A Kazakh Muftiate or the Orenburg Muslim Spiritual Assembly: The Shape of Public Opinion in the Expanses of the Empire (Second Half of the Nineteenth–Beginning of the Twentieth Century)

Abstract

The article examines how the issue of a muftiate on the Kazakh Steppe was connected to imperial transformations and the Kazakhs’ ability to adapt to these changes. It discusses why local communities did not develop a uniform or consolidated position on their religious administration.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. OMSA was formed in 1788 by order of Catherine II. It supervised Islamic institutions (mosques, madrasas, and waqfs) in the Volga-Ural region, European Russia, and Siberia and on the Kazakh Steppe. See D.D. Azamatov, Orenburgskoe magometanskoe dukhovnoe sobranie v kontse XVIII-XIX vv. (Ufa, 1999).

^2. Materialy po istorii politicheskogo stroia Kazakhstana, vol. 1 (Alma Ata, 1960), pp. 339–40.

^3. R.D. Crews, For Prophet and Tsar: Islam and Empire in Russia and Central Asia (Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England, 2006), p. 20.

^4. P. Sartori, Vision of Justice. Shari’a and Cultural Change in Russian Central Asia (Leiden, 2016), pp. 219–20.

^5. S.M. Iskhakov, Pervaia russkaia revoliutsiia i musul’mane Rossiiskoi imperii (Moscow, 2007), p. 140.

^6. D.M. Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v rossiiskom parlamente. 1906-1916 (Kazan, 2005). pp. 387–8. In contrast, S.M. Iskhakov believes that most petitions contained general demands. However, his conclusions are based only on information from the newspapers Terdzheman and Kaspii. The researcher did not perform a deeper analysis of diverse Tatar, Kazakh, and Central Asian periodicals. More extensive archive materials were not used for comparison. See Iskhakov, Pervaia russkaia revoliutsiia i musul’mane Rossiiskoi imperii, pp. 133–40.

^7. D.M. Usmanova, Musul’manskaia fraktsiia i problemy “svobody sovesti” v Gosudarstvennoi dume Rossii (1906-1917) (Kazan, 1999), pp. 110–16.

^8. P.W. Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths. Toleration and the Fate of Religious Freedom in Imperial Russia (Oxford, 2014), pp. 147–8.

^9. Ukaz of December 12, 1904, “O prednachertaniiakh k usovershenstvovaniiu gosudarstvennogo poriadka” and Ukaz of April 17, 1905, “Ob ukreplenii nachal veroterpimosti.” See I.K. Zagidullin, Tatarskoe natsional’noe dvizhenie v 1860-1905 gg. (Kazan, 2014), pp. 400–16.

^10. For information about such trends, see Iskhakov, Pervaia russkaia revoliutsiia i musul’mane Rossiiskoi imperii, pp. 133–6; D.M. Usmanova, Musul’manskie predstaviteli v rossiiskom parlamente, pp. 384–97.

^11. N. Naganawa, “Designs for Dar al-Islam: Religious Freedom and the Emergence of a Muslim Public Sphere, 1905–1916,” in Religious Freedom in Modern Russia, ed. Randall A. Poole and Paul W. Werth (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2018), p. 161.

^12. About the limitations of this approach when applied to the Kazakh Steppe see below.

^13. Istoriia Kazakhstana (s drevneishikh vremen do nashikh dnei): v 5 tomakh, vol. 3 (Almaty, 2000), p. 419.

^14. To promote the new provision, special commissions were formed in each uezd. A report of one of these commissions (operating in the newly formed Iletskii uezd in the Ural oblast—P.Sh.) communicated that “four auls adopted the new provision knowingly and without any distrust, but the formation of a fifth aul was met with the Kirgiz’ determined resistance to the new provision. This resistance was not from the residents of this aul, but rather from several mullahs and sultans who appeared there with an armed gang.” See Rossiiskii Gosudarstvennyi archiv (RGIA). F.1291. Op.82. D.5a. L.322ob.

^15. See for further details Istoriia Kazakhstana (s drevneishikh vremen do nashikh dnei), pp. 421–2.

^16. Thus, for example, one reason for the Kazakh unrest in the Ural oblast was the discontent of influential people who descended from sultans and lost their former authority under the new rules. See RGIA. F.1291. Op.82. D.5a. L.322ob.

^17. Ibid., L.323.

^18. RGIA. F.821. Op.8. D.602. L.172.

^19. Crews, For Prophet and Tsar, pp. 236–8.

^20. Judith Beyer draws attention to this in her study of the institution of the aqsaqal in modern Kyrgyzstan. See J. Beyer. The Force of Custom: Law and the Ordering of Everyday life in Kyrgyzstan (Pittsburg, 2016), pp. 83–6.

^21. See Ibid., 160–1.

^22. It is not surprising, therefore, that Kazakh sources trace the influence of OMSA on a fragmented basis. See Qurban-Ali Khalidi. Tawarikhi khamsa-yi shark (Kazan, 1910); S. Ghilmani, Zamanmyzda bolghan ghŭlamalardyň tarikhtary, vol. 1. (Biographies of the Islamic Scholars of our Time, vol. 1), Zhauapty shygharushylar: A.K. Muminov and A.J. Frank. (Almaty, 2013).

^23. Ghilmani. Zamanmyzda bolghan ghŭlamalardyň tarikhtary, pp. 431–3.

^24. P.W. Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths, p. 213.

^25. Ibid., p. 214; Iskhakov, Pervaia russkaia revoliutsiia i musul’mane Rossiiskoi imperii, pp. 125–39.

^26. See J. Meyer, Turks across Empire: Marketing Muslim Identity in the Russian-Ottoman Borderlands, 1856-1914 (Oxford, 2014), p. 131.

^27. Perhaps with the exception of the Karkaralinsk petition of 1905. It was signed by 14,500 people, including well-known members of the Kazakh intelligentsia, and it covers a wide range of questions. With respect to religion, the petition demanded that Kazakhs be returned to the control of OMSA. See S. Özbekuly and N. Baigelova, Qarqaraly petitsiiasy zhäne Qazaqstan Konstitutsionalizmining damuy (Almaty, 2007).

^28. RGIA. F.821. Op.10. D.29. L.286b–287a.

^29. Ibid.

^30. In 1902, Kazakhs from Kokchetavskii uezd submitted an application requesting all mullahs in the volost be placed under Nauan Khazrat and that his position be equated to that of a metropolitan in the Russian Orthodox Church. The image of Nauan Khazrat as a defender of Sharia and Islam was widely reflected in Kazakh poetry. In particular, well-known poet (aqyn) and dombra (kuishi) player Akan-sere Koramsauly, a relative of the imam of Kokchetav, dedicated a number of works to Khazrat. See for further details S. Ghylmani, Zamanmyzda bolghan ghulamalardyng ghumyr tarikhtary, vol. 1. (Biographies of the Islamic Scholars of our Time, vol. 1), Zhauapty shygharushylar: A.K. Muminov and J. Frank (Almaty, 2013), pp. 61–71; Q. A’buev, Nauan Khaziret. Ko’kshe arystary (Astana, 2001), pp. 24–39; TsGA RK. F.369. Op.1. D.3822. L.16ob.; Aqan seri Qoramsauly, “Kökshetauda Nauan molda men Khamidolla noghai moldasy baqas bol- ghanda, Khamidollagha Aqan serining aitqany,,” in Aqan seri Qoramsauly, Ükili Ybyrai Sandybaiuly, Baluan Sholaq Baimyrzauly. Shygharmalary (Almaty, 2014), pp. 97–9.

^31. Ü. Subkhanberdina, Qazaq khalqynyng atamuralary: Mazmundalghan bibliografiialyq körsetkish (Almaty, 1999), p. 80.

^32. On the whole, imperial projects to codify Kazakh customary law were a failure. See P. Sartori and P. Shablei, “Sud’ba imperskikh kodifikatsionnykh proektov: Adat i shariat v Kazakhskoi stepi,” Ab Imperio, 2015, No. 2.

^33. Natsional’nyi arkhiv Respubliki Tatarstan (NA RT). F.1370. Op.2. D.22. L.1ob.

^34. See P. Sartori and P. Shablei, Eksperimenty imperii: Adat, shariat i proizvodstvo znanii v Kazakhskoi stepi (Moscow, 2019).

^35. P. Sartori, Vision of Justice. Shari’a and Cultural Change in Russian Central Asia (Leiden, 2016), p. 19.

^36. NA RT. F.1370. Op.2. D.22. L.3.

^37. “Vsepoddaneishii doklad Stepnogo general-gubernatora [Sukhotina] o polozhenii islama v Stepnom krae [April 2, 1905],” RGIA. F.821. Op.10. D.23. L.32ob.

^38. At the same time that islamophobia flared up in some regions, in others, quite peaceful relations developed between Muslims and imperial functionaries. Thus, Semipalatinsk Military Governor V.S. Tseklinskii was even a patron of the well-known Kazakh poet Abai Qunanbaiuly. See for more detail the funds of the F.M. Dostoyevsky Memorial House Museum in Semei.

^39. Islam v Rossiiskoi imperii: sbornik zakonodatel’nykh aktov, opisanii, statistiki (Moscow, 2001), 172–3.

^40. Ibid., p. 206. See also Naganawa, “Designs for Dar al-Islam: Religious Freedom and the Emergence of a Muslim Public Sphere, 1905–1916,” p. 176.

^41. See Osoboe soveshchanie po musil’manskim delam 1914 goda: Zhurnaly, sost., avt. predisl., prim. i sokr. I.K. Zagidullin (Kazan, 2011), pp. 113–5.

^42. P.W. Werth, The Tsar’s Foreign Faiths, p. 219.

^43. Ibid., pp. 218–9.

^44. Kazakhs were also published on the pages of Tatar newspapers and journals. As N. Naganawa showed, some Tatar periodicals (for example, the influential newspaper Vakyt) used Kazakh voices to reinforce their perspective on OMSA. Taking liberal positions, the newspaper did not oppose the movement of Muslims closer to the Russian Empire, including as a result of affection for a general religious administration. See Naganawa, “Designs for Dar al-Islam: Religious Freedom and the Emergence of a Muslim Public Sphere, 1905–1916,” p. 177.

^45. See M. Bigiev, “Dini vä ijtimagyi mäsälälär ,” Shura, 1914, vol. 20–21, 23–24; Bilgesez avtor, “Sobranieny islakh mäsäläse ,” Din vä mägyishät , 1916, No. 12, pp. 152–3; Kh. Mäkhmutov, “Sobranie vä “Mäg”lumat”,” Mäg”lumat, 1908, No. 8, p.149.

^46. M. Qoigeldiev, Alash qozghalasy, Birinshi tom (Almaty, 2008), pp. 181–96.

^47. Khasan Shaiakhmetovich Galiev (1878–1940) was a literary critic and educator. He taught in Orenburg and Kazan. He was the publisher and editor of the journal Mogallim. http://www.millattashlar.ru/index.php (last accessed: November 22, 2019).

^48. Kh. Gali, “Kazak”ta mo’ftilek ma’s’a’la’se,” Shura, 1913, No. 9, p. 272.

^49. In the spirit of the then popular lexicon about the cultural role of the Tatar people in the Kazakh Steppe.

^50. Ibid., pp. 272–4.

^51. Mukhammedsabir Mukhammedzhanovich Khasanov (1866–1924) was a mullah and mudarris. He was a member of the second convocation of the State Duma from the Ufa Governorate. See Musul’manskie deputaty gosudarstvennoi dumy Rossii 1906 – 1917 godov. Sbornik dokumentov i materialov (Ufa, 1998), pp. 308–9.

^52. M. Khäsäni, “Qazaqlarda möftilek,” Shura, 1913, No. 11, pp. 333–5.

^53. “Qazaqlargha möftilek birü turynda sorau häm zhavap,” Shura, 1914, No. 9, p. 280.

^54. See R. Fakhreddin, Dini vä ijtimagyi mäsälälär (Kazan, 2001), p. 69.

^55. About this in the next section of the article.

^56. “Qazaqlargha möftilek birü.” See also Naganawa, “Designs for Dar al-Islam: Religious Freedom and the Emergence of a Muslim Public Sphere, 1905–1916,” p. 177.

^57. See similar trends in Russian Turkestan: B. Babadzhanov and P. Sartori, “U istokov sovetskogo diskursa o “khoroshem islame” v Tsentral’noi Azii,” Ab Imperio, 2018, No. 3, pp. 219–55.

^58. See R. Fakhreddin. Dini vä ijtimagyi mäsälälär, p. 69.

^59. J. Habermas, Mezhdu naturalizmom i religiei. Filosofskie stat’i (Moscow, 2011), pp. 15–25.

^60. See about these trends in A. Khalid, The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism in Central Asia (Berkeley, 1998), p. 104.

^61. [A.M.], “Mu’ftilik ma’selesi,” Ayqap, 1914, No. 1, p. 7.

^62. “Qazaqta mu’ftilik ma’selesi,” Ayqap, 1914, No. 12, pp. 192–4.

^63. Tomohiko Uyama, “Vzgliady kazakhskoi intelligentsii na sud biev, russkii sud i shariat (konets XIX – nachalo XX vv.)” in Drevnii mir prava kazakhov. Materialy, dokumenty, issledovaniia v desiati tomakh, vol. 10 (Almaty, 2009), pp. 296–301.

^64. Uyama, “Vzgliady kazakhskoi intelligentsii na sud biev, russkii sud i shariat,” p. 299.

^65. For example, the religious administration of the Inner (Bukey) Kazakh Horde. After the death of Khan Dzhangir in 1845, management of the territory between the Ural and Volga rivers was transferred to a temporary council headed by a Russian bureaucrat. From the administrative point of view, the region became part of the Astrakhan Governorate General. From this time on, the Inner Horde was placed under OMSA. See P. Shablei, “Fetvy akhuna Gumara Karasha: muftiiat i pravovye stolknoveniia vo Vnutrennei kazakhskoi orde v nachale XX veka,” Islamology, 2017, No. 2, p. 16. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Qazaq raised the question of whether the Bukey Horde should remain under administration of OMSA or seek to create its own muftiate. See “Türik balasy. Bökeilikterding möftilikke qaluy,” Qazaq, 1913, nos. 17, 19.

^66. Thus, whereas the circulation of Ayqap reached 1000, Qazaq published up to 8000 copies. Before its closure, this newspaper had its own print shop and a large stock of paper. See Istoriia Kazakhstana (s drevneishikh vremen do nashikh dnei), pp. 701, 704.

^67. “Qazhi Arsylanghali molla Khasen ughly. Ghadet emes, sharighat kerek!” Qazaq, 1914, No. 64, p. 4.

^68. TsGA RK. F.64. Op.1. D. 6003.

^69. True, only two of six articles spoke about Kazakhs. The remainder were devoted to the history of OMSA, government policy with respect to Islam and an increase in the status of imams, the problem of exams in the muftiate, and other questions. See Kh. Makhmud, “Dukhovnoe sobranie,” Qazaq, 1914, nos. 57–61, 64.

^70. Kh. Makhmud, “Dukhovnoe sobranie,” Qazaq, 1914, No. 57, pp. 3–4.

^71. Ibid.

^72. The newspaper’s chief editor, Akhmet Baitursynov, was under police surveillance. The second in command on the editorial staff, Myrzhakyp Dulatov, was arrested in 1911 because of his published materials connected to the Kazakh national awakening. See Istoriia Kazakhstana (s drevneishikh vremen do nashikh dnei), pp. 710–11.

^73. “Möftilik mäselesi häm tatar matbugaty,” Qazaq, 1915, No. 137, p. 4; “Möftilik mäselesi,” Qazaq, 1915, No. 139, p. 5.

^74. “Qazaq häm türli mäseleler,” Qazaq, 1914, No. 59, pp. 1–2.