to be accepted as a non-violent religion that is consonant with the principles of democracy. Muslims (nationwide or globally) must unite against fanatics and those who are abusing their beliefs in the name of Islam if they would like to build the reputation of a peaceful religion. There will always be fanatics and abusers but those cases will be isolated and will not be associated with Islam. There are some Muslim authors who specifically address this issue and share the same thoughts.
In very simplistic terms, I see no light at the end of the tunnel for Muslims as far as their reputation is concerned unless they do some housecleaning. Whether I am a communist, socialist, Westerner, gay, crusader, humanist, free-mason, Jewish or alien has anything to do with this simple observation. Just to make it clear, I have no personal issues towards you or any religious people but I expect (rightfully I assume) a proper response when someone abuses your religion in a way that concerns all.
Posted by: cingoz at November 28, 2008 6:56 PM