Mustafa Öztürk, a professor of Islamic Theology at Istanbul’s Marmara University and a columnist, has become a target of the pro-government media and Islamic movements in Turkey following his comments concerning the Koran. Exposed to a lynching campaign and death threats on Twitter, the professor had to resign from his post at university and retire.
The short speech was filmed in a video recording that is understood to have been shot without the professor’s knowledge in his university office. In it, Professor Öztürk referred to Al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah al-Makhzumi, the chief of the Banu Makhzum clan of the Quraysh tribe, and Al-As ibn Wa’il. Both of these historical figures had some problems with Islam’s prophet, Mohammed. Öztürk said:
The Koran [only] talked about Al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah al-Makhzumi and Al-As ibn Wa’il for 23 years and squeezed its entire frame into [the Arabian regions of] Hejaz, Taif and Medina. The diameter of [the Koran’s] last word to humanity is 3 or 5 polytheists there. And there are such curses for those polytheists in the Quran. They’re referred to both as “bigheaded” and “bastards”… Could this be the language of Allah? Could a humanitarian language have been used? It could. [But] he [Mohammed] was hurt. He was furious.
After his speech became viral on social media, a hate campaign was launched against the professor, using the hashtag “#MustafaÖztürkİhraçEdilsin” (Expel Mustafa Öztürk from university).
Öztürk has since been called names such as “treacherous devil,” “denialist orientalist,” and “pervert.” The theology professor was accused of “poisoning our youth,” “denying the verses of the Quran,” “attacking the Quran with the logic of an atheist,” “insulting [our religion] so severely that even a kafir [unbeliever] would not do that,” and “disavowing the Koran openly.” Others commented:
“If [caliph] Omar was in charge now, he would cut off his [Öztürk’s] neck” and “Our ancestors would swing him on the gallows.”
Pro-government newspapers such as Yeni Şafak, Takvim, Star, and Son Haber have demanded Öztürk’s expulsion from the university. Some Twitter users said Öztürk “must be killed.”
Öztürk has also been targeted by many Islamic movements in the country. Ahmet Mahmut Ünlü, a TV commentator representing the Islamic İsmailağa community, joined the verbal lynching of the theologian and teacher, and wrote:
How much longer will you allow Mustafa Öztürk, who denies that the Koran is [God’s] revelation, to poison our children in theology? You’re sinning! Allah will judge you!
In the face of continued pressures and threats, Öztürk declared his resignation and retirement on his social media account on December 2. He added: “As of today, I bid farewell to academia, academics and the world of theology. Enough is enough. That’s all from me.”
Professor Öztürk describes his analysis of the Koran as “historicist” and notes that the Koran should be analyzed and understood within its historical context. In a 2016 public lecture the professor said that human experiences, values and lifestyles have tremendously changed through time and space since the seventh century and that Muslims should not adopt literalist or universalist approaches towards the Koran. They should instead analyze Koranic teachings in a critical and humanistic manner by taking into account the historical periods, geographical places, local cultures and contexts in which the Koran was written. Öztürk added that claiming the Koran has universal and literal applicability leads to major contradictions and human sufferings.
In a 2018 conference, Öztürk also discussed notions such as “ahl al-kitab” (the people of the book, also known as Christians and Jews), “dhimmis” (Christians and Jews living as second-class subjects under Islamic dominion) and “kalimatullah” (the word of Allah). He said:
This is our practice concerning ahl al-kitap. We go and fight. And they will either be Muslim or be subject to the dhimmi law and will be held to ransom, which is jizya tax. The Islamic interstate law throughout the middle ages is not based on the principle of peace. It is based on the fundamental of war. Look at our books about interstate Islamic law. You’ll see that the fundamental of war is valid in that law…
There is also a concept called ilahi kalimatullah. It means carrying the flag of Islam to every square meter of the world. How will you carry it? Through conquest. That famous imam attacks me [for saying that]. He says that I call our ancestors “invaders.” This is what I am trying to understand. You say “the prophet [Muhammed] came as God’s grace to the universe,” but you also say “I will take this faith to every square meter of the world through jihad.” Someone should explain it to me. I’m asking you: How can I explain launching a direct war against Scandinavia to take Islam there within today’s world context? Establish empathy. Would that be perceived like the US invasion of Afghanistan or not?
Because of his critical analysis of Islamic scriptures, Öztürk has been subject to threats for years. Pro-government Muslim commentator İhsan Şenocak, for instance, interpreted Öztürk’s criticisms as “an attack on the Koran” and compared it to the French Charlie Hebdo magazine’s publishing of Muhammad’s caricatures. He said:
I’m calling on our Presidency of Religious Affairs [Diyanet]. You respond when the Koran is insulted in France. Well, this person attends the tafsir [interpretation of the Koran] class, tells the children of this nation about the Koran and says that some of the stories in the Koran are not true. What is the ruling for someone who believes so? What is the decree for those saying that some verses in the Quran are fairy tales? I am asking.
In 2019 Öztürk’s lawyer filed a criminal complaint against Mufti Ahmet Mehmetalioğlu for giving a “death fatwa” which called for Öztürk’s murder. The lawsuit also included a complaint against two individuals who declared they wished to fulfill the fatwa.
Referring to Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf, a Jewish leader and poet in Medina who was killed on the order of Islam’s prophet Muhammad in the seventh century, the mufti wrote on his Facebook page on December 20, 2018:
If our Prophet was here now, he would most probably have him [Öztürk] killed. Just like he got Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf killed.
As the website “The Religion of Peace” notes:
While the rest of the world generally believes that if God wanted people dead over their religious beliefs then he would do the job himself, apostasy is taken so seriously by Muslims that it spawned the first of many serious internal wars.
Immediately after Muhammad’s death, several tribes wanted to leave Islam and return to their preferred religion. In a conflict known as the Riddah (apostasy) Wars, they were slaughtered in such places recalled as ‘Garden of Death’ and ‘Gulley of Blood’ during the first caliph Abu Bakr’s aggressive and violent campaign to force submission (and keep the tribute payments flowing back to Mecca, of course). Within months, a great many people were dead, including Muslims who had memorized the Quran by heart.
A sound philosophy never requires violence or threats to retain believers.
The greatest reason why Muslim communities have remained intellectually and culturally backward is because they ban or discourage critical thinking and murder free thinkers. Öztürk is a prominent expert on Islamic history and theology. He adopts an authentic way of interpreting the Koran. Many Muslims in Turkey that tolerate and even support ISIS and other murderous jihadist organizations wish to violently silence Öztürk for thinking differently. They then want the world to believe that Islam is a religion of peace.
Uzay Bulut is a Turkish journalist and political analyst formerly based in Ankara.
Michael Copeland says
Islam has no room for critical thinking.
Dr Salah al Say makes this clear:
“For things which have been stipulated in the texts of Islam, the Ummah possesses no power except to acknowledge and obey, following the saying of the Most High: “It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path” [Qur’an 33:36].
Unknowingly he cites one of the two verses that show Allah had a partner, a joint decision-maker, namely Mohammed. The words (of Allah) say “decided by Allah AND his Messenger”. The words do not say “or”.
But then Islam has no room for critical thinking
Michael Copeland says
typo: Salah al Sawy
https://www.weaselzippers.us/16323-american-muslim-leader-issues-fatwa-against-democracy-in-favor-of-sharia/
Waseem Mehar says
the quran never inserts the name of any person next to “God” in the Quran.
The Quran interchangeably and through the very distinct arabic grammar refers to the “messenger” as the message itself.
disobeying the messenger (because he carries the message) is disobeying Allah.
disobeying muhammad is not disobeying Allah as he’s not being referred to by his occupation.
case and point:
مَا كَانَ لِبَشَرٍ أَنْ يُؤْتِيَهُ اللَّهُ الْكِتٰبَ وَالْحُكْمَ وَالنُّبُوَّةَ ثُمَّ يَقُولَ لِلنَّاسِ كُونُوا عِبَادًا لِّى مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلٰكِنْ كُونُوا رَبّٰنِيِّۦنَ بِمَا كُنْتُمْ تُعَلِّمُونَ الْكِتٰبَ وَبِمَا كُنْتُمْ تَدْرُسُونَ
“It is not for a human [prophet] that Allah should give him the Scripture and authority and prophethood and then he would say to the people, Be servants to me rather than Allah, but [instead, he would say], Be pious scholars of the Lord because of what you have taught of the Scripture and because of what you have studied.”
(QS. Aal-i-Imraan 3: Verse 79)
Muhammad is only mentioned by name in the whole Quran 4 times.
And in each of those 4 times is proof muhammad is not but a messenger who doesn’t have personal opinions of God and law.–
وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ ۚ أَفَإِينْ مَّاتَ أَوْ قُتِلَ انْقَلَبْتُمْ عَلٰىٓ أَعْقٰبِكُمْ ۚ وَمَنْ يَنْقَلِبْ عَلٰى عَقِبَيْهِ فَلَنْ يَضُرَّ اللَّهَ شَيْئًا ۗ وَسَيَجْزِى اللَّهُ الشّٰكِرِينَ
“Muhammad is not but a messenger. [Other] messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels [to unbelief]? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.”
(QS. Aal-i-Imraan 3: Verse 144)
—-
وَمَا عَلَّمْنٰهُ الشِّعْرَ وَمَا يَنۢبَغِى لَهُۥٓ ۚ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرٌ وَقُرْءَانٌ مُّبِينٌ
“And We did not give Prophet Muhammad, knowledge of poetry, nor is it befitting for him. It is not but a message and a clear Qur’an”
(QS. Yaseen 36: Verse 69)
—-
the nail in the coffin:
وَالَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ وَءَامَنُوا بِمَا نُزِّلَ عَلٰى مُحَمَّدٍ وَهُوَ الْحَقُّ مِنْ رَّبِّهِمْ ۙ كَفَّرَ عَنْهُمْ سَيِّئَاتِهِمْ وَأَصْلَحَ بَالَهُمْ
“And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.”
(QS. Muhammad 47: Verse 2)
its not about obeying muhammad but obeying the message given to him.
مَا ضَلَّ صَاحِبُكُمْ وَمَا غَوٰى
“Your companion has not strayed, nor has he erred,”
(QS. An-Najm 53: Verse 2)
وَمَا يَنْطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوٰىٓ
“Nor does he speak from inclination.”
(QS. An-Najm 53: Verse 3)
إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْىٌ يُوحٰى
“It is not but a revelation revealed,”
(QS. An-Najm 53: Verse 4)
عَلَّمَهُۥ شَدِيدُ الْقُوٰى
“Taught to him by one intense in strength -”
(QS. An-Najm 53: Verse 5)
gravenimage says
Waseem Mehar wrote:
the quran never inserts the name of any person next to “God” in the Quran.
The Quran interchangeably and through the very distinct arabic grammar refers to the “messenger” as the message itself.
disobeying the messenger (because he carries the message) is disobeying Allah.
disobeying muhammad is not disobeying Allah as he’s not being referred to by his occupation.
…………………………..
Here is Qur’an 33:36, in multiple translations:
https://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=33&verse=36
It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.
…
How does a *message* make a decision? This claim makes no sense at all.
And the texts of Islam are indeed full of demands that people follow the diktats of the vicious “Prophet” Muhammad, upon pain of death.
That Muhammad is only mentioned by name a few times in the Qur’an is immaterial–his ugly stamp is all over the text.
When a different “prophet” is intended, the text makes this clear. “Allah and his messenger”, though, *always* refers to Mohammad himself.
And as the last messenger, Muhammad is indeed considered the final word. Faiths like Baha’i that believe in later prophets are targeted by Muslims for violence and murder.
Waseem Mehar may believe that the savagery of Islam is revealed truth, but civilized people do not.
Michael Copeland says
A thoughtful doctor, who served as an imam in Phoenix AZ, put forward his carefully considered theory that two verses did not properly belong in the Koran. Dr. Rashad Khalifa was stabbed to death in the mosque in 1989 as a result. Some twenty years later his killer, linked with Al Qaeda, was traced to Canada and extradited.
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=glen_cusford_francis_1
Islam has no room for critical thinking
Michael Copeland says
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/12/arizona-muslim-convicted-of-murdering-imam-for-islamic-heresy
gravenimage says
Thanks for those links.
inquisitor says
IT SHOULD BE KNOWN TO THE WORLD THAT ERDOGAN IS PERFOMING ETHNIC CLEANSING IN TURKEY……. OR SHOULD I SAY ISLAMIC CLEANSING………
Infidel says
Are Twitter’s ‘Terms of service’ violated when these death threats are made? As opposed to when the president retweets witnesses about shenanigans in the elections?
gravenimage says
It seems not…
THX 1138 says
“A sound philosophy never requires violence or threats to retain believers.”
The only completely sound and rational philosophy I know of Is Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism.
“I have said that faith and force are corollaries, and that mysticism will always lead to the rule of brutality. The cause of it is contained in the very nature of mysticism. Reason is the only objective means of communication and of understanding among men; when men deal with one another by means of reason, reality is their objective standard and frame of reference. But when men claim to possess supernatural means of knowledge, no persuasion, communication or understanding are possible. Why do we kill wild animals in the jungle? Because no other way of dealing with them is open to us. And that is the state to which mysticism reduces mankind—a state where, in case of disagreement, men have no recourse except to physical violence. And more: no man or mystical elite can hold a whole society subjugated to their arbitrary assertions, edicts and whims, without the use of force. Anyone who resorts to the formula: “It’s so, because I say so,” will have to reach for a gun, sooner or later. ” – Ayn Rand
Teuku Namuda says
You are 100% correct
gravenimage says
+1
James Lincoln says
Professor Öztürk states:
“Muslims should… analyze Koranic teachings in a critical and humanistic manner by taking into account the historical periods, geographical places, local cultures and contexts in which the Koran was written.”
But no!
For “devout” muslims, the koran must *never* be looked at in a “critical” manner….
nicholas tesdorf says
There is no place, these days, for intelligent and critical thinking about Islam such as that shown by Mustafa Öztürk, professor of Islamic Theology at Istanbul’s Marmara University. As a result, Muslim communities remain intellectually, scientifically and culturally primitive because of a lack of critical thinking and curiosity.
gravenimage says
Turkey: Muslim Professor Questions Muhammad, Qur’an, Receives Death Threats, is Forced to Resign
……………………..
I just don’t know how a professor of Islamic Theology would not have seen this coming…
Infidel says
Yeah, doesn’t say much about his subject-matter knowledge
gravenimage says
Unfortunately true.
Waseem Mehar says
he criticized the hadith which Muslims follow in supplement to quran. that contradict the QURAN.
he never criticized the Quran. only Muslims who believe in violent and irrational garbage that contradict their books teachings.
hes part of the progressive movement that follow only the QURAN.
gravenimage says
The idea that he only said something critical of the Hadith is mistaken. This, from the article above:
Öztürk said:
The Koran [only] talked about Al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah al-Makhzumi and Al-As ibn Wa’il for 23 years and squeezed its entire frame into [the Arabian regions of] Hejaz, Taif and Medina. The diameter of [the Koran’s] last word to humanity is 3 or 5 polytheists there. And there are such curses for those polytheists in the Quran. They’re referred to both as “bigheaded” and “bastards”… Could this be the language of Allah? Could a humanitarian language have been used? It could. [But] he [Mohammed] was hurt. He was furious.
……….
So Öztürk has indeed questioned the Qur’an, as well.
Here, he talks about freedom of conscience in general:
https://en.qantara.de/content/interview-with-turkish-islamic-scholar-professor-mustafa-ozturk-religious-groups-need-to-be?page=0%2C1
Then, the claims that the Qur’an is peaceful and that it is only the Hadith that call for violence is not borne out. The Qur’an itself calls for the mass rape, enslavement, and mass slaughter of all those who do not submit to Islam.
laurie stahlbaum says
i gather the many delusional muslims that wish to live as if it is still 600 ac, that this will come as a blow to their reality.
gravenimage says
And the way pious Muslims deal with this is threatening murder…