There are two ways of transferring both worldly and spiritual power. The first is to biological relatives and the second to non-biological relatives. It is solved by turning the non-biological bond into a kinship bond (generally by taking a son-in-law). For both temporal and ethereal power, “becoming a son-in-law” often implies becoming a caliph. We can roughly summarise these two choices as the choice between a republican monarch and an aristocratic monarch.
Turkish politics has a lot to learn from the process carried out by İsmailağa. A group within it is conducting this whole process in a transparent manner in front of the public, rather than behind closed doors and in secret negotiations. They are trying to reach a common decision by forming delegations. Being based in Istanbul and having the same formation as graduates of madrasahs have a great effect on the execution of this process in this way. Menzil, on the other hand, managed to spread from the provinces to the centre. Since power is transferred through biological relations, I hope that the problems will be solved if the economic structures are established in the medium term after the material inheritance is shared.
In a structure that is despised by some in Turkey as bigoted, reactionary, anti-democratic and dark, there is a discussion environment that will give lessons to the British parliament. It is worth remembering that until recently, even in Turkey’s so-called most progressive party, the transfer of seats was determined by tapes.
The issue of rabıta plays a key role here. Will the Naqshi groups evolve into a structure like Suleyman(cı)ism, where the rabıta is still performed to the deceased murshid and made famous by the name of the last murshid, or will the Ismailağa structure, which takes its name from the Ismailağa Mosque, continue.
People want to see a living Murshid-i kamil who is the embodiment of their tariqa.