The Idea of Mahdism as a Problem in Republican Türkiye: An Analysis through the Framework of Islamist Journals

This article examines how conservative religious groups in modern Turkish history have perceived the doctrine of mahdism. The study begins in the 1950s—a pivotal era marking Turkey’s shift from single‑party rule to a more liberal multiparty system—and spans the subsequent fifty years. Until the 1950s, the Republic’s strict secularism had severely curtailed religious organizations, limiting their visibility and preventing their ideas from reaching broader audiences. With the partial liberalization introduced by successive governments after the 1950s, however, these groups regained public prominence. In this changing environment, print media—particularly journals—emerged as the primary vehicle for conservative Islamists to disseminate their views. These periodicals not only offered regular, systematic publication schedules but also hosted vibrant intellectual exchange through scholarly articles, reader correspondence, and interviews, effectively reflecting the cultural climate of Islamist circles. The decades following World War II saw significant political and social developments in Turkey, alongside vigorous debates about the Mahdī. A survey of Islamist journals published between 1950 and 2000 reveals a remarkable proliferation of Mahdī claimants and a dynamic field of discourse that underscores how central messianic expectations were to mid‑century Republican Turkey. Central to these debates was the centennial/millennial beliefs. The writings in Islamist journals point to Said Nursi as the contemporary religious authority at the centre of the Mahdist debates of the period. Virtually almost every contributor to these journals, whether supportive or critical, felt compelled to address his ideas. İzmirli İsmail Hakkı likewise exerted considerable influence, his writings on messianic themes helping to shape the intellectual contours of conservative discourse. Within this rich corpus, three principal orientations toward the Mahdī phenomenon emerge. First are the “Mahdīsts,” who openly champion the coming of the Mahdī and articulate robust messianic expectations. Second is a critical faction that rejects Mahdī anticipation and seeks to redirect Muslims’ attention away from eschatological waiting toward confronting the pressing issues of their age. Third is a cautious cohort that neither fully embraces nor outright rejects the belief, instead focusing on its social and ethical ramifications and employing a deliberately measured tone. All three groups ground their arguments in relevant hadith literature.