 History of the Middle East. Lecture 3 Okay, last time we ended with the demise of the Golden Age, with El Ghazali's philosophy, a return to mysticism, a return, a denial of reason, a complete denial of reason. The only way, the only path to truth is through revelation. And I mentioned that that was the end of Islamic culture, at least in the Fertile Crescent, in the heart of the Muslim Empire. And I ended by saying that one last attempt at comeback was made. And indeed that attempt at comeback of Islamic civilization, Islamic culture, of philosophy, was made in Spain. Now the Muslims ruled parts of Spain from 711 to 1492, a date they should all be easy for all of you to remember. When they first arrived in Spain, the Christians welcomed them and easily converted to Islam. People from Africa, Arabia and Europe came into this area as it thrived both economically and culturally. As I mentioned last time, when the Umayyad dynasty was done away with by the Abbasids, the one remaining heir fled the Fertile Crescent. He fled to Spain where he ruled. He began ruling in 755 and started really a golden age in Spain. This Spanish civilization peaked with Ibn Rushd, a Veronaise, the famous Aristotelian philosopher who lived between 1126 and 1198. Ibn Rushd I think is probably the greatest Muslim philosopher and the purest Aristotelian of all Muslim philosophers. He believed that there was no, unfortunately he believed that there was no necessary contradiction between religion and philosophy when both are properly understood. But he rejected mystical revelation and believed that reason, logic, Greek philosophy were not necessarily contradictory with Islam, at least the way he interpreted it and the way he understood it. He wrote a book in which he criticized Al-Ghazali and showed that Al-Ghazali was not a thinker and was just being completely arbitrary. In many of his works he suggests that religion is indeed inferior to philosophy and places philosophy, reason, logic above religion. At about the same time as Ibn Rushd is writing, the greatest Jewish philosopher of probably of all time was doing his work, his name was Maimonides. My last statement probably was the exclusion of Spinoza who was I think a great philosopher later on. But Maimonides who was also an Aristotelian lived between 1138 and 1204. And again, all these Aristotelians are trying to do what Thomas Aquinas in a sense tried to do. And that is somehow unite religion and reason, somehow pliable reason to religion and somehow find a unity and integration. And of course they all failed just as Thomas Aquinas did. Now unfortunately for Islam, Ibn Rushd Maimonides were too late. The heartland of the Muslim empire had given up on philosophy, had given up on reason by this point and faced dramatic political problems at this time. So the Spanish, this Muslim Spanish civilization was too late in saving the East, but it saved in my opinion the West. The real impact of these Muslim philosophers, the real impact of the Spanish civilization was on the West, on Western intellectuals. Indeed Aquinas reads, Ibn Rushd, he reads the Muslim translations of Aristotle before reading them in the original. Ibn Rushd Maimonides and others are translated into Latin. Even Ibn Sina who is now in the libraries of Cordova and Codiz in Spain is being translated into Latin. In 1291, Roger Bacon wrote, and I quote, the greatest part of Aristotle's philosophy failed to have any effect in the West because manuscripts were hidden away and extremely rare, until after the time of Muhammad, when Avicenna, that's Ibn Sina, and Averonez who is Ibn Rushd and the rest brought back Aristotle's philosophy into the light of comprehensive exposition. Europeans, European intellectuals were traveling to Spain to study, to study science, to study philosophy and returning to the University of Paris to teach. I think the link between Greek philosophy and Western civilization travels through Spain. It travels through the photo crescent, through Muslim philosophy, through the translations into Arabic that are then taken to Spain. Further work is done on them then, they are further developed and the West discovers them, partially when their scholars come to study them and partially when they overtake Spain. When the Christians take Spain in the 15th century, starting in the 14th and then the 15th century, they discover all these libraries and they take these libraries and start translating them into Latin and other European languages. So in a sense the West owes Muslim culture a great debt and that is the debt of preserving Aristotle and a debt of preserving the Greeks. That is the last time that the West gains anything of substance from the East, unfortunately. So let us go back to the photo crescent to where the real action is going on in terms of Islamic civilization. As I said it was too late, politically the Abbasid Caliphate is already starting to deteriorate as early as the 11th century. Starting in 946 the Abbasid Caliphs become figureheads. Powerful tribes, primarily Persians control the politics, control the military. From 946 to 1055 there is an Iranian revival and I think this is part of what explains why Al-Ghazila has such an easy time because while all these Greeks are being translated in this culture of reason and learning, there is also an undercount of Iranian mysticism that is entering into the Muslim lands. And Al-Ghazila, while there is the struggle going on, there is an undercount of a struggle going on, and Al-Ghazila kind of swings it one way rather than the other. From 946 an independent state, a dynasty exists in North Africa, centered in Egypt that threatens the political power of the center at Baghdad. Baghdad is still the cultural, spiritual center, the caliph is still the spiritual leader of all of Islam, but politically we are seeing fragmentation into many countries or many empires. Baghdad becomes fragment of the weak, there is the undercount of eastern mysticism when Al-Ghazila stabs this culture in the heart and kills it. Now as I mentioned last time the Turks start entering the Middle East starting around 960. Now the first entrance of the Turks in is through something that the Egyptians do in setting up this North African empire. One of the ways in which they, their soldiers, their soldiers are raised as slaves. What they do, and this becomes a tradition in Islam, what they do is they go to the outskirts of the empire, they capture slaves, primarily young boys, they bring them back, they convert them to Islam, and they train them to be soldiers. This is a whole professional class of soldiers who are slaves. And the first such slaves are Turks. They are captured in Central Asia through the trade routes, they reach Egypt where they are trained from childhood to be soldiers and they are called the Mamluks. The interesting phenomena is of course these Mamluks become the generals because they are the professional soldiers. And once they become the generals it's just one more step for them to take complete political control. And indeed the Mamluks become the rulers of Egypt. So these people who are brought in as slaves, who become soldiers because they are the only professional soldiers now by necessity become the generals then take over the actual administration of the state, the actual political power of the state. The Egyptians receive a quota of slaves from the Persians. This is part of their trading agreements with both Baghdad and the Persian Empire. Now in 960 an entire Turkish dynasty converts to Islam, forming an Islamic kingdom in Central Asia. They surrender themselves completely to this new religion. They sink their entire national identity, ethnic slash national identity into this religion. And in the late 10th century a large migration of Turks into Islamic lands occurs. The Seljuks, this is named after the ruling family, entered during the 10th century. They slowly take over Persia and in 1055 they march into Baghdad. By 1079 they control Syria and Palestine. They then for the first time from Muslim army enter Asia Minor, which is modern day Turkey, conquering most of it from the Byzantines. This of course is where they ultimately settle and where the country takes their name, Turkey. Large numbers of Turks emigrate from Central Asia into the Middle East. Of course they are being in a sense pushed out of Central Asia by the Mongols. The Mongols play a role here in a little while. So while the Caliphate still exists and is centered in Baghdad, the real rulers now, starting from the 11th, the mid-11th century, are the Turkish sultans. They are very religious and they emphasize religious education. Again, notice this new, these religious entities, this new religious tribe entering the Middle East just as Greek philosophy is starting to decline. Another element that is weakening the Muslim empire politically are the European Crusades, that occur between 1097 and 1291 and present a significant military challenge to the Muslims. This is the first significant military challenge they encounter from a non-Muslim entity. Now the Crusaders take advantage of two centuries of a lot of infighting among the Muslims in order to establish, in order to be successful with their Crusades, and they are finally defeated completely in 1291 and driveled out of the Middle East. In 1236 the Muslims suffer their first defeat, their first significant defeat by the hands of the Christians when Kodoba in Spain falls. We start seeing a complete fragmentation across their empire from Central Asia all the way to Spain. Now I want to talk about just a relatively small phenomena kind of historically, but just that I think it's an interesting anecdote and it has some implications to modern times. And that is the existence of a small group of Shiites in Persia, in a valley hidden away so that they are very difficult to defeat militarily. And indeed it's not until the Mongols invade that they are defeated. And they are called the assassins. Indeed the word in English, assassin, comes from the name of this group. And assassin comes from, originates from the word, some iteration of the word hashish. Hopefully you all know what hashish is, it's a drug of choice of many in the Middle East. And hashish comes from a word in Arabic meaning or I think a word in Persian meaning strange behavior because the drug induces strange behavior. And they were called assassins because they behaved strangely and the stories are that they used quite a bit of this drug. And starting at about 1090, these Shiites engaged in radical in basically in assassinations of Sunni Muslims, primarily Turkish leaders within the Muslim world. They engaged in campaigns of terror, of terrorism and assassination against kings and princes of Islam. In the name of Shiism, in the name of this hidden Imam, you know the Imam that's hiding, the Hussein, the son of Hussein is hiding and one day will return. This campaign of terror lasted 250 years. Looking for quality auto parts for your vehicle? Shop one of the 133 Los Angeles area O'Reilly Auto Parts stores. You'll find we have convenient locations, thousands of brand name parts in stock, extended store hours, everyday low prices and well-trained professional parts people. O'Reilly Auto Parts, better parts, better prices, every day. Hi, I'm the helpful Southern California Honda person and recently we've been doing random acts of helpfulness like surprising a deserving dad with a brand new grill and helping give back to our veterans. And during the Honda Summer Spectacular event we can help you too with a great deal on a reliable award-winning Honda like the Accord, the 2018 North American Car of the Year. Click the dealer locator link to find a dealer near you and go to SoCalHondaDealers.com to suggest a random act of helpfulness for someone you know. And this was the last attempt really until very recently of Shiites to overthrow a Sunni Caliphate that is a Sunni regime being threatened by Shiites. But it was a small group hidden away in a valley in Persia that engaged in this and that for 250 years the Sunnis could do nothing to rid themselves of them. Now throughout the Turkish Empire that was building up, new religious schools were being formed to replace the enlightened schools of the past. These schools were called Madrasas. Now you're probably all familiar with the Madrasas in Pakistan where the fundamentalists, Islamists were being trained as an incentive to Afghanistan to fight the Jihad. These were theological colleges focused only on religion and they became the center for religious power and authority throughout the Muslim world. Notice the change, the shift from schools of wisdom in which Aristotle is debated openly to Madrasas within a change that happens within 150 years. It doesn't take long for the dark ages to descend. The Caliph as I said is viewed as a symbolic and religious leader with a Sultan, the Turkish Sultan as the political leader. But there is a major new force out there in Central Asia. A major source intent on establishing its own new empire. In 1206, Jengiz Han unites the Mongol tribes. In 1219, after securing Northeast Asia, he starts moving into the lands of Islam. By 1240, his successors have conquered Western Iran. And in 1243, they overwhelm Turkish forces in Asia Minor. They even take out their assassins in Persia. In 1258, they converge on Baghdad. The city is stormed, looted and burned. The Caliph and his entire family are put to death. It is said that hundreds of thousands of people are killed. And their bones are piled up outside of Baghdad. The 500 year reign of the Abbasid Caliphate comes to an end. And this is an end of an era in Islamic history. Although many historians view this as the end of the Golden Age. Where in fact, the Golden Age ends about 150 years earlier. This is the consequence of the decline of the disappearance of the Golden Age. The weakness, the political fragmentation, the mysticism that makes the Muslim Empire so weak as to enable the Mongols to just sweep us through it. So the Mongol invasion is not the cause of Muslim decline. Indeed, it is the consequence of that Muslim decline. The Mongols even capture Egypt for a while. Which has become now the cultural center of Islam. But the Mamluks in Egypt and the Mongols now engage in warfare over dominance, over the photo crescent, the heart of the Middle East. What is really interesting in my opinion is that whereas the Mongols come to Europe and they sack the place and ultimately they are pushed back. The Mongols who enter the Muslim lands settle and convert to Islam. In 1295 the Mongols all convert to this new religion. They set up a new capital in Azerbaijan. Again, a place where we now have troops. Politically from this point on, the Turks and the Mongols, primarily the Mongols settling in Persia and Iran are the politically dominant groups in the Middle East. In spite of being Muslim, they use Arabic only in religious ceremony. Persian now becomes the dominant language in the East and Turkish becomes the dominant language in the West. Mysticism grows in power, Sufism. So a mystical version of Islam, an extremely mystical version, all about revelation, very passive, becomes the dominant form of Islamic worship. Now the Mongols and the Turks develop dynasties that will rule Iran and Turkey basically until the 20th century. Now there is a third power at least for a while and that is in Egypt. Ruled by Mamluks of Turkish origin. So notice that even Egypt is ruled by Turks just of a different origin, a different family. These are the slaves and they resist the Mongol invasion. They fight them. In 1260 they beat back the Mongols and the Egyptians occupy Syria. There's finally peace between Egypt and Iran in 1323. What's interesting about Egypt is that there is the existence of one dominant intellectual. His name is Ibn Taymiyyah. His dates are 1263 to 1328. What is interesting about Ibn Taymiyyah is his direct and powerful influence on almost all versions of Islamic fundamentalism in the 20th and 21st now centuries. He becomes from starting in the 19th century the central medieval philosopher in a Muslim debate over politics and religion. He is heavily influenced by El Ghazali's writings. He sees no place for reason. Now he was the last court philosopher in Islam of the Mamluks as they fought the Mongols. And he developed a war theology in spite of the conversion of the Mongols to Islam. He considered them heathens worthy of jihad. They according to him were apostates from Islam. Now apostates are people who are Muslims or Christians and then deny either Islam or Christianity. That's what an apostate means. For him, despite their conversion to Islam, they did not apply the Sharia, the Islamic religious law, consistently, but used many of their old Mongol customary laws when they ruled. Now traditional teachers in Islam recognize the difficulty of new people in adopting the Sharia immediately and gave them time, at least a generation, to slowly wash out those old traditions and convert. And I think the Christians were very good at doing this as well because they realized the long term benefits of getting them to convert completely to Christianity long term. Ibn Taymiyyah said no. You have to adopt the Islamic law immediately upon conversion. Otherwise you are not truly a Muslim. And indeed you are worse than a pagan. Apostates are worse than pagans because they have been introduced to the truth, they have mauled the acceptance of the truth, and then they have rejected it through their actions. To quote Ibn Taymiyyah, it is a well-established rule of Islamic law that the punishment for an apostate will be heavier than the punishment of someone who has never been a Muslim. End quote. To quote him again, any group of people that rebel against any single rule of the clear and reliably transmitted rules of Islam has to be fought, even if the members of this group publicly make a formal confession of the Islamic faith. End quote. We will see that this notion that there are Muslims that are worse than pagans is a very, very important and fundamental idea within fundamentalist Islamic ideology. Within the ideology of bin Laden and the people who influenced bin Laden. And indeed that the real enemies of Islamic fundamentalism, the first and foremost enemies of Islamic fundamentalism are not so much the West as they are the apostate rulers of Islamic countries today. The leaders of Egypt, the leaders of Iraq, the leaders of Syria, the leaders also of Saudi Arabia who are far too Western. You know, we view this as an example of fundamentalism, right? And yet the fundamentalists view them as far too Western for their taste. So that is Ibn Taymiyyah. Indeed, the last Islamic intellectual of note lived from 1332 to 1406 and his name was Ibn Khaldun. He is considered the last great Muslim thinker. Even Muslim historians recognize this fact at least until the late 19th century. Ibn Khaldun was an historian and developed an entire theory of history. I'm not going to go into it, but he was very prolific. He wrote many, many books. He wrote history books and he wrote philosophy of history books that are very interesting within the context of the history of the history of philosophy. But he was, from what I can tell, he was an original thinker. He might not have been right, but he was an original thinker and an interesting thinker. Unfortunately for the Muslims, did not think very highly of philosophy. Okay. So with the establishment of the Turkish, of a Turkish dynasty in Asia Minor, in what is today Asia Minor, from the ruins of what the Mongols left over in Syria and in Baghdad, this Turkish empire, this new Turkish empire, was founded by a man named Osman in the first quarter of the 14th century. And Osman really established what we know today as the Ottoman Empire, named after him. Over a period of a century, they conquered Asia Minor, driving the Byzantines even further west. And indeed in 1354, the Ottoman forces crossed the dandelions into Europe. And in a series of victories, they're being a large part of the Balkan Peninsula into Muslim control. This is later expanded into Macedonia, Bulgaria and Serbia. Let me put up a map, to get a sense of where this all is. That's what we're talking about. Indeed the conflicts today in Serbia, Kosovo, all originate from this Muslim invasion. And from the fact that Muslims, many of the people who lived here converted to Islam. And some did not. And the tension between those two groups, given collectivism, still exists to this day. The Ottomans controlled the trade routes to Europe, which were becoming more and more important as Europe was exiting the Dark Ages and into the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance. They were demanding more and more products for the East. They had more and more wealth. They had more and more with which to trade for the silks of Egypt, the spices of India. And before the sea routes were established, this was the only way to get it, was through the Ottoman Empire. Now, there was this continuous struggle between the Ottomans and the Mongols. And only in the 15th century, did the Ottomans really establish themselves and their dominance over them at least. They consolidate their power in Europe and they start establishing a Turkish national slash ethnic identity. Now, they too have this practice of bringing in slaves, very young boys, and training them as soldiers. They don't use Central Asian slaves since their origins in Central Asia. They cut a deal with Central Europe. And instead of taxes and in exchange for not invading certain lands in Central Europe, the Europeans deliver every year a certain number of young boys to be taken by the Turks, converted into Islam, and trained as soldiers. Now, this sounds like a horrific practice. On the other hand, believe me that these boys had a much longer and more prosperous life in the Ottoman Empire relative to what was going on in Central Europe during this era. And indeed, most of them, or many of them, the more talented ones become generals, they become the administrators of the Ottoman Empire and become a real threat later on to the dominance of the Turks. And later in, I think, the 16th century, there is a civil war between these slaves who are now military, now third or fourth generation, and their children who have now raised into administrative positions within the Ottoman Empire and established positions of power that are very significant. Yeah. If it was so attractive for a young boy to become trained as a soldier, would it be clear that why did the leaders have their own children to follow them? Or why were you chosen to follow them? Well, if it was so attractive to go through this route, why didn't the local population just give their own children to do that? There are two reasons. One, life in the Ottoman Empire in the 15th and 16th century relative to East, Southeast Europe was better, so that children who grew up in the Ottoman Empire just had a better life than children. Now, this changes, obviously, as Europe developed. But also because the Turks didn't want it. The Turks, this was a policy that the Turks had, and indeed the Egyptians had. They wanted an army made up of boys that they trained from youth and that they educated from youth. They believed that this way they guaranteed their loyalty so that instead of going to Egypt and getting some Egyptian troops and to Baghdad and getting local troops and then Turkish troops, each one with their own family and tribal alliances, they brought in people who had no family, no tribal alliances had been raised, educated, fed by the Turks and therefore would be far more loyal as soldiers to the Turks than they would be. And that way they guaranteed that there wouldn't be a lot of infighting within the army between these tribes. Now, you know, within the context of what they were trying to do it seems to have worked. Up until the point where these slaves became so powerful that they threatened the ruling class itself. And of course they had a problem of what to do with fourth generation, third generation, fourth generation and they ultimately freed them and these people became the key people within the administration which for a while sustained the Ottoman Empire with relatively well trained people. Now, the Turks also established a real Islamic religion institutional structure for the first time. A kind of graded hierarchy of professional and academically trained men of religion with territorial jurisdiction and defined functions and powers under the headship of a supreme religious authority that was recognized as the highest instance of holy law. So they tried to implement the Sharia. They tried to implement Islamic holy law throughout the land. Now, the Sultan was considered the Caliph as well. So he was both political and spiritual leader. But he had at his side a Mufti who was the religious leader one under him but who actually engaged in the religious practices and control over the implementation of religious law throughout the Ottoman Empire. In 1453 Constantinople falls and the Byzantine Empire comes to an end. The Ottomans go on to conquer Serbia and Bosnia and to dominate the entire southeast Europe. In Europe, the war is viewed as a jihad and Muslims start populating the areas under control. In the south, the Mamluks on the decline and the Ottomans overtake them. But note that at the beginning of the 15th century the economic viability of the Ottoman Empire is now challenged by what? By the Portuguese circumnavigating Africa and establishing trade routes to the Far East. Trade revenues start declining dramatically from the 16th century on and what surprises the Muslims before they ever get defeated militarily. What really surprises the Muslims is how quickly they lose the Far East in a sense of trade. The British, the Dutch, the Portuguese, all established navies that are now stationed in the Far East protecting the trade routes and the influence of the Muslims in the Far East in spite of all those Muslims having converted way out in the Far East starts systematically declining. However, militarily there was still about 150 years left of victories ahead of the Ottomans. In 1526 they shattered the Hungarian army and 1529 they lay siege to Vienna in the heart of Europe. Indeed, the Europeans throughout this period view the Turks as a major significant enemy. They are considered the terror of the world. However, this is really the end or the beginning of the end that their culture has died hundreds of years earlier. They are in economic decline and this is the beginning of the end of their military dominance. They fail to take Vienna after a long and inconclusive war with Europe. The war continues and in 1683 Vienna is laid the Ottoman Empire lays siege to Vienna for a second time. However, this time they are forced to retreat in utter and complete defeat. The defeat is so total and final that it shocks the entire Muslim world. This is the first real complete defeat other than losing Spain. The Turkish chronicler writes and I quote this was a calamitous defeat of such magnitude that there has never been it's like since the first appearance of the Ottoman state. They lose control in Germany the defeated on land in Vienna but they lose control in the Mediterranean to superior European navies and they start losing control to Russia particularly with the rise of Peter the Great in the north. It becomes clear to them that Europe is far more advanced than they are militarily over the entire span of the Ottoman Empire to this point from the 15th to the 17th century. There is almost no advancement there is no new technology there is no new either military or otherwise there is no cultural progress there is no major innovation in any field there is complete stagnation except from military conquest there is nothing that they succeed at in particular during these two centuries. At its height the empire excelled at an efficiently administered administration government and military but nothing else they had a bureaucracy and they had a military and then military power their military defeats come to them as a complete shock because even in the one thing that they perceive in a sense their self esteem is tied to they have now taken a beating and it is obvious to them and they get credit for this that it has become obvious to them immediately that the West is superior to them technologically and that they have to do something now the context from which they are coming from that there is the house of Islam and the house of war the house of war to them is this uncivilized barbaric place Europe everybody who has ever come in contact with Islam before this has converted most of them willingly like the Mongols the Mongols had political control they dominated the whole place yet they converted everybody who didn't convert was considered a barbarian they considered lands of barbarians they had never been threatened other than by the Mongols who again then converted by any other power and particularly not in the West to them the Christians of the West were the infidel par excellence since they were only the only ones from the Muslim perspective had an alternative religion to their own a real what they considered a real alternative Europe was the house of war was the enemy to the Muslims but they did not fear or respect the Europeans and for the first thousand years of its existence Islam had a clear upper hand and losing that upper hand was indeed a shock and surprise they after all the Muslims had chosen people they had the right religion their prophet was the last prophet prior to the seventh to the eighteenth century the Muslims considered the Europeans as you know at best good with their hands the only values they had received from them were clocks and watches which didn't exist in Islam until they were imported and eyeglasses and telescopes but to the Muslims these were just products of the hand they were good at coming up with you know very finely tuned instruments but they viewed no role to the mind in coming up with clocks and telescopes even some crops arrived from the West prior to the eighteenth century tobacco being the dominant one innovation and technology was something for the Muslims to be bought when necessary they did not engage in any investigation regarding what made innovation possible knowledge in general they viewed was something to be acquired to be stored to be bought if necessary but not to be grown or developed internally so what did the Ottomans do when they lost what was the first thing they imported from the West when they realized that they were losing and this tells you something about the Ottomans but it also tells you about something about the West and something the West engages into this day well the first thing they said well we're losing militarily because the West has better equipment they have really good firearms they have cannons so they bought firearms and cannons from the West and of course the West sold it to them indeed the West had a long tradition of selling weapons to the Muslims even during the Crusades British and Italian and French arms dealers were selling I'm sorry bankers were lending money at interest to the Muslims to fund the purchase of weapons to fight the Crusades who were being waged by the Italians and the French and the British now in my talk about usury last year I explained that the Europeans were actually thought they were doing something harmful to the Muslims because they viewed loaned with interest as something detrimental to the borrower and they thought that they were indeed we know that that's not necessarily the case but the Europeans sold them lots of weapons during the 18th century they also the Ottomans used these weapons and still lost they said wait a minute it can't just be the weapons the Europeans also better trained so they brought in European experts to train the Ottoman armies and that didn't help they kept losing well the Europeans had better uniforms and indeed you notice that the Muslims convert their uniforms to western uniforms the culture doesn't only in army except for the headgear the uniforms become westernized in military marches they wear western uniforms with Arab headgear now let me note that the west made no attempt to stop this trade in arms and military experts this was what was called constructive engagement so Henry Kissinger didn't make anything up this has a long tradition unfortunately in the west of arming and training one's enemy now immediately after the defeat of Vienna and again this is to the Muslims credit although they come to the wrong conclusion a real debate begins within the Muslim world and the debate is centered on why did we lose why are we declining why is the west rising as time goes on through the 18th century and ultimately through the 19th century it is clear and evident that while the Ottoman empire is in the descent economically in every perspective they are losing ground the west is rising and they ask this question what is happening their defeats continue primarily to the Russians in the north and as I said the Dutch and the British are consolidating power to the east of the Muslim empires cutting the Middle East off from Asia the substance of and symbolic blow happens in 1798 1798 Napoleon then a young general the French army lands in Egypt with a very small French army and occupies it very little resistance he just takes over the entire Egypt country and starts administrating he leaves three years later but he doesn't leave because the Egyptians or the Turks are threatening him or mounting some kind of military challenge to his dominance of Egypt he leaves because the British show up so what this more than anything makes it obvious to the Muslim the complete and utter military superiority of the European they can take Muslim lands on a whim only the only entity that can push out a European country from a Muslim country is another European country they basically now control and the Ottoman Empire is basically has to do what the Europeans dictate to it they are at their mercy now in addition during this time the Ottoman Empire their educational system is falling apart and is completely still focused on religious education so any kind of science any kind of education to any sort of culture is completely lacking from any of the Ottoman institutions so we are at a point in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries where the Ottomans and Islam in general it is clear to them that they have lost it's clear to them that they were on the decline it's clear to them that there is a thriving incredible culture out there that is just dominating the world and they must try to explain this so let's look at some of the reasons they give for this and see the consequences of their mistakes so what are the reasons that the Muslims provide now one explanation that unfortunately is still popular in the Middle East and is indeed increasing in popularity today probably more than ever is that the failure is a result of Muslims abandoning their old ways the failure is a result of the Muslims being less Muslim being taking their religion less seriously this is the fundamentalist answer the problem was not only the problem though in explaining to the Ottomans that the fundamentalists have was that ok so we're deteriorating because we're bad, we're not religious enough but how do you explain the rise of Europe why are the infidels succeeding so much they're not Muslims they're not if you look carefully they're not even Christian right there's only one thing for God to punish the Muslims and this is by the way is a tradition that goes back to the Old Testament everything bad that happens to the Israelites or the Israelis in the Old Testament happens to them because God is displeased with the way they're behaving everything, every single chapter King David sleeps with the wrong woman thousands of people die the kind of things that happen in the Old Testament this course continues with lecture 4 welcome to the total wireless store we're total confidence awaits our daughters off to summer camp and we're worried our network coverage won't reach her don't worry you got this with total wireless our phones run on the nation's best 4G LTE network it'll be like she never left the nation's best network I feel better already now you can focus on how you're spending your summer discover the total wireless stores and get total confidence the latest phones the best network all at great prices now open in Los Angeles refer to the latest terms and conditions of service at TotalWireless.com Wireless.com Wireless.com Wireless.com Wireless.com Wireless.com Wireless.com