The Relationship of Religion and Ideology according to Mohamed Taqi al-Din al-Hilali and

Musa Jarrullah Begiyev

A Semiotic Study
Student: Fares KABOUDI (MA)
Supervisor: Dr. Mohamed Fazlhashemi

1. Introduction:
Provide background on the significance of semiotics in the study of
religion and ideology.
Present the rationale behind exploring the works of Mohammad Taqi al-
Hilali and Moussa Jar Allah Bigiev in this context.
Clearly state the research questions and objectives.
2. Literature Review:
Conduct an extensive review of semiotics in religious and ideological
studies.
Examine existing literature on the works of al-Hilali and Bigiev, focusing
on relevant critiques and analyses.
3. Theoretical Framework:
Explore key theories in semiotics, with a specific emphasis on religious
and ideological semiotics.
Discuss how these theories can be applied to analyze literary works.
4. Methodology:
Define the criteria for selecting primary texts of al-Hilali and Bigiev for
analysis.
Specify the parameters for identifying and analyzing symbols, signs, and
meanings within the selected works.
Discuss the potential challenges in the analysis process and propose
solutions.
5. Data Collection:
Compile a comprehensive list of primary and secondary sources,
including books, articles, and interviews with scholars familiar with the
works of al-Hilali and Bigiev.
Outline a structured approach for conducting interviews, if applicable, to
gather insights into the authors' intentions.
6. Analysis:
Develop a coding system or analytical framework for interpreting
semiotic elements within the chosen texts.
Apply the chosen methodology to conduct a detailed analysis of the
semiotics of religion and ideology in the works of al-Hilali and Bigiev.
7. Results and Discussion:
Present the findings of the analysis, highlighting key semiotic elements
identified in the works.
Discuss the implications of these findings in relation to the broader
context of religious and ideological discourse.
8. Conclusion:
Summarize the main findings and their contribution to understanding
semiotics in the context of religion and ideology.
Reflect on any limitations encountered during the research process.
9. Recommendations for Further Research:
Suggest potential areas for future research based on gaps identified in
the current study.
10. References:
Provide a comprehensive list of all sources cited throughout the research.
11. Timeline:
Outline a detailed schedule for each stage of the research, ensuring a
realistic timeframe for completion.

An important conversation with Professor Sheikh Musa Jarallah, the

famous Turkish scholar

By Taqi al-Din al-Hilali

Professor Sheikh Musa Jarallah, a representative of Russian Muslims, visited the city of
Lucknow (India) at the conference held in Mecca, may God honor it in the year 1344 AH.
While I was busy teaching the students, a card came to me from the director of the
Scholars’ Symposium, the eminent Professor Dr. Sayyed Abdul Ali, informing me that
Professor Jarallah was with him and he invited me to meet him. Therefore, I was relieved
with joy and happiness at meeting a world of alert scholars who roam the prairies and seas
to find out the ills of the Muslims and seek their cure, being patient with the hardships they
endure in doing so, the most difficult for the soul being the Muslims’ aversion to their
doctors, their aversion to them, and their insensitivity to the incurable disease that has
devastated their body.
I arrived at the doctor's clinic and found there an old man, white with a reddish
complexion, with a bright red face. So we paid our due respect and then sat down to talk..
The first thing I asked him about was the condition of Muslims in Russian countries, and he
told me that they were in the worst condition, and that the Bolshevik government was
subjecting them to terrible torture: for example, it had seized control of mosques and other
endowments and forbade people from religion so that no one could perform the rituals.
Religious matters are hidden in his home. It is unfortunate that whoever does not register
his name in the Bureau of Bolshevik Socialism and works to publish it is deprived of all
rights, even the king: he does not own property or movable property, his complaint or
grievance is not heard, and a court does not accept him in pleading.
I said to him: How do they live
? He said: They live by fraud.
I said: How do the Christians and Jews treat them? He said: They do not differentiate
between people of one religion and another. Rather, they persecute people of all religions,
except that the Jews are safe from this persecution and enjoy rights that no one else has.
Rather, the entire government is in their hands. .
I said: How is that?
He said: It is hypocrisy and cunning. The Jews are Bolshevism outwardly, but inwardly they
do not give up an iota of their Judaism. With this great cunning, they succeeded above all
people of religions.
I said: Don't Muslims follow this path?
He said: No, until now Muslims insist on adhering to their religion outwardly and inwardly,
and are patient with what has befallen them.
Then I asked him about the news of the Afghan country and its government, and he
praised it greatly.
I said to him: How are the young men there and the Franj?
He said: The young Afghan men are the furthest away from Al-Farj.
I said: How were they spared from it, even though many of them learned in Europe?
He said: Their learning in Europe had no effect on them. I have seen Afghan students in
Moscow learning from Bolshevik professors, but they are extremely upright and adhere to
religion.
So I asked him about the number of Muslims in Moscow, and he said: As for the city itself,
they are not many, but as for its surroundings, their number is about 40,000.
So I asked him about the Muslims in Azerbaijan, and he said: The government of
Azerbaijan is one of the many republics of Russian countries, and it is the richest republic,
the most fertile in terms of land, and the best of countries, but its provisions and those of
the Moscow government are the same.
Then the professor told us that he visited Turkestan, so we asked him about the condition
of the Muslims there, and he praised them and said: The Chinese government treats them
well, they are very free in their country, and it is correct to say that they rule within their
country, and he praised them for adhering to religion and engaging in science.
Mr. Sayyed Talha (MA) (1), professor of the Arabic language at the University of Lahore,
asked him about the Muslims of China. He praised them and said: The condition of
“Turkistan” is the condition of the Muslims of China. Rather, the Eastern Turks are the
Muslims of China, and whoever of the Chinese is guided to Islam, it is through their
guidance.
Then the aforementioned professor asked him about the situation of the Arabic language in
Russian countries and in Turkestan countries. Is it like India, or better? He said: The Arabic
language in Russian countries - as they say - is better than in India, and as for the
countries of Turkestan and China, the Arabic language there is learned with great care, and
if an Arab travels in those countries, he finds someone to understand him wherever he
goes, unlike the countries of India, where the Arab rarely finds someone to understand. He
is understood by scholars as well as the common people.
Then the aforementioned professor asked him: In what language is the Arabic language
taught in your country and in Turkestan? He said: As for the first years, in Turkish, and as
for those above that, the sciences of the Arabic language are taught in Arabic itself.
Professor Jarallah spoke Arabic and Persian with complete fluency, in addition to Turkish,
which was his illiterate tongue.
I asked him about the Turkish language in China and the Turkish language in Anatolia. Is
there a big difference between them? He said: While a slight difference does not prevent
understanding.
embarrassing questions
Then the aforementioned professor asked him about the conditions of the Turkish
government after he mentioned that he had visited their country repeatedly, and is what
we hear about them true?
He replied: That is true, but they have an excuse for everything they did!!!
He said to him: How is Mustafa Kemal Pasha in terms of religion? He said: Mustafa Kamal is
a great man in everything. My eyes have never seen someone like him in his knowledge,
mind, and cunning, and it is enough for him to be proud that he saved his nation from the
fangs of the nations of Europe.
Mr. Talha said: I am only asking you about his religion: Is he a believer or not? He said:
What is this question: He is a sincere believer and one of the strongest people in faith!!!
The attendees were amazed, and I, the resident, was paralyzed, and I could not remain
silent, even though I wished that this door would not be opened because it embarrassed
Professor Jarallah. I said: What is the law of the Turkish government? Is it Islamic law or
something else? He said: Their law is taken from French law.
So I said: What I heard is that they replaced the law of Islam with the law of Switzerland,
and whichever it was, your words are clear that they are not according to the law of Islam.
Then sexual passion aroused in the professor, and he said: The Arabs consider the Turks to
be infidels and say that they are apostates, and the Turks say that the Arabs are the ones
who betrayed us and joined the enemies, so we abandoned them and they did not choose.
Then he said: The Arabs are prejudiced against the Turks and declare them unjust to be
unbelievers, and declaring them to be unbelievers is a great matter, and he is the one who
has divided the Muslims, and I do not approve of him. He blamed the scholar, Mr. Rashid
Reda, may God bless the Muslims, for remaining a cruel campaigner, and he was accused
of exaggeration in declaring the Turks as infidels. So I said that Professor Mr. Rashid Reda
and other Arab scholars do not say that the Turkish nation is an apostate and an infidel,
and their belief in the Turkish nation has not changed and that it is still adhering to its
religion. Rather, they say: The Turkish government left Islam. They did not say that until
after she publicly announced her departure from Islam.
Professor Jar Allah said: This is a mistake on the part of Arab scholars, and I responded to
them with a letter that I wrote and handed to Mustafa Kemal Pasha in my hand.
One of those present said: What language are you familiar with? He said: In Arabic, in
response to Arab scholars.
I said: Mr. Professor, I want to ask you one question. He said: Ask.
I said: What is the religion of the Ankara government? He said: It has no official religion.
I said: Is she afraid to reveal her religion? He said: No!
So I said: What is the ruling on someone who says voluntarily and not under compulsion
from individuals, let alone states: I have no religion? Is this statement an apostasy on his
part or not, especially if he reinforces it by acting in rulings - even marriage and inheritance
- other than the religion of Islam? Is there anyone in any of the Muslim sects, of the four
sects and others, who rules that someone who disavows Islam in word and deed is a
Muslim?
He said, as the contraction appeared on his face: “Everything you say is true.” However, we
should not declare takfir. Rather, if we see a Muslim man who has committed a great act,
we should be kind to him until he returns to guidance. I hope this will be the end of this
research.
One of the attendees asked him: What do the Turks see in Russia in Ibn Saud’s
government? He said: Ibn Saud is a rational political man, and the Turks love him as well.
He asked him: Are there domes built over graves in your country, where people go to seek
healing and fulfill their needs, and to make vows to them? He said: This does not exist in
our country, and our scholars are unanimously agreed that it is forbidden. We only visit
graves to pray for them and learn about their condition, and we do not ask them for
anything. The questioner about this was Mr. Talha.
So I said: You are doing what some imams said about the people of the graves: We pray
for them and we do not pray for them. So he said: Yes, and what a good saying this is.
Professor Jarullah stayed in Lucknow for a day and a night, visited the seminary of scholars
and other schools and historical monuments, and headed to Calcutta. Safety accompanied
him.
Lucknow on the 6th of Rabi’ al-Thani in the year 1350.
Muhammad Taqi al-Din al-Hilali