Schielke 2010

W O I K G
papers
Kirchweg 33, D-14129 Berlin
Telefon: 030-80307-0
Fax: 030-80307-210
Internet: www.zmo.de
E-Mail: zmo@rz.hu-berlin.de
Second thoughts about the anthropoIogy oI sIam, or
how to make sense oI grand schemes In everyday IIIe
!"#$%& !()&*%+*, -*./0$# 123*0.*0 40&*./

567/0"(/
A growIng body oI anthropoIogIcaI research has
turned to study sIam as a dIscursIve tradItIon that
InIorms the attempts oI MusIIms to IIve pIous and
moraI IIves, the aects and emotIons they cuItIva-
te and the chaIIenges they pose to a IIberaI secuIar
IdeoIogy. WhIIe thIs turn has provIded dIrectIon Ior
a number oI InnovatIve studIes, It appears to stop
short oI some key questIons regardIng everyday re-
IIgIous and moraI practIce, notabIy the ambIvaIence,
the InconsIstencIes and the openness oI peopIes
IIves that never !t Into the Iramework oI a sIngIe tra-
dItIon. n short, there Is too much sIam In the anth-
ropoIogy oI sIam. To !nd ways to account Ior both
the ambIvaIence oI peopIes everyday IIves and the
oIten perIectIonIst IdeaIs oI good IIIe, socIety and
seII they artIcuIate, argue that we may have to taIk
a IIttIe Iess about tradItIons, dIscourses and powers
and a IIttIe more about the exIstentIaI and pragmatIc
sensIbIIItIes oI IIvIng a IIIe In a compIex and oIten
troubIIng worId. y broadenIng our Iocus to IncIude
the concerns, practIce and experIence oI everyday
IIIe In Its varIous moments and dIrectIons, we may
eventuaIIy aIso be better abIe to make sense oI the
sIgnI!cance oI a grand scheme IIke sIam In It.
8*9:2037
anthropoIogy, sIam, dIscursIve tradItIon, secuIa-
rIsm, everyday IIIe
;./023$(/&2.
<
sIam has become a centraI topIc Ior the anthropo-
IogIcaI (and other) study oI peopIe, socIetIes, tradI-
tIons and concepts that In one way or another can
be caIIed MusIIm. StudIes oI poIItIcaI movements,
educatIon, moraIIty, mIgratIon and dIaspora and
many other Issues have become IncreasIngIy em-
bedded In a paradIgm oI sIamIc-ness, wIth pubII-
catIon tItIes over and agaIn reIerrIng to The roIe
oI sIam In..., MusIIms In...,sIam and... etc.
GIven the Indeed great sIgnI!cance oI sIam In the
IIves oI a great number oI peopIe around the worId
these days, thIs Is not entIreIy past the poInt. We
are weII advIsed to take reIIgIon serIousIy and to
avoId the pItIaIIs InvoIved In reducIng reIIgIous
pursuIts to economIcaI or poIItIcaI ones (Starrett
1998, Iambek 2000, Mahmood 2005). There Is a
probIem oI Iocus, however. ThIs paper has grown
out oI a sense that the ways some In"uentIaI recent
< ThIs workIng paper Is a sIIghtIy modI!ed versIon oI a
paper that was presented to the workshop What makes a
good MusIIm? CompIexItIes oI moraI practIce and subjectIv-
Ity In the age oI gIobaI sIam at the IeIsInkI CoIIegIum Ior
Advanced StudIes In IeIsInkI, IInIand on 16 AprII 2010, and
the workshop oI the nternatIonaIIsatIon etwork Con!gu-
ratIons oI MusIIm TradItIons In uropean IubIIc Spheres at
the Zentrum Moderner OrIent, erIIn on 25 june 2010. am
especIaIIy Indebted to IhIIIpp IeIchmuth, Knut Graw, oro-
thea SchuIz, SaIwa smaII, MIchaeI Ieener, Armando SaI-
vatore, adIa IadII, AIexandre CaeIro, AnneIIes Moors and
SIndre angstad Ior theIr crItIcaI and heIpIuI comments.
am aIso Indebted to the IG coIIaboratIve research centre
295 (CuIturaI and IInguIstIc Contacts) at the !nIversIty oI
MaInz, the research project What makes a good MusIIm.
Contested !eIds oI reIIgIous normatIvIty In the age oI gIobaI
sIam Iunded by the Academy oI IInIand at the !nIversIty
oI joensuu, the nternatIonaI nstItute Ior the Study oI sIam
In the Modern WorId (SM) and Iast but not Ieast the ZMO,
whIch have at dIerent tImes between 2006 and 2010 sup-
ported the research on whIch thIs paper Is based.
ZMO 2010
o. 2, 2010
2 ZMO WorkIng Iapers 2 S. SchIeIke Second thoughts about the anthropoIogy oI sIam 2010
to have one answer to the questIon about what s-
Iam Is? AIter aII, It can be rather dIIIerent thIngs
dependIng on the questIons we ask. ThIs Is not to
joIn the argument that there are many sIams.
What mean Is that sIam, IIke any major IaIth,
Is not sImpIy somethIng - It Is a part oI peopIes
IIves, thoughts, acts, socIetIes, hIstorIes and more.
ConsequentIy, It can be many dIIIerent thIngs - a
moraI IdIom, a practIce oI seII-care, a dIscursIve
tradItIon, an aesthetIc sensIbIIIty, a poIItIcaI Ideo-
Iogy, a mystIcaI quest, a source oI hope, a cause oI
anxIety, an IdentIty, an enemy - you name It. The
second part oI an expIanatIon, then, Is that there
Is too much sIam In the sense that the anthropo-
Iogy oI sIam has a preoccupatIon wIth deIInIng Its
IIeId oI study, a preoccupatIon that may not be very
heIp-IuI Ior understandIng the sIgnIIIcance oI s-
Iam as a part oI peopIes IIves.
These two pecuIIarItIes are both reIated to the
way sIam In the anthropoIogy oI sIam has be-
come more than a just a subject matter. The prIvI-
IegIng oI sIam as the key to the IIves oI peopIe oI
MusIIm IaIth aIIows sIam to emerge as a cIass oI
Its own, a paradIgm oI study that Is attractIve and
accessIbIe Ior a growIng body oI graduate courses,
Ih theses, IundIng appIIcatIons and research pa-
pers. The anthropoIogy oI sIam appears to have
become more than sImpIy a sub-IIeId oI the anthro-
poIogy oI reIIgIon that has Its Iocus on sIam. The
anthropoIogy oI sIam Is a project concerned wIth
methodoIogIcaI debates oI Its own, guIded by a
sense about sIam not onIy beIng a reIIgIon dIIIe-
rent Irom, say, IInduIsm, but a dIIIerent kInd oI an
Issue aItogether, one that requIres a dIscIpIInary
approach oI Its own.
n thIs process, two key topIcs have emerged
as guIdIng paradIgms oI much oI the recent an-
thropoIogIcaI study oI sIam. the concept oI sIam
as a dIscursIve tradItIon, and a Iocus on the cuItI-
vatIon oI moraI aIIect grounded In that tradItIon.
These topIcs have provIded dIrectIon Ior a num-
ber oI InnovatIve studIes that oIten share a Iocus
on MusIIms who conscIousIy and consIstentIy aIm
to be pIous, moraI and dIscIpIIned, theIr debates
about how to do so, the chaIIenges they Iace and
the chaIIenges they pose to a IIberaI secuIar Ideo-
Iogy oI subjectIvIty and normatIvIty. Some oI thIs
research Is very good and has provIded sIgnIIIcant
progress Ior our theoretIcaI understandIng oI em-
bodIment, power and IdeoIogy. The probIem wIth
thIs IIne oI studIes, however, Is that they are some-
what out oI baIance. There Is a certaIn tendency to
project sIam as a perIectIonIst ethIcaI project oI
seII-dIscIpIIne, at the cost oI the majorIty oI Mus-
IIms who - IIke most oI humankInd - are sometI-
mes but not aIways pIous and who IoIIow varIous
moraI aIms and at tImes ImmoraI ones. The IdeaIs
and aspIratIons peopIe express and the everyday
IIves they IIve are characterIsed by compIexIty,
ambIguIty, reIIectIvIty, openness, IrustratIon and
anthropoIogIcaI research has taken sIam as the
ArchImedean poInt to study the IIves oI peopIe who
In one way or another adhere to the message oI Mu-
hammad prIvIIeges a conceptuaI engagement wIth
the sIamIc-ness oI Its subjects In a way that needs
to be baIanced. To put It more provocatIveIy, there
Is too much sIam In the anthropoIogy oI sIam.
ThIs requIres some expIanatIon. Too much sIam
In what respect? snt the anthropoIogy oI sIam,
aIter aII, about sIam? thInk that thIs seemIngIy
straIghtIorward assumptIon may actuaIIy be part
oI the probIem. To expIaIn what mean, wIII try
to brIeIIy poInt out two pecuIIarItIes that characte-
rIse many anthropoIogIes oI sIam.
IIrst, ethnographIes about the reIIgIous IIves oI
MusIIms oIten prIvIIege peopIe who conscIousIy
present themseIves as pIous, commItted MusIIms
and who partIcIpate In the actIvItIes oI reIIgIous
groups and organIsatIons - In other words, peopIe
who share a sense oI actIvIst commItment. ThIs Is
not to say that It Is not Important to Iook at de-
dIcated actIvIsts. t certaInIy Is. ut most peopIe
are not dedIcated actIvIsts. IocussIng on the very
pIous In moments when they are beIng very pIous
(In mosque study groups, Ior exampIe) rIsks takIng
those moments when peopIe taIk about reIIgIon as
reIIgIous persons (at dIIIerent tImes, they can taIk
about very dIIIerent thIngs and enact rather dIIIe-
rent sIdes oI theIr personaIIty) as the paradIgmatIc
ones, and thus unwIttIngIy reproducIng the partI-
cuIar IdeoIogIcaI aspIratIon oI sIamIst and sIamIc
revIvaIIst movements. the prIvIIegIng oI sIam as
the supreme guIdeIIne oI aII IIeIds oI IIIe.
t Is evIdent that In many pIaces, deIInIteIy so In
gypt where have conducted my IIeIdwork, adhe-
rence to sIam reaIIy Is very Important Ior peopIe,
and has become more so In the past coupIe oI de-
cades. ThIs Is somethIng that needs to be recog-
nIsed and accounted Ior. ut In many ethnogra-
phIes oI MusIIms IIves there has emerged a more
Iar-reachIng way to a prIorI prIvIIege the MusIIm-
ness oI the peopIe InvoIved and the sIamIc-ness
oI the projects they pursue. ThIs, then, Is the IIrst
part oI an expIanatIon. There Is too much sIam In
the anthropoIogy oI sIam In the sense oI a Iack oI
baIance between the emphasIs on reIIgIous com-
mItment and a not aIways suIIIcIent account oI the
IIves oI whIch It Is a part.
Second, there Is a pecuIIar preoccupatIon wIth
the questIon as to what sIam Is. n recent years,
many oI my coIIeagues have been hIghIIghtIng that
they study sIam as a dIscursIve tradItIon. As a Ih
student, thIs was one oI the IIrst thIngs Iearned
In the staII semInars oI our InstItute. MeanwhIIe,
have come to IInd It rather pecuIIar that peopIe
IInd It necessary In the IIrst pIace to state what
they thInk sIam Is. The anthropoIogy oI ChrIstIa-
nIty, In comparIson, appears much Iess preoccup-
Ied wIth the questIon as to what kInd oI object oI
study ChrIstIanIty Is. Why, then, wouId we need
the sItuatIonaI, pragmatIc and IncompIete nature
oI dIscursIve power.
open the enquIry wIth a more theoretIcaI dIs-
cussIon oI two key Issues, IIrst, the search to un-
derstand what sIam Is, and second, the current
turn to a study oI sIam through the notIons oI tradI-
tIon, ethIcs and pIety In juxtaposItIon wIth secuIar
and IIberaI powers. then return to the everyday
worId that Is the sIte oI my IIeIdwork In gypt In
order to poInt out some key Issues that see as
heIpIuI Ior reachIng a better understandIng about
what It actuaIIy means to IIve a IIIe that, among
other thIngs, can be a MusIIm IIIe.
=)"/ ;7%"# >&7?
Many oI the !rst and groundbreakIng anthropoIo-
gIcaI approaches to sIam between the 1960s and
80s trIed to expIaIn what sIam actuaIIy Is. The
answers - the bIueprInt oI a socIaI order (GeIIner
1981), or the IocaIIy embedded specI!c versIon oI
a greater symboIIc order (Geertz 1968) or a muItI-
tude oI cuIturaIIy specI!c sIams (I-ZeIn 1977)
were unsatIsIactory (see Asad 1986, VarIsco 2005,
MarrancI 2008). nterestIngIy, some oI the best
works Irom thIs perIod dId not even try to expIaIn
what sIam Is, Instead they oered some good ac-
counts about what It means to IIve as a MusIIm In
a specI!c hIstorIcaI and cuIturaI sItuatIon (e.g.
GIIsenan 2000 |1982|, Abu-Iughod 1996 |1986|).
SInce then, however, TaIaI Asad (1986) has come
up wIth a very powerIuI soIutIon that has heIped to
IortIIy the questIon about what sIam Is as a stan-
dard part oI teachIng, Ih theses, and theoretIcaI
sectIons oI research papers.
AccordIng to Asad, sIam Is a dIscursIve tradI-
tIon created by the generatIons oI MusIIms deba-
tIng the correct Iorm oI practIce wIth a vIew to Its
past, present and Iuture. WhIIe extremeIy popuIar
among anthropoIogIsts, thIs vIew has not remaI-
ned uncontested. Ior exampIe, GabrIeIe Marran-
cI (2008) has argued that sIam Is essentIaIIy an
emotIonaI category, that sIam Is about the IeeIIng
oI beIng a MusIIm. ut thIs Is not the key poInt Ior
me. What concerns me Is the questIon what It Is
about sIam that It makes It so Important to under-
stand what It Is? Why Is It not suIIIcIent to say
that sIam Is a reIIgIon? Asad has a good theoretI-
caI poInt agaInst the study oI sIam as a reIIgIon.
the category oI reIIgIon In the socIaI scIences, he
poInts out, Is the outcome oI a very specIIIc uro-
pean deveIopment In ChrIstIanIty and carrIes the
very IIkeIy rIsk oI IeveIIIng the specIIIc Ieatures
oI reIIgIous tradItIons around the worId - notabIy
the MusIIm notIon oI !"# (reIIgIon), whIch Is both
vaster and narrower than the socIaI scIentIIIc
category (Asad 1993). Vaster because It InvoIves
many more IIeIds oI IIIe, and narrower because It
Is a normatIve notIon. There Is a very common as-
sumptIon among MusIIms that !"# Is a true reIIgIon
reveaIed by God, IncIudIng sIam, ChrIstIanIty and
tragedy. They argue Ior dIscIpIIne at tImes and Ior
Ireedom at others, but oIten IIve IIves that Iack
both. I we want to account Ior the sIgnIIIcance oI
sIam In peopIes IIves, we have to account Ior It In
thIs wIder context.
n thIs paper argue Ior an exIstentIaI and ethno-
graphIc approach that accounts Ior the motIvatIons,
experIences, compIexItIes and ambIguItIes oI eve-
ryday IIves. To understand the compIex IogIc oI
IIved experIence, we wIII have to take the Inherent
ambIguIty oI peopIes IIves as the startIng poInt,
just as we have to Iocate theIr worId-vIews In both
the IocaI contexts they are physIcaIIy actIng In as
weII as the gIobaI connectIons, both ImagIned and
enacted, they Iocate themseIves In. These are not
mereIy exceptIons Irom some kInd oI normaIIty,
on the contrary they are the normaIIty oI peopIes
IIves - even those who at tImes argue Ior hoIIstIc
and perIectIonIst IdeoIogIes.
My crItIque Is empIrIcaI and methodoIogIcaI
more than It Is theoretIcaI, and so are the sugges-
tIons present at the end oI thIs paper. What con-
cerns me Is the questIon how we can study and
understand peopIes IIves In a way that credIts
the Importance oI reIIgIous and other tradItIons,
IdeoIogIes and expectatIons wIthout IosIng sIght oI
the compIexItIes oI IIIe experIence, the powers to
whIch peopIe are subjected and the actIve reIma-
gInatIon and reInventIon oI tradItIons and IdeoIo-
gIes that constantIy takes pIace In everyday IIIe.
WIth thIs crItIque take Issue especIaIIy wIth
a research programme that has become very pro-
ductIve and InIIuentIaI In recent years. Characte-
rIsed by the keywords pIety, ethIcs and dIscursIve
tradItIon, thIs research programme Is oIten assocI-
ated wIth the work oI TaIaI Asad and hIs InIIuentIaI
InterventIon In the AnthropoIogy oI sIam (1986).
My crItIque Is not, however, dIrected at the work
oI Asad and hIs concept oI sIam as a dIscursIve
tradItIon. t Is a good concept, and whIIe do have
certaIn reservatIons about It (SchIeIke 2007), do
not Intend to be InvoIved In a conceptuaI crItIque
here. What am Interested In here Is not concepts
as such but what Is accompIIshed through them.
nstead, wIsh to oIIer some poInts oI - hopeIuI-
Iy constructIve - crItIcIsm about what has been ac-
compIIshed by a much wIder research programme
that has taken dIscursIve tradItIon as Its keyword.
ThIs Is a research programme that has achIeved
some sIgnIIIcant InsIghts, but aIso created some
probIems that need to be tackIed. n the IoIIowIng
argue that most oI the key InsIghts and Issues
oI thIs research programme, notabIy ethIcs and
the cuItIvatIon oI aIIect, are hIghIy productIve but
may need to be baIanced by a more exIstentIaI ap-
proach that Ioregrounds the many concerns and
pursuIts oI everyday IIIe. Some Issues however, no-
tabIy the juxtaposItIon oI the sIamIc and the secu-
Iar/IIberaI, are IIawed and may need to be revIsed
In Iavour oI an approach that Is more perceptIve oI
Iater the anthropoIogIsts oI sIam aIready encoun-
tered an abstract notIon oI reIIgIon as a corpus,
and to an IncreasIng degree aIso as a system and
as an agent (and thIs encounter has Iurther con-
trIbuted to MusIIms IncreasIng objectIIIcatIon oI
sIam durIng the past century, see Starrett 1998).
AIthough most oI them were not beIIevers In sIam,
and some oI them even openIy hostIIe to It, they
nevertheIess Iound It very easy to deaI wIth It as
somethIng, an entIty, a thIng.
Why Is It so convenIent to deaI wIth the adhe-
rence oI peopIe to Muhammads message as an
entIty? The Iact that MusIIms themseIves com-
monIy do so Is not a suIIIcIent answer, Ior the ty-
pIcaI answers gIven by anthropoIogIsts dIIIer a Iot
Irom the typIcaI answers gIven by MusIIms (that
Is, MusIIms not traIned In anthropoIogy). Ior Mus-
IIms, sIam Is neIther a bIueprInt, nor a muItItude,
nor a dIscursIve tradItIon. Ior MusIIms, sIam Is
the true IeIIgIon oI God.
3
To use an extremeIy oId-IashIoned anthropoIogI-
caI term, sIam Is a very abstract and powerIuI
IetIsh. an entIty ImagIned and created by humans
that, because peopIe ascrIbe It power, begIns to
have power over them. As a IetIsh, sIam Is In a
way even more powerIuI than God, because God Is
aIways surrounded by secrets and mysterIes, and
IIs motIvatIons and pIans are beyond human un-
derstandIng, whIIe sIam can be studIed, anaIysed,
expIaIned and Interpreted. And every study, every
expIanatIon, every anaIysIs and InterpretatIon ma-
kes It more soIId, more IactuaI and more powerIuI
over those who engage It - regardIess oI whether
they beIIeve In It or not.
Irom a socIaI scIentIIIc poInt oI vIew, the ques-
tIon oI what sIam Is Is a bad one, because the
IogIc oI the questIon aIready Ioads the category oI
sIam wIth expectatIons. xpectatIons that by kno-
wIng what It Is we wIII know what wIII happen
to peopIe who beIIeve In It. o matter what our
answer to the questIon oI what sIam Is, by pur-
suIng the questIon we wIII wIIIIngIy or unwIIIIngIy
contrIbute to the power oI our beIIeI In the IetIsh
oI sIam, makIng It more soIId and encompassIng.
Ior a MusIIm proseIytIser, thIs makes good sen-
se. ut Ior us as socIaI scIentIsts concerned wIth
the human condItIon and human agency, there Is
good reason to be cautIous about a questIon that
reInIorces, Instead oI InvestIgatIng, the growIng
these InteIIectuaI tradItIons, but It onIy became domInant
In the 20th century, when mass educatIon and medIa made
tradItIons oI schoIarIy transmIssIon IncreasIngIy obsoIete
and objectI!ed sIam as textbook knowIedge (see IckeIman
1992 and Starrett 1998).
@ My Iree transIatIon, orIented toward vernacuIar usage,
oI the uran verse nna aI-IsIm huwa ad-dn 'Ind AIIh
whIch Is commonIy quoted by MusIIms to state the suprema-
cy oI sIam over other IaIths. ThIs Is In Iact the onIy passage
In the uran that aIIows the InterpretatIon oI sIam as a
reIIgIon rather than as an act oI the IndIvIduaI beIIever.
judaIsm, but excIudIng IInduIsm, uddhIsm aha-
Ism, etc. Irom thIs poInt oI vIew, an anthropoIogy
oI reIIgIon that posIts sIam as beIongIng to the
same cIass oI thIngs as uddhIsm wouId be rather
besIde the poInt.
ut II Asad Is rIghtIy sceptIcaI oI the heurIstIc va-
Iue oI the term reIIgIon, hIs students are very con-
IIdent about the heurIstIc vaIue oI another generaI
notIon. tradItIon. Asads name Is nowadays reguIarIy
mentIoned In artIcIes and conIerence papers whose
authors expIaIn that they understand sIam as a
dIscursIve tradItIon. As mentIoned beIore, It Is not
my IntentIon In thIs context to dIscuss the premIses
and ImpIIcatIons oI the notIon oI dIscursIve tradItIon.
What want to Iocus on now Is that those who argue
that sIam Is a dIscursIve tradItIon do not argue that
ChrIstIanIty, MarxIsm, human rIghts, anthropoIogy
etc., are aIso dIscursIve tradItIons - aIthough thIs
certaInIy can be argued and has been taken Into
consIderatIon In the context oI the anthropoIogy oI
ChrIstIanIty (AnIdjar 2009). They are not InvoIved In
the generaI study oI dIscursIve tradItIons, but In the
study oI sIam In partIcuIar, and they IInd It Impor-
tant Ior the purposes oI theIr anaIysIs and argumen-
tatIon to specIIy what sIam Is. The IabeI sIam as
a dIscursIve tradItIon as It Is commonIy used these
days Is thus Iess oIten about an actuaI InquIry Into
dIscursIve tradItIons (but see SaIvatore 2007), and
more oIten about an attempt to IInd a Irame that aI-
Iows one to Iook at sIam as a whoIe.
What, then, does sIam expIaIn that makes It
so Important to know what It Is? vIdentIy It Is Im-
portant, otherwIse It wouIdnt keep us so busy.
sIam Is the name oI the reIIgIon Iounded by Mu-
hammad on the ArabIan IenInsuIa In the 7th cen-
tury A.. n the IIteraI meanIng oI the ArabIc word,
sIam means submIssIon, that Is, submIssIon oI
the human to God. n Its archaIc meanIng, sIam
Is an act, and thereIore has no agency. Agency, II
any, IIes wIth the human beIIever who submIts her
or hIs wIII and acts under the supreme agency oI
God. And yet MusIIms today speak oI sIam Iess
as an act oI the beIIever and more as an entIty ex-
ternaI to the beIIever. What Is Important Is that at
some poInt, probabIy Iong beIore even the oIdest
Western anthropoIogIsts were born, a graduaI
conceptuaI shIIt began that turned sIam Irom an
act and a dIsposItIon Into a corpus oI norms, pro-
cedures and attItudes, and eventuaIIy Into system
that ItseII prescrIbes acts and attItudes, a system
that, metaphorIcaIIy or IIteraIIy, Is granted agency
that Is Gods. commandIng, prohIbItIng, knowIng,
descrIbIng, sanctIonIng.
2
So the OrIentaIIsts and
A t Is necessary to specIIy that hIstorIcaIIy speakIng, there
probabIy was no dIrect shIIt Irom God to sIam as the Io-
cus oI attentIon. mportantIy, MusIIm InteIIectuaI tradItIons
typIcaIIy Iocussed on schoIarIy masters and reIated to theIr
specI!c arguments and the tradItIons they estabIIshed. The
IncreasIngIy systemIc quaIIty oI sIam emerged through
mIcs oI doctrInaI debate among MusIIm actIvIsts,
the power oI sIamIc IdeaIs oI moraIIty and pIety,
the connectIons between everyday reIIgIosIty and
reIIgIous schoIarshIp and the reIatIonshIp between
MusIIm practIces oI pIety and secuIar archItectu-
res oI power. Ior the anthropoIogy oI sIam, these
works have come to constItute what mre Iaka-
tos (Iakatos and Musgrave 1970) has descrIbed
as a research programme, that Is, a shared set oI
probIems, methods and termInoIogy that provIde
productIve !eIds oI research. AccordIng to Iaka-
tos, a research programme Is seIdom proven IaIse,
because Its key premIses and theorIes can aIways
be protected through ad hoc theorIes. nstead, the
key crIterIon by whIch the success oI a research
programme can be judged Is Its capabIIIty to pro-
duce new probIems and soIutIons. ThIs Is a prag-
matIc crIterIon and a useIuI one Ior InquIrIng what
Is and what Is not accompIIshed by the research
programme oI ethIcs, pIety and tradItIon.
WhIIe thIs research programme Is most promI-
nentIy assocIated wIth the work oI Saba Mahmood
(2005) and CharIes IIrschkInd (2006), It Is Iar Irom
unIIIed, oI course, and dIIIerent IInes oI InquIry re-
gardIng ethIcs and pIety have been deveIoped In
the works oI MIchaeI Iambek (2000), IeIko Ien-
keI (2005), Iara eeb (2006) and SteIanIa IandoIIo
(2007), to mentIon just Iew oI the many worth men-
tIonIng. The InsIghts provIded In these works have
been taken up In recent years by a verItabIe IIood
oI pubIIcatIons marked wIth the keywords oI pIe-
ty, tradItIon and ethIcs. ThIs emergIng IIeId oI stu-
dy, aIbeIt Iar Irom unIIIed, Is marked by a shared
preoccupatIon wIth MusIIms pIous practIce, aIIg-
ned wIth a IramIng oI the enquIry as one about s-
Iam as a dIscursIve tradItIon. WhIIe some authors
have been makIng rather Iree and ecIectIc use oI
these themes (see, e.g. Starrett 1998, smaII 2003,
SchuIz 2006), In other cases there Is a tendency
to deveIop a canon oI reIerences and concepts to
the degree that, especIaIIy In northern AmerIca,
one may speak oI the emergence oI somethIng IIke
an orthodox canon (see, e.g. Scott and IIrschkInd
2006, Anjum 2007).
4
The research programme oI pIety, ethIcs and
tradItIon has made It possIbIe to recognIse much
better how MusIIms engagement wIth theIr reIIgI-
on Is neIther the outcome oI bIInd adherence, nor
the resuIt oI coercIon, but an actIve and dynamIc
process oI engagement wIth IdeaIs oI good IIIe and
personhood - a poInt that has been truIy Impor-
B ThIs Is a deveIopment that has to do wIth InstItutIonaI
poIItIcs as much as wIth the nature oI the argument ItseII,
and the In"uence oI the research programme oI pIety and
ethIcs Is correspondIngIy uneven across the InternatIonaI
academIc !eId. ts In"uence Is most marked In northern
AmerIca. n urope It has been approprIated more crItIcaI-
Iy. t seems to be rather margInaI In the Irancophone and
SpanIsh-speakIng worIds.
ImagInatIon oI a worId reIIgIon as an entIty wIth
agency.
The Iocus on sIam as a pecuIIar entIty oI Its own
kInd Is part oI a hIstory oI exceptIonaIIsm In the
study oI cuItures and socIetIes In whIch sIam Is
the domInant reIIgIous tradItIon. ven In varIants
that are radIcaIIy crItIcaI oI OrIentaIIsm, It carrIes
an OrIentaIIst herItage. an assumptIon that s-
Iam Is somethIng sIgnIIIcantIy dIIIerent Irom the
West. nstead oI beIng the backward other oI u-
ropean modernIty, sIam may now be taken up as
the pIous other oI secuIarIsm, the resIstIng other
oI neo-coIonIaIIsm or the methodoIogIcaI other oI
comparatIve socIaI scIence. Ievated to such a po-
sItIon oI sIgnIIIcant aIterIty, the reIIgIous tradItIons
oI MusIIms gaIn partIcuIar brIIIIance and Impor-
tance Ior the sake oI hIghIIghtIng theIr partIcuIa-
rIty through theIr dIIIerence. ut at the same tIme,
the IaIth and IIves oI MusIIms In theIr own unIque-
ness, theIr specIIIcIty In theIr own rIght - and not
just comparatIveIy - become opaque, reduced to
theIr sIamIc-ness. To study sIam as somethIng
makes It much easIer to enter sophIstIcated theo-
retIcaI debates, but It aIso makes It much easIer
to overIook the ways sIam actuaIIy matters In the
IIves oI peopIe who adhere to It.
The probIem, then, IIes not wIth the answer but
wIth the questIon. I we shouId gIve any anthropo-
IogIcaI answer at aII to the questIon oI what sIam
Is, we must IIrst reaIIse that thIs Is an empIrIcaI
questIon. The answer depends on the sItuatIon at
hand, the peopIe InvoIved, the dynamIcs evoIvIng
and the questIons we as researchers are askIng.
ThIs Is not to say that the questIon or the answers
to It shouId be bare oI theoretIcaI dIrectIons. That
wouId be a sure recIpe Ior bad research. ut It Is
to say that our theoretIcaI dIrectIons shouId have
a dIIIerent Iocus. I we want to understand what It
means to IIve a MusIIm IIIe, then we need a groun-
ded and nuanced understandIng oI what It means
to IIve a IIIe - more urgentIy than we need a so-
phIstIcated theory about what sIam Is.
ut the probIem Is not settIed yet. The two ques-
tIons oI what sIam Is and what It means to IIve a
IIIe are commonIy IntertwIned. And they are IntI-
mateIy bound together In what may be the most
InIIuentIaI and productIve research programme In
the anthropoIogy oI sIam at the moment. the stu-
dy oI pIety, ethIcs and tradItIon.
C&*/9, */)&(7, /0"3&/&2.
The tremendous sIgnI!cance oI TaIaI Asads work
Ior the contemporary anthropoIogy oI sIam IIes
Iess In that partIcuIar short essay In whIch he deve-
Iops the notIon oI dIscursIve tradItIon (Asad 1986)
than In the way hIs wIder body oI work (Asad 1993,
2003, 2006, 2009) has been taken up and deveIo-
ped by a generatIon oI anthropoIogIsts who have
made creatIve use oI hIs crItIcaI enquIrIes about
reIIgIon and the secuIar In order to study the dyna-
be taken to be vaIId Ior aII oI humanIty. The coun-
ter-cIaIm made by thIs crItIque Is that we have to
recognIse the humanIty oI MusIIms (and anyone
eIse) as they see themseIves and not reduce them
to the IdeoIogIcaI patterns oI Western IIberaIIsm.
As a poIItIcaI crItIque, thIs master narratIve Is
justIIIed. CertaInIy uropean and AmerIcan po-
IItIcIans, InteIIectuaIs, journaIIsts and ordInary
cItIzens very oIten do make questIonabIe cIaIms
to cIvIIIsatIonaI and moraI superIorIty, and such
cIaIms do need to be questIoned. And certaInIy It
Is ImperatIve to recognIse the humanIty oI aII peo-
pIe, regardIess oI the notIons and IdeaIs they hoId.
As a paradIgm oI anthropoIogIcaI research, howe-
ver, thIs master narratIve carrIes the rIsk that we
wIII IInd It too easy to poInt our IInger at the usuaI
suspects, wIth the resuIt that our enquIrIes may
IaII to account Ior what Is reaIIy at stake Ior the
peopIe InvoIved. n the end we may once agaIn IaII
to serIousIy recognIse the humanIty oI peopIe on
theIr own terms.
To make thIs cIearer, oIIer a short crItIcaI re-
vIew oI two recent contrIbutIons (both pubIIshed
In 2009) Irom thIs IIeId oI study, not because IInd
them bad, but on the contrary because IInd them
so good that they deserve a serIous crItIcaI enga-
gement that hope may show where theIr power
and where theIr probIems IIe.
The IIrst exampIe Is Saba Mahmoods brIIIIant
but aIso somehow hermetIc essay IeIIgIous Ie-
ason and SecuIar AIIect. An ncommensurabIe
IvIde? (Mahmood 2009), In whIch she scrutInI-
zes the ways what she descrIbes as secuIar and
IIberaI assumptIons about speech, Iaw and mo-
raI Injury have caused a mIsunderstandIng about
the reasons why MusIIms so energetIcaIIy protest
agaInst the cartoons pubIIshed by the anIsh
daIIy $%&&'#!()*(+,# In 2005. Mahmood argues
that what reaIIy made MusIIms upset about the
cartoons was the way MusIIm devotIonaI tradI-
tIon works towards buIIdIng an IntImate perso-
naI reIatIonshIp wIth the Irophet Muhammad as
an extensIon oI the beIIevers seII and IamIIy, In
contradIstInctIon to a secuIar understandIng oI
speech and meanIng that InsIsts on a cIear dII-
IerentIatIon oI thIngs and theIr representatIon.
6

Ior thIs reason, Mahmood argues, uropeans
were unabIe and/or unwIIIIng to understand the
D ThIs seems to be a rather reduced understandIng oI the
compIex ways oI deaIIng wIth speech, Image and representa-
tIon In contemporary uropean cuItures. Take, Ior exampIe,
the ways the swastIka has become IdentI!ed wIth azI ter-
ror. One may successIuIIy cIaIm wIth uropean medIa that
a carIcature depIctIng the Irophet Muhammad In an unIa-
vourabIe way Is just a carIcature, yet one mIght expect a
Iot Iess understandIng II one cIaImed that a azI "ag Is just
a "ag. So uropeans do seem to be very weII abIe to thInk
beyond the "at dIstInctIon oI thIngs and representatIon. ut
some oI them may not want to do so II It wouId suggest ma-
kIng Important poIItIcaI and IdeoIogIcaI concessIons.
tant In a decade overshadowed by the gIobaI war
oI terror, as It perhaps shouId more accurateIy
be caIIed. ut thIs research programme has aIso
magnIIIed some oI the probIems Inherent In the an-
thropoIogIcaI turn to sIam as the key to the IIves
oI MusIIms. These are probIems that many In the
IIeId are acuteIy aware oI, and many share the sen-
se that It Is necessary to Iook beyond the eIegant
but narrow conIInes oI pIety and tradItIon and to
IncIude the messIer but rIcher IIeIds oI everyday
experIences,
5
personaI bIographIes and compIex
geneaIogIes (see, e.g. Abu-Iughod 1996 |1986|,
wIng 1990, Marsden 2005, OseIIa and Soares
2009, MasqueIIer 2009, Moors 2009, angstad
2009b, eeb 2009). Iart oI the probIem Is Iocated
In the specIIIc Iocus on moraI and pIous subjec-
tIvIty. Another part Is based In the wIder master
narratIve In whIch the study oI sIam as ethIcs and
tradItIon Is commonIy embedded.
The IIrst part oI the probIem - moraI and pIous
subjectIvIty - Is prImarIIy one oI baIance, whereby
the prIvIIegIng oI pIous pursuIts In IsoIatIon Irom
wIder paths oI IIIe has contrIbuted to accounts oI
reIIgIous experIence that are based more on what
peopIe argue Ior and Iess on how they actuaIIy IIve.
AII want to add to thIs probIem are some practI-
caI suggestIons on how a more baIanced approach
couId be accompIIshed whIIe buIIdIng on the Im-
portant InsIghts about ethIcs and subjectIvIty.
wIII return to thIs poInt towards the end oI thIs
paper. The second part oI the probIem - the wIder
master narratIve - Is a more IundamentaI one and
may requIre some more substantIaI rethInkIng,
whIch Is why try to tackIe It In some more detaII
In the IoIIowIng.
;7%"# E7F %&6*0"%&7#
The key themes oI thIs research programme In the
anthropoIogy oI sIam - ethIcs, pIety, subjectIvIty,
seII-IormatIon, the cuItIvatIon oI aect, debate,
governmentaI ratIonaIIty - are very oIten bound
together by a master narratIve that posIts the Mus-
IIm tradItIon oI ethIcs, aect, devotIon and debate
In juxtaposItIon wIth IIberaI and secuIar notIons
about the state, Iaw, seII and so on. ThIs juxtapo-
sItIon Is not mereIy an anaIytIcaI tooI, It Is part
and parceI oI a poIItIcaI seII-crItIque oI IIberaIIsm
and secuIarIsm aImed at reveaIIng how the aIIeged
superIorIty and unIversaIIty oI Western tradItIons
oI enIIghtenment actuaIIy conceaI mechanIsms oI
coercIon, sIIencIng, and excIusIon, as weII as cuItu-
raIIy and hIstorIcaIIy specI!c notIons that cannot
G y juxtaposIng eIegant but narrow wIth messy but
rIch, am obvIousIy makIng an aesthetIc dIstInctIon and
equatIng It wIth a dIstInctIon In the substance oI the argu-
ment. ThIs Is Intended. As Is known among anthropoIogIsts
at Ieast sInce the WrItIng CuIture debate, the ways one wrI-
tes anthropoIogy cannot be separated Irom the substance oI
the argument one makes.
work oI an IntImate and sensItIve emotIonaI bond
that characterIses MusIIms veneratIon oI theIr
prophet, a carIcature couId cause a strong sense oI
moraI Injury In a way other provocatIons couId not.
And yet Mahmoods anaIysIs strIkes me as probIe-
matIc, because mIss somethIng oI the emotIonaI
dynamIcs encountered durIng the controversy. t
oIIers onIy a partIaI account oI why the carIcature
controversy couId arouse such strong emotIons.
ecause Mahmoods anaIysIs Is so much Iocussed
on the quasI-systemIc Ieatures oI an sIamIc and a
IIberaI modeI oI cuItIvatIng poIItIcaI and reIIgIous
aIIect, her anaIysIs remaIns conIIned to thIs duaII-
ty. ut thIs duaIIty Is not heIpIuI II we want to un-
derstand the emotIonaI dynamIcs oI the carIcature
controversy.
was In gypt at the tIme oI the controversy,
and my ImpressIon was that somethIng more was
goIng on. encountered peopIe beIng at once an-
gry and enthusIastIc about deIendIng theIr pro-
phet. IaIn and anger were actIveIy cuItIvated and
exercIsed as part oI an IntensIve and enthusIas-
tIc event through whIch peopIe IeIt encouraged to
express a strong emotIonaI sense oI aIIectIon and
oIIence. At Ieast In gypt, the controversy was not
just a reactIon oI MusIIms commItted to preser-
vIng an ImagInary In whIch theIr reIatIon to the
Irophet Is based on sImIIItude and cohabItatIon
(88). t was part oI a dynamIc process oI creatIng
and promotIng - rather than just preservIng - a
specIIIc reIIgIous and poIItIcaI sensItIvIty. And It
provIded many peopIe a very gratIIyIng possIbIIIty
to do somethIng good, somethIng reaI In deIence oI
the Irophet. boycott enmark.
As returned to the etherIands, Iound a
strIkIngIy sImIIar sentIment beIng cuItIvated
In the press and In InIormaI dIscussIons among
my IrIends. Iather than a secuIar ratIonaIIty at
work, what saw was a much more pIaIn and oId-
IashIoned chauvInIst gut reactIon that turned the
Ireedom to provoke MusIIms Into a matter oI ho-
nour (and reIusIng to do so Into a matter oI cowar-
dIce), an Issue at whIch ones moraI commItment to
our shared vaIues was measured. AgaIn, Iound
peopIe rather enthusIastIc about havIng a cIear
sense oI Iear and oIIence, about IeeIIng justIIIed
anger and beIng abIe to make a strong poInt about
where they stand.
On both sIdes, the Issue was roIIed agaIn and
agaIn Ior many weeks, oIIerIng the peopIe InvoIved
a strong sense oI rIghteous IndIgnatIon, emotIonaI
bondIng and knowIng ones pIace. Thus whIIe the
dIscourses and the arguments expressed as weII as
the specIIIc moments oI moraI Injury experIenced
on both sIdes oI the controversy may have been
dIIIerent, the emotIonaI quaIIty oI the event was
oIten strIkIngIy sImIIar on both sIdes, and thIs can
be expIaIned by neIther sIamIc tradItIon nor secu-
Iar power. I we want to understand why the reac-
tIon oI MusIIms - and Indeed, just IIke them, the
motIvatIons oI MusIIms. MusIIms In turn IaIIed to
successIuIIy make theIr poInt and Instead trIed to
make reIerence to uropean Iaws agaInst dIscrI-
mInatIon and hate speech wIthout understandIng
that the uropean practIce oI Iaw regardIng mo-
raI oIIence Is by nature majorItarIan and unIIkeIy
to take serIousIy the concerns oI a reIIgIous mI-
norIty, the more so as theIr concerns are not cor-
rectIy transIated due to a mIsconceptIon about
the nature oI speech and representatIon, a mIs-
conceptIon that, accordIng to Mahmood, Is essen-
tIaIIy due to a normatIve understandIng oI reII-
gIon InternaI to IIberaIIsm (Mahmood 2009. 74).
Mahmoods prImary IeveI oI anaIysIs Is hIghIy
sophIstIcated cuIturaI concepts, such as Ierd-
nInand de Saussures theory oI Ianguage (Mah-
mood 2009. 72). WhIIe she does quote the voIces
oI MusIIms to deveIop the poInt about the emo-
tIonaI Importance oI IntImate attachment to the
Irophet, In generaI the artIcIe moves on a hIgh
IeveI oI abstractIon where concepts, ratIonaIItIes
and tradItIons - rather than peopIe - are the maIn
agents. ThIs becomes especIaIIy cIear In the way
the secuIar, the IIberaI and the state repeatedIy
appear not just as key anaIytIcaI categorIes but as
thIngs, so much that they are ImpIIcItIy attrIbuted
agency.
(...) contrary to the IdeoIogIcaI seII-under-
standIng oI secuIarIsm (as the doctrInaI sepa-
ratIon oI reIIgIon and state), secuIarIsm has
hIstorIcaIIy entaIIed the reguIatIon and re-
IormatIon oI reIIgIous beIIeIs, doctrInes, and
practIces to yIeId a partIcuIar normatIve con-
ceptIon oI reIIgIon (that Is IargeIy Irotestant
ChrIstIan In Its contours). (Mahmood 2009. 87)
IIstorIcaIIy speakIng, the secuIar state has not
sImpIy cordoned oII reIIgIon Irom Its reguIatory
ambItIons but sought to remake It through the
agency oI the Iaw. (bId.)
There thus emerges an over-archIng and aII-
present secuIar ratIonaIIty, embodIed by the na-
tIonaI state and IntImateIy paIred wIth IIberaIIsm
In a way that Is not expIaIned. Mahmood takes up
the cartoon controversy as a poInt to drIve home
the poInt that the secuIar Is InherentIy partIaI,
saturated wIth power and prejudIce, and hence un-
IIkeIy to IuIIII Its pubIIcIy procIaImed promIse oI
IncIusIon and toIerance. n other words, her crI-
tIque targets these abstract entItIes and not the
uropeans who Iound It convenIent not to take se-
rIousIy MusIIms concerns.
Mahmood does oIIer a weIcome cIarIIIcatIon
about the Importance oI emotIonaI attachment
that makes the person oI the prophet Muhammad
such a sensItIve Issue Ior MusIIms. ecause oI the
IIberaI seII-understandIngs by means oI theIr jux-
taposItIon wIth an equaIIy IdeaIIsed sIamIc tradI-
tIon.
have no probIem wIth the crItIque. have a pro-
bIem wIth the juxtaposItIon. n my vIew, thIs kInd
oI an anthropoIogIcaI theory does a bad job InsoIar
as It does not teII us how It actuaIIy Is to IIve under
the condItIons It descrIbes. n the abstract Image
oI secuIar/IIberaI ratIonaIIty recognIze neIther
the urope In whIch grew up, nor the urope In
whIch IIve (there Is quIte a dIIIerence between
the two, marked by the end oI the CoId War). Ior
one thIng, secuIarIsm Is In no way partIcuIarIy II-
beraI, and at Ieast where come Irom (IInIand)
secuIarIsm has been at Ieast as much II not more
reIated to socIaIIsm, communIsm, occuItIsm and
the many other socIaI and cuIturaI movements that
have marked the Iast century and haII (see, e.g. jo-
kInen 1906, rvast 1928 |1903|, SoIkkanen 1961).
Iurthermore, whIIe uropes antI-MusIIm new
natIonaIIst movements do wrIte secuIarIsm Iarge
In theIr decIaratIons, see a more opportunIstIc
popuIIst usage, rather than an underIyIng secuIar
ratIonaIIty at work.
aIso do not see the IIves oI MusIIms In gypt
accounted Ior by thIs theory. The tradItIons oI
MusIIm devotIon are Important but not suIIIcIent
to account Ior the compIex IIves my MusIIm IrIends
and InterIocutors IIve - not to mentIon the degree
to whIch the Iorms and aIms oI MusIIm devotIon
have shIIted In a matter oI just a generatIon or
two Irom an emphasIs on saIntIy IntercessIon and
communaI beIongIng towards an emphasIs on mo-
raI knowIedge and actIvIst commItment (see aIso
eeb 2006).
One couId object that am takIng Issue here
wIth Mahmoods specIIIc preIerence Ior hIgh the-
oretIcaI crItIque rather than wIth the substance
oI her argument. WIth my decIared preIerence Ior
grounded and dIaIogIcaI ethnography, my objec-
tIons wouId thereIore be more a matter oI taste
than a serIous argument. There may be somethIng
to thIs objectIon, whIch Is why want to take up
another exampIe that Is more ethnographIc and
more sensItIve to the actuaI IIves oI peopIe but In
whIch the ethnography Is Iramed by the contrast
oI the sIamIc and the secuIar.
ThIs second exampIe Is adIa IadIIs artIcIe
ManagIng aIIects and sensIbIIItIes. The case oI
not-handshakIng and not-IastIng. (IadII 2009).
IadII, too, expIores the Issue oI causIng and takIng
oIIence, but her Iocus Is Iess on abstract notIons
and more on the pragmatIcs oI everyday IIIe. n
a rIch and sensItIve IashIon she Iooks at the ex-
perIences and narratIves oI two groups oI MusIIm
women In eIgIum. pIous women who InsIst on
not shakIng hands wIth men, and ImpIous women
who InsIst on not IastIng durIng Iamadan. oth
are hIghIy aware that theIr InsIstence wIII oIIend
the sensIbIIItIes oI some oI the peopIe wIth whom
deIenders oI the cartoons who reacted In emotIo-
naIIy sImIIar ways - was not IrratIonaI, It Is there-
Iore not suIIIcIent to provIde a nuanced theoretIcaI
anaIysIs oI the way a revered person becomes part
oI a beIIevers seII. ThIs does make It easIer to un-
derstand the kInd oI Injury InvoIved, but It does not
yet aIIow us to understand how and why that Injury
was -.&+/0'+,! wIth such enthusIasm (and how and
why a dIIIerent sense oI Injury was cuItIvated wIth
sImIIar enthusIasm on the other sIde). n my vIew,
the anIsh carIcature aIIaIr was an event oI me-
anIngIuI anger on both sIdes. an occasIon to IeeI
and express rIghteous anger about beIng hurt and
threatened In a way that both 1,2./1,( and '&&*3(
a cIear response. As such, suggest that II we Iook
Ior an InterpretIve Iramework to understand It, po-
puIIsm may do much better than a juxtaposItIon oI
secuIar/reIIgIous reason and aIIect.
IopuIIsm, Ieena AvonIus (2008) argues In her
study on SharIa ImpIementatIon In Aceh, Is a mo-
daIIty oI poIItIcaI dIscourse and mobIIIsatIon that
turns a dIIIuse and oIten ImpIIcIt moraI gut Iee-
IIng Into sImpIe sIogans and personIIIed dIstInc-
tIons oI good and evII, us and them. IopuIIsm Is
Iurthermore characterIsed by a hIghIy opportu-
nIstIc use oI whatever IegItImate dIscourses are
avaIIabIe (such as SharIa In Aceh or secuIarIsm In
the etherIands) In order to pIace them In the ser-
vIce oI an personIIIed poIItIcaI battIe. y makIng It
possIbIe to gIve names to a sense oI moraI unease,
popuIIsm not onIy aIIows one to express ImpIIcIt
moraI anxIetIes, It Is aIso oIIers a way to actIveIy
enIarge and aggravate them to a poInt oI escaIa-
tIon. The anIsh cartoon aIIaIr Is a prIme Iesson
In how that works, aIthough hIstory oI course does
oIIer other Iessons In popuIIsm that are much gra-
ver and much more terrIbIe In theIr consequences.
SInce a key power oI popuIIsm IIes In Its utIIIty In
namIng and reInIorcIng anxIetIes that peopIe reaIIy
have, It wouId be mIstaken to IabeI popuIIsm sImpIy
as IaIse. Yet thInkIng about gIobaI events oI anger
In terms oI popuIIst agItatIon may heIp us Iook bey-
ond expIIcIt dIscursIve justIIIcatIon and gIve more
attentIon to the emotIons that are beIng cuItIvated.
WhIIe Mahmoods poInt about the specIIIc kInd
oI emotIonaI bond MusIIms cuItIvate wIth theIr
Irophet and about the specIIIc kInd oI expecta-
tIons and anxIetIes that are InvoIved In appIyIng
posItIve Iaw do take us a step Iurther, her InsIs-
tence on IramIng thIs as a quasI-systemIc dIIIe-
rence between the sIamIc and the secuIar/IIbe-
raI resuIts In a brIIIIant theoretIcaI crItIque that
somehow mIsses the poInt. t mIsses the poInt,
argue, because the engagement wIth sIamIc tra-
dItIon and secuIarIsm/IIberaIIsm Is InIormed by a
poIItIcaI meta-narratIve that dIrects the anaIysIs
towards a generIc crItIque oI modern power and
away Irom the actuaI IIves, emotIons and experI-
ences oI peopIe In theIr everyday IIves. n the end,
what we see Is a crItIque oI IdeaIIsed secuIar and
a probIem to whIch the master narratIve oI the crI-
tIque oI the secuIar oIIers a very compeIIIng soIutI-
on. n my vIew, however, the ambIguIty wIth whIch
IadII treats the probIem oI gIvIng moraI oIIence
IndIcates that the soIutIon does not work weII and
that a better soIutIon Is needed.
What we need, then, are better narratIves oI
exactIy how powerIuI dIscourses work In practIce
and oI what powerIuI dIscourses there are out the-
re anyway. must admIt that do not have a cIear
soIutIon to thIs probIem, but wIII try to make
some suggestIons.
The probIem wIth the meta-narratIve oI a crI-
tIque oI secuIar and IIberaI power through Its
other, sIam, Is that It reduces the compIexIty, rIch-
ness and ambIvaIence (whIch Is not necessarIIy
paInIuI, but oIten aIso joyIuI, see Marsden 2005) oI
human experIence Into provIdIng evIdence agaInst
a IIberaI/secuIar power consteIIatIon. specIaIIy In
Mahmoods essay and to a Iess sharp degree aIso
In IadIIs artIcIe, the reader Is presented wIth an
Image oI a secuIar/IIberaI hegemony so strongIy
reduced to Iew key terms, notIons and powerIuI
poInts oI vIew that to me It Iooks very much IIke
a straw man and very much unIIke the uropean
cuItures and socIetIes as know them. Ierhaps a
crItIcaI anthropoIogy oI secuIarIsm and new natI-
onaIIsm wouId do much better II It gave up or at
Ieast toned down Its paradIgmatIc equatIon oI the
secuIar wIth the IIberaI and the natIon state, and
Instead IncIuded the IIIe worIds, experIences and
trajectorIes oI beIng secuIar In theIr maIn Iocus.
ThIs wouId certaInIy InvoIve expandIng the IIst oI
powerIuI dIscourses to IncIude much more than
the IIberaI. t wouId aIso InvoIve the pragmatIcs
oI actIng on the sIde oI power, somethIng that
see very sensItIveIy accompIIshed by Oskar Ver-
kaaIk (2010) In hIs study oI the ways utch cIvII
servants run naturaIIsatIon ceremonIes that have
been estabIIshed as part oI a cuIturaI natIonaIIst
poIIcy - a poIIcy that the cIvII servants are oIten
crItIcaI oI, and yet they oIten end up endorsIng
It In subtIe ways. Such ethnographIc and hIsto-
rIographIc enquIry wouId be IIkeIy to be more
successIuI In tracIng the connectIons oI exIsten-
tIaI concerns, powerIuI dIscourses and the prag-
matIcs oI actIon In a way that Is crItIcaI wIthout
beIng reductIonIst.
H2#I*%%&.J I$07$&/7
IegardIess oI the poInts oI crItIque that have
made and the many more poInts others have made
(Marsden 2005, Van er Veer 2008, angstad
2009a, SImon 2009, Starrett 2010) about the turn
to the cuItIvatIon oI ethIcs and the master narratI-
ve oI sIamIc tradItIon vs. secuIar power, do !nd
It Important to hIghIIght that thIs turn, whatever
Its probIems may be, has provIded some Important
InsIghts Into the study oI the human condItIon. And
that, oI course, Is what counts.
they Interact and try to baIance the compIIcated
demands oI standIng by theIr prIncIpIes and oI
showIng tact towards theIr coIIeagues, IrIends and
IamIIIes. TheIr sItuatIons and posItIons are quIte
dIIIerent, however, IadII argues, because the way
we vIew theIr actIons Irom a IIberaI perspectIve
wIth Its maxIms oI authentIcIty and outspokenness
prIvIIeges the not-IastIng women agaInst the not-
handshakIng women.
As Ior Mahmood, aIso Ior IadII the dIIIerence Is
once agaIn one oI sIamIc tradItIon on one sIde and
IIberaI and secuIar notIons oI personhood on the
other. IadII Is careIuI to poInt out that thIs Is not
a hermetIc boundary. the not-handshakIng MusIIm
womens understandIngs oI seIIhood and agency
are In a sIgnIIIcant way InIIuenced by IIberaI no-
tIons they have approprIated, and the not-IastIng
womens sensIbIIItIes and aIso some oI theIr soIu-
tIons are InIormed by theIr IntImate rootedness
In MusIIm IamIIIes and embodIed tradItIons. ThIs
dIIIerentIated outIook notwIthstandIng, IadIIs
anaIytIcaI Iramework stands and IaIIs wIth the ca-
tegorIcaI dIIIerence between the sIamIc and the
secuIar/IIberaI, and thIs categorIcaI dIIIerence Is
once agaIn more than an anaIytIcaI Iramework. In
the IInaI Instance, It Is a poIItIcaI crItIque oI the
way a IIberaI common sense vIews some choIces
as IegItImate and others as IIIegItImate.
ThIs Is a vaIId poInt, and a necessary one In or-
der to make the reader reaIIse that both the not-
handshakIng and the not-IastIng women are ma-
kIng compIex moraI and pragmatIc choIces that
must be taken serIousIy. And yet by InsIstIng on
thIs as the key poInt, her anaIysIs IaIIs short oI her
ethnography. Some oI IadIIs ethnographIc mate-
rIaI makes It very cIear that there are muItIpIe -
partIy competIng, partIy combIned - cIaIms to and
determInatIons oI a normaIIty, aII oI whIch come
together In peopIes IIves In compIex and oIten sI-
tuatIonaI ways. Some oI them make a dIIIerence
among coIIeagues whIIe others make a dIIIerence
among IamIIy. ut some oI the very though-provo-
kIng materIaI Is used to come to rather sweepIng
and (meanwhIIe) conventIonaI concIusIons about
the power oI the secuIar/IIberaI to determIne a
specIIIc normaIIty. IadIIs crItIque oI secuIar po-
wer stops short oI accountIng Ior what It means to
be aware that ones convIctIons and actIons can be
oIIensIve to others, what kInd oI oIIences may be
InvoIved, what may be at stake Ior the peopIe InvoI-
ved and why dIIIerent sItuatIons create dIIIerent
kInds oI oIIence. To accompIIsh thIs, It mIght have
been heIpIuI to Iook at the not-handshakIng and
not-IastIng women more In theIr own rIght and Iess
as representatIves oI an sIamIc-secuIar dIvIde.
IadII, however, aIms at more. The probIem IadII
trIes to tackIe Is how to account Ior the pragmatIcs
oI moraI actIon wIthout IosIng sIght oI the reaII-
ty oI powerIuI dIscursIve regIsters that pave the
way Ior certaIn paths whIIe cIosIng others. ThIs Is
the most Important poIItIcaI Iorce and the most
Important reIIgIous one, aIong wIth the SaIaII pI-
ety movement that promotes a rIgorous moraI and
reIIgIous dIscIpIIne.
n AIexandrIa, gypts second-Iargest cIty
whIther the upper and mIddIe cIass CaIrIne head
Ior summer vacatIon, the cosmopoIItan herItage
and easygoIng hoIIday atmosphere oI thIs port
cIty has been chaIIenged by the spectacuIar rIse
oI varIous sIamIc movements, most ImportantIy
the SaIaII movement, whIch controIs a Iarge part
oI the mosques, especIaIIy In the eastern dIstrIcts
oI the cIty. Men sportIng Iong beards and short-
hemmed trousers and women wearIng a IuII veII
(#/245) coverIng theIr entIre bodIes have become
more and more common In the streets oI the cIty.
ut aIso those who do not joIn the SaIaII movement
generaIIy show a strong sense oI emotIonaI com-
mItment to the reIIgIon oI sIam. There Is a very
wIde consensus about the need Ior MusIIms to Iear
God, to IuIIII theIr reIIgIous dutIes, to shape theIr
IIves and socIetIes accordIngIy and to deIend theIr
IaIth, theIr Irophet and theIr MusIIm brothers and
sIsters.
n CaIro, gypts gIgantIc capItaI, a sImIIar
Image prevaIIs. uIIdIngs, pubIIc transportatIon,
shops and homes are covered wIth posters, stI-
ckers and graIIItI caIIIng peopIe to pray and Iast,
to mInd theIr manners and to cuItIvate theIr cha-
racters, to IIght the jews and to Ieed the poor, Ior
women to cover themseIves and Ior men to teach
sIam to theIr IamIIIes. IeIIgIous IIterature domI-
nates the newsstands and bookstores. roadcasts
and cassette recordIngs oI the urn and sermons
are routIneIy pIayed In caIes, busses, shops and
homes. WhIIe varIous socIaI nIches especIaIIy In
CaIro and AIexandrIa contInue to encourage worId
vIews and IIIestyIes that are at odds wIth the wave
oI sIamIsatIon, most oI the upper- and mIddIe-
cIass cItIzens have come to embrace the wave oI
the sIamIc revIvaI, aIbeIt In ways that do not chaI-
Ienge the sources oI theIr weaIth or theIr pursuIt oI
consumerIst pIeasure (IutII 2009 |2005|).
ThIs Image Is Iar Irom harmonIous. WhIIe the-
re has been a sIgnIIIcant Increase In reIIgIosIty as
weII as a generaI turn to a specIIIc kInd oI reIIgI-
osIty, thIs does not mean that gypt has become
a generaIIy more pIous, moraI or happy country.
There are many ambIguItIes and contradIctIons,
and some oI them are sharp. n the vIIIage, young
peopIe express a nIhIIIstIc sense oI boredom and
IrustratIon In spIte oI the great promIses oI moder-
nIst progress and reIIgIous hope they have embra-
ced. The vIIIage has become a IocaI centre oI drug
trade In recent years as marIhuana and hashIsh
have swept the bIack market In tremendous quan-
tItIes and at Iow prIces, and an IncreasIng number
oI young peopIe have become habItuaI consumers.
n AIexandrIa, the rIsIng commItment to reIIgIon
has aIso become a breedIng ground Ior vIoIent con-
The turn to Iook at a creed as a dIscursIve tra-
dItIon oIIered an Important step Iorward by Io-
cussIng our attentIon to the Iact that reIIgIon Is
not about gods, books and InstItutIons, but about
the ways peopIe worshIp gods, read books and act
In InstItutIons. ThIs may appear to be a trIvIaI In-
sIght, and yet It seems to be necessary to keep re-
mIndIng coIIeagues, students, InteIIectuaIs, pubII-
cIsts and poIItIcIans about It. AIso, the turn to the
cuItIvatIon oI aIIect has been an Important step
Iorward In the way oI understandIng what It means
to beIIeve In somethIng and to IIve a IIIe guIded by
that beIIeI. And the crItIcaI theoretIsatIon oI the
secuIar has oIIered ways to thInk about modern
power and subjectIvIty In ways that go beyond the
seII-ceIebratory tendency oI modernIst secuIa-
rIsm. The questIon Ior me, then, Is. how can we go
on Irom here? Iow can we overcome the probIems
oI thIs IIne oI research wIthout IosIng sIght oI the
InsIghts It has to oIIer? Iow can we account Ior the
ways peopIe express perIectIonIst IdeaIs In pursuIt
oI IIvIng a compIex, ImperIect IIIe? Iow can we teII
about the motIvatIons and pressures that make
some Ideas so compeIIIng? Iow can we teII about
the ways a meanIngIuI worId Is ImagIned and the
ways It both shapes and Is shaped by peopIes ex-
pectatIons and IIves?
ThIs Is an ethnographIc probIem as much as It Is
a theoretIcaI one, and Ior the sake oI an answer
wIII start by takIng a Iook at the sItuatIon In three
sItes In gypt where have been conductIng IIeId-
work sInce 2002.
n present-day gypt, sIam has become omnI-
present. IIke many other pIaces around the worId,
gypt has been swept by a verItabIe reIIgIous eu-
phorIa sInce the 1970s. IeIIgIon Is contInuousIy
vIsIbIe, audIbIe and paIpabIe. And It has become
characterIsed to an unprecedented degree by an
enormous emphasIs on IndIvIduaI IearnIng, know-
Iedge and practIce, guIded by the perIectIonIst aIm
to create a pIous character that Is commItted
(6.&+'7/6, a term borrowed Irom the natIonaIIst/
modernIst notIon oI ,#8'8,6,#+ (KIemm 2000)) to
reIIgIon as a compIete Iramework oI emotIons, wIII
and acts.
n a vIIIage that caII azIat aI-IayyIs In nort-
hern gypt, a strong sense prevaIIs that peopIe
have become more reIIgIous and that thIs Is a very
good thIng. IeopIe greet each other wIth the sIa-
mIc greetIng peace be upon you ('(9('&'6. ;'&'%9
<.6) rather than wIth the conIessIonaIIy neutraI
good mornIng/evenIng, a IoIty new mosque Is
beIng buIIt In the outskIrts oI the vIIIage (aIthough
the work has temporarIIy stopped as a resuIt oI
the gIobaI IInancIaI crIsIs), the bar In the vIIIa-
ge cIosed decades ago, and aII aduIt women now
wear the headscarI (=/845) as a part oI a coverIng
dress that reveaIs onIy hands, Ieet and Iace. n a
vIIIage that was once a socIaIIst and communIst
stronghoId, the MusIIm rotherhood has become
mInIbus arrIvIng on the bus statIon Irom the coun-
trysIde has been decorated by Its owner wIth two
kInds oI stIckers, neatIy organIsed next to each
other.
ont Iorget to Invoke God
Ihoto oI ancy Ajram (Iebanese IemaIe pop
sInger)
ThIs Is due to the grace oI my Iord (a pIous
phrase agaInst envy)
Ihoto oI IaIIa Wehbe (gyptIan-Iebanese IemaIe
pop sInger)
seek reIuge In the Iord oI the dawn... (a
chapter oI the urn beIIeved to protect Irom
evII and envy).
ZappIng through sateIIIte teIevIsIon the way
many gyptIans do, one can quIckIy shIIt between
a SaIaII sermon, a vIdeo cIIp, a news programme,
an gyptIan soap opera, a IoIIywood IIIm, a Ioot-
baII match, a taIk show and so on. Yet one thIng
that unItes aImost aII programmes (wIth the ex-
ceptIon oI some state channeIs) Is theIr commer-
cIaI nature and the aggressIve advertIsements
they make Ior commercIaI text message servIces
that have become a IInancIaI backbone oI teIevIsI-
on channeIs oI varIous kInds.
Whenever one goes Ior a waIk on the seaIront
oI AIexandrIa and on the IIe promenades oI CaI-
ro, the scenery Is wIthout exceptIon domInated
by Iovers (='55"5' In gyptIan ArabIc). IaIrs oI
young peopIe waIk or sIt on the promenades, taI-
kIng to each other, sometImes hoIdIng hands, aI-
ways cIoseIy together, aIways keepIng as much
poIIte dIstance as possIbIe Irom other paIrs. n
another mInIbus, thIs one drIvIng up and down
the seaIront In AIexandrIa, reIIgIous stIckers ad-
monIsh youths about datIng. Idnt he know that
God sees? WouId you accept It Ior your sIster?
Where Is your IIIe? ndeed, the Idea oI young un-
marrIed peopIe datIng, sIttIng shouIder to shouI-
der, hoIdIng hands and possIbIy kIssIng Is a cause
oI consIderabIe moraI and reIIgIous unease among
gyptIans. ut at the same tIme, the same gyptI-
ans aIso consIder the meetIngs oI Iovers as a natu-
raI part oI IIIe, wrIte and consume Iove poetry and
songs, enthusIastIcaIIy ceIebrate VaIentInes day
and proudIy IdentIIy themseIves as the romantIc
peopIe (KreII IorthcomIng). Some oI them do decI-
de to become commItted and to gIve up aII the
ambIvaIence, stop wrItIng Iove Ietters and IookIng
the opposIte sex Into the eyes and Instead dedI-
cate themseIves to the purpose oI purIIIed pIety.
ut Ior many oI them thIs remaIns a passIng perI-
od In theIr IIves, one part oI a compIex and oIten
troubIed bIography. And sometImes even the most
energetIc SaIaIIs IaII madIy In Iove.
IIIerent worIds stand here sIde by sIde. the
worId oI sIam as a regIme oI dIvIne protectIon,
order and justIce, the worId oI commercIaI medIa
IessIonaI cIashes between MusIIms and ChrIstIans
that have cost many IIves (mostIy oI ChrIstIans)
In recent years. WhIIe pubIIc moraI dIscourse Io-
cusses very strongIy on the rIgorous prohIbItIon oI
aduItery, both AIexandrIa and CaIro have become
centres oI prostItutIon Ior weaIthy gyptIans and
Arab tourIsts, oIten arranged Ior In the Iorm oI
very short-term sIamIc ;.1>" marrIages.
Yet most oI the ambIguItIes surroundIng the s-
IamIc revIvaI are actuaIIy oI a much Iess dramatIc
and bIeak nature than those IIsted above. Iather
than dark cracks In a perIectIonIst Image oI hope,
they present themseIves as a compIex patchwork
oI dIIIerent kInds oI hope, dIIIerent senses oI IIvIng
a good IIIe. The same peopIe who repent theIr sIns
and thInk about the AIterIIIe aIso debate the pre-
vIous evenIngs IootbaII match, teII jokes, IeeI tIred
and gIance at the opposIte sex, even wIth reIIgIous
stIckers decoratIng the waIIs and the voIce oI the
urn In the background. They entertaIn IdeaIs
oI obsessIve romantIc Iove that deIIes aII norms.
They search Ior a pIace In IIIe, try to be respon-
sIbIe towards theIr IamIIIes and dream about new
possIbIIItIes Ior themseIves. They try to make mo-
ney and to move up In socIety, oIten by any means
possIbIe. And at dIIIerent moments, they hoId dII-
Ierent poInts oI vIew and outIooks on IIIe, arguIng
Ior them In very dIIIerent tones. What happens,
then, to the power oI guIdance, the purIty that was
the very reason and the justIIIcatIon Ior the ubI-
quItous everyday presence oI reIIgIous objects and
sIgns?
WrItIng on cassette tape sermons, CharIes
IIrschkInd (2006) has IIttIngIy descrIbed theIr
presence as an ethIcaI soundscape that IIIIs and
structures the noIsy and crowded spaces oI CaIro.
The sensory presence oI sIam as an overwheImIng
and compeIIIng IdIom oI IIIe, moraIIty and poIItIcs
Is In Iact aImost omnIpresent. t Is present In the
sounds oI prayer caIIs, sermons and recItatIons, In
the vIsuaI presence oI reIIgIous decoratIon, graIIItI,
stIckers and the mInarets that mark the skyIIne. t
Is present In the bodIIy motIons oI prayer and Invo-
catIon, the straIn oI wearIng coverIng dress In hot
weather, the wearIness caused by IastIng, the ex-
change oI greetIngs, phrases and handshakes and
the smeII oI certaIn perIumes preIerred by SaIa-
II actIvIsts. ut thIs sensory presence Is seIdom
cIearIy dIIIerentIated Irom other, very dIIIerent
kInds oI sounds, Images and surIaces that mark
the everyday IIIe oI the bIg cIty and the provInces
aIIke. Iather than a competItIon between pIous
and secuIar sensory regImes, an unpredIctabIe co-
exIstence oI dIIIerent nuances, moments and re-
gIsters characterIses daIIy IIIe In gypt.
A kIosk at a bus statIon In CaIro, decorated wIth
verses oI the uran and stIckers wIth moraI and
pIous messages, has the radIo turned on, pIayIng
the newest meIIow Iove song produced by a SaudI-
owned and Iebanon-based musIc corporatIon. A
ThIs Is, In Iact, somethIng that has been taken
serIousIy by anthropoIogy Ior a Iong tIme. The cur-
rent preoccupatIon wIth ethIcs and subjectIvIty Is
paraIIeIed by other approaches to subjectIvIty that
are more concerned wIth ambIvaIence (Iuhrmann
2006, IehI et aI. 2007). oth were preceded by an
engagement wIth the Issue oI muItIpIe IdentItIes,
an engagement that, whatever Its shortcomIngs
may be, provIded Important InsIghts that appear
to have been partIy Iorgotten by the research pro-
gramme oI pIety and ethIcs (wIng 1990, WIIce
1998, Van MeIjI 2006). The exIstence and Impor-
tance oI muItIpIe voIces, too, has been recognIsed
Ior quIte some tIme (see, e.g. Abu-Iughod 1996
|1986|). And sInce the compIexIty oI human cha-
racters Is common knowIedge and thereIore aIso
known by anthropoIogIsts, there Is good reason
to assume that thIs hIstory couId be taken much
Iurther back In tIme. Good Ideas are usuaIIy quIte
oId. There Is thus no need to reInvent the wheeI
to account better Ior what It means to IIve a IIIe oI
whIch sIam Is a part. The theoretIcaI dIrectIons
are IargeIy avaIIabIe.
n thIs IIght, what a good anthropoIogy oI beIng
a MusIIm needs most Is a commItment to a sensItI-
ve and dIaIogIcaI IIeIdwork and an eye Ior the bIo-
graphIcaI and hIstorIcaI depth oI peopIes trajecto-
rIes and socIetIes, aIong wIth a theoretIcaI anaIysIs
that Is commItted to doIng justIce to the peopIe It
teIIs about, whIch Is Iar Irom a trIvIaI task. n the
end, thIs Is more than a theoretIcaI probIem. It Is a
matter oI an emotIonaI commItment to anthropoIo-
gy as a dIaIogue and an encounter.
K02$.37 2L (2##&/#*./
Above have crItIcaIIy noted that there may be too
much research on commItted actIvIsts and too
IIttIe research on the majorIty oI MusIIms who are
not that commItted. The empIrIcaI Iocus on the
commItted actIvIsts, argued, seems to be reIa-
ted to the theoretIcaI Iocus on sIam as a key to
understandIng MusIIm IIves. WhIIe am crItIcaI
oI thIs theoretIcaI Iocus, thIs does not mean that
wouId argue that we shouId stop doIng research
on commItted actIvIsts. ut do argue that thIn-
kIng about the exIstentIaI prImacy oI peopIes
search Ior a pIace In IIIe and the tragIc quaIIty
thIs search oIten takes aIso oers us a dIerent
Image oI actIvIst reIIgIous commItment. The pro-
bIem wIth many oI the numerous ethnographIes
about MusIIms that have been pubIIshed In recent
years Is that they take commItted actIvIsm as
the paradIgmatIc, normaI standard oI reIIgIosIty
Instead oI IookIng at commItted actIvIsts as what
they are. commItted actIvIsts who are wIIIIng to
go very Iar beyond ordInary expectatIons Ior the
sake oI an Important cause In a way most peopIe
are not. ThIs Is a characterIstIc Ieature oI actI-
vIsm and shouId have a promInent pIace In the
study wIth and oI actIvIsts.
wIth Its reIIance on consumerIsm, advertIsement
and sexuaI attractIon, the worId oI romantIc Iove
wIth Its ceIebratIon oI passIon. ut these are not
dIIIerent worIds. They are constItuent parts oI
peopIes IIIe worIds - IIIe worIds that can never be
expIaIned by any sIngIe prIncIpIe but that need to
be understood In theIr compIexIty and openness,
In theIr many hopes and IrustratIons (jackson
1996, 2005). WhIIe the conservatIve ethIcs oI the
reIIgIous revIvaI may appear compIeteIy opposed
to, Ior exampIe, the IIberaI ceIebratIon oI romance
and sexuaIIty In pop musIc, IIIm, vIdeo cIIps and
youth cuIture, In Iact one cannot be understood
wIthout the other, nor are they cIearIy dIstInct In
peopIes IIves (SchIeIke 2009). An attempt to un-
derstand what exactIy Is goIng on must take these
dIIIerent hIghIy compeIIIng pursuIts as parts oI an
essentIaIIy compIex and oIten contradIctory sub-
jectIve experIence and practIce.
argue that we need to take these ambIguItIes
serIousIy and to consIder the ways peopIe IIve them
and theIr attempts to make sense oI theIr IIves. To
understand what Is goIng on, It Is heIpIuI Indeed to
Iook at the ways peopIe cuItIvate emotIonaI aIIects,
the ways sensuaI experIence structures daIIy IIIe
and the ways peopIe try to soIve, cIrcumvent or
cope wIth compIex moraI dIIemmas. t Is not heIp-
IuI, however, to work wIth IdeaIIsed opposItIons,
such as revIvaIIst pIety vs. IIberaI secuIarIsm, be-
cause most peopIe adhere to somethIng oI both
(and somethIng oI many other thIngs as weII), to
dIIIerent degrees at dIIIerent tImes. or Is It heIp-
IuI to hoId the aspIratIonaI aspect oI pursuIng pI-
ety too hIgh wIthout takIng Into consIderatIon the
troubIes and dIsappoIntments that are oIten an In-
evItabIe part oI aspIratIonaI projects.
suggest that one good way to provIde a better
account Is to take serIousIy MIchaeI jacksons ar-
gument about the prImacy oI exIstentIaI concerns
(jackson 2005, see aIso Graw IorthcomIng). ThIs
means we shouId take as our startIng poInt the
ImmedIate practIce oI IIvIng a IIIe, the exIstentIaI
concerns and the pragmatIc consIderatIons that
InIorm thIs practIce, embedded In but not reduced
to the tradItIons, powers and dIscourses that grant
IegItImacy to some concerns over others and struc-
ture some consIderatIons whIIe IeavIng others dII-
Iuse. IoIIowIng thIs exIstentIaI IIne oI enquIry, It
Is aIso Important to reaIIse that the ways peopIe
try to IInd a pIace In IIIe are ambIguous and oIten
tragIc In theIr outcomes. As Iobert OrsI (2005) has
shown In hIs work on AmerIcan CathoIIcIsm, the
same aspects that provIde hope, recognItIon and
IncIusIon can aIso be a source oI IrustratIon, IntI-
mIdatIon and excIusIon. ThIs ambIguIty appears to
be characterIstIc oI our attempts to IIve good IIves,
and an anthropoIogy commItted to understandIng
the human condItIon Is weII advIsed to take It se-
rIousIy.
tIme In the army, whIch, he saId, sImIIarIy provI-
ded hIm the cIear structure he was mIssIng. To
understand hIs account, we thereIore aIso need to
take serIousIy hIs IdIosyncratIc experIence, hIs Ia-
mIIy hIstory and the characterIstIc way he some-
tImes marches and sometImes stumbIes through
IIIe. And consIderIng thIs IdIosyncratIc IeveI aIso
heIps to make InteIIIgIbIe the more generaI Iea-
tures oI hIs quest.
Take, Ior the sake oI comparIson, the way Mus-
taIa descrIbes hIs motIvatIons to become a SaIaII
and the way john SteInbeck (1961 |1936|) has the
IIterary IIgure oI jIm oIan descrIbe hIs decIsIon
to joIn the CommunIst Iarty In hIs noveI ?# @.5/9
*.( A'++&,.
IIson touched the desk here and there wIth hIs
IIngertIps. ven the peopIe youre tryIng to heIp
wIII hate you most oI the tIme. o you know that?
Yes.
WeII, why do you want to joIn, then?
jIms eyes haII cIosed In perpIexIty. At Iast he
saId, n the jaII there were some Iarty men.
They taIked to me. verythIngs been a mess, aII
my IIIe. TheIr IIves werent messes. They were
workIng toward somethIng. want to work to-
ward somethIng. IeeI dead. thought mIght
get aIIve agaIn. (SteInbeck 1961 |1936|. 6)
n the tIme when started to get back to mys-
eII had Iost many thIngs. started to search.
Where Is the rIght way? |...| dIdnt have a ba-
sIc method that couId IoIIow to soIve my prob-
Iems and to Iace the worId. had no prIncIpIe to
IoIIow. had no Iaw that couId appIy and that
wouId aIIow me to teII rIght Irom wrong. |...|
took to askIng about everythIng In my IIIe. s It
haII or harm? ven II dIdnt have awareness
about It, no cIear textuaI prooI. ut my IeeIIng
was. I onIy couId know whether thIs Is haram
or haII? |...| Ior a whIIe IIved a better IIIe IIke
hadnt IIved It sInce the death oI my Iather. t was
even better. got to know a Iot oI peopIe, and IeIt
that the IIIe IIve Is good. (MustaIa, IntervIew In
2006)
WouId MustaIa have been attracted to communIsm
Instead oI SaIa!sm II he had IIved In a dIerent
tIme? nterestIngIy enough, hIs Iather was. ut Ior
MustaIa, the answer Is probabIy no. CommunIsm
and SaIa!sm are dIerent soIutIons, not because
they stand on dIerent sIdes oI the secuIar-sIamIc
dIvIde, but because they appeaI to sIIghtIy dIe-
rent kInds oI sensIbIIIty. oth the reaI person Mus-
taIa and the IIterary !gure jIm oIan search Ior
a way to IeeI aIIve, to do somethIng meanIngIuI,
to have a basIs and dIrectIon oI IIIe. ut whIIe the
n my own ethnographIc encounters wIth peopIe
who Ior a perIod oI tIme have trIed to IIve a dedI-
cated and actIvIst reIIgIous IIIe, two reIated motI-
vatIons Ieature very centraIIy. One Is the search
Ior a soIutIon to a personaI crIsIs, the other Is the
desIre to !nd somethIng truIy Important to pur-
sue In a way that gIves ones IIIe a sIngIe and per-
manent purpose. oth appear to be quIte generaI
human pursuIts, and yet neIther oI the two Is very
typIcaI oI everyday human experIence, In whIch
there are usuaIIy severaI Important purposes In
IIIe.
To understand what these actIvIsts are aIter, It Is
thereIore Important to ask why, on what grounds
and wIth what expectatIons some peopIe embark on
the search Ior dedIcated perIectIon whIIe others do
not, and why some go on whIIe others stop aIter a
whIIe. MusIIms do not sImpIy want to be good Mus-
IIms. eIther the wIII to be pIous, nor the choIce
Ior pIety rather than other Iorms oI actIvIsm Is ob-
vIous. StrIkIngIy, many oI those who joIn the SaIa-
! movement do so because the rItuaI and moraI
rIgour oI SaIa!sm promIses order In a conIusIng
IIIe. At other tImes or In other contexts, they mIght
have joIned other reIIgIous or poIItIcaI groups, but
Ior sImIIar reasons. The questIons !nd worth as-
kIng, then, are. What makes a specI!c dIrectIon
oI actIvIsm attractIve In a specI!c sItuatIon? What
are the anxIetIes peopIe try to overcome and what
are the promIses they are oered? What does theIr
actuaI work oI dedIcatIon Iook IIke? What conse-
quences does It have? Iow do the experIments oI
actIvIst dedIcatIon, whIch are oIten temporary, be-
come a part oI peopIes bIographIes?
To pursue these questIons, It Is heIpIuI to be open
to both the generaIIy human, the hIstorIcaIIy and
cuIturaIIy specIIIc and the IndIvIduaIIy IdIosyncra-
tIc. Ior the sake oI IIIustratIon, take the account
oI MustaIa, who became a dedIcated SaIaII In hIs
earIy twentIes aIter experIencIng a perIod oI strong
dIsorIentatIon, but stopped aIter Iess than a year.
Today, he Iooks back at hIs SaIaII perIod wIth a mIx-
ture oI Iondness, dIstance and regret. Ie remem-
bers hIs short perIod oI dedIcated pIety as a happy
tIme, but Is neIther wIIIIng nor abIe to return to It.
To understand MustaIas story, It Is Important
but not suIIIcIent to Iook at SaIaII sIams suc-
cess In northern gypt In estabIIshIng ItseII as
the most powerIuI reIIgIous voIce and thereIore
MustaIas IIkeIIest choIce In the search Ior a cIear
dIIIerence between rIght and wrong. IavIng cho-
sen the SaIaII path, MustaIas dedIcatIon took a
specIIIc dIrectIon wIth emphasIs on gender segre-
gatIon, abstInence Irom aIcohoI, drugs and cIga-
rettes and vIewIng IIIe as the appIIcatIon oI dIvI-
ne Iaw. ThIs had very specIIIc consequences Ior
the way he deaIt wIth hIs mother and some oI hIs
IrIends, Ior exampIe. ut the emotIonaI work thIs
experIment dId Ior hIm was aIso oI a more generaI
nature. MustaIa Iater compared It to me wIth hIs
ted by IaIIures and tragedIes, the grand scheme as
a guIdeIIne oI IIIe can remaIn vaIId and credIbIe.
y vIrtue oI theIr Inherent ambIguIty oI apparent
perIectIon externaI to daIIy IIIe and to the exIsten-
tIaI sIgnIIIcance oI the everyday, such grand sche-
mes can never be accounted Ior aIone. They must
aIways be understood as connected In at Ieast two
dImensIons. IIrst, In theIr reIatIon to everyday con-
cerns and experIences, and second, In theIr reIa-
tIon to other compeIIIng grand schemes that aIso
promIse to provIde meanIng and dIrectIon to those
everyday concerns and experIences.
n the case oI my IIeIdwork In gypt, such grand
schemes IncIude commItment to sIam, romantIc
Iove, capItaIIst weaIth and consumptIon, educatIon
and socIaI mobIIIty, deveIopment and modernIsa-
tIon and natIonaIIst, pan-ArabIc and pan-sIamIst
poIItIcs, to name just a Iew. ThIs Is not to say that
the promIse oI good IIIe and eternaI saIvatIon (wIth
the converse threat oI eternaI damnatIon) that Is
centraI to peopIes adherence to sIam today Is no
dIIIerent Irom romantIc Iove or Irom socIaI mobI-
IIty. t Is very dIIIerent, and hereIn IIes Its appeaI
and Its power. ut the ways peopIe IIve sIam,
as Magnus Marsden (2005) has put It, may not be
so dramatIcaIIy dIIIerent Irom the ways they IIve
capItaIIsm and Iove. n aII these cases, we are taI-
kIng about great hopes, deep anxIetIes and com-
peIIIng promIses about grand schemes and pow-
erIuI persons that wIII Iead to practIcaI soIutIons,
promIses that peopIe try to IoIIow and to put In
practIce. Some do It more consIstentIy than others.
Some attempts actuaIIy heIp peopIe to IIve a better
IIIe as they understand It. Others resuIt In trage-
dy. Most are ambIvaIent, provIdIng both satIsIac-
tIon and suIIerIng. Many attempts are short-IIved,
and aImost aII oI them are partIaI. n aII cases, the
grand schemes are Iorever unreaIIsed, and yet aI-
ways apparentIy wIthIn reach, promIsIng a hoId,
a dIrectIon In a dIIIIcuIt, compIex and oIten Irus-
tratIng IIIe. IookIng at these attempts and theIr
consequences wIth an eye Ior the rIchness and the
openness, but aIso the IImItatIons and power re-
IatIonshIps oI the human condItIon Is In my vIew
the most promIsIng way to understand the sIgnIII-
cance oI the adherence to sIam as a part oI human
IIves.
M*L*0*.(*7
- Abu-Iughod, IIIa. 1996 |1986|. B,/&,! (,#+/6,#+(C
=*#*.1 '#! )*,+1% /# ' A,!*./# (*-/,+%. CaIro.
AmerIcan !nIversIty In CaIro Iress.
- Abu-Zahra, adIa. 1997. D=, E.1, '#! E*3,1>.&C
F+.!/,( /# G*#+,6)*1'1% H.(&/6 F*-/,+%, erk-
shIre. thaca Iress.
- AnIdjar, GII. 2009. The dea oI an AnthropoIogy oI
ChrIstIanIty. ?#+,10,#+/*#( 11, 3. 367-393.
- Anjum, OvamIr. 2007. sIam as a IscursIve TradI-
tIon. TaIaI Asad and IIs nterIocutors. G*6)'1'9
communIst creed that provIdes the sense oI exIs-
tentIaI hope on the pages oI ?# @.5/*.( A'++&, Is
orIented toward a struggIe agaInst someone, a
search Ior meanIngIuI exIstence through coIIectI-
ve actIon, the SaIa! creed that provIded MustaIa
a temporary !rm hoId In a tIme oI crIsIs was hea-
vIIy Iocussed on IndIvIduaI dIscIpIIne and saIvatI-
on. There may be more sImIIarIty between actIvIst
careers In communIsm and mIIItant sIamIsm, but
MustaIa had hIs reasons to stay away Irom both.
The poInt that am tryIng to make Is that when
we Iook at sIamIc - or any other - actIvIsm, It Is
necessary but not suIIIcIent to Iook at the partIcu-
Iar actIvIst movement and the tradItIon to whIch It
Iays cIaIm. ThIs Iook needs to be suppIemented by
a Iook at both the IdIosyncratIc and the comparatI-
ve IeveIs. ThIs Is IIkeIy to requIre more work, but
It Is aIso IIkeIy to gIve us a much deeper vIew oI
the motIvatIons and the consequences oI actIvIst
commItment.
H2.(%$7&2.N O)* "#6&J$&/9 2L J0".3 7()*#*7
n a way, thIs approach bIds IareweII to the project
oI an anthropoIogy oI sIam, at Ieast II the anthro-
poIogy oI sIam Is meant to be an anthropoIogy that
Is marked not onIy by Its subject matter but aIso by
Its own set oI theoretIcaI concerns. Such anthropo-
Iogy Is too IIkeIy to be trapped In the pItIaIIs oI ex-
ceptIonaIIsm, too preoccupIed wIth sIam to make
reaIIy good sense oI what It may mean to be a Mus-
IIm. am hesItant, however, to reIegate the Issue
to the anthropoIogy oI reIIgIon. oIng so, we wouId
stIII Iace an anaIogous probIem oI an excessIve prI-
vIIegIng oI reIIgIous IdentIty and actIon In peopIes
IIves. We wouId stIII rIsk drawIng an arbItrary dIvI-
dIng IIne between reIIgIous pursuIts and other pur-
suIts, a IIne wanted to questIon by takIng up the
comparIson oI SaIa! and communIst actIvIsm.
thInk that to understand the sIgnIIIcance oI a
reIIgIous or any other IaIth In peopIes IIves, It Is
perhaps more heIpIuI to Iook at It Iess specIIIcaIIy
as a reIIgIon or a tradItIon and Instead take a more
Iuzzy and open-ended vIew oI It as a grand scheme
that Is actIveIy ImagIned and debated by peopIe and
that can oIIer varIous kInds oI dIrectIon, meanIng
and guIdance In peopIes IIves (see SchIeIke and
ebevec, IorthcomIng). What characterIses grand
schemes oI thIs kInd Is theIr appearance oI beIng
externaI and superIor to everyday experIence, a
hIgher and reIIabIe measure and guIdeIIne oI IIIe
- whIch can be both personIIIed as gods, prophets,
saInts and heroes as weII as abstract In the Iorm oI
books, knowIedge, IdeoIogIes and attItudes. What
makes them so powerIuI Is precIseIy the ambIguIty
that Is centraI to theIr assumed externaIIty. by vIr-
tue oI theIr apparent perIectIon they can be caIIed
and acted upon, and yet the contradIctIons and set-
backs oI everyday experIence seIdom shake theIr
credIbIIIty (see SImon 2009). ven II ones attempt
to IIve a IIIe guIded by a grand scheme Is Irustra-
IeIIgIous IraxIs In SenegaI and GambIa, In SamuII
SchIeIke and IIza ebevec, eds., I0,1%!'% J,&/8/*#,
ew York. erghahn.
- IenkeI, IeIko. 2005. etween beIIeI and unbeIIeI
IIes the perIormance oI saIat. MeanIng and !""#$
%&%y oI a MusIIm rItuaI. $*.1#'& *> +=, J*%'& K#9
+=1*)*&*8/-'& ?#(+/+.+, 11. 487-507.
- IIrschkInd, CharIes. 2006. D=, ,+=/-'& (*.#!(-'),C
-'((,++, (,16*#( '#! ?(&'6/- -*.#+,19).5&/-(. ew
York. CoIumbIa !nIversIty Iress.
- smaII, SaIwa. 2003. J,+=/#</#8 ?(&'6/(+ E*&/+/-(C
G.&+.1,L +=, F+'+, '#! ?(&'6/(6. Iondon. TaurIs.
- jackson, MIchaeI (ed.) 1996. D=/#8( '( +=,% '1,C
M,3 !/1,-+/*#( /# )=,#*6,#*&*8/-'& '#+=1*)*&*8%.
IoomIngton. ndIana !nIversIty Iress.
- jackson, MIchaeI. 2005. IN/(+,#+/'& '#+=1*)*&*8%C
I0,#+(L ,N/8,#-/,( '#! ,>>,-+(. OxIord. erghahn
ooks.
- jokInen, WIn. 1906. O(<*#+* P<(/+%('(/'<(/Q R'<9
(/ ,(/+,&6SS ,1/ &S=+,/+S <S%++S,#T Tampere. Tam-
pereen tyven sanomaIehtI-osakeyhtI.
- KIemm, Verena. 2000. IIIerent notIons oI com-
mItment (/&+/7'6) and commItted IIterature (aI-adab
aI-muItazIm) In the IIterary cIrcIes oI the MashrIq.
H/!!&, I'(+,1# U/+,1'+.1,( 3, 1. 51-62.
- KreII, Aymon. IorthcomIng. Ia St VaIentIn au pays
daI-Azhar. eIements dethnographIe de Iamour et
du sentIment amoureux au CaIre.
- Iakatos, mre and AIan Musgrave (eds.) 1970. G1/+/9
-/(6 '#! +=, V1*3+= *> R#*3&,!8,C E1*-,,!/#8( *>
+=, ?#+,1#'+/*#'& G*&&*2./.6 /# +=, E=/&*(*)=% *>
F-/,#-,. CambrIdge. CambrIdge !nIversIty Iress.
- Iambek, MIchaeI. 2000. The AnthropoIogy oI IeII-
gIon and the uarreI between Ioetry and IhIIoso-
phy. G.11,#+ K#+=1*)*&*8% 41, 309-302.
- Iuhrmann, T.M. 2006. SubjectIvIty. K#+=1*)*&*8/9
-'& D=,*1% 6. 345-361.
- IutII, WII. 2009 |2005|. W4=/1'+ '&9!.X4+ '&98.!.!,
2nd ed., CaIro. r aI-'Ayn II-n-nashr.
- Mahmood, Saba. 2005. E*&/+/-( *> E/,+%C +=, ?(&'6/-
J,0/0'& '#! +=, Y,6/#/(+ F.5Z,-+. IrInceton. IrInce-
ton !nIversIty Iress.
- Mahmood, Saba. 2009. IeIIgIous Ieason and
SecuIar AIIect. An ncommensurabIe IvIde? In
TaIaI Asad, Wendy rown, judIth utIer, and Saba
Mahmood, ?( G1/+/2., F,-.&'1[ A&'()=,6%L ?#Z.1%L
'#! Y1,, F),,-= (Townsend Iapers In IumanItIes,
2), 64-100. OnIIne document. http.//eschoIarshIp.
org/uc/Item/84q9c6It
- MarrancI, GabrIeIe. 2008. D=, K#+=1*)*&*8% *> ?(9
&'6. OxIord and ew York. erg.
- Marsden, Magnus. 2005. U/0/#8 ?(&'6C H.(&/6 1,&/9
8/*.( ,N),1/,#-, /# E'</(+'#X( M*1+=9\,(+ Y1*#+/,1.
CambrIdge. CambrIdge !nIversIty Iress.
- MasqueIIer, AdeIIne. 2009. \*6,# '#! ?(&'6/- J,9
0/0'& /# ' \,(+ K>1/-'# D*3#T IoomIngton. ndIana
!nIversIty Iress.
- MeIjI, Toon van. 2006. MuItIpIe dentIIIcatIons and
the IaIogIcaI SeII. !rban MaorI Youngsters and
+/0, F+.!/,( *> F*.+= K(/'L K>1/-' '#! +=, H/!!&,
I'(+ 27, 3. 656-672.
- Asad, TaIaI. 1986 D=, ?!,' *> '# K#+=1*)*&*8% *>
?(&'6, OccasIonaI Iapers SerIes, WashIngton, C.
Center Ior Contemporary Arab StudIes, George-
town !nIversIty.
- Asad, TaIaI. 1993. V,#,'&*8/,( *> 1,&/8/*#C !/(-/)&/#,
'#! 1,'(*#( *> )*3,1 /# G=1/(+/'#/+% '#! ?(&'6, aI-
tImore. johns IopkIns !nIversIty Iress.
- Asad, TaIaI. 2003. Y*16'+/*#( *> +=, F,-.&'1C G=1/(9
+/'#/+%L ?(&'6L H*!,1#/+%, StanIord, CA.. StanIord
!nIversIty Iress.
- Asad, TaIaI. 2006. ]# F./-/!, A*65/#8. ew York.
CoIumbIa !nIversIty Iress.
- Asad, TaIaI. 2009. Iree Speech, Iasphemy, and
SecuIar CrItIcIsm, In TaIaI Asad, Wendy rown,
judIth utIer, and Saba Mahmood, ?( G1/+/2., F,-.9
&'1[ A&'()=,6%L ?#Z.1%L '#! Y1,, F),,-= (Townsend
Iapers In IumanItIes, 2), 20-63. OnIIne document.
http.//eschoIarshIp.org/uc/Item/84q9c6It
- AvonIus, Ieena. 2008. AmbIguItIes and IubIIc e-
bates. AhmadIyah, Iornography, and State ControI
In ndonesIa. paper presented at the workshop
MoraI communItIes and ambIguItIes 9-10 October
2008, IeIsInkI CoIIegIum Ior Advanced StudIes.
- angstad, SIndre. 2009a. ContestIng secuIarIsm/s.
SecuIarIsm and sIam In the work oI TaIaI Asad.
K#+=1*)*&*8/-'& D=,*1% 9, 2. 188-208.
- angstad, SIndre. 2009b. F,<.&'1/(6,#( K#(/<+,1.
OsIo. !nIversItetsIorIaget.
- IehI, joo, yron Good, and Arthur KIeInman
(eds.). 2007. F.5Z,-+/0/+%C I+=#*81')=/- ?#0,(+/8'9
+/*#(. erkeIey etc.. !nIversIty oI CaIIIornIa Iress.
- eeb, Iara. 2006. K# I#-='#+,! H*!,1#T V,#!,1
'#! E.5&/- E/,+% /# F=/;/ U,5'#*#. IrInceton. IrInce-
ton !nIversIty Iress.
- eeb, Iara. 2009. IIety poIItIcs and the roIe oI a
transnatIonaI IemInIst anaIysIs. $*.1#'& *> +=, J*%'&
K#+=1*)*&*8/-'& ?#(+/+.+, 15 (2009), S1. S112-S126.
- IckeIman, aIe. 1992. Mass IIgher ducatIon
and the IeIIgIous magInatIon In Contemporary
Arab SocIetIes. K6,1/-'# I+=#*&*8/(+ 9, 4. 643-
655.
- rvast, Iekka. 1928 |1903|. M%<%/#,# K(,6'. 2nd
ed., IeIsInkI. MystIca.
- wIng, CatherIne. 1990. The IIusIon oI WhoIe-
ness. CuIture, SeII, and the xperIence oI ncon-
sIstency. I+=*( 18. 251-278.
- IadII, adIa. 2009. ManagIng aIIects and sensIbII-
ItIes. The case oI not-handshakIng and not-IastIng.
F*-/'& K#+=1*)*&*8% 17, 4. 439-454.
- Geertz, CIIIIord. 1968. sIam Observed. ew Ia-
ven. YaIe !nIversIty Iress.
- GeIIner, rnest. 1981. MusIIm SocIety. CambrIdge
etc.. CambrIdge !nIversIty Iress.
- GIIsenan, MIchaeI. 2000 |1982|. J,-*8#/7/#8 ?(&'6C
J,&/8/*# '#! F*-/,+% /# +=, H*!,1# H/!!&, I'(+, re-
vIsed ed., Iondon. TaurIs.
- Graw, Knut. IorthcomIng. IvInatIon and sIam.
xIstentIaI IerspectIves In the Study oI IItuaI and
the CuIturaI IenaIssance. $*.1#'& *> +=, J*%'& K#9
+=1*)*&*8/-'& ?#(+/+.+, 12. 917-933.
- Moors, AnneIIes. 2009. sIamIc IashIon In u-
rope. IeIIgIous ConvIctIon, AuthentIc StyIe, and
CreatIve ConsumptIon. I#-*.#+,1( 1, 1. 175-199.
- Ieuwkerk, KarIn van. 2008. Iepentant artIsts
In gypt. debatIng gender, perIormIng arts and re-
IIgIon. G*#+,6)*1'1% ?(&'6 2. 191-210.
- OrsI, Iobert A. 2005. A,+3,,# ^,'0,# '#! I'1+=C
D=, J,&/8/*.( \*1&!( E,*)&, H'<, '#! +=, F-=*&'1(
\=* F+.!% D=,6. IrInceton. IrInceton !nIversIty
Iress.
- OseIIa, IIIIppo and enjamIn Soares. 2009. sIam,
poIItIcs, anthropoIogy. $*.1#'& *> +=, J*%'& K#+=1*9
)*&*8/-'& ?#(+/+.+, 15 (2009), S1. S1-S23.
- IandoIIo. SteIanIa. 2007. The burnIng. IInItude
and the poIItIco-theoIogIcaI ImagInatIon oI IIIegaI
mIgratIon. K#+=1*)*&*8/-'& D=,*1% 7, 3. 329-363.
- SaIvatore, Armando. 2007. D=, E.5&/- F)=,1,C U/9
5,1'& H*!,1#/+%L G'+=*&/-/(6L ?(&'6. ew York etc..
IaIgrave MacMIIIan.
- SchIeIke, SamuII. 2007. IegemonIc ncounters.
CrItIcIsm oI saInts-day IestIvaIs and the IormatIon
oI modern sIam In Iate 19th and earIy 20th-centu-
ry gypt. @/, \,&+ !,( ?(&'6( 47, 3-4. 319-355.
- SchIeIke, SamuII. 2009. AmbIvaIent commItments.
TroubIes oI moraIIty, reIIgIosIty and aspIratIon
among young gyptIans, j*.1#'& *> J,&/8/*# /# K>9
1/-' 39, 2. 158-185.
- SchIeIke, SamuII and IIza ebevec (eds.). Iorthco-
mIng. I0,1%!'% J,&/8/*#. ew York. erghahn.
- SchuIz, orothea. 2006. IromIses oI (Im)medIa-
te saIvatIon. sIam, broadcast medIa, and the re-
makIng oI reIIgIous experIence In MaII. K6,1/-'#
I+=#*&*8/(+ 33, 2. 210-229.
- Scott, avId and CharIes IIrschkInd, eds. 2006.
E*3,1( *> +=, F,-.&'1 H*!,1#T D'&'& K('! '#! ^/(
?#+,1&*-.+*1(. StanIord. StanIord !nIversIty Iress.
The -14 =20+&.J C"I*07 Is a serIes oI pubIIcatIons that document and re"ect deveIopments and dIscussIons wIthIn
ZMO research projects. Texts are usuaIIy empIrIcaIIy based and regIonaIIy Iocused and may aIso represent outcomes oI
research at an earIy stage. They are pubIIshed on the ZMO websIte.
The -*./0$# 123*0.*0 40&*./ (ZMO) Is the onIy German research InstItute devoted to an InterdIscIpIInary and compa-
ratIve study oI the MIddIe ast, AIrIca, South, Southeast and CentraI AsIa Irom a hIstorIcaI perspectIve. Current research
Iocuses on the InteractIon between predomInantIy MusIIm socIetIes and theIr reIatIons wIth non-MusIIm neIghbours. ZMO
was Iounded In 1996 as one oI sIx unIversIty-Independent, non-pro!t research centres Ior research In the humanItIes.
SS 2191-3897
ZMO 2010
esIgn. jrg Iuckmann, erIIn
ThIs text may be downIoaded onIy Ior personaI research purposes. AddItIonaI reproductIon Ior other purposes,
whether In hard copIes or eIectronIcaIIy, requIres the consent oI the author(s), edItor(s). I cIted or quoted, reIerence
shouId be made to IuII name oI the author(s), edItor(s), the tItIe oI the programmatIc text, the year and the pubIIsher.
Ior questIons and comments pIease contact ZMO.
- SImon, Gregory. 2009. The souI Ireed oI cares? s-
IamIc prayer, subjectIvIty, and the contradIctIons oI
moraI seIIhood In MInangkabau, ndonesIa. K6,9
1/-'# I+=#*&*8/(+ 36, 2. 258-275
- SoIkkanen, Iannu. 1961. F*(/'&/(6/# +.&* F.*6,,#C
I#(/66S/(//# %<(/<'6'1/(,# ,!.(<.##'# 0''&,/=/#
'(+/T Ih thesIs, !nIversIty oI Turku.
- Starrett, Gregory. 1998. E.++/#8 ?(&'6 +* \*1<C
I!.-'+/*#L E*&/+/-(L '#! J,&/8/*.( D1'#(>*16'+/*# /#
I8%)+. !nIversIty oI CaIIIornIa Iress.
- Starrett, Gregory. IorthcomIng. The VarIetIes oI
SecuIar xperIence. G*6)'1'+/0, F+.!/,( /# F*-/9
,+% '#! ^/(+*1% 52, 3. 626-651.
- SteInbeck, john. 1961 |1936|. ?# @.5/*.( A'++&,T
ew York. antam ooks.
- Van der Veer, Ieter. 2008. mbodIment, MaterIa-
IIty, and Iower. A IevIew ssay. G*6)'1'+/0, F+.9
!/,( /# F*-/,+% '#! ^/(+*1% 50. 809-818.
- VarIsco, anIeI MartIn. 2005. ?(&'6 ]5(-.1,!C D=,
J=,+*1/- *> K#+=1*)*&*8/-'& J,)1,(,#+'+/*#. ew
York. IaIgrave MacmIIIan.
- VerkaaIk, Oskar. 2010. The cachet dIIemma. IItuaI
and agency In new utch natIonaIIsm. K6,1/-'#
I+=#*&*8/(+ 37, 1. 69-82.
- WIIce, james M. jr. (ed.). 1998. CommunIcatIng
MuItIpIe dentItIes In MusIIm CommunItIes. Spe-
cIaI Issue oI I+=*( 26, 2.
- I-ZeIn, AbduI I. 1977. eyond deoIogy and Theo-
Iogy. The Search Ior the AnthropoIogy oI sIam.
K##.'& J,0/,3 *> K#+=1*)*&*8% 6. 227-54.
!"#$%& !()&*%+* /( J,(,'1-= Y,&&*3 /# +=, )1*Z,-+ _?#
F,'1-= *> I.1*),C G*#(/!,1/#8 +=, E*((/5&, /# K>1/-' '#!
+=, H/!!&, I'(+` '+ +=, WH]T

Schielke 2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Schielke 2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

W O I K G

You might also like