9 - The reformer says:

"The reformer says: The religion sources of which had been blurred by personal ambitions and political fights yet at the beginning, was made a toy during the era of 'Abbasis. Right then the Ottoman Empire was established."

Poor Ottomans! How unfortunate that it was coincident with their birth! If the sources of Islam were so much turbid, on which basis would the religious reforms be made today? Reformers keep almost all hadiths under suspicion. I wonder what they would say about the Qur'an. Is this source blurred, too? We quoted above their idea that religion was necessary to correct morals. Could the religion do this if its sources were blurred and it were made a toy. Their words do not make any sense. As for the Russian reformer Baykiyev, he was aggressive against kalam and fiqh. He blamed Muslim scholars for having left their work aside and busying with Greek philosophy. In those days, however, Greek philosophy was translated into Arabic and introduced into Muslim countries as an advancement; it blurred the minds of many people, and the scholars of kalam examined those new ideas and answered them one by one. Thus, they protected the Ahl as-Sunnat belief against a shock. Also today it is an honorable task for our religious men to examine the knowledge, science and new discoveries on the points concerning Islamic beliefs and answer them. Why do religion REFORMERS IN ISLAM, while understanding this necessity today, try to blemish the former scholars for having done their duty in their time? Then they blindly endeavor, without foundation in knowledge, to humiliate Islamic scholars. They say on the one hand that it is a big guilt today not to adapt religious knowledge to new discoveries, and no the other, they claim that the former scholars were guilty of mixing the religion with philosophy and new discoveries of their time; everything religious men do is a guilt according to reformers.