How Muslims under Ottoman Empire Treated Other Religions
Name
Institutional Affiliation
How Muslims under Ottoman Empire Treated Other Religions
Non-Muslim religions during the Ottoman Empire were allowed to practice their religions through the Millet system. This system recognized the existence of clergy under the condition that Islamic faith would be recognized as dominant and could never be subject to criticism. In return, the other religions remained loyal and paid taxes to the empire. People belonging to Christian and Jewish faiths were considered second class citizens right after those practicing Islamic religion.
There were lots of privileges for being a Muslim, and some Christians and Jews converted to Islamic religion to tap into these privileges. It was, however, unlawful to attempt to convert a Muslim to any other religion. A move like these could attract severe punishment, including being exiled from the community. Religions other than Christianity and Jews were similarly placed under the millet system, as was any other religion that was not Islam.
Student 1
Safavid and Ottoman’s shared a few similarities but many differences. Safavid’s were Shiite Persians while the Ottomans were Sunni Turks. The Ottomans were a military power while the Safavid’s were a cultural power. The Safavid’s formed a very strong alliance with nearby European countries while also strengthening their government and military forces. The Ottoman Empire on the other hand pushed for total dominance instead of alliances with other European countries. Shah Abbas the leader of the Safavid’s promoted the Persian culture of arts, poetry, and learning which have produced a plethora of beautiful rugs, silks, and clothings. This culture was stolen by the Ottomans to build beautiful mosques and manuscripts. The close proximity and political differences caused these two powers to form a bitter rivalry.
Response
You have stated great points there. It is also important to note that despite belonging to the same religion, Islam, the key difference between the two empires was their approach to the same. The Safavid practiced Shia Islam, while the Ottomans practiced Sunni Islam. The difference came about after the death of Prophet Muhammad. There was a conflicting opinion on who was to succeed him. The Shia believed that Muhammad’s son in law was best suited to succeed him while the Sunni preferred Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s close friend. This conflict arose since the prophet Muhammad had no male heir, and at the point of his death, had not chosen who he willed to succeed him. The two could not come to an agreement hence the split. Despite that, they still share a lot in common, including the firm belief in prophet Muhammad.
STUDUENT 2
I chose question 2:
The Ottoman Empire was built on Islamic history and decent. They viewed and approached other religions that were not Muslims as “millets” which means community. The Ottomans only recognized three millet groups that were aside from the Sunni Muslims. Those were the Jews, Armenians, and Greek Orthodox. Other millet groups had their own laws, leadership, legal systems, welfare, and educational system. The Greek Orthodox was added into the Ottoman regime. Later on, the Armenian Church was also accepted into the regime. The Ottoman viewed Roman Catholics and Catholics as enemies to the Ottoman Empire. The only Catholics that were not seen as enemies of the empire were the catholic groups that were within the empire’s boarders. The Ottomans placed them into the same category as the Armenian millet. The Ottomans were liked by the Christians and the Christians preferred the Ottoman empire’s rule over the Catholics rule (Streusand, 2010). Overall, the Ottoman Empire was known for its diversity with different religions and races. Sultan Mohammad-II conquered Constantinople and renamed it Islam-bol, which means Islam in abundance. Later on, the name was changed to Istanbul. The word Islam means Peace and the teaching within the Quranic talks about peace and freedom. The teaching talks about people having the ability to have freedom of choice in which faith they followed (Yakub). Even though that is the background and right way for the Muslims to believe, Jewish and Christians had issues being under the Ottoman Empire. In the empire Jews and Christians were viewed as “inferior subjects or as illegitimate denominations.” Because of that, they were usually discriminated against in the empire
Response
I agree with your input. I would like to add that the inferior status branded on Jews and Christians gave Muslims a significant advantage over them. Much as the two religions were tolerated and allowed to practice their beliefs, they were always put in check by their Islamic counterparts. They were not allowed to worship in public or hold leadership positions above that which involved their religion. This strategy made sure that they had an opportunity to serve in their religion provided they did not forget Islam as the dominant religion. Tax named Jizya was levied to non-Muslims and the same contributed towards economic growth of the Ottoman empire as they were among the main revenue sources.
STDENT 3.
The Ottoman Empire and The Mughal Empire were two greatly influential Islamic empires sharing many similarities. Both Empires were Sunni Muslims and implemented a moderate form of Sharia law as the primary law even with a large population of non-Muslims within their empires. Both empires allowed non-Muslims to own land and even advance in the government allowing for more inclusion and unity within the empires. Interestingly, both are Turkic origin with the Mughals being of Turkic-Mongol origin and both would not see there rise with the decline of the Mongol rule in the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent. The Mughals Empire looked to its fellow Muslim empires as a source of shared knowledge as they were not opposed to utilizing what others had learned to benefit themselves. For starters, the Mughal Empire got its start with the help of ottoman tactics at the battle of Panipat and would later borrow architecture styles from the Persians when they constructed building such as the Taj Mahal and the Red Fort. The Mughal Empire would expand and stay confined to the Indian subcontinent, whereas the Ottoman Empire at its peaked had spread from Iraq to Algeria and was at the gates of Vienna. With an empire this large the Ottomans were able to thrive from different trade partners and natural resources. During this time Europe was at war with the ottomans forcing them to constantly be battling professionals’ armies where the Mughals mostly dealt with civil unrest or rebellion. Through my research it was interesting to find that The Ottomans and The Mughals shared more in common, from their tax system to the inclusion of non-Muslims into their society and even their Government, the leaders of the Mughals and Ottomans were known to send gifts even information’s on one’s enemies.
Response
Great input. A noticeable difference between Mughal and Safavid empires was their system of ruling. While Safavid practiced Theocracy, the Mughal empire is well known for her practice of religious tolerance. With the Safavid empire, loyalty was proven by conforming to the Islamic religion. This was unlike the case of Mughal, where dedication was demonstrated through service. In the Safavid empire, a hierarchy was based on religion among the ruling class, which was not the case with the Mughal Empire. The end result was the same for both empires as eventually, they both pushed for the preservation of Islamic religion through conversion. It took Mughal a more extended period to achieve this thanks to its religious divide, but finally, they incorporated the practice.