CONCLUSION

The moral lesson drawn from the complicated relation among Turkey of the Ottomans, Iran of the Safavids, and Egypt of the Mamelukes

Introduction:

1- We are digging in history within our research and write about rarely tackled topics NOT for the sake of amusing readers, but to draw morals lessons about the present and the future, because history repeats itself when citizens and nations are (re-)living the past within the present time. This fatal error occurs typically when earthly, man-made religions dominate people/nations and leading them to worship what their ancestors have left as centuries-old traditions. The Salafist (i.e., literally, ancestral) religions control not only the religious aspect of such nations, but also its intellectual, political, social, and legislative aspects. Within such a miserable state of affairs, the past repeats itself but within other appellations and persons. This does not occur in the West as it has entered into the age of innovations and modernity when it imposed a curfew on the Catholic Church of Europe, and Christianity in general, within its walls and never allowing it to infiltrate and control other aspects of life. Thus, within scientific discoveries and empiricism, the white European man has roamed the earth and discovered the outer space, and later on, Europeans colonized the countries of the Muhammadans previously ruled by the Ottomans. Of course, the West is still controlling the Arab world because most of the Arabs/Muhammadans  maintain their silly, illogical earthly, man-made religions since the Abbasid Era till the present moment and deify certain idols that lead them to fight one another, causing destruction to themselves with their own hands with the help of other non-Arab hands.              

2- In such a state of affairs now, we are to delve deeper into the historical roots of the current political life within the countries of the Muhammadans; because history there in the Middle East is repeating itself. This is proven when we see on TV screens the nauseating figures of ISIS terrorists who do not differ at all from the soldiers of Al-Saud troops when they established the very first Saudi state (1745 - 1818) and they repeat atrocities committed by the fierce Hanbali fighters during the Abbasid Era in Iraq. This is why Abou Bakr Al-Baghdadi of ISIS is no different figure from Abou Bakr Ibn Abou Qohafa the first caliph among the four pre-Umayyad ones, deified by the Sunnites till now. Both men had committed military aggression and atrocities. Indeed, massacres committed by ISIS are very much like the ones committed by the Qarmatians in Iraq and the Levant (specifically in Mosul and Raqqa) within the Middle Ages. A last thing to exemplify the fact that history repeats itself in the Middle East is that Shiites who perform pilgrimage to Karbala city in Iraq are being massacred since the Abbasid Era till now. The only difference is in names of figures/persons and the types of weapons and arms used, but all such events of the past and the present are united in the same earthly, man-made religions that force on followers to repeat the past and re-live it even in silly dress codes: hijab (veil), niqab/chador (full veil covering the face), circumcision (or rather genital mutilation) of male and female children and babies, etc.            

3- The purpose of this book you are reading now about how the earthly, man-made religions of the Muhammadans developed and evolved is to assert that Islam has nothing to do at all with what crimes and atrocities that are going on now in the Arab world and in the countries of the Muhammadans, as such crimes are sins that contradict Islam (i.e., Quranism). The factors behind such crimes and atrocities are the earthly, man-made religions of the Muhammadans. We assert this fact repeatedly in our writings so as to warn all people and to undeceive them. This is the mission undertaken by reformist authors like ourselves. May God come to our aid and help.     

Firstly: the three poles of the Middle East, past and present:  

1- Within our current age of collapse, decay, and downfall in the Arab world, the three poles of the Middle East, which is a region situated in the middle of the countries of the Muhammadans, are Egypt, Iran, and Turkey. Of course, Iran embraces the religious and political ideology of the Shiite Twelver sect; Turkey has a weird president with a mania to restore the past 'glory' of the Ottomans; Egypt is currently ruled by a military regime that follow the footsteps of the Mameluke military state that tortured, oppressed, and despised Egyptians. The only difference between the Mameluke Egypt and Egypt of today is that Egypt was great and glorious during the Mameluke Empire (e.g., Cairo is filled with monuments and great buildings and mosques of the Mameluke Era), whereas now, the military regime in Egypt made Egypt sink lower on all levels, because we tend to think that the military ruling regime is a failure and has betrayed Egypt and Egyptians more than any previous regime.   

2- Within our current age of collapse, degeneration, and deterioration in the Arab world, we see the worst game ever played; namely, to mix politics with an earthly, man-made religion. The most dominant earthly, man-made religion is Sunnite Sufism embraced by more than 70% of the Muhammadans; minorities are ordered (from biggest to smallest groups) as follows: Shiites, Sunnite Wahabis, and Sufi orders, as the latter has their own notions away from the Sunnite religion, including unity/union with God.   

3- When a failed attempt of a military coup occurred in Turkey in 2016, many denounced it and felt glad when Erdoğan crushed it. In fact, we personally have written that we wished the coup would have succeeded in overthrowing this Turkish president, though coups are admittedly a bad thing. This 2016 coup attempt failed because it had no religious ideology to support it nor did it have the support of the Turkish citizens. This is why this coup (and previous ones before it in recent history in Turkey) failed miserably; yet, it has been a step toward democratic transition which is a process that will take many generations who will imbibe the culture of democracy. Thus, we maintain that this coup, if it were a success, would have been for the benefit of Turkey in the short run and in the long run as well. What is definitely NEVER beneficial for Turkey and its neighbors – as it is situated in a unique location between the West and the East – that a theocracy would be established in this secular country. This theocracy, if established, will mix between religious fanaticism and bigotry and Turkish nationalism and racism expressed clearly in speeches and policies of Erdoğan. Shortly after he quelled and crushed such a coup, Erdoğan is turning into a dictator who is getting rid of all his foes and create for himself other new foes inside Turkey and others outside Turkey as he creates troubles for Europe. Of course, Erdoğan is intimidating the Turkish citizens with assumed or imagined internal and external dangers to propagate himself as a new Ottoman sultan who represents 'Islam' and who is facing the 'Christian' West!      

4- Iran names itself as an 'Islamic' republic and claims falsely that it represents 'Islamic' liberation. Indeed, Al-Khomeini declared the endeavors to export the so-called 'Islamic revolution' so as to revolutionize other Muhammadans overtly and ostentatiously by making them practically embrace the Shiite religion to be controlled by Iran. Iran at first has raised the motto of making religious doctrines/sects draw nearer to one another during the 1980s; we personally criticized and attacked such motto and endeavors at the time when we were living in Cairo, Egypt, and exposed it as an attempt to spread and proselytize the Shiite religion for political reasons to benefit Iran and no other countries at all. At the time, we were a 'moderate' Sunnite man, before we have crystalized the Quranism theory as True Islam, and we have attended a conference held (and financed/sponsored by Iran) to discuss this Iranian attempts and calls. When our turn to speak came, we have told the attendees that Shiites must first discuss and reject hadiths ascribed to Muhammad causing the Shiite-Sunnite conflict and making it art of the Shiite religion. We have addressed a shrewd, cunning smiling Shiite high-rank clergymen among the attendees that instead of making Shiites sects draw nearer to the Sunnite ones, the Shiites of Iran must attempt first to make different Shiite doctrines get nearer to one another and be unified. Of course, our words have infuriated most of the attendees, because it touched a nerve and rubbed salt to the wound. The Iranian endeavors to infiltrate (by proselytizing the Shiite religion) into the countries of the Sunnite-Sufi Muhammadans have failed, despite of the raised motto of making religious doctrines/sects draw nearer to one another; Iran has raised another motto or banner of facing the 'Greater Satan' (i.e., Israel and the USA), and Iran tries to lead other Muhammadans worldwide within such assumed confrontation. This confrontation includes the followers of the Sunnite Wahabi religion inside the USA: they are arch-enemies of Iran and the Shiite religion; they are loyal only to the KSA and the other Persian Gulf Wahabi monarchies. Egypt is now dominated and controlled by the kings of the Persian Gulf monarchies thanks to the military regime that has betrayed Egypt and caused failure within many levels in Egypt. 

5- The third pole is Egypt, with its military regime which is a failure and has betrayed Egypt; this military rule made Egypt lose its stature and leadership in the region, and this has left ample room for dwarf countries like the UAE and Qatar and a collapsing country like the KSA to undertake this leadership instead of Egypt, a weak country now in terms of economy and politics. Instead of the Egyptian pole being dominated by either the strong Turkey or the strong Iran, it is controlled now by the Persian Gulf countries, especially the temporary KSA, and this way, the Wahabi countries face the Shiite Iran. Of course, however rich and powerful the KSA might be because of oil revenues, it cannot face Iran on all levels; after neutralizing the Egyptian role, Iran has made its influence and domination reach Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Palestine, Syria, and some parts of North Africa where the Shiite religion is being proselytized.       

6- We cannot help but notice that history repeats itself now within the complicated relations between the three poles (Iran, Turkey, and Egypt). Egypt now is as weak as it was within the reign of the sultan Al-Ghoury. Iran is very strong now; it was the same when Shah Ismail of the Safavid dynasty ruled Persia. Turkey now has its president who seeks to revive the Ottoman 'glory'. Likewise, Europe was an enemy of the three poles (especially Spain and Portugal), but now,  this enemy has emerged as locations and figures changed, and with the rise of the right-wing parties all over the West, which are parties that suffer Islamophobia; there is no difference in this respect between the right-wing in the USA or France, or even within the neutral Netherlands.  

Secondly: the ever-increasinghope of Shiites to reach power:

1- The Sufi religion represents the masses and their submission to the rulers in all eras; the only ambitions Sufis have within political life is to "dance" within the processions of sultans/rulers and to support them to get nearer to them. In contrast, the Sunnite religion represents power-seekers, hegemony, and dominance as well as savagery derived from the history of deified caliphs who came from Qorayish. The Shiite religion is not less than the Sunnite one in seeking to reach (or to maintain) power and authority, and this is why Shiites always join the opposition movements against  Sunnite rulers everywhere. Shiites that way are always within the opposition and resistance side, and they are suffering persecution and clampdown from Sunnite rulers, but Shiites scheme and plot secretly to overthrow Sunnite rulers, while practicing Taqiyya (i.e., showing the opposite of what they believe in) and overtly adhering to peace, and once Shiites reach power anywhere, they practice dominance, tyranny, hegemony, and savagery. Hence, there is no difference between the Iranian persecution inflicted on the Sunnite minority inside Iran in Arabstan and the Saudi persecution inflicted on the Shiite minority in Al-Ahsa region. When Sufism dominated the Arab region for centuries, Sunnites and Shiites in their struggle for power controlled Sufism to control the masses, and this is why there are Sunnite Sufism and Shiite Sufism, and both religions competed at some point in history; e.g., when the Safavid Shah Ismail (the Shiite-Sufi ruler) struggled against the Ottomans whose religion was Sunnite Sufism.            

2- The complicated relation between the three rulers (i.e., Selim I the Ottoman caliph, Shah Ismail of the Safavid dynasty, and the sultan Al-Ghoury of Egypt) ended as Selim I won eventually and dominated over Egypt, the Levant, Hejaz, Yemen, and North Africa (except Morocco). This way, Egypt turned from a pioneer, leading country to a mere Ottoman province. This change took place all over the Arab world, as the Ottomans controlled and ruled the Red Sea and lands on its both sides and the lands south of the Mediterranean Sea. Later on, the Ottoman Empire doubled its geographical space and led the so-called 'Islamic' world as opposite to the Christian world. This change in Egypt and its submission to the Ottoman rule was aided by a certain catalyst: the Sufi-Shiite spy named Al-Sharif Al-Ajamy who managed to enter secretly into the council of Al-Ghoury in the Citadel to control it, and he managed to give Al-Ghoury ill pieces of advices and to convince him to apply them, which resulted in the murder of Al-Ghoury. This change in Egypt started with this Persian Shiite spy; this shows the unparalleled Shiite genius and experience when it comes to scheming, intrigues, and conspiracies. This means that the loyalty of these extremist Shiites is to their religion and not to the country or homeland in which they live. Of course, we cannot generalize this about any Shiite person now; we mean to say this about zealots among them who seek power anywhere. We, of course, do not blame Shiite religious extremists in such eras for such loyalty (who were not involved in politics) as their being persecuted by the extremist Ibn Hanbal Sunnite clergymen for centuries was too much to bear; this continues against Shiites of today who are persecuted by Wahabis everywhere. Thus, when Shiites find that no country protects them, they resort to their religion to defend themselves and their existence.         

3- Shiites within most eras of their history lived in the resistance camp or trench; they practiced Taqiyya as part of their religion features to defend their existence and their faith that infuriates Sunnite as Shiites curse Aisha, Abou Bakr, Omar, and Othman as part of their rituals. All the time, Shiites never cease to hope that one day, conditions will change in their favor, and they never stopped their schemes, intrigues, and plots in many eras as they seek to reach power and authority anywhere. Some of the Shiite schemes succeeded partially or wholly and many failed miserably; it is beyond the scope of this book to exemplify this, but we provide a brief example in the next point.  

4- After the collapse of the Fatimid caliphate, the Ayyubid State was established in Egypt, and this led to the creation of secret Shiite movements that aimed to restore Egypt to the Shiite rule, and members of these movements pretended to embrace Sufism. Such movements were very near to have a measure of success during the period of rule of weak Ayyubid sultans in Egypt, but Shiites failed in their endeavors because the Mamelukes ruled Egypt and proved their meritocracy, especially during the reign of the Sultan Al-Dhahir Beibars. Within the last stage of these secret Shiite movements, when Beibars was in authority, the secret Shiite leader was a man who pretended to be a mad Sufi who settled in a minor Egyptian Delta city called Tanta; this man was called Al-Sayed Al-Badawi, and he had his agents spread all over Egypt and outside it, chief among them were Al-Shazily and Al-Disouky. All these men are now famous Sufi saints/deities who has their mausoleums dedicated to them in Egypt. Another Shiite secret agent who pretended to be a Sufi sheikh was Khedr Al-Adawi who was among the retinue of the sultan Beibars in the palace in Cairo. Of course, Beibars felt this secret movement and tried to hunt down its agent; this drove the frightened Al-Badawi and his men to adhere to Sufism and to overtly discard any Shiite practices and notions. Eventually, this Shiite secret movement proved a political failure; yet, it produced famous Sufi orders ascribed to those conspirators who metamorphosed after their death into supreme Sufi deities/saints later on. More details on that topic are found on our book titled "Al-Sayed Al-Badawi between Fact and Myth", published on our website and in Cairo, Egypt, in 1982.     

Thirdly: Egypt now is coveted by Iran and the KSA:

1- Among the three strategic poles of the region, Egypt is the most important one, even during the current era of being on the verge of collapse because of the military rule (of so many failures) that betrayed Egypt, but Iran and the KSA vie for the control of Egypt and winning Egypt to their side. 

2- At present, the military rule in Egypt (of so many failures) that betrayed Egypt submits to all commands of the KSA, including to criminalize the Shiite proselytization inside Egypt. The KSA fears that Egypt would leave its Wahabi Sunnite religion to convert to the Shiite one. At the same time, Iran is doing its best to spread the Shiite religion in Egypt, hoping to win Egypt one day to its side in order to siege the KSA, its arch-enemy, and to control the whole Arab world later on.

3- Both Iran and the KSA tend to forget a fact of vital importance about Egypt: Egypt can NEVER be a Shiite country at all, though it might be a Wahabi Sunnite extremist country for some time, as Wahabism is dwindling by the passage of time in Egypt. The Shiite Fatimids ruled Egypt at some point in history, and they built its current capital city, Cairo, as well as Al-Azhar institution in which Egypt takes pride. The Fatimid Shiites managed to convert most Egyptians from the Orthodox Coptic Christianity to the Shiite religion (while thinking it were Islam). Yet, shortly before the collapse of the Fatimid caliphate, Egyptians deserted and abandoned the Shiite religion and mocked the deification of  the Fatimid caliph/imam, and they did not like to verbally attack historical figures like Aisha, wife of Muhammad, Othman, Abou Bakr, and Omar. Shortly before the collapse of the Fatimid caliphate, a certain caliph had tried to win back the Egyptians to the Shiite religion by building a mausoleum dedicated to Al-Hussein, the murdered son of the Shiite supreme deity Ali, and the Sunnite Egyptians continue (till now) to deify and sanctify Al-Hussein along with the four pre-Umayyad caliphs. Thus, most Egyptians deify and sanctify the household of Ali and refuse to verbally abuse or mock Aisha, Othman, Abou Bakr, and Omar, and this means that the Egyptians now can NEVER convert to the Shiite religion en masse, even if few citizens convert.       

4- Turkey has no religious ideology now, but it has its Ottoman history in which it takes pride, but the Ottoman rule of Egypt still carries nothing but painful memories to Egyptians. Besides, Turkey has remained a secular country for decades and wishes one day to join the EU, and when Turkey has lately turned toward Arabs and Egypt in particular, it will never have the same weight in Egypt like the Wahabi monarchies of the Persian Gulf. In addition, the geographical location of turkey does NOT make it fit to lea Arabs or the Muhammadans in general, and this location makes it in constant troubles with Europe, Iran, and the Kurds. Moreover, the Ottoman Turkey would not have turned to Arabs if it had not been for the Safavid Shah Ismail, and the Ottomans would have turned westward into Europe; now, modern Turkey seeks (in vain and hopelessly) to join the EU.        

5- This means that the only forces that compete to control Egypt and to win it to their side is Iran and the Gulf monarchies (especially the KSA). A historical fact: Egypt can never be a Shiite country and will never remain a Wahabi one for long; sooner or later, Egypt will return to its ''moderate'' Sunnite Sufism and this will hasten the imminent collapse of the KSA and the Wahabi ideology in general.     

Lastly:

1- The Sunnite-Shiite conflict is actually an Iranian-Saudi one that caused the destruction of Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya, and it threatens to destroy Egypt, Sudan, and North African Arab countries. It does NOT serve Saudi purposes and interests to see a very strong State established in Egypt, Iraq, and Yemen; besides, the KSA never desires to see a non-Wahabi State established at its borders, and this is why the criminal Wahabis of the KSA cause the outbreak of many wars and bloodshed in the region presumably to protect the Saudi monarchy.  

2- To avoid such total destruction coming soon, Egypt must be ruled by a democratic secular regime that applies human rights, so that Egypt restores its stature and important strategic role in the region; this will lead at once to the collapse of the rule of the Saudi royal family (the axis of evil) and to creating a balance between both real poles in the region: Iran and Egypt. This way, Iran will be confined to its borders and its role will never pose a threat, while the Turkish MB president, Erdoğan, would be forced to let go of his illusions of restoring the Ottoman caliphate.  

3- Otherwise, destruction lies ahead, looming on the horizon for all Arab countries and the whole Middle East.

4- God's Decree will prevail eventually.