orated it by never having been involved in any incident recorded by the police, so which law permits that unhappy man’s house to be raided as though he were a revolutionary and ‘komitadji’, and for pitiless men to insult him, and despite not finding anything in his house, as though he was a multiple criminal gather up his most precious, miraculous Qur’an and the inscriptions hanging on his wall as though they were pernicious writings? What benefit demands turning thousands of religious people who thus serve public order with their good morals against government and public order because of some baseless suspicion?
The Sixth: Endless thanks be to God that thirty years ago, through His grace and the effulgence of the Qur’an, a person realized just how valueless and meaningless are the fleeting fame and glory of this world, and its egotistical self-admiration and celebrity, and since that time has struggled with all his strength against his evil-commanding soul, and to be self-effacing and give up egotism, and not to be artificial and hypocritical. Those who have served him or befriended him are perfectly certain of this and testify to it. For twenty years he has fled with all his might from people’s good opinions and their attention, which everyone takes too much pleasure in, and contrary to everyone else has rejected praise and acclaim and being accorded a spiritual rank. He has also rejected the excessively good opinions of him of his closest brothers, and has wounded their feelings by not accepting the praise and commendation expressed in their letters. He has show himself to be devoid of virtue, and has ascribed all virtue to the Risale-i Nur, a Qur’anic commentary, and hence to the collective personality of the Risale-i Nur students, thinking of himself as only a lowly servant. This proves that he has not tried to make himself liked, and he has not wanted to and has rejected it. So under what law has he been deemed guilty because without his consent some of his friends in a distant place had an excessively good opinion of him and eulogized him and awarded him a high spiritual rank; and because of what a preacher said in the region of Kütahya whom he does not know; and because of a letter with a forged signature which had been sent to Kütahya, where I have never sent any letter; and because of an offensive book in Balikesir, the author of which is unknown? Would any law in the world permit sending officials to break the lock of a wretched, aged, ill stranger’s room as though he had committed a serious crime, and allow them to justify this by finding only a book of supplications and a wall-hanging? Would any politics allow such aggression?
The Seventh: Would any law permit for an unfortunate who, although at this time inside the country when there are so many lively political parties and currents, internal and external, and the ground is ripe to take