Online Watch on HarunYahya.Tv

Click to Download for Transcribe

Reporter: With your permission I would like to start with the Atlas.

Reporter: As you know, the Atlas has attracted considerable interest, especially in the West. What was the idea behind the book? Why did you publish this book?

Adnan Oktar: Yes, people have been openly and terribly deceived for the last 150 years. Chance cannot do anything. For example, when we throw sand around it merely spreads out unconsciously; Allah creates that as well, of course, but nothing comes of it. But there is a highly ordered system in the human cell structure, molecular structure, that is many times more perfect than any computer. In other words, it is obvious that everything was made by a power. In addition, there are 100 million fossils. Not one is of the kind Darwin spoke of. They are all of such a kind as to prove creation. There is not a single fossil that could be regarded as a transitional form, as Darwin spoke of. That is why I consider this deception as the greatest mockery Shaytan has ever committed and his biggest ever trick on humanity.

Reporter: And that is why the book…

Adnan Oktar: Yes, I wrote that book to set matters straight. And it has produced results very quickly.

Reporter: Yes, true. Why did you send it to scientists in particular. You must know better than me. You did you send it to scientists in the West particularly, did you not? I believe you have also sent it to religious figures at the same time. 

Adnan Oktar: Yes. It is especially important for scientists to see the truth. Indeed, it is impossible for any honest, reasonable person to defend Darwinism after reading this book. In other words, everyone is in agreement on the matter. Because there are manifest proofs. Anyone reading any four or five of the book’s pages will see that Darwinism is a deception. It is crystal clear. But if someone is prejudiced from the start, then even if we give them a thousand books like this one and produce thousands of proofs and Darwin offers not a shred of evidence, they will still believe in Darwin and we will never be able to convince them otherwise, of course.

Reporter. Richard Dawkins is perhaps the best known.

Adnan Oktar: Yes. “Come and debate with us”, we said. But he said he has sworn not to engage in debates and he would not come. So how should we proceed? I mean what can we do? We say there are a hundred million fossils and put these on show. I say, come up with just one fossil and I will give you 10 trillion Turkish lira. Just come up with one fossil to confirm the claims of Darwinism. But he says he can’t. So what do you want? The matter is over and done with. He should admit he has been defeated, accept the facts and withdraw gracefully, but he is still childishly digging in his heels.

Reporter: What were the reactions from the West, as far as you can tell, to the Atlas?

Adnan Oktar: Superb, superb.

Adnan Oktar: Let me explain.

Reporter: Of course, go ahead.

Adnan Oktar: We achieved one huge result in the public eye in particular. At the moment the percentage of people in Europe who do not believe in Darwinism is 80%. Eighty percent of Europeans no longer believe in Darwin. This has been made perfectly clear in public opinion polls. And not just one survey, but a great many.

Sarkozy, for instance, underwent a huge change after reading the book.

He says “it was atheism, not religion, that caused the sufferings of the 20th century”. The Masons were furious that he said such a thing and demanded he explain himself. They criticised him for saying he adopted that view after reading the books of Harun Yahya.

I think that someone who bears Allah in his heart is harmless, rather than a threat. We need a laicist conception that does not exclude religion. Not to exclude religion, he says.

Reporter: And this is Sarkozy?.

Adnan Oktar: Yes, Sarkozy. That is what he said in Riyadh, Sarkozy’s speech in Riyadh on January 14th, 2008.

“Almighty Allah is in everyone’s hearts and thoughts. It is Allah who constantly sends people a message of humility and love, a message of peace and brotherhood, a message of tolerance and respect. Allah is a bastion against unbounded human pride and madness. It is Allah who makes man free, not a prisoner.” It is a superb development.

As you know, Tony Blair was a socialist and a Darwinist, but I draw your attention to how he changed after reading the book. 

He said that in the Guardian newspaper on April 4th, 2008.

Adnan Oktar: Yes, Tony Blair’s own statement.

Protect religion. And help it to become a force for good. Protect religion and help it become a force for good.

In another statement to a different news agency, on April 3rd, 2008.Tony Blair called for religion to be given a central place in solving the problems of the world. He said that religion could stir the conscience of the world. That is really excellent.

Reporter: Tony Blair became a Catholic, didn’t he? I was talking about that with my colleagues a bit earlier.

Reporter: Right, you have in a sense already answered my next question, but let me ask it anyway. I visited your Science Research Foundation last year.

Reporter: I spoke with your colleagues. In their view, the theory of evolution is dead or dying in Turkey. My first question is do you agree with that? And my second is how do things stand in the West. You have already answered that in a way, but let the question stand.

Adnan Oktar. Many surveys have been conducted in Turkey. In early polls there was a very low percentage opposed to Darwinism, around 20% to 30% of people were against it. The level of opposition to Darwinism in Turkey now is 90%, a very high figure. Turkey has the highest level in Europe. This is a superb thing.

Adnan Oktar: This has been crystallised in the surveys – 90%. It was more or less just the other way round in the 1970s. We have had a glorious result in Turkey. It is been all straightened up. When it comes to Europe.. People in Europe are even more predisposed to such truth and beauty, and are more easily convinced. Europeans are not like people in certain other countries, and we have had really fast results there. For instance, the German magazine Stern called my book as a book that exploded like a thunder. Another major German daily said Darwin was now in a difficult position in Europe. These are genuine admissions, and mean that they have accepted the defeat.

A news agency in Holland, a web site said the Atlas of Creation had created a whirlwind in Europe.

One of Italy’s major papers said “but one thing is for certain, that we will be the losers.” A perfect analysis. Look, they are saying that what is for sure is that they will be the losers. A well-known French scientific journal says the Atlas has had the impact of a cold shower. And in Belgium...

Reporter: May I ask you something?

Reporter: Pardon me for interrupting. Why do you always say ‘Darwinism’? Maybe it is a linguistic question. In English we refer to the theory of evolution. Why do you prefer to use the term Darwinism?

Adnan Oktar: Because it is a theory that Darwin proposed and this is concentrated in him, because the theory of evolution is something that could be developed subsequently. For example, you know there are claims regarding the evolution of history, claims about the evolution of the universe and of matter, and that could be confusing. The universe came into being with an explosion of matter, the Big Bang, of zero volume, and time and place came into being in a moment, when there had been no time or place before. This is most important. One might call that evolution. But I do not, I call it a process of development. Allah developed it. But one might make the same claim for the creation of living things. I use the term Darwinism to avoid any confusion of concept, in other words.

Reporter: All right. I would now like to come to your particular interest, your particular interest in Darwin. When did that interest begin? To my knowledge, Turkey was in a state of terrible conflict in the 1970s, Left and Right. Did it stem from that? Maybe you could tell us? I know you said the same kind of things at Gazeteport, but with your permission...

Adnan Oktar: InshaAllah. You are very well-informed, mashaAllah. At least as much as any Turk mashaAllah. Yes, my high school years. Because in childhood I was always puzzled by people having no Allah, by their not thinking about Allah, or death, or what comes after death. They were prefectly well at ease; I have sometimes seen people at the brink of death and they were perfectly at ease, and even joking. They say not a word about Allah. I was really puzzled as a child. Any normal person should ask what will become them after death, where they came from and where they will go. It is a terrible disgrace for someone not to be curious about such things. But I saws that this had a root. The philosophical basis at its root was Darwinism. When I looked into it I encountered a total lie and fraud. And I have seen that people were openly defrauded despotically. No theory receives as much official protection from states as Darwinism. It enjoys immunity, and that is truly shameful. Marxism is criticised, fascism is criticised, but Darwinism is above criticism. Darwinism enjoys official protection all across the world, in 90% of the world. To espouse the opposite position is forbidden, and to espouse Darwinism is obligatory. One cannot give anti-Darwinian answers in university exams, for instance. You have to give answers favouring Darwinism. When you go to class you have to espouse Darwinism. This very awkward. An article or statement espousing the opposite view can lead to a professor losing his post; they will get rid of him straight away, as they did in Turkey with a professor by the name of Adem Tatlı. This person had written an unofficial book in addition to works he had written in school. The man was removed from his post because of that book. They won’t let such people breathe easy anywhere in the world. You see there was a huge reaction in France, but that reaction of course, turned into a favourable one. The commission even decided to ban my book in the European Union. But no decision is ever taken to ban Darwinism. No such decision can be taken anywhere because it enjoys official protection. It is terrifying how the theory is propped up by official patronage. There must be something behind it.

Reporter: I think I am right in saying you regard Darwinism as an ideology?

Adnan Oktar: Yes. An ideology. But I have never seen an ideology so protected across the whole world. Hitler and Mussolini supported fascism and defended it as an official ideology, but other countries did not support it. And it soon enough came to an end, in other words, nobody can officially espouse Hitler’s views in Germany today. There is no such obligation, though there was once. Supporting Darwinism is as obligatory as supporting Hitler’s ideas once was. That is a shameful imposition. And a despotic imposition in the name of science. If they have the courage they should lift this official protection, this official pressure and let us square our account with Darwinism. It would be demolished in a moment. Because such a rotten and groundless and ludicrous theory can never be. It a theory that explains everything in terms of chance and is built around fictitious scenarios, a total fantasy.

Reporter: You say that Darwinism is imposed, but have you experienced any suffering or personal problems because of such imposing?

Adnan Oktar: It is the reason for the pressure I am currently under. A report against me appears in the papers, for example. They conclude the report with a small note about my attitude towards Darwinism. That is where it stems from. Because in their eyes, someone who espouses Darwinism is enlightened, progressive and acceptable. But if he opposes Darwinism that person is exceedingly dangerous. And if he sets out his position with rational, scientific and irrefutable evidence, the situation is even worse. Therefore they have perceived the catastrophe they will be facing, as they regard this as a catastrophe. They have understood what they will be facing that is why they are fighting me with all their might and main, with conspiracy after conspiracy, trap after trap. They have slandered and conspired against me time after time, as you know. They have come up with cocaine plots, allegations of insanity and all kinds of unimaginable claims. I have demolished them all, but they refuse to back off. They even make use of the means at the disposal of the state. They are trying to do something with those, and everyone can see it.

Reporter: Why, in your view, are they trying to protect Darwinism, what power does Darwinism have over them?

Adnan Oktar: Darwinism is the religion of the new world order. The new world order.

Reporter: In an anti-religious guise.

Adnan Oktar: Yes. The new world order rests on a religious foundation; in other words, it has to account for the world, and it does so by saying the world, and living things, came into being by chance. History too develops with chances. Everything develops by way of chance and you are all animals. And society is a herd of animals. Animals fight, the strongest survive and the weak are eliminated. That is what is alleged, of course.

Reporter: And what happens to people who believe that, what kind of human being emerges?

Adnan Oktar: The result is savage capitalism, Marxism, that is to say communism, fascism. Savage capital emerges, and a system arises that takes over the whole world. More than 90% of the world regimes are of this kind. 

Reporter: I would like to ask you one last question about Darwinism. I believe it is the same in Turkey, but according to various Western thinkers, there is no contradiction between religion and science and one can accept religion and also believe in the theory of evolution. On the one hand you have faith and on the other side reason, or whatever name you chose to give it. These are actually very different and the debate appears a rather artificial one. What do you think? Is it not artificial? 

Reporter: There will always be people like Richard Dawkins, of course. But is he not a bit of an extreme example? 

Adnan Oktar: That is exactly what they want from me. They want me to be a nice, pleasant man of religion, to be at peace with and accept Darwinism, and then no-one will mind if I pray and live by Islam. But this is science, they say, you must sign up to Darwinism, how dare you oppose it?, let Darwinism be. This is a very sly, cunning policy and a real trap. I will never, ever fall into that trap, but am trying to destroy it, as I have and will again. They have deceived many devout people in this way. They have deceived many Muslims and scholars in the Islamic world. They state that Darwinism does not conflict with Islam or the Qur’an, and these are professors, regarded as the most rational professors; that is how it is in Turkey. In other words, they will never accept someone who is not an adherent of Darwinism as a professor. Many people regard anyone who accepts Darwinism as religious; not everyone, but certain circles. This is a trap.

Reporter: What do you say? Do you say that if you believe in evolution you can never believe in religion?

Adnan Oktar: Naturally. Religion is something utterly at variance with Darwinism. The illogicality of the latter can be seen wherever you look. For one thing, religion has angels and djinn. Angels and djinn did not come into being through evolution according to their claims. I mean when you ask a religious professor the trap is neutralised at once. Go and ask those scholars if angels and djinn evolved, and they will tell you no. Ask them how they came about and they will tell you that Allah created them. But how did human beings appear? Supposedly through evolution. Since they think that humans cannot make the connection with angels and djinn, they imagine it would not be a problem. But human beings are visible entities, and accounting for them in Darwinian terms does not conflict with the new world order. They are still trying to keep this ruse going in their mind, but it has been totally demolished in Turkey and they are no longer able to find religious scholars who will talk in those terms, preach such a falsehood to the public and thus maintain the deception.

Reporter: OK. Now I would like to go back in time a little. As you said earlier, the position was the exact opposite in the 1970s. I understand there were communists in Turkey in the 1970s. There was communism, meaning communism, atheism. But communism today is finished, although laicism still also means atheism for some people. What do you think? You said we need a more broad-based laicism. What is your opinion?

Adnan Oktar: Communism is a system with no Allah, scripture, creed or faith. Laicism, on the other hand, is the guarantee of religion, and is the system favoured by it. I have a laicist mindset, for example. What does laicism mean? It means the state showing the same love, affection, respect and concern for everyone, Christians, Jews, agnostics, atheists, communists, everyone. This is an immaculate system, one in which everyone can freely express their ideas. Falsity and hypocrisy emerge in the absence of laicism, when people conceal their true beliefs. You cannot tell what someone really thinks because there is imposition. If communist ideology prevails, for example, everyone will say they are communists even if they do not really believe in it. And the same applies to religion, with everyone claiming to be devout believers, Muslims. Even though they are not. But one must be honest. If someone is an atheist they must say they are an atheist. This is possible because Allah tells us in the Qur’an that He does not create everyone as believers. Some are Christians and some are Jews, and this is also set out in the Qur’an. Allah creates them in that form, that is the form His creation takes. People’s beliefs should be stated openly. That is what makes laicism such an essential system.

Reporter: Do you think the laicist system in Turkey needs adjusting? Is it perfect, or else...?

Adnan Oktar: A conception of laicism under Europe norms would be a very good thing, of course. The European model is perfect.

Adnan Oktar: In terms of laicism.

Reporter: But what needs to be changed, in your eyes?

Adnan Oktar: There could be a little more tolerance. There could be a little more moderation regarding the matter of the headscarf. It seems to me there is an unnecessary policy of repression...

Reporter: From what I know you are more disposed to the right, to the right in political terms. And you have always been so. And speaking on Gazeteport or somewhere you referred to the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) as Turkey’s political cement. Could you tell us a bit more? What kind of cement might it be?  

Adnan Oktar: First and foremost, MHP people have a joyous love of Allah. They have a joyous love of Islam. They are totally determined when it comes to the unity and integrity of the state. They espouse a unitary system. They are fiercely opposed to separatism and are anti-communist. Those are highly important criteria for me. Such people are my friends. In those regards I love and support them very much. I love and support whoever espouses those views. I will never allow the motherland to be split up. I brook no words against the faith, against Islam. I am anti-communist, but this is something I engage in with my ideas and books. In other words, I am strongly opposed to pressure, violence and terror. I think they are also first-class citizens. But I also think an exchange of ideas would be useful in the intellectual struggle.

Reporter: Is it possible to be religious and Leftist? Is there any such thing? It is not something often observed in Turkey.

Adnan Oktar: There are such people. Yes, there are.

Reporter: But not many. Why is that, in your view? In Iran, for instance, there used to be people like Ali Shariati, Leftist and Islamist. But not many in Turkey.

Adnan Oktar: They use that word Leftist a bit unnecessarily, as shorthand. What they really mean is, we are social democrats, we sympathise with the poor and want to protect them. In other words, we are opposed to capitalism. But that is in any case what Islam says, so what is the point of describing oneself as a Leftist? Muslims in any case have an obligation to protect the poor, show them affection and strive to give them pleasant, peace-filled and agreeable lives. There is no need to be a Leftist for that, as the Qur’an has already set it out. If anyone is going to be anything, the Leftists should abide by the Qur’an. The Leftists could say they espouse the Qur’an. Because if Leftist philosophy had adopted any ideas, it is the Qur’an it has taken them from. If it has taken on board the idea of Social Democracy, that is where it got it from. It got it from the Qur’an. For example, when Noah was on the Ark he collected rice, chick-peas, lentils and the like, figs. And he made a broth from them, and ladles it out to everyone. Is that not what communism says? So where did it get the idea from? Where did socialism get this idea of social justice from? It got it from the Qur’an. So there is no need to be a communist at all. Any virtuous person will love and defend the poor, and will love his country and national flag. I do not think there is any special need to be a Leftist.

Reporter: Looking at your web sites I see you are a great admirer of the Ottoman Empire. Is that true?

Adnan Oktar: Yes, of course.

Reporter: What kind of admiration is that? I mean why do you admire it so much?

Adnan Oktar: For one thing, the Ottoman Empire …

Reporter: When one enters the Science Research Foundation for example, there are Ottoman decrees everywhere, Ottoman music, etc...

Sayın Adnan Oktar: The Ottomans were very loving, pure, clean, loving people who delighted in beautiful things. We can see that from their designs, their motifs and patterns. There is a grandeur and nobility in them. They are very lovely.

Reporter: What do you mean by grandeur?

Adnan Oktar: A majesty, a splendour, a display. We can see that in the Mehter Bands [bands specialising in Ottoman military music] today. One cannot see it in any other such bands elsewhere in the world. The grandeur and majesty, that beauty that raises the hairs on the back of one’s neck, that exist in the Mehter Bands cannot be found in any other such bands anywhere in the world; the Mehter Bands are the most perfect in the world. For example, the colours employed by the Ottomans were highly relaxing and delightful. Their decorations, the decorations known as Edirnekari, are the most perfect form of decoration I have seen anywhere in the world. It has a relaxing quality all its own. Ottoman homes, for instance, have the most perfect interior design in the world. And in functional terms, too, in terms of people having perfect lives, they are very, very perfect. Ventilation, areas for different purposes, systems designed with guests in mind, and systems concerning cleanliness in particular are really, really excellent. They bestow a vast delight on the soul. They impart a feeling of rest. One can see that in their mosques. Ottoman mosques are really very pleasant, everyone entering them, foreigners for instance, experience a feeling of peace. They feel a beauty. But one does not achieve that in modern architecture. But one can there. This beauty in the Ottoman soul is reflected everywhere, I mean that the beauty in the Ottoman soul is Islam. Islam is reflected all over.

Reporter: What do you think has been lost in the modern soul?

Adnan Oktar: No, no. Modernity has a beauty of its own. But it does not have the same psychological impact, the same other worldly profundity. If we enter a museum of culture, for example, we enter a splendid building and are delighted by the art contained in it. But it can never reach that other worldly depth, as that is something completely different. But modernity is very beautiful. Our homes are modern, and if you have noticed I also like modernity. It has a different decor and attractiveness. But the depth of Ottoman decoration has a beauty all its own with a powerful impact on the soul.

Reporter: I would like to return to modernity later, but I would now like to ask this. How can I put it? The Ottoman Empire was a great world empire, of course. From what I can tell, a rather new Ottoman spirit has been growing in Turkey over the last 10 years. Could there be a new Ottoman Empire in Turkey’s future, could it become a new world power of that kind?

Adnan Oktar: In my view, a far greater power than the Ottoman Empire will consolidate around Turkey. That will be the Turkish-Islamic Union. The spiritual power of the Turkish-Islamic Union, its power of love, will enfold the whole world. It will be a union of love that will include Armenia, Israel, Georgia, China and Russia. A union that will protect and watch out for them all. There will be no policy of hostility or idea of potential hostile forces in this union. The only idea will be one of potential love and friendship. It will look at everyone and everything with love. It will even look on animals with love, on plants and flowers, even insects. Its guiding policy will be to look with love on everything that Allah has created for mankind. InshaAllah, the Turkish-Islamic Union will bring that about.

Reporter: Some people speak of Turkish Islam as if it were different to other kinds of Islam. Is there such a thing as Turkish Islam, in your view? And if so, what form does it take?

Adnan Oktar: No, no.. I see Turkishness as the leading force within that.

Adnan Oktar: In other words, Turks must adopt the role of leader. Otherwise, however, Islam is a single, whole entity. The same Islam exists all over the world. But the truth is that the Islam in Turkey is lived in the finest possible manner.

Reporter: But Islam does have different life styles. There is a rather different conception in Saudi Arabia, is there not? And a different one again in Turkey, for instance.

Reporter: From what I can see, Turks generally rather look down on Arab Islam. As if it were rather backward.

Adnan Oktar: The whole world admits that the conception of Islam in Turkey is the very finest conception. In other words, the Turks have come up with the best interpretation of Islam. And it is in Turkey that it is lived in the best way. The Islam lived by the Turks is really perfect in terms of warmth, moderation, tolerance and cleanliness. That is why I want Turkey and Turkishness to play the leading role, and that is how it has always been in the past. As you know, Turks were always to the fore in Ottoman times. The Turks are an affectionate nation, a trustworthy nation, full of love, hospitable and compassionate. We can see that in the Turkish Army.

Reporter:    That is what they say in the West. Have you read such things?

Reporter: They say the Turks are the most hospitable nation.

Adnan Oktar: Yes. The Turkish Army is much loved everywhere in the world. Our troops are embraced wherever they go, mashaAllah. Why? Because they are humane, warm, compassionate and fair. But it needs to spread as a power right across the world. The Turkish-Islamic Union is most important in that regard.

Reporter: All right. My last question on this subject. You have a Foundation for the Protection of National Values.

Reporter: What do national values mean to you?

Adnan Oktar: Religion, faith, the motherland, the nation, the flag, our nation, peace and security of the humanity, everything. That is what I understand by them.

Reporter: They may be different for everyone, of course. So in your view there is no one set of national values.

Adnan Oktar: National values.

Reporter: If I asked someone else they would list other things.

Adnan Oktar: Someone else might hold a different view, but my view is that.

Reporter: I would like to come back to your conception of Islam. I may be wrong, but from what I can tell, you were close to the Nurcus [the disciples of the Light].

Reporter: What did you find attractive in the Nurcu movement? Could you tell us about that? Like you, Said Nursi was someone who both wanted to live in the modern age and who was also closely devoted to the Qur’an, to faith. I don’t know, but maybe that attracted you? 

Adnan Oktar: In my opinion, Said Nursi’s most impressive side was his honesty. He was a very earnest man. All his life was honest. He was an extremely genuine religious scholar. He was also an extraordinary man, a man with many metaphysical aspects. He spoke of events to take place in the future as if he had seen them with his own eyes, and they happened just as he described, which is most amazing. He had a very vivid, a very sincere way of describing events in his life, but never thought of his own interests or anything that might be of use to his earthly desires. Of course everyone loves his own teachers, his own scholar most of all, but I really do regard Said Nursi as the most perfect religious scholar of the last century. That is my honest opinion. I also regard him as the most effective man of religion. He had a most serious impact, in my view. One of the subjects he most concentrated on was the signs leading to faith, telling the beauties created by Allah in other words, and the description of those signs. And that is what I do. Beloved Said Nursi talks about materialism and naturalism, in other words Darwinism. He stated in his works that Darwinism would be eradicated, totally defeated in the future; he did not engage in it himself, but he said it would be eradicated in the future. And indeed, we, as his students, and I regard myself as one of his students, a very humble student, are striving to that end. And we will attain ever stronger results.

Reporter: So you have drawn some of your enthusiasm, particularly as regards Darwin, from Nursi.

Adnan Oktar: I draw on the Qur’an, of course, directly from the Qur’an and my own conscience. But Said Nursi has also been a very wide-ranging, very positive influence on me. Said Nursi deals very well with ideas such as moderation, looking rationally at events, supporting and defending the state and loving the Turkish nation. Said Nursi was a Kurd himself, and a great admirer of the Turkish nation. In national terms he was a Kurd. But he had huge love and respect for the Turkish nation and the Turkish Army. He described the Turkish Army as heroic, for instance. That is a perfect description. He describes the Turkish nation as possessing religious faith, and that is an excellent definition. He refers to the Turkish nation as glorious. These are really exquisite terms. And he reflects a very warm and peaceable style. He says we possess the light [Nur], but is strongly opposed to armed force and violence. He says we can resolve our problems by using the light. We have no weapons, he says, but we have the light. This is most significant. What does light mean in that respect? He says we have brightness and beauty in our hands, we have love and depth and dialogue. And we shall preach Islam through these, he says. Said Nursi is absolutely opposed to violence, and this is truly excellent. 

Reporter: How did you come across him first? In childhood, or…

Adnan Oktar: During my high school years... I met a friend who took me to the home of the disciples of the Light…

Adnan Oktar: Yes, he took me to their school. That is where I first became acquainted with them. I saw they were really immaculate people, very modern, well-dressed with ties and jackets and well-scrubbed faces. They sat on the floor on carpets.

Reporter: Were you always religiously inclined before attending the school?

Adnan Oktar: Yes, I was. But I had heard about the Nurcus before and was curious about them. One day my friend insisted. All right then, I will go, I said. I went, and felt a huge affection, because their hands and faces were spotlessly clean and they were warm and respectful. I listened to what they had to say and formed a very warm and positive opinion. They then offered us tea. 

The Nurcus are a great element of equilibrium in Turkey, they prevent it being damaged by events and represent a serious bastion against communism. History will make that clear in the future, how they were a bastion, how the Nurcu movement is a most significant one that had a profound influence on Turkey, gave direction to society and played an immensely important role in the proper raising of Muslims. It has been highly beneficial. It has been of immense service to the Turkish state, nation and flag.

Reporter: I would like to move on to Fethullah Gülen. Like you, he came out of the Nurcu movement. Do you think he says anything different to Said Nursi? Is he very different to him?

Adnan Oktar: No, he is the same. He is a very warm and affectionate person. A very good person. The way he is portrayed is very odd. I sometimes hear things about him, things that do not comply with a sound conscious. First and foremost one must use compassions and conscience when looking at events. He is ill, he has a number of disorders. He went to America and settled there. He is in a difficult position but always tries to perform good deeds. He sets up schools and strives to ensure people are well educated. The people around him also work with all their might and main. And no state or nation has ever come to any harm from them. He is particularly respectful towards the Turkish state, serves the Turkish nation and often reiterates his devotion to it. I fail to understand what is wrong with such a perspective. I am unable to understand why people are making abnormal evaluations. In all conscience, I feel no such thing. I regard him as an excellent person.

Reporter: How do you define yourself? As a man of religion, or what?

Adnan Oktar: I am an ordinary servant of Allah.

Reporter: At the same time, you also have a group, whom we might refer to as sympathisers.

Adnan Oktar: Yes, I have friends with a great affection for me. 

Reporter: What is it? A congregation, or a religious sect? I believe that sects are banned in Turkey…

Adnan Oktar: Yes. Free sects are active.

Adnan Oktar. Of course. But in order to represent a sect I would have be from a sect. In other words, a member of a sect would have had to…

Reporter: You would have to be a sheikh.

Adnan Oktar: He would have to declare me to be a sheikh. But I am not a sheikh. I am not, therefore, a sect. I am merely surrounded by people who love me. They read my books. What can one call people who share my ideas? All one can call them is friends.

Reporter: It may be different in Islam, but in Christianity a proximity to religion generally involved humility. Today this concept is not as strong as it used to be, , but it was in the past. You always dress very well, as if you were trying to make a point, as if to show something. May be “to show” is not the right word but why do you have such an image?

Adnan Oktar: I am a great admirer of the Prophet Sulayman. I am an admirer of our Prophet (saas). I am an admirer of the Prophet Ibrahim. I am like them. Our Prophet (saas) also dressed well, very elegantly. The Byzantine skull cap he wore was very valuable. He dressed stunningly elegantly when appearing before foreign envoys. The Prophet Sulayman’s palace was on everyone’s lips. No such splendour as in his days has ever been or will ever be in the future. It was that beautiful. Sulayman also dressed very elegantly, as did those around him. His envoys did the same. When the Queen of Sheba came to his palace she looked at the floor and thought it was water. She gathered up her skirts and got ready to try to cross that water, but then she realised it was not water at all, but crystal. This was a perfect technology and perfect aesthetics and beauty. A technology indistinguishable from water that has never to date been matched. But the Prophet Sulayman produced that technology, had it brought into being...In other words, a women is unable to tell whether something is water or not, and forms the conclusion it is water, and gathers up her skirt in preparation for entering the water. Then she realised the floor was made of crystal and said that she already had faith before, but this had been instrumental in causing her to believe. This is very important; to put it another way, Muslims will of course be elegant and well-dressed. Moreover Allah tells us to wear out best clothes when we attend the mosques. What does this mean? It means to be elegant and well-dressed. That is a verse from the Qur’an. This does not, therefore, eliminate humility, because Allah also creates our clothes. It is Allah Who creates clothes, those adornments. And it is Allah Who will bestow those blessings upon us. It is the same thing. Paradise, for instance, is a perfect place. Everyone will dress very well in paradise. People will move around in very attractive clothes. But this will not make them proud, but will be instrumental in their giving thanks to Allah. That also applies in this world. It will not lead to pride, but will be instrumental in their giving thanks to Allah and forming a favourable impression of the faith.

Reporter: Do you think the image of Islam in the world, and especially in the West, needs to be improved? Attempts are being made to do that.

Adnan Oktar: Yes. Ignorant people have given Europe a very false idea of Islam. Some of them have a prejudiced conception of Islam. When the word Muslim crops up, they think of someone all hair and beard, a total fanatic clutching bombs to his breast or holding a sword and looking for someone to impale on it. Whereas Islam is not like that, of course. Islam has a much more perfect and wider-ranging version of the love and affection they see in the Bible. And the conception of love and affection described in the Christianity operates and is also described in the most perfect manner in Islam. Because they are the same Allah and the same faith, Christianity is also an Islamic religion. But in my view, Christianity has been corrupted and distorted. The belief in the Trinity has been added on subsequently. Otherwise it is also a revealed faith. Judaism is also a revealed faith. But it has been corrupted. It has undergone a number of changes. That is why Islam came, to put those changes right, as the last true faith, and it has indeed corrected those deficiencies. Allah is One, for example, and there is but one Allah. But as you know Christianity has the belief in the Trinity. Islam has put that right. It has stated that there is only One Allah. It has rejected this belief in the Trinity. Allah also made other corrections by sending down the Qur’an.

Reporter: I would now like to go back to modernity.

Reporter: As you know, modern and modernity are highly ideological words in Turkey and controversial ones. What does modernity or contemporaneity mean to you? What does being modern mean? Or modernity?

Reporter: A very broad sphere…

Adnan Oktar: Being modern is a very good thing in technology, in art or in fashion. Modern means constant development and improvement. New advances, new conceptions of quality. And that is an excellent thing. It means new colours, new designs, new wealth. No rational person can reject these, for they are excellent and things that human beings need to search for, need to do.

Reporter: And what role does science play in modernity?

Adnan Oktar: It is the development of technological equipment, the perfecting of modern tools, and offers us comfort and quality. It enables us to achieve a higher-quality standard of life. For example, the decor we see here was made with modern decorative techniques. Why should it stay the same as art 3,000 or 2,000 years ago? Of course it will change. But of course we can also take the art of 3.000 years, 2.000 years ago and use them now, it would also be modern because it is something new, something different.

Reporter: They may be mistaken, but does modernity not represent a kind of laicism for most people?

Adnan Oktar: That is illogical, of course…

Reporter: It may be illogical, and from what I can see you find it illogical as well…

Adnan Oktar: Everything can be as modern as possible, and everything will be very excellent. Allah also creates modernity. Allah creates the most modern, the most up-to-date of everything. Human beings do not create modernity. Allah creates all musical instruments, all technological devices, and all the laws of physics. People merely see what Allah has created. They see an image created in their brains by Allah. For example, I am now talking to you. There is technical equipment all around. Your image and mine are created at the same place in my brain. You exist on the outside, but I am speaking to the image of you in my brain. This means that modern equipment and devices are also created inside my brain. Who creates them? Allah, the one Creator.

Reporter: All right. I want to turn back to your group. I mean you are known as an anti-Darwinist group generally.

Reporter: But I can’t stop but ask this; do you also have schools like Nurcu classes?

Adnan Oktar: No, no.. In that sense no we do not. In that sense we do not resemble to any other religious group. We are very normal people having normal every day life. For example I can go directly to my home from here or may be go to Bebek and spend time out. I mean I do not have such a disciplined life, neither do my friends have such a disciplined life. They too for example in the day time go to their jobs, they are in trade, we sometimes coincide, or they come and we see eachother. They come to converse with me if and when they do not have something to do. I mean there is no obligatory hierarchy and there is no need for that. That is meaningless. I mean we have a free and liberal understanding of life.

Reporter: Ok. But of course you are talking about the Qur’an, don’t you?

Adnan Oktar: of course, of course. When we come together we talk about Allah and faith. About Qur’an and about everything that would be for the benefit of our nation and our land.

Reporter: Okay I see. I also would like to ask you this: Now you are a Sunni Muslim.

Adnan Oktar: I am a Sunni Hanefi , yes. 

Reporter: Yes, but as far as I can see, you are quiet an atypical Sunni Muslim. Would it be right to say that?

Reporter: What I am trying to say is this; what is your view of the hadith? To the best of my knowledge, some 10 years ago did you have a direct line to the Qur’an in the same way as Christians, Protestants? I mean, did you have a rather purified vision? Is that so?I may be wrong, I don’t know.

Adnan Oktar: I have been a Hanefi, a Sunni, ever since childhood, and I have never changed. Right from primary school they taught us that we were Hanefis, I asked my parents and my teachers and they said we were Hanefis, Sunnis. I learned about and studied Hanefism and Sunnism. I saw that it really is the most perfect interpretation of Islam. It is the best applied conception of Islam. I like my own denomination. Abu Hanefi’s accounts and descriptions are perfect. He interprets the Qur’an and the hadith in an excellent manner. For that reason, I believe whatever my imam has said about the hadith. In matters of tenets of faith I am a member of the Maturidi school. Maturidi is my imam in matters of tenets of faith, and my denominational imam is Abu Hanefi. I act in that light. Whatever Abu Hanefi has said is right for me. Do I apply it perfectly?   Actually, I do my best. The greater part of the people in Turkey are Hanefi Sunnis.

Adnan Oktar: Of course. And they are also modern. They wear normal ties and jackets. In terms of the namaz, some people only perform the Friday namaz, others only the religious festival namaz, some pray five times a day and others only in the morning, at home, but they all are very keen on the Sunni-Hanefi system. Not implementing it fully is one thing, and totally rejecting it quite another. In other words, some Turkish people are not, or may not able to, fully comply with all the requirements of the faith, but they still respect their own denomination and faith.

Reporter: You recently spoke to Reuters. It was a most interesting meeting. Could you tell us about it? I am no expert on the idea of the Mahdi, but is it a typical idea or an atypical one?

What I do not fully understand is that you say both that Jesus will come and that the Mahdi will come. What does this mean?

Adnan Oktar: There are people in Turkey, and in the Islamic world, of course who deny the coming of the Mahdi and the coming of the Prophet ‘Isa (a.s.). There are people who hold such views. This is normal and can occur in any belief. Most people in Turkey hold Sunni beliefs, while some are Alawites. The coming of the Mahdi is certain in both Sunni and Alawaite belief. Abu Hanefi, Abu Hanbel, Imam-i Malik and Imam-i Shafi have all issued definitive statements on the subject.

The coming of the Prophet ‘Isa (a.s.) and the Mahdi is a definite certainty in the Hanefi and Hanbel denominations, and the Maliki and Shaahi schools, and they have all said the appearance of the Mahdi is certain. And that is an end to the matter. In other words, the subject is an absolute one in Sunni belief. But if someone says that he is not a Sunni and that in his belief the case is this or that, then that must be respected. He is free to think that. But if he says is a Sunni, a Hanefi, that he believes the school’s teaching but denies this one issue, than that is unacceptable. In that case he is not part of the school. He is not a Sunni. Alawaites, Jaferis and Shiites all have an absolute belief in the appearance of the blessed Mahdi. And they all believe in the coming of the Prophet ‘Isa (a.s.), that he will come down from the sky. That he will descend to Earth. There are two main denominations in Islam, Shia and Sunni, in other words, Sunnism and Alawitism. They are both in complete agreement on the subject of the Mahdi and ‘Isa (a.s.), and both have made declarations that both will come. There can thus be no validity to any accounts saying anything else. There can therefore be no question of a Sunni rejecting such a belief or idea. Nor of a Shiite.

Reporter: All right. For a long time now you have been saying that Doomsday is close at hand.

Reporter: How do you know when it will happen? More or less when it will approximately happen? You have written a book on the subject, have you not? 

Adnan Oktar: Said Nursi is literally someone who saw all of history. He gives the impression of describing great events that were laid out before his eyes. In the same way, and much more importantly, we have the statements made by our Prophet (saas). We have the statements of the Prophet Muhammed (saas). The prophet described that period as if he had seen it with his own eyes and provides considerable detail. He went right down to the most minute detail. He explained it in that details. He says that Afghanistan would be invaded, that Iraq would be occupied, he even described the armies in Iraq as ‘Rum.’ He said it would be occupied by foreign countries, in other words, by non-Muslim countries. He says that Baghdad will be in smoke and flames. He says the waters of the Euphrates will be severed within the same period, and the waters were indeed severed by a dam, and the bed of the Euphrates dried up. Our Prophet (saas) says there will be solar and lunar eclipses, 15 days apart. These are clear statements, and they have all come about.

Reporter: Is that in the Holy Qur’an?

Adnan Oktar: No, in the hadith.

Adnan Oktar: That is extraordinary. What can one say? One just believes in the words of the Prophet (saas).

Reporter: So when will it take place? What are the signs, in your view? Do you see them?

Adnan Oktar: The signs have already appeared, what I just listed were all signs.

Reporter: I don’t understand.

Adnan Oktar: The things I just described were all portents, and they have all taken place.

Reporter: I see, the things that will take place just before Doomsday. All right. I would like to ask a few last questions. We have not yet spoken about your court case. When was the first verdict issued, 2-3 months ago, May?

Adnan Oktar: Yes, more or less.

Reporter: I imagine you have appealed.

Adnan Oktar: Yes, the appeal is before the Supreme Court as we speak

Reporter: When do you think the result will emerge?

Adnan Oktar: Allah knows. I cannot know.

Reporter: The Supreme Court...What kind of decision are you expecting?

Adnan Oktar: I respect both verdicts. It could be prison, or the Supreme Court could overturn the original verdict. I respect both.

Reporter: From what I can see this is a rather interesting legal process. The court case was abated, and then began again etc.

Reporter: Do you think there is an ulterior motive behind this legal process, an attempt to wear you down?

Adnan Oktar: Whatever Allah creates, He creates in the most auspicious form. I have already spoken about these matters before, of course. This court first gave us an acquittal, it decided there was no criminal enterprise and acquitted my colleagues. Then the Supreme Court overturned that decision. This time, when we returned to court it decided we were a criminal enterprise, and that I was a member and even its leader. I respect that decision, but I am not the leader of a criminal enterprise, I am an author. I have written 300 books. But if they insist we are a criminal gang, then I will respect that, I can’t say anything else. But I insist on to say I am not a criminal gang leader, I am someone who supports love, affection and compassion. I have killed no-one, hurt no-ne and robbed no-one. I have a completely clean record at the moment. There is absolutely nothing in it. I therefore of course refute the accusation. But if Allah produces such a thing in destiny, as with the Prophet Yusuf, who, as you know, was falsely imprisoned...Allah even says in a verse, I take shelter in Allah from the shaytan;“even though they had seen the evidence stating he was innocent,” see “even though they had seen the evidence stating he was innocent, the idea of imprisoning him for a while prevailed.” Says Allah. I mean Allah says he was going to be put into prison even though he was innocent. But it was of course Allah who had him imprisoned. But anyone looking at my court file can see I am innocent. My court file is completely empty, and there is nothing in it at all. All it contains is statements taken by force under threat of death at Police Headquarters. In the face of death threats and torture any person can easily make statements of that kind and even more. There is no other evidence. And that is inadmissible since it was taken in the absence of a lawyer. But the court said it was admissible, so I respect that. But under Turkish law that evidence is inadmissible. It is inadmissible according to the rules of the Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court decided it was admissible. So did the criminal court. I respect that and accept the decision. But I am no gang leader. I am a man of love, affection and compassion.

Reporter: All right. That is all. Thank you.

Adnan Oktar: And thank you.

Reporter: Thank you very much

Oct 10, 2008

Click to Download for Transcribe

Click to Download for iPhone or iPod (MP4)

Online Watch on HarunYahya.Tv

Click for All Documentaries