Skip to main content

[43] Ascent and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful The Bestower of Mercy

Sultan Abdul Hamid aimed to win the loyalty of Sufi orders for the Ottoman state and to encourage the idea of Islamic unity. He effectively linked the caliphate’s center – Istanbul – with the tekkes and Sufi gathering places across the Islamic world. [Footnote a] He used the Sufi movement to promote Islamic unity and also involved ascetics outside the Sufi tradition to support the idea of Islamic congregation. In the caliphate’s capital, a main committee was created, made up of scholars and Sufi leaders, who acted as advisors to the Sultan on issues related to Islamic unity. The prominent members of the central committee of the Islamic University included Sheikh Ahmad As’ad, the representative of the Sharif in Hijaz, Sheikh Abu al-Huda al-Sayyadi, the leader of the Rifa’i order, and Sheikh Muhammad Dhafir al-Trabulsi, the head of the civil order and a distinguished scholar of the Holy Mosque in Mecca. They were joined by several other notable figures.

The Ottoman Empire set up various subordinate organizations throughout its territories, all managed by a central committee. One of these organizations was based in Mecca, overseen by the Sharif of Mecca, with the main goal of fostering Islamic unity during the Hajj season among the pilgrims. Another important organization was located in Baghdad, with a similar purpose for the followers of the Qadiri order, who often journeyed from North Africa to honor Sheikh Abdul Qadir al-Jilani, the founder of the order. In a specific year, the number of these pilgrims was estimated to be about 250,000.

The Baghdad Committee was focused on preparing individuals to promote the concept of an Islamic university and to resist French colonialism in North Africa. French intelligence characterized the actions taken by these individuals from North Africa, who had come from Baghdad, as provocations by certain religious leaders affiliated with the Qadiri order. The Central Committee of the Islamic University in Istanbul has an African branch operating in North Africa, which functions in complete secrecy. Its mission is to coordinate efforts among the religious groups in that region, resisting French occupation. The groups involved are: (Shadhili, Qadiri, and Madani). The impact and reputation of this movement were so significant that the French intelligence agency in North Africa remarked: (The Sultan Abdul Hamid, as the leader of the Islamic community, is able to coordinate a local reaction due to his strong connections with religious organizations in North Africa, which can, if needed, oppose any foreign authority.)

The French intelligence was unable to uncover the methods of the Sufi orders associated with the Islamic caliphate in North Africa. All it managed to do was attempt to undermine the authority of Sultan Abdul Hamid in the minds of the Muslims in North Africa, as well as to challenge the policy of Islamic unity. This was pursued through a French strategy that involved:

– Enticing certain Sufi leaders with financial incentives and positions to support France and its policies in North Africa.

– Preventing pilgrims from performing the Hajj, so they do not meet the advocates of the Islamic University during the appropriate occasion. This means: not officially announcing a ban on the Hajj, but rather implementing health measures to instill fear in the people, such as spreading news about the presence of cholera. Sultan Abdul Hamid sent a group of ascetics and mystics to India to work on thwarting the English attempts aimed at stripping the caliphate from the Ottomans and granting it to the Arabs. This caravan also made contact with some rulers of the Arabian Peninsula, particularly in Hijaz. There were connections between Sultan Abdul Hamid, in his capacity as the head of the Islamic University, the Caliph of Muslims, and the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, and the gatherings of Sufi orders and their leaders in Turkestan, South Africa, and China. Some of these connections have been revealed, while most remain insufficiently documented. He succeeded in uniting the Sufi orders; however, he chose to remain silent about many of their doctrinal deviations. Consequently, during that period, the Sufi orders strayed from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, except for those whom Allah had mercy upon. This deviation weakened the Ummah and contributed to the fall of the Sunni Ottoman Islamic Caliphate. [An Excerpt from Ad-Dawla Al-Uthmaniyyah Awamil An-Nuhud Wa Asbab As-Suqut 6/468-470]

Footnote a: http://www.ibntaymiyyah.com/articles/dgfil-the-origin-of-the-sufis-is-from-basrah-iraq.cfm

Reflections on some statements of Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi al-Mad’khali 90

In The Name of Allāh, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

It is necessary to bring together the disparager and the disparaged, the refuter and the refuted, and to seek judgment in the (presence) of the scholars. It is not permissible to pass judgement on the refuted and disparaged person in absentia: 

This is one of the Shubuhaat (1) of Adnan Ar’ur, when he used to demand (or request) from Shaikh Rabee, may Allāh have mercy upon him, to seek judgement (together with him) in the (presence) of Al-Allamah Al-Uthaymin, may Allāh have mercy upon him, concerning the Mukhaalafaat and Dalaalaat (2) for which he was criticised. He used to falsely accuse the scholars – who denounced him due to the observations they made regarding his falsehoods – that they pass judgment on him in absentia, meaning  before Al-Muhakamah (i.e. that in order to make a judgement against him, both him and his opponent must be present in the presence of a scholar), and according to him, this is not permissible. 

Al-Allamah Rabee Al-Mad’khali, may Allāh have mercy upon him, was asked, as found in his treatise “Dar Baghi Adnan” about this Shubha (3): “What is your opinion regarding Adnan’s speech as follows: ‘Among the matters that are universally agreed upon by the nations- Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians – is that during judicial rulings and judgement, it is incumbent to hear from both parties. It maybe that he did not intend this, maybe he did not desire it, maybe it is a slip of the tongue, maybe it is a Shami expression which is different from a Saudi, maybe it is a Maghribi expression which is different from a Mashriqi. (4) When a man rejects Niyyah [i.e. intention which is a requirement in acts of worship] in Islam, then a judgment is issued without hearing the other side, (leading to accusations of) disbelief; how is (this) disbelief? Meaning, what is its ruling (i.e. the ruling on rejecting Niyyah in islam)? A disbeliever! So how can one judge, be pleased with and accept that a person has rejected Niyyah in Islam merely based on a phone call from an unknown person. Masha-Allah, masha-Allah, (is this) based on knowledge and piety; masha Allah, based on understanding?! Someone on the phone from Europe is talking about a well-known person who is a pioneer in Dawah and lives among them, so what prevented them from verifying this issue?

Shaikh Rabee, may Allāh have mercy upon him, replied: 

Indeed, we are profoundly flabbergasted by this man’s hotchpotch in his speech about the scholars, his belittling of them and his self-aggrandizement in this instance. We are profoundly flabbergasted that he conflates judicial rulings with fatwas, so, at times considering their responses as fatwas and at other times as judicial decisions. This is a strange hotchpotch and an atrociously flawed argument on his part. Sadly, he has placed himself in the position of mentoring senior scholars- members of the Council of Senior Scholars- who have devoted their lives to knowledge, fatwas, and judiciary rulings. They know what is required of them when a questioner asks them questions and when they issue rulings. In any case, it can be understood from his speech (i.e. Adnan) regarding judicial rulings that it is not permissible to issue rulings on someone who is absent under any circumstances.

This speech is false. There are numerous situations where a judgment can be made on a person who is absent and it is not a condition that he should be present, nor is a judge obliged to hear from both parties. This matter is well-established and its proof is that Hind bint Utbah said to the prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, “Indeed, Abu Sufyan is a stingy man and he does not give us what suffices me and my children, can I take from his wealth?” He (i.e. the prophet) said: “Take from his wealth that which suffices you and your children”. [Al-Bukhari 5364 and Muslim 1714]

He did not say: “Where is Abu Sufyan? Where is he, bring him to me so that he hears this speech?” Allāh’s messenger, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, passed a judgement on him while he was absent. He allowed this woman – the wife of Abu Sufyah – to take from his wealth even without his consent. This is a ruling on an absent person. In the Mad’habs of Ahmad, Shafi’i, and Malik, and other than them among the scholars of the Ummah, is that in matters regarding the rights of the people and mutual dealings, it is permissible to make a judgement on the one who is absent.

Here, I reference what Al-Bukhari has stated. He said: “Chapter: Judgment on the one who is absent” with his chain of narration to Urwah, from Aisha that Hind said to the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, “Indeed, Abu Sufyan is a stingy man and I am in need from his wealth”, so he said: “Take what suffices you and your children in a reasonable manner”. Al-Hafidh (i.e. Ibn Hajr) said about the statement “(Judgement) on the one who is absent”, meaning, (concerning) the rights of the children of Adam, but not Allāh’s rights, based on the consensus (of the scholars that this applies) even if evidence is established against an absent person regarding theft, for instance, financial judgments that is other than the judgment of cutting the hand. Ibn Battal said: “Malik, Al-Layth, Al-Shafi’i, Abu Ubaid, and others have permitted judgments on the absent person”.

Ibn Abd al-Barr said: “the comprehensive nature of judicial rulings in lawsuits”: Judgment can be made against an absentee with regards to rights, mutual dealings, debts, and all rights, with the exception of real estate because no judgement is made about it, except if the person’s absence is prolonged and it harms his opponent. If this becomes the case, a judgement is made. This is the Mad’hab of Malik. When it is the case that it is permissible to pass a judgment on a dead person, judgement on an absent person is even more permissible. Also, in the Mad’hab of Imam Ahmad, judgement on an absent person is permissible”. The author of “Al-Mughni” reported a difference of opinion on this matter, then he (concluded that what) carries more weight is the permissibility (of passing judgement on an absent person) and he used as evidence the hadith of Aa’isha in the story of Hind, while also pointing out contradictions in Abu Hanifa’s stance.

Adnan neither knows the value of the scholars nor the value of knowledge, nor does he know the conditions of Fatwa. Despite this, he behaves arrogantly towards the scholars and makes them the most ignorant people. So, all the nations make it a condition with regards to judicial rulings and lawsuits that the judge should hear from both parties; all the nations, in Adnan’s view, are acquainted with this, Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, while these scholars are ignorant of these matters that are known to the nations of disbelief.

Then the questioner said: May Allāh protect you. What is your view on his earlier statement where he said that perhaps it wasn’t intended that way, it could have been a slip of the tongue, or that the expression might differ between Syrian and Saudi dialects, or even between Moroccan and Eastern expressions, thus, one passes a judgement without hearing the other side in the matter of disbelief. How can that be considered disbelief, meaning, when a man rejects the Niyyah in Islam?

Shaikh Rabee- may Allāh have mercy upon him – responded: This man has elevated himself and his speech to a status unprecedented by anyone else. Scholars listen to the speech of a scholar or someone other than him, clarifies for him that it is a mistake, and then criticises. (For instance), one narrates a hadith and makes a mistake, he (another person) says: “So and so has made a mistake, so and so has misperceived, so and so makes a lot of mistakes, so and so narrates munkar hadith”. He does not summon this narrator and say: “Maybe you intended such and such; inform me of what you intended, perhaps you intended such”. (Rather), he passes judgement on his speech that it is an error. He reads a book, then finds an error in it, he authors volumes to debate this scholar regarding what he considers as mistakes, and none says that (one uses) this method mentioned by Adnan.

Al-Shafi’i engaged in discussions with Malik and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, the companion of Abu Hanifa, regarding statements they made and rulings they issued. No one said to him: “Why did you approach Muhammad ibn al-Hasan or why did you not engage in discussion with Malik during his lifetime. Why? Why? Why?” No one says this, except the ignorant and the dull-witted who utter the likes of this speech, and put forward such objections. The Salaf used to critique people regarding their beliefs, their statements, and their actions, and they considered this as part of enjoining good and forbidding evil. They would issue fatwas based on the statements they received, and no one says they did not summon the speaker and say, “What did you intend, this or do you intended such and such”. 

An Excerpt from Juhud Al-Allamah Rabee Al-Mad’khali Fee Naqd Shubuhat Al-Hizbiyeen An Manhaj An-Naqd Inda Ahli As-Sunnah As-Salafiyyeen 165-170


[1] Shubuhaat: doubts or ambiguities that are made to resemble truth but are falsehood in reality

[2] Mukhalafaat: deeds, beliefs, or methodologies that are opposition to what is right in the divine legislation. Dalaalaat: deeds, beliefs or methodologies that are tantamount to misguidance in religious practice.

[3] Shubhah: the singular of Shubuhaat

[4] Shaam: includes countries like Syria, Lebanon, Palestine etc. Maghrib: includes Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia etc. Mashriqh: includes Egypt, Sudan, etc

[42] Ascent and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sultan Abdul Hamid viewed the idea of the Islamic University as a strategy to fulfill specific goals, such as:

Tackling the adversaries of Islam who are influenced by Western education, especially those occupying critical administrative and political positions in Islamic nations overall, and more specifically within the Ottoman Empire, and to assert their limits when they come to understand that a formidable and robust Islamic barrier is obstructing their path.

Efforts to curb the ambitions of European colonial powers and Russia emerge when they recognize that Muslims have come together as one, becoming aware of their colonial intentions and opposing them through Islamic unity. This demonstrates that Muslims can form a formidable political and military force in response to the cultural, intellectual, and doctrinal encroachments from Russian and European Christianity.

The new Islamic unity plays a crucial role in shaping global politics. The Ottoman Empire regains its strength as a caliphate, facilitating its revitalization and equipping it with modern scientific advancements across various fields. In this manner, it can reclaim its identity and serve as a historical lesson. It is asserted: “Indeed, working to fortify the Islamic political and social entity is preferable to neglecting it and establishing a foreign entity both intellectually and socially on the same land. Reviving the caliphate position should serve as a powerful instrument rather than a mere formality as it was for a period, ensuring that the sultan is not the sole figure confronting the ambitions of the West and its internal agents, but rather nurturing a collective awareness among all Muslim communities. He will be the symbol, the guide, and the unifier.

The British historian Arnold Toynbee highlighted this when he remarked: “Sultan Abdul Hamid sought, through his Islamic policy, to bring Muslims around the globe together under one banner, representing nothing short of a counter-offensive by Muslims against the Western world’s attack on the Muslim domain.”

Consequently, Sultan Abdul Hamid made full use of all the resources available during his reign by enlisting advocates from diverse nationalities across the Islamic world. This included scholars, influential political figures, and missionaries who traveled to various regions to engage with Muslim communities, comprehend their needs, and communicate the Sultan’s views and directives. His goal was to spread Islamic knowledge, set up Islamic study centers both at home and abroad, publish vital Islamic texts, and for the first time in Ottoman history, implement Arabic as the state language, a process now referred to as the Arabization of the Ottoman state. He also prioritised the renovation and construction of mosques and places of worship, launched fundraising initiatives to restore mosques globally, enhanced transportation to link different areas of the Ottoman Empire, aimed to win the allegiance of Arab tribal leaders, and founded a school in the capital of the caliphate to educate the children of tribal chiefs and prepare them for administrative roles. Furthermore, he sought to secure the backing of Sufi leaders, utilised the Islamic press to promote unity among Muslims, employed certain newspapers to advocate for this cause, and focused on fostering scientific and technological advancements within the Ottoman state, modernising it as needed.

A group of advocates, including Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (footnote a), Mustafa Kamal from Egypt, Abu al-Huda al-Sayyadi from Syria, Abdul Rashid Ibrahim from Siberia, and the Sanusi movement in Libya, among others, came together to champion the cause of Islamic unity.

Firstly, Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Sultan Abdul Hamid: Jamal al-Din al-Afghani endorsed Sultan Abdul Hamid’s vision for Islamic unity and suggested initiatives that went beyond the Sultan’s aspirations. The Sultan envisioned a unified purpose among Islamic nations and a cohesive movement, which would represent a practical emotional unity, while the caliphate would embody dignity and strength. In contrast, al-Afghani offered the Sultan a strategy aimed at uniting both Sunni and Shia Muslims. (footnote b) In this context, Sultan Abdul Hamid’s perspective was confined to merging the political efforts of the two factions to combat global colonialism. He significantly gained from Afghani’s advocacy for Islamic unity, despite their differing ideologies. Several factors contribute to this divergence, including:

Afghani’s belief in the unity of Muslims, while simultaneously supporting the revolutionaries against Sultan Abdul Hamid from the Turkish nationalists and the Ottomans in general.

Afghan’s call for the unity of Islamic peoples, aiming for a cohesive structure like a single building, stands firm against European nations intent on dividing the Ottoman Empire and contributing to its downfall. Simultaneously, he did not address French colonialism, not even with a word of condemnation, at a time when Sultan Abdul Hamid needed to resist the French in North Africa.

His condemnation of British colonialism, even though Sultan Abdul Hamid mentions: that the Ottoman intelligence obtained a plan prepared in the British Foreign Office, in which Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Blunt participated. This plan aimed to remove the caliphate from Sultan Abdul Hamid and from the Ottomans in general. Blunt is a British politician working in the British Foreign Office and the author of the book “The Future of Islam,” in which he explicitly called for efforts to strip the caliphate from the Ottomans and bestow it upon the Arabs. Mustafa Kamal Pasha, the leader of the national movement in Egypt, responded to Blunt in his famous book “The Eastern Question.”

He stated: In summary, the distinguished author of “The Future of Islam” posits – reflecting the hopes of his community – that it would be most appropriate for Islam to designate England as its state, with the caliph being English. In light of Russian ambitions and the conflicts waged by Russia against the Ottoman Empire, along with their annexation of Ottoman lands, al-Afghani’s perspective on Russian expansion was unique in relation to the idea of Islamic unity; he recognized the crucial and strategic interests that Russia held in India, which necessitated their occupation. He did not contest this potential occupation; instead, he recommended that the Russians adopt the most sensible and practical strategy to achieve it, proposing that they collaborate with Persia and Afghanistan to facilitate access to India, on the condition that these nations would partake in the gains and advantages. The theological disagreement that emerged among scholars in Istanbul and al-Afghani, coupled with the release of Shaikh (Khalil Fawzi’s) book titled: “The Cutting Swords” which sought to challenge al-Afghani’s views, and al-Afghani’s reticence regarding this issue, as well as his lack of self-defense. The book was originally in Arabic and subsequently translated into Turkish during that period.

The Sultan sought to centralise power in his own hands after facing challenges from his ministers, military leaders, and influential figures swayed by Western ideologies. These individuals aimed to create a European-style democracy featuring an elected council that would represent all the diverse peoples of the Ottoman Empire. However, Sultan Abdul Hamid was against this idea, contending that Muslim representatives would only make up about half of the parliament’s total members. On the other hand, Jamal al-Din al-Afghani was a proponent of democracy and opposed the concentration of authority in one person, championing the cause of free speech. In his memoirs, the Sultan  described Jamal al-Din al-Afghani as a fraud with connections to British intelligence:

“I discovered a scheme devised in the British Foreign Office by a fraud named Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and an Englishman named Blunt, which proposed to strip the caliphate from the Turks. They suggested to the British that Sharif Hussein, the Emir of Mecca, should be declared the caliph for Muslims. I had known Jamal al-Din al-Afghani personally. He was in Egypt and was quite an imposing figure. At one point, he claimed to be the Mahdi and proposed that he should incite all the Muslims in Central Asia. I recognized that he was not capable of such an undertaking, and he was aligned with the English. It seemed very likely that the English had groomed him to test my resolve, so I promptly declined, leading him to form an alliance with Blunt. I called him to Istanbul with the help of my father, Al-Huda Al-Sayyadi Al-Halabi, a man esteemed across the Arab world. Both Munif Pasha, the former guardian of the Afghans, and the poet Abdul Haq Hamid played a role in this situation, leading to Jamal al-Din al-Afghani’s arrival in Istanbul, from which I ensured he would not depart again”.

Concerning Jamal al-Din al-Afghani’s perspective on Sultan Abdul Hamid, he remarked: “If Sultan Abdul Hamid were measured against four of the most exceptional men of his time, his intellect, shrewdness, and political skill would surpass theirs. This is particularly evident in his ability to manage his associates. It is not surprising that he successfully navigates the challenges to his rule posed by Western powers, leaving his opponents content with his presence, behavior, and reasoning, whether they are kings, princes, ministers, or ambassadors.”

He continued: “I observed him mastering the complexities of political matters and the motives of Western nations, always ready with a contingency plan for any crisis that could arise for the king. What impressed me the most was the covert strategies and formidable tools he created to thwart Europe from orchestrating any perilous actions against the Ottoman Empire, making it clear to them that the disintegration of the Ottoman sultanate would only result in widespread devastation across all European lands”. He remarked, “Regarding my observations on the Sultan’s vigilance, his wisdom, caution, and preparedness to counter the schemes of Europe, along with his noble intentions and commitment to uplift the state, which would, in turn, elevate the Muslims collectively, it inspired me to reach out to him, and I pledged my allegiance to him for the caliphate and kingship. I was fully aware that the Islamic territories in the East cannot evade the traps set by Europe, nor the efforts to weaken, divide, and ultimately diminish them one by one, except through a united awakening, awareness, and solidarity under the banner of the supreme caliph.”

The mystery surrounding Jamal al-Din al-Afghani is intriguing; some support him while others cast accusations. For example, Mustafa Fawzi Abdul Latif Ghazal’s book, “The Call of Jamal al-Din al-Afghani in the Balance of Islam,” argues that he played a role in the nation’s decline in modern history. In contrast, Dr. Mohsen Abdul Hamid’s work, “Jamal al-Din al-Afghani: The Misunderstood Reformer,” depicts him as a reformer, despite claims of his involvement with Masonic lodges. [An Excerpt from Ad-Dawla Al-Uthmaniyyah Awamil An-Nuhud Wa Asbab As-Suqut 6/462-468]

—————————————————————–

Footnote a: Jamal al-Din al-Afghani: 

https://abukhadeejah.com/jamal-aldin-afghani-muhammad-abduh-rashid-rida-hasan-albanna-radicals-modernists/

http://www.ikhwanis.com/articles/oqqxcoo-the-baatinee-movements-secret-organizations-freemasonry-al-ikhwaan-al-qaidah-and-isis-part-3.cfm

Footnote b: Unity between Sunni and Shia:

https://abukhadeejah.com/understanding-the-differences-between-ahlus-sunnah-and-the-shiah-free-leaflet-download-print-share/

http://www.shia.bs/index.cfm

[41] Ascent and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Abdul Hamid II

The Islamic University

The concept of the Islamic University did not emerge in the realm of international politics until the reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid, specifically after he ascended to the Ottoman throne in 1876. Once Sultan Abdul Hamid caught his breath, he stripped those influenced by European thought of their powers and took firm control of the country and became invested in the idea of the Islamic University. In his memoirs, he spoke about the necessity of strengthening the bonds of Islamic brotherhood among all Muslims worldwide.

He discussed the relationship between the Ottoman Empire and England, which poses obstacles to Ottoman unity. He stated:

“Islam and Christianity are two distinct perspectives, and it is impossible to merge them within a single civilization.” Therefore, he believed that the English had corrupted the minds of the Egyptians, as some began to prioritise nationalism over religion. They think that it is possible to blend Egyptian civilization with European civilization, and England’s aim in promoting nationalist thought in Islamic countries is to undermine my throne. Furthermore, nationalist thought has made significant progress in Egypt. The Egyptian intellectuals have unwittingly become puppets in the hands of the English, thereby undermining the power of the Islamic state and shaking the prestige of the caliphate”. [Footnote a]

He commented on the English policy towards the caliphate:

“The English newspaper Standard stated: ‘Arabia should come under English protection, and England must control the sacred cities of the Muslims’. England is pursuing two objectives: to weaken the influence of Islam and to strengthen its own power. Therefore, the English want the Khedive in Egypt to be the caliph of the Muslims, but there is not a single sincere Muslim who would accept the Khedive as the Commander of the Faithful; for he began his studies in Geneva, completed them in Vienna, and has adopted the characteristics of the unbelievers”.

When the proposal from England emerged to declare Sharif Hussein, the Emir of Makkah, as the Caliph for Muslims, Sultan Abdul Hamid II acknowledged that he lacked the energy and strength to combat European nations. However, the major powers trembled at the might of the Caliphate, and their fear of it led them to agree on the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire encompassed a diverse array of ethnicities, including Turks, Arabs, Albanians, Bulgarians, Greeks, and Africans, among others. Despite this diversity, the unity of Islam binds us as one family.

Abdul Hamid II expressed his confidence in the unity of the Islamic world by stating: “We must strengthen our ties with other Muslims everywhere; we need to draw closer to one another, more and more. There is no hope for the future except through this unity. The time for it has not yet come; however, it will come. The day will arrive when all believers unite and rise together as one, and in that moment, they will break the necks of the unbelievers.” [An Excerpt from ‘Ad-Dawlah Al-Uthmaaniyyah Awaamil An-Nuhood Wa Asbaab As-Suqoot 6/461-462]

Footnote a: Culture and Islam: https://salafidawahmanchester.com/2025/05/25/the-current-discussion-among-some-african-muslims-about-aththaqafah/

To the “duly inquisitive” who inquired, “What prompted you to share history of the Ottomans?”

To the “duly inquisitive” who inquired, “What prompted you to share history of the Ottomans?”

[40] Ascent and Decline of the Ottoman Empire- [Otto von Bismarck and Others Plotted]

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sultan Abdul Hamid II

The Russian envoy presented preconditions and requested their immediate signing; otherwise, the Russian armies would advance and occupy Istanbul, leaving the Ottomans with no choice but to sign.
The treaty stipulated:

1 – The establishment of borders for Montenegro to resolve the dispute, granting this principality independence.

2 – The Principality of Serbia gains independence and acquires additional territories.

3 – Bulgaria achieves administrative self-governance, paying a specified amount to the Ottoman Empire, with state officials and soldiers being exclusively Christians appointed by the Ottomans and Russians. The prince is elected by the inhabitants, and the Ottomans withdraw their troops completely from Bulgaria. The borders are to be defined.

4 – Romania is granted full independence.

5 – The Sublime Porte commits to protecting Armenians and Christians from Kurds and Circassians.

6 – The Sublime Porte will reform the conditions for Christians on the island of Crete.

7- The Ottoman state is to pay a war indemnity of 250 million gold lira, and Russia may receive territories in exchange for this amount.

8- The straits (Bosphorus and Dardanelles) will remain open to Russian ships in both peace and war.

9 – Muslims in Bulgaria are permitted to migrate to any part of the state they desire.

Thus, the fragmentation of state properties in Europe took place, even though Bulgaria’s expansion caused dissatisfaction among other Balkan countries like Austria, Greece, and Serbia. Moreover, Britain was unhappy with the growing Russian influence in the Balkans and was ready to challenge Russia. In June 1878, Britain obtained the right from the Ottoman Empire to occupy and manage the island of Cyprus, on the condition that it would stay under Ottoman control. In return, Britain agreed to protect the state’s properties in Asia from any further Russian threats, as long as the Sultan from Aleppo promised to carry out necessary reforms in his Asian regions in cooperation with Britain. Additionally, Britain promised to leave Cyprus if the Russians withdrew from the territories they held in Asia.

Sultan Abdul Hamid was initially not pleased with entering this war, which is why Britain supported him. This led to another conference (the Berlin Conference) to ease the situation. He did not approve the treaty and engaged in intense political and diplomatic efforts. The effects of the San Stefano Treaty, along with the fear of Russia competing with Britain, helped divert Russia’s attention from the war. He managed to secure gains for the state and reduced the losses outlined in the first treaty. The events surrounding both treaties showcased Sultan Abdul Hamid’s political genius, which was evident in creating a rift between Russia and Germany as well.

The German Emperor “Wilhelm II” mentioned in his memoirs:

I had a conversation with one of the senior commanders who served in the imperial court during the reign of “Alexander II”, the Tsar of Russia, about the relations between the Russian and German courts, as well as between the two armies and countries. I told this commander: I see a definite shift in these relations. He replied: The blame lies with the Berlin Conference! That was a major mistake made by (Bismarck) as it destroyed the old friendship we had and eroded Germany’s trust with the Russian court and government. It made the army feel it had suffered a great injustice after the bloody war it fought in 1877.

The Berlin Conference (1305 AH /1887):

The major powers (at the time) attended the conference (England, France, Germany, and Austria). Discussions were held regarding the amendment of the San Stefano Treaty between Russia and the Ottoman Empire, as the involved countries opposed this treaty because it did not align with their strategic interests. The conference participants agreed to modify the San Stefano Treaty. The Berlin Treaty was then established, which included the following terms:

1 – The independence of Bulgaria, with adjustments to its borders, and the establishment of a province named Eastern Rumelia in the southern Balkans, which would be under the political and military sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire. A Christian governor would be appointed for five years by agreement of the states, and Russia would maintain a military presence in Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia, limited to fifty thousand soldiers.

2 – Greece’s borders were slightly extended to the north, noting that Greece did not participate in the fighting, and the San Stefano Treaty did not include any of its territory.

3 – The annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austria.

4 – The annexation of Bessarabia by Russia after it was taken from Romania, along with the inclusion of the Dobruja region and some islands to Romania, granting it full independence.

5- The independence of Serbia and Montenegro.

6- The annexation of the cities of Kars, Ardahan, and Batumi to Russia.

7- The conference decided to maintain the war indemnity established by the Treaty of San Stefano on the Ottoman Empire, amounting to 250 million gold lira.

8- The Sublime Porte pledged to accept all its subjects’ testimonies in court without discrimination based on religion.

9- Approval to improve the conditions of Christians on the island of Crete.

The German Chancellor Bismarck was the one who called for the conference, fearing that Britain’s opposition to Russia could lead to a general European war and threaten the German Empire, which he had worked hard to establish. Therefore, he invited the great powers (at the time) to the conference in Berlin to review the Treaty of San Stefano and settle the outcomes of the Russo-Turkish War.

Some historians have noted that behind the scenes of the Berlin Conference, Bismarck proposed dividing the Ottoman Empire for the sake of European peace. He offered Britain Egypt, France Tunisia, and the Levant, Austria Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Russia the Bosporus and Dardanelles, among other possessions of the Sultan. However, these proposals were not included in the conference’s resolutions. [Footnote a]

The Berlin Conference marked a significant decline for the Ottoman Empire, which was forced to give up large areas of its territory. It also highlights Britain’s and France’s efforts to maintain control over Ottoman possessions. Furthermore, both Britain and France revealed their colonial intentions; France occupied Tunisia in 1881, while Britain took control of Cyprus. Additionally, Britain invaded Egypt in 1882, claiming that its occupation was temporary. As a result of the war between the Ottoman Empire and Russia, the Sultan had to adopt the title of Caliph to address the new challenges. He also worked on establishing the Islamic University to unite all Muslims both domestically and abroad. There is no doubt that the Islamic University movement was well-received by Muslims, who believed that the weakness of the Ottoman Empire stemmed from a decline in religious sentiment among Muslims. This perception encouraged enemies of Islam to invade Islamic lands, plundering one country after another. [An Excerpt from ‘Ad-Dawlah Al-Uthmaaniyyah Awaamil An-Nuhood Wa Asbaab As-Suqoot 6/456-460]

Footnote: Another Berlin Conference took place from 1884 to 1885, during which several of the same colonialists convened to partition Africa using arbitrary borders. Thus, while the author does not provide evidence that Bismarck privately advocated for the division of the Ottoman Empire to serve European interests, it is not unreasonable to assume that he may have made such proposals. This is because of the fact that some of these same colonialists, after invading, brutalising, and plundering Africa, divided the continent as if it were a mere commodity- systematically fragmented Africa to facilitate an agreement on resource sharing, perpetuating exploitation, injustice, and brutality. Therefore, concerning the alleged suggestions to fragment the Ottoman Empire, readers are encouraged to conduct further research to verify the facts.

To the “duly inquisitive” who inquired, “What prompted you to share history of the Ottomans?”

To the “duly inquisitive” who inquired, “What prompted you to share history of the Ottomans?”

[2] The Mali Empire before arrival of the oppressive and greedy French colonialists

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

What prompted us to start this series was an incredible and repugnant nonsense uttered by a French ideologue who says that Africa should show gratitude to France! Gratitude for what exactly? For 147 years of plundering, violence, oppression, exploitation, cruelty, theft, and arrogance? This is why none deserves Imam As-Sadi’s, may Allah have mercy on him, rebuke against the oppressors more than the French Colonialists. He said: “What kind of progress is this? A progress that turns its people into vicious wild animals, marked by oppression, annihilation, and the colonisation of weaker nations while stripping them of their rights?” He also noted that their so-called development is disconnected from submission to Allah and the religion He ordained, leading to harm and resulting in savagery and barbarism, with outcomes that bring about destruction, ruin, and unparalleled evils. [1]

The inhabitants of the kingdom were very dark-skinned. Its king Mansa Musa strengthened Islam through what his brother Sulayman had gathered from the lands of Sudan. He built mosques, established congregational prayers and the call to prayer, and brought scholars of the Maliki Mad’hab to his land, ensuring the authority of the the Muslim sultan and seeking understanding of the religion. The ruler of this kingdom was known among the people of Egypt as the King of Takrur, though he would preferred to be called the owner of Mali, as it is the more prestigious title and he was more renowned by it. He was the most powerful among the Muslim kings of Sudan, possessing the largest territory, the greatest army, the strongest might, the most wealth, the best condition, the most formidable against enemies, and the most capable of bestowing gifts. The regions included in this kingdom were Ghana, Zafun, Terinka, Takrur, Singhana, Darmuda, Zaga, Kabra, Kuku amd other regions.

The name given to all these regions was Mali, which served as the base for the provinces of the kingdom, consisting of fourteen provinces with cities, villages, and districts. The kingdom was square-shaped, measuring four months or more in length and the same in width. It was located south of Marrakesh and the interior of the enemy’s territory, extending southwest to the ocean, with its length from Muli to Tora, which is on the coast. Most of the area was inhabited, except for a few places. In the domain of the Sultan of this kingdom, there was a barren land of gold, from which they brought gold every year. The inhabitants of the barren land were untaught disbelievers.

In the northern part of Mali, there were tribes of white Berbers under the rule of their Sultan, namely: Yennayer, Madira, and others. They had leaders who ruled over them, except Yennayer, as they were ruled by kings from among them under the authority of the ruler of Mali. Additionally, in the same region, there were people of different faiths, including some who consume human flesh, some who reverted to Islam, and others who remain in their beliefs. The The kingdom consisted of several palaces surrounded by a wall. A branch of the Nile encircled this city on all four sides. In some areas, it could be waded through when the water was low, while in others, it could only be crossed by boats. The construction of this city was made of clay, similar to the walls of the gardens in Damascus. It was built by layering clay to a height of about two-thirds of a cubit, then left to dry before adding another layer, repeating this process until completion. Its roofs were made of wood and reeds, with most roofs being domes.

All those lands were lush with palm trees, and their mountains were filled with thick wild trees, where a single tree could provide shade for five hundred knights. Their main food sources were rice and a type of grain called ‘quni’, which is a fine, fluffy substance that resembles mustard seeds or is even smaller. It is white, sweetened with honey, then ground and kneaded, and consumed. They also had wheat, which was scarce, and corn, which served as food for both them and their horses, as well as fodder for their animals. They possessed horses of the Tatar Akadish breed, and all their mules were very small in size. Likewise, their cattle, sheep, and donkeys were the finest creatures. They cultivated a plant called ‘qafi’, which consists of thin pods buried in the ground that grew until they become thick. Its taste was similar to taro but distinct from pepper. It grew in the open, and if the king learned that someone has stolen any of it, he would cut off their head and hang it in place of what was taken. This was a tradition passed down through generations. They also grew beans, squash, turnips, onions, garlic, eggplants, and cabbage. However, eggplants and cabbage were rare among them. Wild molokhia also grew there.

They had a variety of garden fruits, particularly the Jiz, which was abundant in their region. Wild trees bearing edible and pleasant fruits also grew there, including a tree called Tadmout that produced something resembling large pods. Inside these pods was a substance similar to fine wheat flour, which is very white and has a delicious taste. When dried, it was used in henna, turning it black like ammonium. They stored this tree for food and firewood. There was also a tree known as Qumi that bore fruit similar to quince, with a delightful taste reminiscent of bananas, and it has seeds that resemble cartilage. There was a tree named Farini that produced fruit similar to lemons, with a taste akin to pears. Inside, it contains a fleshy seed. This seed, when fresh, could be pierced to extract a substance similar to ghee, which was sour. Its seeds were used for making soap. If this ghee like thing was to be consumed, it must be carefully heated. The method involved placing it over a gentle fire, covering it, and allowing it to boil until it reaches a strong simmer. The person managing it should keep a close watch, testing it periodically, and adding small amounts of water gradually while it remains covered until it reached the desired strength. Afterward, it should be left to cool and can be used in cooking like ghee. If the cover is unexpectedly removed, it may bubble over and rise to the ceiling, and in some cases, the heat could ignite a fire that burns the house, or even escalate to a larger fire that could devastate the area. This fat would burn any skin it came into contact with, and it can only be contained in pumpkin shells.

In this region, there were wild fruits that resemble various cultivated fruits, but they were bitter and unpalatable, consumed only by the local Sudanese, as they formed a significant part of their diet. Additionally, salt was available here, unlike in the coastal areas and what is beyond that.

In their deserts, the buffaloes were wild, resembling beasts, and their hunting method involved capturing young ones that they raised at home. When they wished to hunt buffaloes, they took one to the buffaloes’ area so it can see and approach it, becoming familiar with the species. Once it is accustomed, they shoot it with a poisoned arrow, then they cut out the poison spots. A single goat could give birth to seven or eight kids at once. In their deserts, there were various wild animals such as donkeys, cattle, deer, ostriches, and others like them. Elephants, lions, and tigers also existed, but they only harmed those who provoked or disturbed them, and they did not interfere with a person unless surprised. Thety also had an animal called Tirma which is a hermaphrodite, the size of a wolf, and whenever it finds a small human or adolescent at night, it snatches and eats them, but during the day, it does not harm anyone and does not approach a fully grown man. It bellows like a bull when it wants to charge. It also scavenges on the dead and consumes them. Its teeth are like those of a crocodile.

There were enormous crocodiles in the Nile, some measuring over ten arms in length. Its bile was valuable and is taken to the treasury of their king. Elephants were in the neighbouring lands of the disbelievers. The sea in this entire region was abundant, especially in the land of Ghana, where disputes were often brought before their king. It is said that someone was killed by sorcery, whether it be a brother, son, daughter, or sister, the killer is sentenced to retribution, and the sorcerer is executed.

The sultan of this kingdom sits on a large platform in his palace, known as ‘Yinbi,’ with a large ebony throne that resembles a grand council chamber. The platform is adorned with the tusks of elephants on all sides. He possessed weapons made entirely of gold: a sword, a spear, a bow, and a book. He wore a large pair of trousers tailored from about twenty pieces, and no one dares to approach him. Behind him stood around thirty slaves from the Turks and others purchased from Egypt. His commanders sat around him under two large canopies, to his right and left, with notable knights of his army seated nearby.

The king Mansa Musa was asked by an Arab Maliki scholar whether he has enemies, so he said: “Yes, I have fierce enemies in Sudan, similar to the Tartars for you. There is a resemblance between them and the Tartars in that they have broad faces and flat noses, they are skilled in archery, and their horses are swift with flat noses. We have had encounters with them, and they possess great strength in their archery. There are disputes between us and them, and wars occur intermittently”.

He was asked how he came came to power. He replied: “The previous ruler did not believe that the ocean has an end, and he was eager to discover it. He prepared hundreds of ships filled with men, and an equal number filled with gold, water, and provisions sufficient for years. He instructed those on board: ‘Do not return until you reach the end, or until your supplies and water run out’. They set sail, and their absence was prolonged, with no one returning for a long time. Eventually, only one ship returned. We asked their leader about their journey and what they encountered. He said: ‘Yes O Sultan. We traveled for a long time until we came across a strong valley in the depths of the sea. I was the last of those ships. As for the other ships, they advanced, but once they reached that place, they did not return or reappear, and we did not know what happened to them. As for me, I turned back from my position and did not enter that valley’. The Sultan was skeptical of this account. He then prepared two thousand ships, one thousand for himself and the men he took with him, and one thousand for water and provisions. He appointed me as his deputy and sailed into the ocean with those who were with him. That was the last time he was seen, along with all his companions. The kingdom then fell to me”.

It is said that during his transit through Egypt on his way to Hajj, he maintained a consistent pattern in worship and devotion to Allah. He and those with him exhibited similar behavior, dressed well, and displayed tranquility and dignity. He was generous, charitable, and known for his many acts of kindness. He left his homeland with a hundred wasqs of gold, which he spent on his pilgrimage, from his country to Egypt, then in Egypt, and finally to Makkah and Madinah, both on his way there and back.

An Excerpt from “The Mali Kingdom As Narrated By Muslim Geographers” pages 43-61

To be continued…InShaAllah


[1] Excerpt from Al-Adillah al-Qawaatiq Wal-Baraaheen Fee Ib’taal Usool al-Mul’hideen 44

To the “duly inquisitive” who inquired, “What prompted you to share history of the Ottomans?”

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Al-Allamah Salih Aala Ash-Shaikh, may Allah preserve him, said:

When Muslims conquered different regions of the earth and Islam spread, it appeared as though it began with non-Arabs, until Persians and other non-Arabs became scholars and Imams of mosques, and people learned from them. Many non-Arabs are mentioned in Islamic history as leading the Muslims in knowledge, pronouncing religious verdicts, and other matters. Consider Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy on him), who was not Arab, and Imam Al-Bukhaari (may Allah have mercy on him), whose book became an upright example. There is no Muslim who is not familiar with Imam Abu Abdillah Muhammad Bin Isma’eel Al-Bukhaari. And take into account other Imams of Islam other than Al-Bukhaari and Abu Haneefah.

Thus, when Islam was implemented, it erased the differences that the people had created; and why did those non-Arabs become the leaders and Imams of the Arabs? That is because they carried the religion, raised the banner of true Islamic monotheism – there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah, and Muhammad is Allah’s Messenger – and because there is no differences in virtue between a non-Arab and an Arab except through fear of Allah.

When Muslims disciplined themselves with Islam, there was no dispute between them regarding social class by way of that pre-Islamic dispute and distinction, because they did not accept leadership or give precedence to anyone based on this; rather, they accepted everyone because people are equal in this matter. The Quraish rulership, the Umayyad rulership, and the Abbasid rulership ended; then the Mamluk rulership arose, followed by the rulership of Banee Uthman – meaning in the beginning when it was upright; so the Muslims obeyed them and they became the leaders and rulers because the Muslims saw that there was welfare for the people in doing so. As a result, class distinction and its practice were eradicated from the start, and no one had any reservations about implementing Islam. Islamic history attests to the application of this magnificent principle. Listen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRkeYjcJ728 [end of quote]

Secondly, anyone who delves into the history of the Ottomans recognizes the remarkable way in which Islam transformed the lives of the early Ottomans, alongside the various periods of decline and revival, and the concerted efforts made to undermine it from both internal and external forces. Moreover, the Ottomans provide us with significant insights into European history during their reign, particularly when considering the political landscape of Muslim dominance before the onset of colonialism. Today, we can observe who holds power on the global stage and how this dominance gradually developed when viewed through the lens of Ottoman history.

Additionally, the various figures who emerged at the height of Islamic history following the era of the Salaf, both the positive and negative aspects, paint a vivid picture of what contributed to dominance and what ultimately led to decline. Personalities such as Nidham Al-Mulk, Salahuddin Al-Ayyubi, and others rose among the Ottomans to restore some strength to the Ummah. Therefore, when Al-Allamah Salih Aala Shaikh briefly highlights the success and resilience of the early Ottomans, it becomes clear what factors contributed to that success. This history is an integral part of our glorious past, and the decline of the Ottomans, along with other Muslim Sultanates, serves as a valuable lesson. The scholarly works addressing the themes of ascension and decline are plentiful, as are their explanations of the clear reasons behind this decline. We are eager to celebrate the victories and learn from the causes of decline, yet this religion remains evident and supreme through its proofs and evidences. Whenever we deserve dominance, Allah will grant it, as it is a promise. Allah said:

وَعَدَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ مِنكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا۟ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ كَمَا ٱسْتَخْلَفَ ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ ٱلَّذِى ٱرْتَضَىٰ لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّنۢ بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا يَعْبُدُونَنِى لَا يُشْرِكُونَ بِى شَيْـًٔا وَمَن كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْفَٰسِقُونَ
وَأَقِيمُوا۟ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَءَاتُوا۟ ٱلزَّكَوٰةَ وَأَطِيعُوا۟ ٱلرَّسُولَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ

Allah has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practise their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Islam). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah). And perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat and obey the Messenger (Muhammad) that you may receive mercy (from Allah). [Al-Nur 55-56]

[39] Ascent and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sultan Abdul Hamid II

continued….

Russia aimed to gain access to warm waters for religious, economic, and geographical reasons. Peter the Great (1672 – 1725) stressed in his will to the Russians, especially in paragraphs nine, eleven, and thirteen, the importance of a civilizational fight against the Ottomans until the Ottoman Empire is no more. Peter the Great states in paragraph nine of his will:

“As we get closer to Constantinople and India, it is clear that whoever controls Constantinople has effectively taken charge of the world. Thus, it is crucial to persist in the conflict against the Ottomans”.

The eleventh paragraph states:

“We are working with Austria to drive the Ottomans out of Aurea”.

The twelfth paragraph notes:

“After God, or in relation to the Ottoman territories, we will assemble our forces, our fleets will navigate into the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea, and we will initiate discussions with France and the Austrian Empire about the partitioning of the world between us”.

Russia showed a strong interest in that decree, and under Sultan Abdul Hamid II’s rule, many revolutions took place with backing from Russia and various European nations in the Balkans, Greece, and other areas of the Ottoman Empire. Their efforts didn’t end there; they also aimed to create independent Christian nations like Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece. Following the Ottomans’ significant victories in the Balkans, Russia geared up for war and then announced a relentless conflict against the Ottoman Empire. Romania formed an alliance with Russia, drawing the Ottomans into a fierce confrontation with the Russians. The Russian forces crossed the Danube River and took control of multiple cities that belonged to the Ottomans, such as “Turnu” and “Nicopole,” which are now situated in Bulgaria.

Moreover, the Russians captured several strategic locations and crossings that lead to the Balkans. Sultan Abdul Hamid made important adjustments in the command of the Ottoman forces to resist the Russian invasion. The Russians tried to capture the city of (Balkan), now situated in Bulgaria. During that period, Uthman Pasha valiantly faced them, pushing them back in defeat and regaining the vital crossings to the Balkans. However, the brave Ottoman commander initiated another assault with a greater number of troops. Still, that notable Ottoman leader effectively drove the Russians away again, leading the Ottoman Sultan to release a special decree commending that commander.

In response to this resilience, the Russians sought to change their strategy for capturing the city. They enacted a siege policy designed to block supplies from reaching the Ottoman armies positioned there. At the same time, they strengthened their forces, with the Russian Tsar personally preparing for the upcoming battle, and the Prince of Romania forming an alliance with Russia. He brought along 100,000 troops, which altered the military balance in favour of the Russians, whose forces numbered over 150,000. They laid siege on three fronts against the Ottoman troops. However, the besieged Ottomans, commanded by Uthman Pasha, exhibited remarkable resilience. Despite having around 50,000 fighters, they crafted a brilliant plan for a counteroffensive against the enemy’s besieging lines, aiming for either victory and relief from the siege or martyrdom (InShaaAllah).

Uthman Pasha commanded his troops against the enemy, who were celebrating and rejoicing. Many of them died as martyrs (InShaAllah) at the hands of the Russian forces; however, they succeeded in breaking through the first and second lines of the besiegers, seizing the artillery within. He suffered some injuries at the third line, which ignited a strong rumour among his men regarding his martyrdom (InShaAllah). This news demoralised them, prompting an attempt to retreat to the city. Yet, some Russian troops had already penetrated it, leaving the Ottoman soldiers vulnerable to various enemy fire. As a result, they were forced to surrender to the Russian forces. This took place in the year 1294 AH, towards the end of 1877. The Ottoman commander, despite his injuries, surrendered to the Russians, who respected and commended his courage and bravery. The chief commander of the Russian troops even congratulated him for his outstanding defense, reinstating his rank in acknowledgment of his fighting abilities and determination. In December of that same year, 1877, he was taken to Russia, where the Tsar welcomed him with full honours, and not treating him as a prisoner.

The victories of the Russians inspired the Serbs in the Balkans to act against the Ottomans, prompting their forces to assault Ottoman strongholds in the area, which diverted focus from the Russians, who were concurrently aiming to seize new lands. In fact, the Russians managed to take Sofia (now the capital of Romania) and continued their advance; they moved south towards the former Ottoman capital, getting within just fifty kilometers of Istanbul, creating a critical predicament for the Ottoman Empire. Simultaneously, many battles were occurring between the Ottomans and the Russians on the Asian front, where the Russians advanced into Anatolia. Nevertheless, the Ottomans managed to defeat and chase them back into Russian land. Under the leadership of Ahmad Mukhtar Pasha, the Ottomans won over six battles against the Russians, however, the Russians renewed their offensives in those regions, once again focusing on specific areas within Anatolia. In the year 1295 AH, they succeeded in defeating the Ottoman forces and taking control. Given the Ottoman setbacks in both Europe and Asia, the Ottoman Empire was forced to agree to a truce with the Russians and enter negotiations, resulting in the signing of the Treaty of San Stefano in 1878. This treaty was finalised on March 3, 1878, and was signed by “Saffet Pasha” on behalf of the Ottoman Empire, who was visibly emotional. It was unavoidable that this treaty would contain terms unfavourable to the Ottoman Empire.

An Excerpt from ‘Ad-Dawlah Al-Uthmaaniyyah Awaamil An-Nuhood Wa Asbaab As-Suqoot 6/454-456

[38] Ascent and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sultan Abdul Hamid II

continued….

In 1293 AH (1876), the people of Montenegro and the Serbs encouraged Herzegovina to rise up against the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were able to quell this rebellion. To deter European nations from intervening, Sultan Abdul Hamid enacted a decree that separated the judiciary from the executive branch. He also required that judges be elected by the local populace and instituted tax equality for both Muslims and Christians.

The residents were unhappy with the situation, leading them to return to revolution, which was also quelled. Nevertheless, Austria, which supported the revolution and aimed to annex Bosnia and Herzegovina, kept stirring up discontent against the Ottoman Empire. Austria worked alongside Russia, Germany, France, and England to pressure the Sultan into enacting reforms. He consented, but the Christians in Bosnia rejected this. This shows that the call for reforms was just a weak pretext; in reality, they sought to intervene both directly and indirectly in state matters to undermine and topple it.

The Bulgarian revolution took place at the same time as the uprising of Christians in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which received support from Austria and various European nations, especially Russia. In Bulgaria, societies were formed to promote Russian influence among Orthodox Christians and Slavs, with assistance from Russia, which provided them with arms. These societies actively encouraged the populations of Serbia, Bosnia, and Herzegovina to rise up against the Ottomans. When the Ottoman Empire moved some Circassian families, the Bulgarians objected, leading to a revolution that was backed by Russia and Austria with weapons and financial support. The Ottoman Empire was able to quell the uprising, which led European nations to circulate rumors about the atrocities committed by the Ottomans against Christians, despite the reality being quite the opposite. These rumors influenced European public sentiment against the Ottoman Empire, prompting European governments to call for stringent actions against the Ottomans, including granting self-governance to the Bulgarians and appointing a Christian governor for them.

The Russians, Germans, and Austrians pushed the Serbs and Montenegrins to wage war against the Ottomans, as Russia aimed to expand its borders towards Bulgaria. Meanwhile, Austria sought to extend its territory towards Bosnia and Herzegovina, promising support to these nations, including the Prince of Montenegro. Russian soldiers began to secretly flow into Serbia and Montenegro, and the Ottoman Empire managed to defeat the Serbs and their allies. This prompted European nations to intervene, demanding a ceasefire, or else a larger war would ensue.

Delegates from European nations convened in Istanbul and suggested to the state regarding its security: to split the Bulgarian territories into two provinces, appointing Christian governors, to establish an international committee to carry out the resolutions, to extend these privileges to the principalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina as well, and for the state to relinquish certain lands to Serbia and Montenegro. However, the Ottoman Empire dismissed these proposals and negotiated a separate peace with the Turks, leading to the retreat of its forces from Serbia, while the Ottoman and Serbian flags were hoisted as a symbol of Ottoman authority. Sultan Abdul Hamid II was convinced that the Western powers aimed to bring about the fall of the Ottoman Empire. In his memoirs, he stated: (During the conference of the great powers held in Istanbul, I observed their intentions, which were not as they claimed to secure the rights of Christian subjects, but rather to ensure their autonomy, followed by efforts for their complete independence, ultimately leading to the division of the Ottoman Empire.

They were working on dividing this goal into two aspects: inciting Christian families and disturbing the peace, thus these countries can protect them. Second, advocating conditionality to create division among ourselves, and unfortunately, they managed to find supporters among us who would serve both purposes. Sadly, some educated Ottoman youth could not distinguish between easy implementation and constitutional governance in a nation with national unity, and the impossibility of such governance in countries lacking national unity.

An Excerpt from ‘Ad-Dawlah Al-Uthmaaniyyah Awaamil An-Nuhood Wa Asbaab As-Suqoot. 6/451-453

[37] Ascent and Decline of the Ottoman Empire

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sultan Abdul Hamid II

He confronted his era amidst challenging conditions, severe crises, and a global conspiracy against the Ottoman Empire from both internal and external forces. He initiated state reforms grounded in Islamic teachings to avert European interference in state affairs, demonstrating a commitment to the implementation of Islamic law. He distanced writers and journalists from the capital and resisted all Western influences that contradicted the illustrious Islamic civilization in the provinces of the empire. He successfully established a robust intelligence apparatus to protect the state from internal threats and to gather intelligence on his adversaries abroad. He was also invested in the concept of Islamic unity, achieving notable results that unsettled Europeans, prompting them to strive for its disintegration. He spoke about his intelligence apparatus and clarified its purpose, stating:

According to Ottoman custom, the Sultan learns about the thoughts and grievances of the subjects through the governing apparatus, including his officials and judges on one side, and through the charitable institutions spread across the Ottoman Empire, with their leaders and ascetics on the other side, thus gathering all this information and building upon it”. He expanded his intelligence network by incorporating wandering ascetics into it. [Footnote a] This occurred when he ascended to the throne, and it continued thereafter.

He said: One day, I received information from our ambassador in London, Musurus Pasha, indicating that the former Grand Vizier, Sir Askar Hussain Aouni Pasha, had accepted funds from the English. If the Grand Vizier, who administers the country on behalf of the Sultan, is disloyal to his state, then it is imperative that his intelligence should inform the palace regarding his performance of duties. As a result, I felt disturbed and affected by this revelation. During that period, I met Mahmud Pasha, who provided me with insights about certain members of the Young Turks. The information he shared was of great importance. I asked him how he came by this information, and I learned that he had created a private intelligence network, financed by money, which included relatives of some Young Turks. These relatives would meet with their family members, listen to their discussions, and subsequently report back to him, for which he offered them compensation.

It is true that he is my sister’s husband; however, it is inappropriate for any of the state’s officials to establish independent intelligence operations separate from the state’s intelligence services. I told him that he must disband his operation immediately and refrain from engaging in such activities again. He handed over his operation to me, appearing quite distressed. The state cannot be secure if major powers are able to recruit individuals at the level of a prime minister to serve their objectives. Based on this, I decided to establish an intelligence agency that is directly linked to me, and this is the agency that my adversaries refer to as the secret police (intelligence gathering).

It was essential for me to understand that among the members of the journalism apparatus, there were genuinely loyal individuals as well as those who were slanderous, all from this agency without thorough verification. However, I did not believe it, nor did I accept anything that came from this agency without precise verification.

My grandfather, Sultan Salim III, used to say: ‘The hands of foreigners are on my liver (i.e. figuratively meaning causing me concern), thus, we must send ambassadors to foreign countries to convey the methods of European advancement. We need to dispatch envoys abroad and work swiftly to learn what they have achieved”. I too felt the presence of these foreigners, not above my liver, but within my liver. They are purchasing my esteemed ministers and advisors, using them against my country. How can this happen, when I have spent from the state treasury on them, yet I cannot discern what they are doing, what they are plotting, and what they are preparing? After witnessing my big newspapers being filled by foreign countries in exchange for the destruction of their state, and conspiring against their ruler, I established this apparatus not to serve as a tool against the citizen, but to identify and track those who betrayed my nation, while they were receiving their salaries from its treasury, at a time when the Ottoman grace was overflowing to the point of their throats”.

Sultan Abdul Hamid encountered intense criticism from the Committee of Union and Progress concerning the intelligence system he created. In truth, this system provided considerable advantages to the Ottoman state. When instigators and terrorists were urging the Armenians to rise against the Ottoman Empire, the soldiers were present to counter them, resulting in bloodshed. For three decades, Sultan Abdul Hamid’s intelligence service kept him promptly informed of every new movement, allowing him to effectively quell any internal insurrection in a timely fashion.

An Excerpt from ‘Ad-Dawlah Al-Uthmaaniyyah Awaamil An-Nuhood Wa Asbaab As-Suqoot 6/449-451

Footnote a: https://www.troid.org/understanding-zuhd-asceticism-in-islam/