Islam in Central Asia - Essay Example

Final Paper on Islam in Central Asia Part Discuss the Qrighiz legend of origin involving the figure of Mansur al-Hallaj Manur al-Hallaj was bornin Fars area of Ancient Persia. Mansur al-Hallaj was an innovative writer and teacher of Sufism. He was famous for his writing, poetry, allegation of deviation and also for his implementation during that era, having significant impression on the Qrighiz legend of origin. Manur al-Hallaj was also much appreciated as a projecting character and was well-known for his axiom that ‘I am the truth’, defining God and His connection with followers of Islam in a new way. As a result, he was argued to be disorganized by traditional Muslims for a religion right (Rustom, 2013). Mansur al-Hallaj was different from other Suffis who followed traditional perceptions that further had its impressions in the literature. For instance, Suffis in the era believed that sharing mysticism with the masses was inappropriate. However, Al-Hallaj followed a rebellious path that further had its impression on the Qrighiz legend of origin. Illustration of such a fact can be obtained from his writing in Kitab-Al-Tawasin, emphasizing dialogues of Satan and God (Lenz-Raymann, 2014). Contextually, the method used by Al-Hallaj in his writing was known as the ‘universal mystical introspection’, which later gave birth to a new dimension of Sufi culture in Qrighiz. He was also rebellious for his belief that practices in contradiction to the traditional religious principles indicate the individual’s thirst for greater truth rather than his challenging or opposing attitude to the beliefs. In his writings, rather than expanding on the traditional religious beliefs, Al-Hallaj emphasized humanity. Mansur al-Hallaj believed in the unity of man with the Divine. He travelled to various places to preach his writings, which majorly included Tostar, Baghdad, Mecca and Turkestan among others that further gave rise to the Qrighiz legend of origin. As argued by Shepard (2009), the writings of Mansur-al-Hallaj were important for Sufi culture, as it defined a new dimension of Islam. His life was measured widely by the French Scholars of Islam. According to the supporters of Al-Hallaj, the writer was a strong believer in unity of God and man and withdrew from following the defined path of followership towards divinity. It was also owing to these aspects that many Protestants following the traditional preaching of Islam disagreed with Al-Hallaj and demanded legal actions against him. He was subsequently sued for being a strict monotheist (Karagiannis, 2009). Part 2: Religions profile of the madhhab that dominated Central Asia through most of the Islamic era The term ‘madhhab’, in general, refers to the dogmatic school of thoughts followed in Islam. There are commonly four schools of thought practiced in Islam, especially within Central Asia. These madhhabs are referred as the Hanifa Madhhab founded by Abu Hanafi, Maliki Madhhab by Malik ibn Anas, Shafi’i Madhhab by Ash-Safi’i and Hanabali Madhhab by Ahmad ibn Hanbal. While these four madhhabs find their existence in modern Central Asia as well, all these schools of thoughts were propagated in the Islamic era within Central Asia. Among the four most prominent madhhabs, Hanafi school of thought or the Hanafi Madhhab is often argued as the most influential one that dominated the principles and believers of Islam in the Islamic era. This particular school of thought was most dominant owing to its abidance and inclusion of traditional and customary laws of Islam, remaining much tolerant to the pre-Islamic customs and norms. Critically reviewing the aspect, it can thus be argued as a major cause as to why the school was dominant in the Islamic era, having minimum difference with the customary way of Islamism and thereby, restricting its dogmatic impression on the followers (Lenz-Raymann, 2014). However, when relating this particular school of thought with the prudence of Muslim umma in the Islamic era within Central Asia, a degree of conflict can be witnessed within the then leaders of the dynasty wherein Abu Hanafi realized the mal-intentions of the political decision-makers in the Islamic era. In subsequence, the leadership trend in diversified into two paradigms, one being the riyashah and the other as the sultanah. However, as the school of thought preached for humanity and transparency in the government, Abu Hanafi received many appraisals from the common people and thereby, could remain dominant in the era in Central Asia (Al-Islam.org, n.d.). Part 3: Discuss the Taymīya’s views about the conversion of Ghāzan Khān Taymiya was a scholar, philosopher as well as a logician of Sunni Islamic domain. As he survived throughout the declining phase of Mongols, he had a significant role as an interpreter to Ghazan Khan’s leadership and religious followership, who was the seventh emperor of the Mongol dynasty. The opinions of Taymiya on Ghazan Khan, is deemed as much valued particularly as he emphasized the polytheistic as well as the unitarian principles of Sabians in the then period. It is in this context that vast differences can be observed amid the views of Taymiyyah and the leadership approaches of Ghazan Khan. Records show than Ghazan Khan, although claim Islam by the 1295 CE, he was still found to be devoted to Mongol Shamanism. Subsequently, he continued worshiping the Mongol deity, Tengri, which indicated to his non-compliance to the customary Islamic principles of the era. This particular action taken by Ghazan Khan triggered many conflicts amid the Sunni followers, which can be addressed through the views of Taymiyyah. However, unlike many other protestants, Taymiyyah remains agreeable and sympathetic to Ghazan Khan’s mutiny towards Islam, as he also believed in the oneness of God, irrespective of religious divisions of Mongolism, Islamism or Christianity. With respect to Taymiyyah’s views for Ghazan Khan’s abidance towards Islamism, the scholar can be observed as appraising the emperor for his truthfulness towards his deities, both Allah and Tengri. In the words of Taymiyyah, “And that is because the belief (i’tiqad) of those Tartars in Genghis Khan was great indeed and they used to believe that he was the son of Allah similar to what the Christians believe regarding the Messiah” (Salafi Manhaj, 2014). Part 4 Assumptions about the origin of the shrines-centered religious practice Shrines religious practice is also described as action-centered religion. Shrine worshiping has been an ancient tradition in the history of Islam. To be noted in this regard, records reveal that rulers of the Islamic era mostly focused on drawing their inspirations from social memory, popular myths and devotional practices that defined Muslim kingship, rather than following scriptural Islam. This trend further gave rise to shrine worshiping in Islam, giving birth to a new paradigm, i.e. the Shrine-centered Sufism. This particular culture further defined the social life of the then Islamic society to a great extent (Moin, 2013). Assumptions about the relationship between Shrine-centered religious practice and normative Islam To be specific, Shrine centered religious refers to the practice which defined the consensus of Muslims in following the verses of other religions that focused on such ethnographic approaches. To be mentioned in this regard, the knowledge of normative Islam depends on the Islamic norms deeply, which influenced the societies of the then Islamic era as well as Muslims. It is in this context that during the Islamic era, the set of actions as well as knowledge were getting accepted by the Muslims within the world of Islam giving emphasis to the rising fundamentalism (Tyson, 1997). However, the trend of shrine worshiping has always remained complex when imbibed in the ideologies of normative Islam, which in turn raised many conflicts within the social and the political domains of the then Islamic society. It was in this context that people, to believe in shrines, were much influenced by the then implemented governmental rules and restrictions, imposed on the visit to shrines and thereby, follow the path of religious which they deemed to be rationale (Tyson, 1997). Assumptions about the people who go to Shrines A shrine is referred to a structure, which is worshipped with the main objective to confine one’s interests and motives to the principles of Islam. The assumptions about people who go to shrine are often noted as being ideal possessing a number of characteristics who find the normative approach of Islamic norms to be stronger when constructed with the inclusion of ethnographic beliefs of the religion. The assumptions also indicate that people who go to shrines have to be realistic and should possess the knowledge of the various religion concepts (Tyson, 1997). As argued in Tyson (1997: 21), people worshiping shrines believed it to be “a habitual and important undertaking, critical to both their supernatural and physical well-being”. Strategy for interpreting the “real” significance of Shrines The strategy to interpret the real significance of shrines mainly emphasizes the expansion of the domain of Islam, with the help of which, the thinking of people can be expanded at a larger circle. People can also focus on unleashing the thinking of others, who can understand their responsibilities and perform accordingly. Expansion of thinking is also a strategy to effectively interpret the significance of shrines that can make the shrine well develop as well as idealistic. Through this strategy, the perceptions of the Muslims can be well developed, as they can apply their thinking into their work as well as work places (Tyson, 1997). References Al-Islam.org, (n.d.). Chapter 10: The Ummah Fractures. Retrieved from http://www.al-islam.org/printpdf/book/export/html/28972 Karagiannis, E. (2009). Political Islam in Central Asia: The challenge of Hizb Ut-Tahrir. New York: Routledge. Lenz-Raymann, K. (2014). Securitization of Islam: A Vicious Circle: Counter-Terrorism and Freedom of Religion in Central Asia. Wetzlar: Transcript Verlag. Moin, A. A. (2013). The millennial sovereign: Sacred kingship and sainthood in Islam. New York: Columbia University Press. Rustom, M. (2013). Rumi’s Metaphysics of the Heart. Muhammadan Press, 69-79. Salafi Manhaj, (2014). Did modern Salafi scholars invent the notion of ‘Ishtihlal’ while it was not mentioned by scholars of the past? A critique of Yasir Qadhi’s Theory. Eemaan and Kufr Series, 17. Shepard, W. E. (2009). Introducing Islam. New York: Routledge. Tyson, D. (1997). Shrine Pilgrimage in Turkmenistan as a Means to Understand Islam among the Turkmen. Central Asia Monitor, 1, 15-32. Read More