Religious leaders usually propose some criteria for selecting a “good” tradition. Haji Ilgar has a well-thought list of them. He pointed to the following: (1) rationality (“chosen religious way shall be close to reason”), (2) assessing the attitude a particular religious tradition developed towards a human being, (3) a possibility of self-realization. Only when a religious ideology upholds these standards can it be a subject of choice. A decision must be based upon studies and reflection. No authority has a right to dictate the choice. It must be individual. People need to know what rules they follow and why. A director of an NGO, engaged in popularizing Islamic knowledge, told me that the most important in making a choice and finding a way in the chaos of information is one rule—“the golden mean.” No extreme ideologies are acceptable. No radicalism. She also stresses the need to learn about other religions and treats all (Sunni) schools of law as offering some useful guidelines.
Sunnism Versus Shiism
What stands behind a religious choice? Why are some people in favour of the Sunni model and some prefer Shiism? How do people justify their decisions of choosing a particular religious path?
There is a recent, distinct and possibly revolutionary cultural trend in contemporary Azerbaijan of a massive turn of the traditionally Shiite Muslim society towards Sunnism. It does not, however, mean that Shiism is unattractive and rejected. Numerous people and groups feel themselves well in the Shiite tradition. Reasons that Shia people give to explain their decision are, to a certain extent, similar to what Sunnis say. Both groups underline their own search for the truth or for a religious model that would most suit them. The choice was not accidental, they argue.
During a discussion with female members of the Juma community, one women told her story of moving from Sunni to Shia Islam:
Why was I a Sunni Muslim? My family was ethnically Sunni, and since childhood I had only information about this Islamic branch. That was the Islam I was shown. But when I was 18, I got interested in religion, so I began to look for information and learn about different schools. People were coming from various Muslim countries to us, they brought us books, and were telling us about Islam. Finally, I have decided to follow the [Shia] Jafari maḏhab, but it is solely my personal, rational choice.
A frequent explanation for choosing Shiite Islam was its “reasonability.” A Muslim Shiite scholar in his thirties confirms the need to be familiar with religion before making up one’s mind. He recalled a period after Azerbaijan regained independence when there was a lot of criticism of Shiism. Those public attacks inspired him to begin his own inquiry: “I was reading about Sunni and Shia Islam. I found that much of the allegations against Shiism was based on false information and exaggeration.” The comparative analysis led him to the conclusion that for him Shiism made more sense. This tradition requires more knowledge and is not superficial. In its core is the constant reflection and study. More depends on one’s own interpretations of the Koran. In Sunnism, the process of issuing fatwas is more flexible than in Shiism—more people claim that they can announce their own “official” statement. In Shia Islam one must devote a lot of time to studies to reach the level to be granted permission to issue fatwas. Such a scholar is thus more trustworthy.
Another young Shiite graduated from the Islamic University in Baku, which is accepting both Shia and Sunni Muslims. For him the preference for Shiism had two sources: a family background and religious studies. In 2000 –2003, he did research on both Islamic branches mainly from Sunni sources. At the university he also attended courses on Sunni fikh. Researching Sunni writings and comparing them with Shia, he became convinced that in fact Shia arguments are more convincing and logical for him. Moreover, historical events do not support Sunni view. “Shia lay strong emphasis on intellect and logical reasoning. When there are no clear answers in the Koran and Sunna, Shiites are encouraged to use their own mind,” he elaborated on his choice. It would be interesting to know how were these arguments influenced by his family or university teachers. In the prevalent “rationalistic” discourse on religion, few would admit to that.
Pro-Shia arguments, but of different kind, were given by less educated people. They opposed the moderate character of Shiite people against more radical Sunnis. In their stories, the image of Sunnism pertains chiefly to North Caucasus regions. Sunni Chechens are admired for their knowledge of Islam, but at the same time they are viewed as too dangerous and too fanatical. That’s how mass media present them. Similar prejudice relates to the “local Sunnis,” most commonly known as “Wahhabis.” Radicalism allegedly relates only to Sunnism. This is enough to discourage some people even from thinking about joining the Sunni community.
On the other hand, the majority of Azerbaijani Sunnis describe themselves as “moderate,” and distance themselves from extremist groups that allegedly have links with global terrorist networks. They either regard both Islamic traditions as equal and ascribe their choice to individual preferences, or they use arguments of the Sunni discourse according to which Shiism is a mistake, misinterpretation of history. In the second case, only Salafi Islam is a “real” or “true” form of religion. That argument appears and is thoroughly discussed in numerous Salafi books, easily available in Baku. As far as the former argument is concerned, I will mention just one example, which shows that the choices can be really individual. A Sunni lecturer at the Department of Religious Studies of the Baku State University was telling me about his search for the truth. At the beginning, he was interested in both Islamic variants, but under the influence of books and reflection he accepted the Sunni path and follows it as much as possible. However, he is not using his knowledge of religion to persuade anybody into the same direction. His parents and wife are Shia Muslims, and everybody in the family accepts each other’s choices. “I just like Sunnism more,” he concluded.
Another interesting argument in favour of Sunnism refers to Christianity and its internal divisions. During a discussion I held with a group of Sunni Muslim men, one of them proposed thinking about Sunnism as Protestantism, in contrast to Catholicism-like Shiism. According to this view, Shia people surround themselves with a variety of saints and other mediators between people and God. Instead of listening directly to the words of God, written in the Koran, Shiites listen to their mullas and ayatollahs. They refer to saints and magic. They do not follow their logic and rationality in contemplating religious sources. Their religiosity is embedded in customs, traditions, rituals. History is given a priority over the Revelation and the life of the Prophet. The traditions that evolved in the course of centuries have nothing in common with original Islam as it has been passed to Mahomet. What truly matters, is the Koran and the Sunna, the direct message from God, the Sunnis argued.
A sociologically interesting category is constituted of people who have decided to practice religion, but are caught between two traditions. One of them was a professor of the Baku Caucasus University. Answering my question about his religious preferences, he called himself “semi-Sunni, semi-Shia.” How is it possible? Two opposing, often clashing Islams at the same time? His family cultivates Sunni tradition, he made it clear at the beginning. Nevertheless, when he became interested in religious issues, like many other people, he set out to study stories and arguments of both groups. Finally, he concluded that Shiites are right taking into consideration historical and legal points of view. Later, however, Shiites changed a lot in Islamic religion, especially they added too many elements which distorted religion, such as religious rituals, the faith in Imams. On the other hand, those elements, he argued, are not only wrong, but also totally irrelevant for contemporary Muslims. That’s why he made up his mind to be in the middle. He’s fortunate not to live in a country torn by violent clashes, where religion overlaps with ethnicity or clan allegiances.
Another person who deliberately did not choose one tradition was a 23-yearold girl. She said, “In a way I am Shia, because I pray the way Shiites pray—with loose hands along the body. I learned it from books an
d find it better for me; this posture resembles a slave standing before his Master.” But, on the other hand, the sources of knowledge about Islam that she uses (books and Internet sites) are Sunni, in my opinion—Sunni Salafi, as her arguments in disputes resemble Salafi discourse. Shiite way of performing rituals, Sunni ideology.
Another attitude is exemplified by the rector of the Islamic University in Baku, with whom I had a short interview. “As a rector, I am a Muslim,” he declared at the very beginning. He was born in Nakhchivan, one of the main strongholds of pious Shiism, and he is still attached to that place. Then he studied in Tashkent, where he began to pray in a Sunni way, as the majority of Muslims did at that time. That was the way he was taught. In his current work he does not place emphasis on the differences between Sunnism and Shiism. His university accepts students of both traditions. The differences should be minimalized as Islam is only one. According to him, the graduates are first of all “Muslims.” That is the main message he carries to students.
6.5Plausibility and Legitimacy
Recent changes in religion in the South Caucasian Muslim republic introduced a great level of pluralism. It is a huge novelty in a society accustomed to clinging to their religious worldview and practices. Religious elements, although not many during the long communist era, were taken for granted. Not much thought was given to choosing or changing one’s religious tradition. The emergence of modern pluralism, alongside loud and effective religious movements, radically changed this situation. Nowadays people are faced with the necessity of making their own choice, for which they are responsible, and which they have to justify. In Azerbaijan such a situation results, among other things, in the existence of many religiously-mixed families in which children are given the freedom to choose their own way. Although people’s religious choices are inspired by a wide range of factors, such as social or economic, my focus was on the personal choice and its justification, just as believers present them.
There are two vital issues concerning the impact of pluralism. The first is the problem of pluralism and plausibility: How can people regard their religious convictions as real in the light of competing alternative religious and non-religious ideological systems? The second issue is a question of practices used in an adaptation to new conditions. Peter Berger claimed (1967) (in regard to religious institutions) that there are two kinds of practices or attitudes, one consisting in adaptation to a pluralistic situation, the second—in rejecting it. Similarly, believers either espouse an inclusivist or exclusivist model of religious diversity. Both types of strategies lead to an increased engagement in religious issues. In the inclusivist model, social actors are continuously faced with religious alternatives. They interact with others who have diverse, often contradicting opinions. They are open to confront and reflect upon their ideas. In an exchange of views and discussions they get to know other options and points of view. To defend their views, they must become more knowledgeable in various aspects of their religious tradition. They need arguments to respond to questions and allegations. In the exclusivist model, people react to pluralism with anxiety. They limit their contacts with those belonging to other religious traditions. In this process of “self-ghettoization” they create their justifications of being more right and proper than others. They look for ways to justify their claims that they represent the real Muslims. To defend themselves against accusations, they constantly have to show and prove their piety to themselves and to the outer world. Being in the limelight, they cannot omit a Friday mosque prayer or dress “improperly.” During the Ramadan they must fast with all the rigor Islam requires. In that way, their religious engagement increases as well.
Why Islam is the only true religion?: Overcoming the Problem of Plausibility
Pluralism threatens the plausibility of religious belief systems by exposing their human origin and thereby weakens competing faiths (Bruce 1992: 170, in: Stark (1998)).
The problem of plausibility of religion emerges when people are confronted with competing ideas. The above quotation presents a version of one of the most influential theses that was supposed to explain the way in which pluralism leads to the erosion of religion’s role in society. Contemporary empirical evidence from most parts of the world that undergo a resurgence of religious life suggests however something opposite. In Azerbaijan, which was all of sudden exposed to the “threat” of diversity, there was a lot of confusion in the first years after 1991. At present, after two decades, there is a surprisingly high level of certainty among believers. How is it possible? As it was mentioned before, nationalism and science, which are often viewed as secular ideological alternatives to religion, are well integrated into religious convictions. Those two strong forces entered the wide religious landscape of ideas. Ideologies were adapted to the present needs. For believers, nationalism and science even reinforce religious faith, support it with novel arguments, present it in more attractive way.
One of the main processes that accounts for the certainty in the pluralistic context is legitimation in Berger’s (1967, p. 61) interpretation. It is understood as a way in which “knowledge” that is socially objectified is employed to justify an existing social order. In the case of Azerbaijan this problem translates itself into a question: How do people assert that religion, or a religious branch they follow, contains the truth? This issue can be divided into two more precise questions. One would touch the competition between Islam and other religions that are around. The second is related to an understanding of ways in which believers gain certainty that their tradition is right or better than others.
The Islamic discourse in Baku about other religions is reduced to monotheistic religions. Maybe it was due to my presence as a Christian in a Muslims society that have induced my interlocutors to raise the topic of Christianity versus Islam. Or maybe it stems from the long polemical tradition in Islam related to monotheistic faiths. In Azerbaijan, it could have been reinforced by the presence of Russian and other Christian communities. One of my observations, surprising at the first sight, was that the inter-religious discourse is more developed, or more common, than the intra-religious one. There are more arguments concerning Islam and Christianity or Islam and Judaism than Shiism and Sunnism or Sufism. In a society, where more than 95 percent of people share one religion, and the religious divisions are found mostly inside Islam offering various interpretations, one may expect the opposite to be true. Why is it so? Apart from the polemical Islamic tradition already mentioned, there are some socio-political issues at stake. Azerbaijan has Christian neighbours—Georgia, Armenia, and Russia. International relations in the Caucasus have never been smooth and easy. During conflicts, religion is often used in creating the image of an enemy. Moreover, Azerbaijan is almost monolithic in terms of its Islamic identity. Interactions between people of different faiths are scarce and relationships weak. There are hardly any opportunities to verify existing stereotypes and change the dominant discourse. When people socialize, as it is the case of Muslims in Azerbaijan following different variants of Islam, it is much more difficult to maintain stereotypical images. Shiite and Sunni Muslims meet in family circles, at schools, at universities, in bars.
There are at least five main types of arguments, partially overlapping, used by Muslims to create a representation of Islam as the true religion. The most common is the claim that Judaism and Christianity, two main competitors to Islam, have been modified by people. There is a non-divine factor in their teachings. Even though Muslim believers accept those two religions as created by God as well, they argue that, in the course of time, some changes were introduced to Jewish and Christian sources that have a distinct sign of human interference. Muslims in Baku claim: “I studied Christian and Jewish Scriptures and I saw the hands of people in both of them,” “Only the Koran contains true words of God.” A 50-year old Muslim woman who had studied Christianity said that even the Bible includes information that Muhammad would be the last Prophet. However, this information appeared only in the old version o
f the Christian Bible which was lost for a long time and has only recently been found. But apparently it is inaccessible to the public. Another version of this explanation states that the Torah had been hidden for a long time, and, in the meantime, people tried to recreate it by inventing some rules and stories allegedly included in the original Scripture. Fortunately, the true Torah has recently been excavated, and now we have the proof that people were deceived. But a believer must trust in what others, more knowledgeable, say.
Another popular idea circulating alongside the Caspian seaside links the alternations in Christianity and Judaism to Jews. Again, science becomes useful to provide justifications. Changes introduced to Christianity have been scientifically proven, my Muslim friend asserts. There is a story of a British scholar who was close to the Christian church and had access to the religious sources collected at the Cambridge University. He devoted some time to studying Christian documents, largely unknown to the public. His analytic mind led him to confront his faith with the original historical documents without prejudice. He made a breakthrough discovery that a lot of elements in the core of religious doctrine were added later than it is usually assumed. The only holy book that contains pure words of God is the Koran. I was unable to get more precise information about the name of the scholar or the written proof for these words. Spoken stories do not need confirmation.
There is some evidence for that thesis, as a lot of Muslims believe. The most convincing for them is the belief that there is no contradiction in the Islamic Scripture (“If people wrote the Koran, there would be some inconsistency in it. Since there are no two ayats contradicting each other, it is the proof for the perfection of Islam,” my respondents argued). For that reason, in the Koran one can find answers for all questions and problems. It is a perfect unity encompassing all spheres of life.
Religious Revival and Secularism in Post-Soviet Azerbaijan Page 24