Kadızadelis (also Qādīzādali) was a seventeenth-century puritanical reformist religious movement in the Ottoman Empire that followed Kadızade Mehmed (1582-1635), a revivalist Islamic preacher. Kadızade and his followers were determined rivals of Sufism and popular religion. They condemned many of the Ottoman practices that Kadızade felt were bidʻah "non-Islamic innovations", and passionately supported "reviving the beliefs and practices of the first Muslim generation in the first/seventh century" ("enjoining good and forbidding wrong").^[1]

Driven by zealous and fiery rhetoric, Kadızade Mehmed was able to inspire many followers to join in his cause and rid themselves of any and all corruption found inside the Ottoman Empire. Leaders of the movement held official positions as preachers in the major mosques of Baghdad, and "combined popular followings with support from within the Ottoman state apparatus".^[2] Between 1630 and 1680 there were many violent quarrels that occurred between the Kadızadelis and those that they disapproved of. As the movement progressed, activists became "increasingly violent" and Kadızadelis were known to enter "mosques, tekkes and Ottoman coffeehouses in order to mete out punishments to those contravening their version of orthodoxy."^[3]

Kadizade in his sermons "used the grand pupil of Aya Sofya to propagate a kind of "fundamentalist" ethic, a set of doctrinal positions intended to rid Islam of beliefs and practices that had accumulated since the era of the Prophet Muhammad’s Medina."^[6] Kadizade's sermons and his persuasive style of delivery permeated "new life into the centuries-old dialect between innovation and fundamental, "orthodox," Islam".^[6] For Kadızade and his followers, innovation represented their spiritual guides and the Islamic past, a shift away from the vulnerable salvation of the society. The Kadızade's contended that Muslims had abandoned the Sunna, the "way" of the Prophet Muhammad due to the prominence of the Sufi order. Accordingly, the Kadızadelis maintain that if the Sufi is not restrained, then the whole society would be forged into non-belief.

In addition, the Kadızadelis specified precise Koran sanctions against wine and had sermons paying attention to a variety of controversies that had progressed during the Prophet Muhammad era. The Kadizadelis took the negative pose and argued that the "issues typified the contagion of Sufi-inspired error."^[8] Moreover, with respect to religious obligations, the Kadızadelis asserted that every single believer was obligated to comply with the Koran's law sanctioning to "enjoin right and prohibit wrong."^[8] Besides, the Kadizadelis contended that those who rejected to abandon such innovations were "heretics who must reaffirm their faith or be punished."^[8] According to the Sufi spokesmen, and others opposed to the Kadızadeli movement, contends that “Kadizadeli-labeled "innovation" was either not canonically forbidden or had flourished for centuries within the community and thus stood validated by the principle of consensus.”^[8]

According to Mustapha Sheikh, under "the leadership of Uṣṭūwanī", attacks on un-Islamic behaviour were not left to the authorities. One preacher (Al-Aqḥiṣāri) urged his followers to physically remove from the pulpit any preacher "whose sermon is not in conformity with the Quran and Sunna". As the movement progressed, activists became "increasingly violent" and Qadizadelis were known to enter "mosques, tekkes and coffeehouses in order to mete out punishments to those contravening their version of orthodoxy."^[3]

In 1631, Kadızade served as a Friday preacher at Beyazid for eight years and at Suleymaniye for one or two months, he was then promoted to Aya Sofya, the imperial mosque. "It was clear that for a growing segment of the mosque-going public, Kadizade had become the instrument of their escape from the hellish depths of ignorance".^[6] Kadizade's speech-making had permeated "new life into the centuries old dialectic between innovation and fundamental 'orthodox' Islam" yet his "underlying struggle laid between Kadizadeli Puritanism and the pragmatism of ulema decision-makers"^[6] and this was something Kadizade fought hard to bridge the gap between. At first, in order to quell resentment and rebellion, as well as to settle down the Kadizadelis, Murad IV worked with Kadizade Mehmed and suppressed the most blatant displays of luxury and aberrant behaviour. This however did not prevent the Kadizadelis agitation toward the Ottoman Empire and "in 1656, after the appointment of Koprulu Mehmed to the Grand Vezirate, the Kadizadeli wave ended".^[10] However, Mehmed was not excessively "fond of the Sufis and their practices; he felt Kadizadeli vigilantism was more threatening to his vision of order"^[11] "It came at a crucial time as well since an armed Kadizadeli movement had made their way towards the Fatih mosque. Koprulu Mehmed acted swiftly, arresting then banishing off key members to Cyprus".^[11] This was a devastating loss to the Kadizadelis who lost their public voice and at that moment, seemed to have been slowly disappearing into the abyss of obscurity.

The Kadizadelis failed in implementing their endeavors; nevertheless their campaign emphasized the divisions within the religious establishment in Ottoman society. The Kadizadeli legacy from one generation to another has been deeply enmeshed in the leaders who were inspired by scholar Birgivi that gave growth to the Kadizade movement. The Kadizade's religious advancement in the Ottoman periphery strengthened the anti-elitist movement. In the end, the faith's chief ulema's continued to support Sufi theology. Many academics and scholars have argued that the Kadizadelis were self-serving and hypocritical; since most of their criticisms were based on the fact that they were on the fringes of society and felt alienated from the rest of the social order. Scholars felt due to being separated from opportunities and power positions inside of the Ottoman Empire, the Kadizadelis took the position they did and were thus cast as reformers instead instigators.