The Hui of Xi’an, as Gillette states, were institutionalized by the Han establishment as the ‘backward’ minority, unable to fully be brought into the fold of Han society, due to their low “culture”. In fact Gillette contends that most of the cultural accommodation on the part of the government has in fact been instrumental in propagating this notion. The affirmative action policy is perpetuating a stereotype of the Hui as a minority that needs to be handled with great car, since they are not able to adjust and react to things in a high-cultured, Han way. Throughout the reading I kept thinking about the North African communities of France. While there are obviously more serious problems with this community in the French context, than the Hui in the Chinese, some parallels are clear. Both communities are widely spread throughout their countries, but at the same time ghettoized, and mostly keeping to themselves. At the same time, the government institutes a policy, which turns into a vicious cycle – the Arabs need subsidies and welfare because they’re unable to truly be “French”, but are despised for their low “culture” and unwillingness to assimilate. It is a difficult social problem, plaguing many countries and minorities – how does one get out of this cycle? And what in particular makes a community achieve this miserable standing? It cannot be Islam – since there are many examples of Muslim minorities doing quite well, like in Sri Lanka or Canada for example. It is a combination of many factors – and some play a bigger part than others, depending on the cultural environment.
Reflections on Reading by Gillette.
October 29, 2009Huaisheng Mosque
October 8, 2009One of the readings for this week focused on Chinese mosques. This is one of the oldest:
Reflections on the readings for Oct. 8
October 8, 2009The Murata piece is certainly fascinating, and provides an insight in the interplay of Confuscian ideals prevalent in Chinese culture and the theology of Islam. It is important to stress that it is theology that is focused on in Wang’s work, and not Islam as a commonly understood practical way of life. There is no doubt that defining what Islam means is infinetly problematic, but for the sake of this post, we can say that Wang did not speak on Islamic ritual or history. Throughout Wang’s discussion on The Real One, there are no envocations of Quranic passages or ahadith, and most of the ideas are expressed through Confuscian or Daoist terminology. Murata alludes to a problem in translating terms like God into Chinese in the prelude to Wang’s work, but it is not entirely clear whether it is the language itself that presents a problem, or whether Wang simply thought Confuscian terminology to be sufficient in explaining Islamic monotheism. Whatever the answer may be, it is interesting to note that almost in every Islamic culture, Arabic terminology still dominates every piece of Islamic writing, Sufi or not. Wang’s work seems to be an example of this exception.
A fascinating thing about Wang’s treatise is the similarity of the ideas to Ibn Arabi’s cosmology – Murata draws many parallels between Wang’s and Ibn Arabi’s concepts. Has Ibn Arabi’s work made its way through to China then, at the time of Wang’s writing? If so, this fact would suggest an impressive unity of the scholarly community in the Islamic world. A work from Andalus being brought all the way to China and studied by the local ulema is remarkable..
Sufi Shaykh in China
October 1, 2009A sufi shaykh (most likely Naqshbandi judging from the hat) adresses his followers in yunnan. Appears to be a Hui
Reflections On The Readings For Oct 1.
October 1, 2009Towards the middle of the first chapter of our reading for this week, entitled “Ethnicity and Hui history”, the author mentions Hudson’s assertion that the Muslims, through their denial of Chinese piety, have historically not been able to play a full part in the community’s social life. The author disagrees with this notion, however, and states that the historical record suggests otherwise. He states quite clearly: “There is no conflict between Islamic values and Chinese filial piety.” The assertion is quite bold, and I think a book about this interesting topic certainly deserves to be published. I am not aware of this subject being actively studied, however, as most studies of Islam in China are either historical or theological in nature. While there are works published about the connection of Sufi Islam to Dao or Buddhist thought, for example, there seems to be a lack of information about the practices of the Muslims and how the practices of the Chinese have affected their ritualistic life. Later, the author mentions the Muslims having to bow to the Imperial Tablets, but not touching the floor, in order to invalidate “the rite in their minds”. This is fascinating stuff, and I am sure more examples of this could be found in the historical records. In class, Chuck mentioned beer being served in every Hui restaurant he’s been to. Could this compromising stance be the defining feature of the Hui, as opposed to other religious minorities? It is also interesting to note the author mentions Sufi orders valuing the family and lineage connections that existed in Han piety, and, to a point, incorporating them. From my studies of Islam, it seems any place on earth has the Sufis play a part of mediators, between the original inhabitants and the new Muslim arrivals. Whether it is the social structure of the Sufi orders, or the more-embracing theology that explains this phenomenon is a different subject…
Sufism in China 