QUOTE
I find that for alot of Armenians (especially the old seroont), Christianity is inseparable from the Armenian identity.
I know.
This is why I wanted to know what the younger seroont especially living in the west (which usually is understood to be more 'open-minded' to such things as mixed marriage, etc.) thinks of this.
I think that the problem is that the traumatic experiences of Armenians have been under "Muslim" rule, although I maintain that it is not much, if at all, is about Islam, but more about pan-Turkism and Turkish nationalism/chauvinism. Islam might have been a rallying call, but that is nothing other than identity politics, and has nothing to do with the nature of true Islam. You will find that rulers have often manipulated Islam to maintain their position and strengthen it. It is the case today in much of the Muslim world where dictatorial regimes continue to use Islam to legitimize their rule. So for example, rebels against the regime want to sow "fitna" (this is not easy to translate to English, so let us say it means "schism"). In fact, much of this manipulation goes not so much through clerics but through education in schools.
And as for clerics, in Shi'i Islam, there is something called "marja'a taqlid" (source of emulation), and each person has to choose a marja'a taqlid, who would be a high cleric, known as Ayatollah. People are free to choose whichever cleric's rulings they want to follow, even across borders. But rarely does the issue of loyalty pose a problem. Why? Because, for example, in the case of Iran's Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei, his fatawa (fatwa = edict) are 99.99% related to religion and not politics at all. So his emulators in Lebanon would not have to follow their political line. In fact, this is exactly what people are not aware of, or want to use to badmouth for example Hezb Allah, by saying that Hezb Allah takes orders from the "wali al faqih" of Iran... which is not true.
Also the idea of Jihad is way too overrated and overused in Western lexicon.
First, not everyone can issue fatawa. Especially not so in Shi'i Islam. In Sunni Islam there are some offshoots like the Salafis who believe in direct interpretation and believe that the door to "Ijtihad" is closed, so basically anyone (someone with no religious credentials as Ossama Bin Laden) can issue fatawa. Now of course, Bin Laden is NOT, I repeat, NOT a cleric. He just issues fatawa because he believes issuing a fatwa is not the monopoly of the Ayatollah...
Anyway , I have not seen a Muslim in Lebanon or Iran for that matter, emulating an Azeri cleric. Nor have I seen any cleric in Iran or Iraq issue a fatwa on Azerbaijan or any other related issue. In that respect , it's a safe bet. Plus, Jihad merely means "struggle", and it is used in many contexts (just saying this so people will shake off their fears of this word based on the actions of some nutcases like Bin Laden). Like, internal Jihad means struggling internally, as an individual, to do good and avoid evil, etc. Not only that, but the struggle between Armenia and the Turks and Azeris is not religious in nature... although Armenians want to portray it as (and also many Turks and Azeris want to portray it as that, too). It is between Armenian nationalism (which has become associated with Christianity) and Turkic nationalism (which has become associated with Islam). I think that by accepting a Muslim Armenian (who is already a Muslim de facto and you cannot change that), you would be strengthening the Armenian cause and not the opposite. I have heard many Turks who use the anti-Muslim card to "show" that Armenians are the ones who are intolerant, etc., and I think this is something that must be truly paid attention to. Although , as my mother says, «թուրքերը աւելի լաւ պտուղ մը չեն: Անանկ մը կը խօսին որ կը կարծես թէ սուրբ են»:
I have grown up in a secular family, though I have attended an Evangelical Armenian school and had to go to church, etc. My knowledge of the Armenian Orthodox church is rather limited (though I was Orthodox on paper). In Lebanon there are very few Armenian converts to Islam and they have been virtually completely excommunicated.
I think that when people talk about Islam in the context of Christian-Muslim relations, they heap classical sentence upon sentence about "clash of civilizations". But they ignore that Muslims and Christians have lived side by side for centuries, and also, in today's age and time, nationalism is still (despite some transnational Salafi movements which I do not want to have anything to do with and in fact call them IDIOTS and CRIMINALS) defined in terms of the nation-state and loyalty to one's people. A Muslim Lebanese is no less loyal to Lebanon than a Christian Lebanese (though in Lebanon there used to be a similar debate, and to this day many extremist Christian elements, though marginalized, continue to argue this point).
I think that some might also be afraid of the danger of opening the way to Turkification of Armenian. In other words, Muslim Turks claiming to be Armenians would somehow make their way and settle in Armenia and "take over the country from within". It's quite an imaginative and paranoid argument, and I am not sure how Armenia determines Armenianness. Is it done based on religion? I mean, at the end of the day a non-Armenian American is also Christian so what is the "right of return" based on? I mean, how does one determine Armenianness, especially when over generations there are mixed marriages, and the new generation (for example in USA) might not even know how to speak Armenian? If it is based on having Armenian ancestors, then I have Armenian ancestors too (from the birthplace of Armenian heroes -- you can guess from my username where that is
), would that make me eligible to go and live there as an equal, and not be considered an enemy within?
Welcome back to Hyefoum indeed.
