Religious Revival and Secularism in Post-Soviet Azerbaijan Read online

  Another suggestion for improving the market model of religion is to test the theory in non-Western contexts, which have largely been neglected in scientific explorations. Such tests require that the concepts and their operationalization are suitable for non-Christian and non-Western societies, in the case of this study, for a Muslim country. Responding to these challenges, I propose to understand pluralism not only as a multitude of religious groups or “firms,” but much wider, as a set of options consisting of “discursive traditions,” which is a term employed in the anthropology of Islam. Representatives of various traditions constantly influence and challenge each other, thus prompting change in the belief system, ideology, organization, goods or services provided by them.

  1.1Studying Religious Pluralism

  Two interesting shifts have taken place in the recent scholarship on religion. Firstly, this subject has returned from the marginal position it occupied in sociology since around the 1950s to the mainstream field of social research. For decades students had been discouraged from studying religious problems. “Why invest in studying something that was destined to wither and die,” mentors advised (Smith, 2008, p. 1561). A bulk of books and articles on religion has recently been published by prestigious scientific companies. Numerous enterprises attempting to understand the vast and complex area of religious phenomena are noticeable. This unexpected change is related to a general trend in social sciences of religion to widen the scope of research by increasing the extent of observations from non-Western religious traditions and cultures (see Zielińska, 2009). World events and religious movements since the mid-1970s, indicating an increasing vitality of religion around the globe, have gradually attracted scientists’ attention. The cold war finished and religion became a factor in ethnic conflicts and wars. Rising nationalisms included religion in their agendas. At the same time, we are currently observing the revival of evangelical Christianity, the global spread of Protestant movements and a growing popularity of transnational Islamic networks, such as the Salafists. In that process of religious ferment on nearly all continents, new stimuli to theoretical developments have appeared, resulting in turbulent discussions in social sciences.

  Secondly, the issue of religious pluralism emerged in the centre of the debate on religion. Obviously, the phenomenon of pluralism existed in the past, to mention some examples, such as the Silk Road, multi-ethnic and multi-religious Andalusia ruled by Muslims, or toleration of religious dissidents in Poland-Lithuania. The Tatar population living in Poland for several centuries managed to keep their attachment to Islam, although the architecture of their mosques resembles that of Catholic churches. The process of exchanges and interactions between Catholic Poles and Muslim Polish Tatars resulted in striking similarities in many ideas on religion and its practice (Wiktor-Mach, 2008). Each of the world religions has its own local characteristics with elements of ethnicity, nationality, and culture influencing the overall content and form of religion. Religious traditions adjust and reveal a colorful diversity of customs, beliefs, and convictions. At the same time, research on contemporary modern religious pluralism have been dealing almost exclusively with the American situation. It was only with the sudden “globalization of pluralism” (Berger, 2006), that the problem emerged as a hot topic in the scientific study of religious behavior. At present, neither is the American religiosity studied as a “deviant case,” nor are scholars pursuing the thesis of “American exceptionalism” (Tiryakian, 1993). Social scientists analysing all aspects of pluralism and diversity in religion aspire to create theoretical propositions that could apply to non-American contexts as well.

  Research on religious pluralism and conflict are an alternative to the influential functionalist paradigm in social sciences, which assumes an integrative role of religion in society. Far from Durkheim’s interpretations, studies of religious groups in a pluralistic society do not focus on common values or social bonds between people belonging to different social strata. Instead, they analyse religious figures as agents of conflict between groups and nations.

  Some of the puzzles in contemporary debates on religious pluralism concern the questions: What is the impact of religious pluralism? Does the lack of a religious monopoly influence peoples’ faith? Does it induce religious organizations to change their way of doing? How does pluralism reshape the religious map? Or, more precisely, what is the relationship between religious pluralism and religious vitality? Does religious pluralism decrease religious participation or increase it? What are the mechanisms behind this relation? As we will see further in this chapter, the answers found in the literature are far from being conclusive.

  The Concept of Pluralism

  Pluralism is a concept used in different branches of humanities and social sciences, such as philosophy, ethics, political studies or sociology. It is thus inevitably understood in a variety of ways and thus has to be clarified. Which meaning of the term pluralism will be suitable for exploring the religious resurgence? If by pluralism we understood simply a coexistence of diverse religious orthodoxies and orthopraxies under the condition of at least a minimum level of tolerance and freedom of acting (“civic peace” (Berger, 2006)), then such definition would be too wide for the aim of this study. It will not be a useful tool for studying the situation in the post-Soviet religious sphere. We should widen the scope of the term to include not only the existence of diverse religious expressions but also some level of social interactions between representatives of various religions or branches of religion. Pluralism, therefore, is not diversity. It describes the field of engagements between religions. If we excluded an element of interactions, then pluralism would also refer to different forms of ghettos, isolation, or the caste system. It is imaginable that in such circumstances other religions do not constitute real options for the majority of believers who keep attachment to their religious tradition.

  In scientific literature there are also other approaches to the concept of religious pluralism. Quite often it is defined in a purely institutional way (Jagodzinski, 1995); the number of churches or other sacred places, organized communities, sects, cults, or religious movements is taken as an indication of the level of religious pluralism. Researchers examining Muslim communities in the West underline an increase in the range of mosques, Muslim organizations, cultural centres, foundations, associations, with many such institutions acting in practice also as mosques. In this case it is possible to compare the level of pluralism on the state, regional or other levels of analysis. Although this approach is applicable to American or European contexts, it creates problems outside the Western world. Islamic religion is, to a larger degree than Christianity, based upon a direct relationship between people and the Creator. Although a lot of ritualistic life in Islam takes place publicly (e. g., hajj, prayer in mosques, pilgrimages), there is also a tendency to celebrate religion either privately, in the family circle or in informal groupings, which are not registered anywhere nor do they appear in statistics. There is no Islamic equivalent to the Catholic parish system of organization. Further, fundamentalist militant groupings will be unwilling to share true information on the numbers of their communities or members. The number of sacred places in Central Asia and Caucasus that are visited by believers of different faiths will not indicate the real level of pluralism. Finally, at least in Azerbaijan, participation of people in religious movements or an affiliation with a particular tradition does not require believers to attend mosques or other sacred places. Especially among young people links with a religious branch are upheld through the Internet, where people seek the advice of scholars, look for specific information, take part in discussion groups, or join on-line religious communities. Religious lifestyles begin to follow completely new patterns. The emergence of a network society poses new challenges to researchers.

  These examples make us aware of the difficulties related to a purely institutional conceptualization of religious pluralism that can easily be quantified and employed in statistical research. Another intuitive
understanding of pluralism is the diversity of religions in a given society. The number of religions would then indicate the level of pluralism. However, in many cases, the differences between distinct traditions inside Judaism, Hinduism or Islam are too huge to be neglected. It is probably the most important lesson from social research on Jews and Christians that inner divisions matter a lot. Orthodox Jews differ in many aspects from the Reform or Conservative Jews beginning with the approach to the Torah. In Orthodox Judaism, the Torah comes directly from God, in the Reformist branch it is believed that God has only “inspired” people to write the Book. This division is clearly observable in everyday life, from gender issues to the degree of strictness in observing the Sabbath. The problem of inner-religious diversity lies in differences in theology, worship, and lifestyle inspired by religion, or in attitudes to modernity. Adherence to a particular movement has crucial cultural, social and political implications (Woodberry, Smith, 1998). It often has impact on the family structure as well as on shared norms and values. Some branches may emphasize the need to be an active member of a society, to do volunteering, to devote one’s time and energy to some public goods. Other religious traditions stress the importance of meditation and distance to the outside world. That is the main reason why in researching religions an anthropological sensitivity to inner differences and seemingly unimportant details is key in proper analysis of religion and religious impact on the society.

  The Concept of Religiosity

  In summation, the term pluralism in this book will refer to the variety of religious traditions, more specifically to Islamic traditions operating inside the same field, or, in the language of the economics of religion, on the same market. The other concept that has to be mentioned in this context is religion—concept, which can be understood in a number of ways. In thinking about this term and its various meanings, I prefer to follow Max Weber’s suggestion included in his “Sociology of Religion”:

  It is not possible to define religion, to say what it “is,” at the start of a presentation such as this. Definitions can be attempted, if at all, only at the conclusion of the study. The “essence” of religion is not even our concern, as we make it our task to study the conditions and effects of a particular type of social action (1963, A.1.a).

  In every world religion, including Islam, we can distinguish separate traditions with their particular set of ideas, interpretations, institutions, leaders, followers, reformers and contesters. Each tradition emerges in a certain political context and is shaped by developments in the secular world. If we want to understand the social world of religions, an exclusively theoretical discussion on basic characteristics or the “nature” of religion will not lead us to any fruitful conclusions. For questions on religious revival, the impact of pluralism, and religious change, the most useful approach will be to understand the concept of religion from an anthropological perspective, i.e., with a focus on various understandings that emerge in Muslim societies or communities and on the choices people make on the religious market. It is the human perspective that matters—how people understand religion in a given context and what kind of activities they undertake in relation to the religious sphere.

  Apart from the discussion on religion, it is useful to include the concept of religiosity, which points to the degree and characteristics of religious commitment. A simple denominational description (e. g., “Muslim,” “Buddhist,” “Catholic”) will not indicate religious engagement. The world religions while having ‘core’ pillars and sacred texts are adapted, to a various degree, to local cultures. More information can be obtained from knowing a person’s belonging to a particular tradition, but still the level and the meaning of one’s religious commitment inside religious branches change from time to time. Religious movements and their leaders often redefine the model of Islam and change an emphasis from one aspect of religion to another. In such a process, the meaning of a “religious person” will differ. Followers of Sufism, for example, in some periods were encouraged to follow a mystical path with its precise requirements taught by mentors, in other—to engage in the study of Islamic scriptures and law. And in other periods of history, or in different places, a religious Sufi meant someone ready to give his life in the name of God, as it was during Imam Shamil’s rule in the 19th-century Caucasus. Sufism then became associated with armed struggle. Therefore, it seems necessary to identify styles of religiosity typical of a particular Islamic group in a given place and time.

  The main flaw of sociological statistical research on religion in Azerbaijan is rooted in an ignorance of various aspects of religiosity. The majority of research include questions about self-identification (often with a limited set of options) and religious practice. It is assumed that being a “Muslim,” a “Jew” or a “Christian” is a fixed and static social identity. Consequently, phenomena such as the “privatization” or “domestiation” of religion, and women’s religious engagement (Dragadze, 1993) are often ignored by scientists. Moreover, these studies do not reveal styles of religiosity, which can vary among distinct Islamic traditions in one society. In order to be able to assess the impact of religion on society, the starting point shall be an understanding of the local meanings of the term “religious person.” In many statistical projects multidimensional models of religiosity, which have been developed since the 1960s, contain a set of indicators intended to measure the state and condition of religiosity in society (Swatos, 1999).2 In my field research, I have not used any particular model of religiosity, but treated it as a multi-dimensional concept. In gathering empirical data, I tried to always be aware of the need to pay attention to various aspects of religious expressions, such as religious behavior (practices, rituals, attitudes towards religious requirements) and religious awareness (religious knowledge, ideas, symbols and their understandings). All those elements create a larger and more nuanced picture of religion and its impact on society.

  The Impact of Pluralism

  Contemporary pluralism means that far more religious worldviews are in immediate competition with each other than has ever been the case in the past (Swatos, Christiano, 1999, p. 221).

  The above quotation, referring to the theoretical propositions of Stark and Bainbridge, underlines the basic feature of contemporary pluralism. Religions and religious traditions find themselves in a more competing global environment than ever. The scope of religious pluralism is without precedence. Today not only a cosmopolitan urban educated person, but also someone living in a remote religiously homogeneous village, is faced with challenges of “otherness.”

  In some cases, an encounter with an alternative religious worldview is indirect; public debates in mass media on the threat other faiths allegedly bring raise the public awareness of pluralism. Islamophobia, in the era of migrant and refugee crisis in some European countries, exists to a large extent due to media coverage and radical discourses. Many people who have never met a Muslim person have deep prejudices against Islam. The discourses presented in media on the radicalization of Muslims, on jihadi groups and suicide bombers, as well as on the extreme cases of implementing the Sharia have direct influence on popular attitudes towards the Islamic religion. Similarly, Anti-Semitism can appear in societies which do not have Jewish communities. As Introvigne has argued, “perceived pluralism is at least as important as real pluralism” (2005, p. 2). In Italy a dramatic rise in Muslim immigration in the 1980s and 1990s, accompanied by news about radical Islamism, triggered a lot of discussion on pluralism. Although the majority of Italian citizens are Catholics, the “theoretical” or “perceived” pluralism, as the researchers hypothesize, can account for the growth in religious attendance.

  The unprecedented coexistence or clash of religious interpretations leads us to the question that inspired this study: What does the situation of pluralism change in the religious field? This issue raises the next questions on the mechanism of competition. Before we move to our major hypothesis, which originated in the field of market approach, let us review
some other inspiring propositions concerning the impact of pluralism on religion that have also been tested on the basis of field work in Azerbaijan.

  First of all, when one dominant religious system is challenged by alternative (religious or secular) worldviews, the problem of plausibility (believability) emerges. It is focused around the question of why and in what way people view their beliefs, practices and rituals as true. More specifically, how can they uphold such convictions under the situation of a multitude of other allegedly “real” or “true” religious or non-religious traditions. In the past, religious beliefs belonged to wider cultural systems, and people took for granted their ideas about the spiritual sphere, and rarely questioned the prevailing ideology. Nowadays, a wide array of cults, denominations, and movements propose religious worldviews with their own distinct truth claims. The more varied ideologies there are, the less plausible each seems. Secular ideologies provide new explanations which can undermine or are in opposition to the truth of the “church.” In the past, and still at present in many parts of the world, competing worldviews were eliminated, for example in military struggles or actions. During the Middle Ages the institution of Inquisition was used by the Catholic church to combat heresies. In some cases, as in Hinduism, some elements of competing definitions and explanations were absorbed by dominant religions (Berger, 1967).

  Pluralism affects both religious organizations and believers. Religions compete and evolve. When the state is not sponsoring or protecting any particular religion, it must act according to market rules. Religious doctrines, services, ideas, symbols and other elements change to meet the requirements of believers and to keep attractiveness. For the institutional actors, pluralism means a more challenging environment in which they have to find effective strategies to survive and flourish. As Peter L. Berger (1967) has argued, religious institutions can respond in one of two ways: either adapt themselves to new requirements or reject the pluralistic situation. Adaptation can be realized on at least two paths. The first is through reduction of the ideological content and is expressed in the secularization of religious tradition. The second path leads through more constructive steps and results in discovering new ideas and meanings in the richness of religious sources and tradition. Rejecting pluralism, which is another type of strategy, implies choosing a defensive position. In theological concepts this kind of response is typical of neo-orthodox religious trends (ibidem). There is also a middle way; religious firms can at the same time emphasize the need for isolation and pragmatically accept some of the new conditions.