Alevism as an Ethno-Religious Identity

Contested Boundaries

Celia Jenkins, Suavi Aydin, Umit Cetin, Celia Jenkins, Suavi Aydin, Umit Cetin

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN:
  9780367519100
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351600989
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

Until recently the importance of religion in the modern world has often been underestimated in Western societies, whereas its significance is absolutely crucial in the Middle East. Religion is critical to a sense of belonging for communities and nations, and can be a force for unity or division. This is the case for the Alevis, an ethnic and religious community that constitutes approximately 20% of the Turkish population – its second largest religious group. In the current crisis in the Middle East, the heightened religious tensions between Sunnis, Shias and Alawites raise questions about who the Alevis are and where they stand in this conflict. With an ambiguous relationship to Islam, historically Alevis have been treated as a 'suspect community' in Turkey and recently, whilst distinct from Alawites, have sympathised with the Assad regime's secular orientation. The chapters in this book analyse different aspects of Alevi identity in relation to religion, politics, culture, education and national identity, drawing on specialist research in the field. The approach is interdisciplinary and contributes to wider debates concerning ethnicity, religion, migration and trans/national identity within and across ethno-religious boundaries.

The chapters in this book were originally published as a special issue of the National Identities journal.

The emergence of Alevism as an ethno-religious identity

Suavi Aydın^†

ABSTRACT

Alevism has been regarded as a contested identity which is difficult to define because of its ‘syncretic’ character. Attempts at definition have been overwhelmed by essentialist approaches as well as different political agendas since the fifteenth-century Ottoman period. This paper aims to trace the history of Alevism with a particular focus on historical sources such as the Velāyetnāmes and the organization of ocaks and dergahs. The paper argues that we shall see Alevism as an ethno-religious identity which is formed under different social conditions and emerged through the complexities of the organization of ocaks in a vast territory encompassing different ethnic groups.

Introduction

The most problematic concepts with regard to theories of ethnicity appear in debates surrounding the identification of religious and regional identities as ‘ethnic’ entities. This identification problem arises from the situational and historical characteristics of the socio-political and cultural category named ethnicity. Contrary to essentialist and ahistorical constructions of ethnicity arising from and encompassing nationalist approaches, ethnicity is best understood in a situational and historical context, an approach that is informed by anthropology and has now become widely accepted in the field. Since Alevism, as a form and system of belief, is a common denominator for a number of diverse groups who identify themselves variously as Turks, Turkmen, Yörüks, Kurds and Zazas, and have different histories and speak different languages, traditional ways of defining it seem to fall short and a special perspective needs to be adopted in order to understand the situation. As an ethno-religious identity, the unifying power of Alevism cannot be examined by reference to an inclusive religious concept such as is the case with Sunni Islam with its idea of the Ummah, a single community of Islam that embraces many ethnic groups, nor can it be compared, for example, with the religious unity of Buddhist people.

No essentialist approach is successful in understanding the ethno-religious character of Alevism because essentialist approaches get stuck in a narrow perspective which tries to trace the origins of Alevism back in time and examine its trajectory in history beginning with some common root. According to some, Alevism is a ‘tradition’ in which Turkmen, who whilst emigrating from Inner Asia to Asia Minor came into contact with Islamic religious ideas and incorporated them into their original belief system, and as such it is a ‘national belief system’ that is uniquely Turkic. For some, it is a heterodox belief system shaped by the influence of Iranian religions,¹ whilst for others it is a re-interpretation of Christian heterodoxy in Asia Minor within an Islamic framework.² Some researchers even trace its origins back to the ancient Sumerians.³ There is no doubt that Alevism is a ‘syncretic’ formation; however, when its origins are sought we are forced to neglect many historical factors and actors that have shaped it and created its ‘ethnic’ status. For example, if the first approach is adopted, we would have trouble in explaining why not just the Turkmen but also the Kurds and Zazas became Alevis. In the second approach, it is hard to explain why the Islamic influence that had begun long before the Islamization of the Turkmen in Iran, and the institutionalization of Shia Islam in the region, had not affected Alevism as such, and why was a structure set up on the foundations of the ‘older’ pre-Islamic Iranian religions. The third one lacks evidence as to why the communities that contacted Anatolian Christianity were influenced by Christian heterodoxy, and what would justify their need to put aside their own body of knowledge. But essentialist theoretical approaches support reductions of this type.

^†A glossary of terms can be found at the end of this article.

Approaches that are freed from essentialism, and that try to recognize ethnicity within social practices, are more convincing. In this respect, ethnographic methods in anthropology have made a major contribution. Thus, the continuities supposedly established through abstract historical relations or through data ‘chosen’ from history in a deductive method, and the attempts at isolationist constructions that bridge the present time to the distant past by way of leaving out unwanted elements of the idealized history of an ethnic group whose origins are sought, can be scrutinized and their inadequacies demonstrated.

It is also not possible to define ethnicity as a comprehensive social category. Along with the question of the persuasiveness of essentialist approaches obsessed with the notions of lineage and ancestry, it is also necessary to get rid of the obsession with strict definitions. Accordingly, ethnicity does not refer to pre-defined, static groups, but rather, points to a social status where groups establish their own identity by defining the boundaries between themselves and other groups and reconfiguring themselves accordingly.⁴ In this approach there are symbolic and social boundaries between actors who are divided ethnically that determine this distinction. Wimmer’s (2008) comparative analysis of ethnic statuses makes a very important contribution to this basic approach. Thus, following his work, based upon examples derived from Meso-America, it has become more apparent that ethnic status is a special case that takes shape to varying extents and ways within various socio-historical contexts. Wimmer brings a dynamism to Barth’s analysis of ethnic boundaries and takes the issue of ‘ethnic boundaries’ to ‘beyond the construction of ethnic boundaries’, drawing attention to the paths that these constructions take historically. However, at the same time, the position of the perennialist school, who view ethnicity as a phenomenon that represents human history’s most stable principles of ‘social organization’ [sic.] (Wimmer, 2008, p. 971) needs to be ruled out. Otherwise it would lead to a standardizing definition of these ethnic groups and to the neglect of versions that are not included in these standardizing models. This, in turn, would prevent us from seeing the relationships between ethnicity and identity, and also the situational and contingent characteristics of ethnicity occurring under different conditions, emerging and collapsing through time.

In addition to the reading of ethnicity as being built through the construction of boundaries, all these efforts to counter the essentialist views of ethnicity make a theoretical contribution that helps us observe the shaping of ethnicity through historical encounters and under specific conditions. This new way of seeing does not attempt to seek an historical origin, the kind that are advocated by the essentialists, but as Wimmer emphasizes, needs to take account of the following: the dynamic relations such as the formation and disintegration of ethnic groups in history; the emergence of other groups from an ethnic group and in this context splitting up or becoming inclusive; the ethnicization throughout history of clusters of people sharing no ethnical context; and the use of religious or cultural characteristics as a means of ethnic coherence. All these make it possible to move from a standardizing point of view that aims to categorize ethnic groups under a single definition. Thus, in this paper, based on the assumption that Alevism is an ethno-religious social formation and an identity, I shall try to build a model that tracks the foundational elements of this identity, its historical journey, the moments of its reconstruction via identity and grouping, the disintegration and reconstruction of their ethno-religious solidarity, and on the other hand the strategies and tactics pursued in the face of emerging historical conditions.

The foundational elements of Alevi identity

The role of the Velāyetnāme tradition in identity formation and the differentiation of the Shī’a

Sunni religious narrative is based on a tradition stemming from the interpretation of the Quran and Hadith on how to organize everyday life. Hence, Sunni Muslim rhetoric legitimized sectarian divisions within it only on their basis in Islamic law (fiqh) and deemed others as heretical (rafidism, ilhād, even atheism, etc.). Yet in fact, beliefs that were deeply held in everyday life could become incorporated as practices, mythology and cult within Sunni Muslim circles even though strictly speaking they could be contrary to the Quranic and academic understanding of Islam. These beliefs thus created a folk Islam; and moreover, this ‘folk Islam’ could take on a political form historically, and even, was able to be organized under ‘iconoclastic’ oppositional groups vis-à-vis the harsh rhetoric of Sunni Islam. This is a situation that has prevailed since the beginning of Islamic history and confronts us in various guises throughout that history. When Islam is viewed through its own historicity, the resultant events, formations and conflicts become clearer.

The Velāyetnāmes (saintly legends), the main written sources of Alevism, are the most representative texts that signify the divisions created by Orthodox Sunni Islamic rhetoric.⁵ The Velāyetnāme tradition dates back to the thirteenth century and, therefore, although living within the influential domain of Islam, vast numbers of people who had limited or no access to Quranic Islam or Madrasah Islam came into contact with this tradition via the Velāyetnāmes. Most of the Velāyetnāmes were transcribed, but it was not important for most people whether the Velāyetnāmes were written down or not because they were transmitted to ordinary people by dervishes and disciples (tālips) via an oral tradition, and in this way its adherents grew. As stated by Rıza Yıldırım (2007–2008, p. 13)

… it could be stipulated that Velāyetnāmes (‘saintly legends’) told and retold over and over played a primary role in the expansion of Islam and its practice in daily life among the nomadic and semi-nomadic people, settled and peasant Turks … who are far from the high written culture, struggling for survival amidst tough conditions of nature, and having a cultural life based mostly on oral tradition.

As texts that frequently cover phenomena such as miracles, wonders, premonitions, shapeshifting and reincarnation, all of which are strongly rejected by Orthodox Islam, the Velāyetnāmes are embedded within the tradition (recognized as the ‘truth’) of the disciples of the dervishes about whom the Velāyetnāmes narrate.

Foundational figures that influenced the direction of Alevi teachings, and the rituals shaped around them, reveal the fundamental relations of these teachings with Shī‘a, Khārijism and Batinism, the branches of Islam that were dominant during Islam’s period of diversification. The idea of qutb and insān-ı kāmil⁶ in these teachings is fundamentally different from the Sunni Islam point of view. While Sunni Islam establishes an interpretation of religion and humanity that does not allow for the personal representation of revelation on earth, and thus restricts the concept of the Imamate (the leadership of Imams) within narrow and mundane boundaries, the aforesaid orientations expanded the possibilities of Sufism by opening the doors to the idea of sainthood (velāyet), represented physically by selected people, and reinterpreting the imam in a whole new way, one that entrusted him with the authority to speak on earth in the name of God. Hacı Bektaş Velī, Abdal Mūsa, even people like Shāh Ismail Safawī were given such authority and status (makam), and they have been seen from time to time as the 12th imam forming an extreme interpretation of Batinism, totally differentiating it from the Shī’a tradition. The fact that these leaders and saints (velīs) were part of a lineage that followed the line of Yasa...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Citation Information
• Notes on Contributors
• Introduction: Alevism as an ethno-religious identity: Contested boundaries
• 1 The emergence of Alevism as an ethno-religious identity
• 2 Constructing a social space for Alevi political identity: Religion, antagonism and collective passion
• 3 The AKP, sectarianism, and the Alevis’ struggle for equal rights in Turkey
• 4 Thoughts on the rhetoric that women and men are equal in Alevi belief and practice (Alevilik) – to Songül
• 5 Television and the making of a transnational Alevi identity
• 6 From a ‘sort of Muslim’ to ‘proud to be Alevi’: The Alevi religion and identity project combatting the negative identity among second-generation Alevis in the UK
• Index