CC BY
61История и современность
УДК 929
Muhammad Murad Ramzi (1855-1935) and his works
Abdulsait Aykut
(University of Wisconsin - Madison)
Abstract. Article tells about Mohammad Murad Ramzfs biography. Also in this study you can find his ideas, scientific directions in which he worked and movements in which he was involved. We learn that Murad Ramzi made an essential contribution to the development of Sufism in the Volga-Ural region, Anatolia and throughout the Ottoman Empire. We can see that RamzT's scholastic career covered a greater part of the intellectual terrain of his day, from Sufism and Islamic philosophy to national history. In addition, his command of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish afforded him access and influence across the Islamic world. Moreover, article deals with Ramzi's the most important and remarkable works. Consequently there are books and articles about the cultural problems of Muslims and religious polemics.
Keywords: Murad RamzT, Islamic studies, Sufism, Ismail Bey Gasprinsky, QadTmism, JadTdism, Volga-Ural region.
I. Introduction
In contrast to its narrow geography and isolation from the greater Ottoman world, the Idel - Ural region was host to a considerable degree intellectual activity and produced many influential authors such as QursavT (d. 1812), MarjanT (d. 1889), and Musa Jarullah/Yarulla Bigiyev (d. 1949) whose thought contributed to the cultural resistance against Tsarist rule. Despite important contributions such as Adeeb Khalid's work on Jadidism in Central Asia [3], the almost complete silence in the literature on JadTdism regarding a figure of the stature of Murad RamzT represents a significant lacuna in our knowledge of this intellectual movement.
RamzT's contribution to both traditionalist and reformist movement was remarkable, criticizing traditional customs incompatible with modern life, while defending the notion of classicalfiqh and the centrality of religion in the life of his people. He clearly supported new scholars and teachers from JadTd generations who learned the Russian language and were thus better suited to work within the
government bureaucracy in Kazan to push for their reforms. He was a supporter of Ismail Bey Gasprinsky (d. 1914), the leader of the Jadid movement, skillfully defending him against extremely traditional scholars known as the Qadimists, without offending the establishment. He also criticized overzealous Jadid authors whose extreme radical program risked alienating the public and provoking a state suppression of the movement. He was neither an extreme Jadidist, nor a Qadimist. Rather, Ramzi's scholastic career covered a greater part of the intellectual terrain of his day, from Sufism and Islamic philosophy to national history. In addition, his command of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish afforded him access and influence across the Islamic world [6, p. 495-505; 50, 84-96; 49, p. 171-174; 27, p. 9-10, 89, 96, 99, 174, and 447; 13, p. 223-227; 62, p. 71-75].
Given the diversity of his scholarly pursuits, it is impossible to place him in just one of the categories which made up his contemporary milieu, such as Naqshi master of the Volga-Ural region, Qadimist author, translator, or theologian. In fact, Ramzi participated in, and had a unique impact on, all these fields. Moreover, through translations of works such as the Maktubat of Sirhindi (d. 1624), he contributed to the development of Sufism, not only in the Volga-Ural region, but also in Anatolia and throughout the Ottoman Empire. This Arabic translation, and its re-translation into Turkish, would go on to influence the worldview of many young Turkish intellectuals after the second half of the 20th century1.
Because his Maktubat translation was the most popular of his works, Ramzi is remembered as a Sufi. As he was finishing his famous book on history, however, he was becoming a person who was quite different from the Sufi for which he is remembered. This shift in his thinking led him to an engagement with nationalist ideologies by the end of 1910. After publishing in 1908 his Talfiq al-akhbar wa talqih al-athar, a nationalist history of the Turkic-Tatar peoples of the Volga-Ural region, Ramzi traveled to Eastern Turkistan where he disappeared from the historical record. Anything that may be said of his post-1914 intellectual path remains mere speculation. Whether he continued along the trajectory we can trace from the Maktubat translation to the Talfiq al-akhbar and became an ultra-nationalist, or returned to religious revivalism, is unclear. Even without a complete picture of his intellectual development, a comparison of the documents he left behind is sufficient to prompt a revision of the conventional understanding of Ramzi as merely an old Naqshi sheikh. Clearly, his thinking was much more
1 Ramzi's Arabic translation was well known among Naqshi dargahs of Istanbul. After the 1970's, a new wave of Maktubat translations would start with the works of translator Abdulkadir Akfifek [18]. I observe that this new wave of translations came after the famous poet and author Necip Fazil's strong attraction to the Naqshi order and Sirhindi. Necip Fazil (1904-1983) was one of the most influential authors on the young conservative Muslim generations from 1950-1980. Many Turkish publishing houses (including Qelik, Semerkand, Merve, and Yasin) are still printing Turkish translations of the Arabic version of Maktubat (in the translation by Ramzi) in different forms.
complex. Moreover, the vacillations in the manner he responded to the challenges of his day can teach us a great deal not only about the state of Russian Muslims in late 19th to the early 20th centuries, but also about the particular dilemma that all Muslims, in fact, all non - Europeans, faced with the westernization of the world.
The translation of Maktubat continued to exercise a strong influence upon our interpretation of his legacy despite his metamorphosis as evidenced in Talfiq al-akhbar. Our misunderstanding of Ramzi reflects a common condition suffered by any author fortunate enough to achieve widespread recognition. Although he may abandon his texts by traveling beyond the territory in which they circulate, though a change in his outlook may lead him to disown the utterances of an earlier stage in his intellectual evolution, his words, once written and circulated, will forever cast a specter that follows him wherever he goes and will continue to speak in his name after his death. This is the predicament of writing as such, and philosophers have remarked upon this dilemma since the emergence of the technology of writing [10, p. 10-12]. After the author's words are inscribed on paper, reproduced, and distributed, they take on a life of their own and they travel wherever fate might bring them.
Like his published works, Ramzi also traveled from Kazan to Mecca (al-Makka) and back again, making his final journey to Eastern Turkistan. His movement through space coincided with his traversal of various intellectual stations. And as both the author and his texts were traveling about, their paths must have crossed several times. We can imagine, as his thinking evolved, that his encounter with his older work was an awkward one. Even as he sought to go beyond the mentality of his formative years, the world inaugurated by the emergence of print media is one which forces an author to repeatedly revisit and account for earlier iterations of himself. In fact, texts and other forms of representation characteristic of the modern, westernized world are at the heart of the kinds of issues with which the non-western intelligentsia as a whole has grappled. Ramzi's confrontation with and alienation from his own texts is a model of the broader problem ushered in with the dawning of the modern world. Seen in this light, the failure to assign an author like Ramzi his proper place in history is not the result of bad scholarship, but is rather a symptom of the great divide between two ways of writing. Since the modern nation - state emerged by differentiating itself against religion, since nationalism and secularism were born together, it is no surprise that Ramzi could only fall into one of two categories: Sufi mystic or nationalist historian. But, as we have seen, Ramzi was both a Sufi disciple and a nationalist, and this is exactly why the author's place in our memory is fragmentary.
II. A short sketch of the life of Murad Ramzi
Murad Ramzi informs us that he was born in the month of Rabf al-Awwalof 1272 AH (December 25, 1855) in Almat-Minzala, which was situated between
Ufa and Kazan [37, p. 188]2. Murad Ramzi used pseudonyms such as Tuti, Andalib, Abu al-Hasan, Akmal, and M. M. Ramzi in his shorter works. He signed his books in Arabic as al-Minzalawi, al-Qazani, or al-Makki [37, p. 188]. He wrote that he belonged to the Bikfura clan [38, p. 339-340], a noble family descended from Bikfura (Bik-Chura) Khan [8, p. 79-89 and 135]. This clan supposedly ruled a vast area in Central Asia, including the Aral Sea, the Amu Darya, the Syr Darya, and sections of the Uzbek and Turkmen territories in the 16th century [5, p. 566-568]. His grandfather Adil-Shah was the local ruler of the town of Almat. Damir Garifullin, a relative of the poet Tukay and a regional historian of Almat, wrote about Murad Ramzi's ancestors, his relationship with Kazan nobles, and other discussions pertaining to Ramzi's travels to Mecca, Medina, and Turkistan. According to this article, the poet Tukay criticized the lifestyle of Ramzi as well as his opinions [13, p. 223-227].
Before he was born, his elder brother Hasan Shah was accused of setting up a secret political group and executed in Siberia (1844). At the age of eight, Ramzi was enrolled in the madrasa of his uncle Hasan al-din, disciple of the great scholar Ismail Qishqari. There he studied Arabic grammar, medieval logic, ethics, and theology until the age of 18 [6, p. 495-505].
When he was 18 years old (1873), he went to Kazan to study Islamic disciplines at the madrasa of Shihab al-din Marjani. At that time, Marjani (d. 1889) was already a famous intellectual, historian, and scholar. Murad Ramzi was not pleased with Kazan's educational environment and went to Bukhara to study logic, Islamic philosophy, Qur'anic exegesis (tafsir) and the prophetic tradition (hadith) with the texts preferred in the madrasa system ofthat era. On the road to Bukhara, he stayed two years at Trosky where he continued to study Islamic disciplines under the scholarship of Sharaf al-din and Muhammad Jan. Then he was introduced to the most famous Naqshbandi master of Central Asia, Zaynullah Rasuli (Zeynulla Rasulev) [16, p. 89-112]. He arrived in Tashkent and met some other scholars there. As a result of the invasion of Russian troops in the 1860's, the Kokand Khanate had been abolished and the Turkistan Governor-Generalship was established on July 11, 1867, with the Emirate of Bukhara and the Khanate ofKhiva each receiving the status ofprotectorate [53, p. 71].
2 This is Murad Ramzi's translation ofthe Maktubat by Ahmad Sirhindi. The place of his birth, Almat-Minzala (Menzelinsk), is not to be confused with the city of Almat (Al'met'evsk), Republic of Tatarstan, Russian Federation; rather it is in the Sarman region (administrative center: Sarmanovo), which is located between the city of Almat (Al'met'evsk) and Yar Challi (Naberezhnye Chelny) in the Republic of Tatarstan. Personal communication (July 16, 2015) from Farit Urazayev of the World Congress of Tatars, Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan to Professor Uli Schamiloglu, who first learned of the Urazayev family's connection with Murad Ramzi in June 2015. I would like to thank Prof. Schamiloglu for on passing this information to me. Today the village Almat of (selo Al'met'evo) is located in the rural district of Almat (Al'met'evskoe selskoe poselenie), Sarman region (rayon Sarman), Republic of Tatarstan.
In 1876 he arrived in Bukhara, where he met Abdullah Sartawi and Abd al-shakur Turkman!. In the same year, he came back to Tashkent where he met Abd al-munim Ishan and other Sufi scholars. As he declared in his personal account, he was dissatisfied with traditionalfiqh education and he started to search for his own ethical - spiritual path. One day, he saw the Prophet Muhammad in his dream; then, he met Sufi brothers from the Naqshbandi tariqa, the most influential spiritual order in the Central Asia. After this event, he was initiated into the Naqshabandi order [39, p. 302].
Around 1878 he intended to go on the pilgrimage to Mecca (al-hajj), passing through some Afghan and Indian cities such as Lahore, Bombay, and Karachi, where he boarded a ship traveling to Jedda in the Arabian Peninsula. He came to Hejaz and continued his education in the Amin Agha (Emin Aga) and Mahmudiya madrasas and became a disciple of the Naqshabandi Sufi Master Muhammad Mazhar. Because Medina was a rich city home to many great scholars and libraries, he was happy there. At that time, there was a Tatar community living in Mecca-Medina consisting of students in Islamic disciplines and traders. In 1880, he married Asma', the noble daughter of Muhammad Shah, a member of the Kazan community in Mecca. Around those years, he became ill and went back to Kazan but, after a few months, he returned to Mecca where he took lessons from Abd al-hamid Daghistani, Abd al-rahman Siraj, and Sheikh Surur al-Sudani.
When both Muhammad Mazhar and Abd al-hamid Daghistani died in 1884, Sheikh Muhammad al-Zawawi assumed the position of Daghistani, and Ramzi continued his spiritual education under the mastership of al-Zawawi. In 1885, al-Zawawi went to Medina and gave an ijaza (certification of mastery) in the Naqshi spiritual path to both Ramzi and a sheikh from Java, the East Indies (today's Indonesia). In these years Ramzi translated the Rashahat Ayn al-Hayat of Kashifi, a very important biography of Naqshi masters, and started to translate the Maktubat-i Rabbani, that is"The Letters"of Ahmad Sirhindi. As he mentioned in his personal accounts, he was also intrigued by the books of Ibn Arabi and read al-Futuhat al-Makkiya and Fusus al-Hikam ("The Bezels of Wisdom"). In Mecca, he was a productive scholar sharing his experience with many students coming from diverse locations around the Muslim world, including Muhammad Rashid Jarullah, father of the famous Turkish scholar Ahmet Temir (see above). Mecca of 1885 was under the influence of Sufi orders such as the Qadiriya and Khalidi-Naqshbandiya. As Weismann indicates in his book [19, p. 98], when the Dutch scholar Snouck Hurgronje arrived in Mecca in 1885 to investigate the position of residents and pilgrims from the East Indies, he found four Naqshbandi Sufi masters in the city, with the Khalidi-Naqshbandi masters being the most popular among them [36, p. 156]. Murad Ramzi was one of the most prominent Islamic scholars who had a private library in Mecca [51, p. 87 and 91]. His library included some rare Islamic manuscripts and other precious books, as
the Indian scholar Sulayman al-Nadwi mentioned in the journal Ma arif [51, p. 100]. However, his private library was incorporated along with other small libraries into the General Library of al-Haram al-Sharif (Uy^Jill ^j^Jl ) when the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was established [1, p. 19-20].
Between 1902 and 1914 he traveled to Istanbul, Kazan and Turkistan. For his final journey he went to Tashkent, Andijan, Khokand, and Bukhara with his son Fehmi Murad. In fact, he intended to return to Mecca. However, the war between the Russian Empire and Ottomans must have prevented his return. Then he went instead to Orenburg where his aunt's son, Muslih al-din Nogaybek, was a local teacher in the village of Toztoba.
The Russian Empire was going through politically turbulent times and the government forced him to stay in Toztoba as a civilian prisoner. The problem was Murad Ramzi's famous book Talfiq al-akhbar, a clear and bold refutation of the Russian Empire's policy of referring to the population of the Central Asia, Siberia, and Far East Asia as "aliens" (inorodtsy: Инородцы). The Russian imperial censors tried to remove all printed copies of this book [62]. Ramzi was writing his work to attack the hegemonic discourse of the Empire. He worked in different libraries and archives to collect materials for Talfiq al-akhbar and traveled around the country. At times, he had to move suddenly to escape the authorities. Around 1915 he was arrested and sent to Siberia. Following great efforts he was able to escape and return to his family in Orenburg.
During the Revolution and the Civil War which followed, Ramzi wanted to leave the country as soon as possible. It was not until 1919 that he was able to flee to Coghachag (Tacheng) in Eastern Turkistan (today's Xinjiang) [66] in China where he continued to teach as a scholar until he died on April 2, 1934, as Ahmet Temir relates. However, Zeki Velidi Togan disputes this date, declaring that Murad Ramzi died on October 5, 1935 [63, p. 542]. Muhammad Amin Bughra (Mehmed Emin Bugra, 1901-1965), the leader of the Eastern Turkistan Freedom Movement, describes Murad Ramzi as his mentor in his book Sherqi Turkistan Tarikhi "History of Eastern Turkistan" [25, p. 36.]. It seems that Murad Ramzi was an active scholar - intellectual in Turkistan. According to Gaynetdinov, he was actively interested in the politics of Eastern Turkistan around 1920 [14, p. 100-101].
Ahmet Temir states that Murad Ramzi's son Fehmi Murad studied medicine and pharmacology at the University of Berlin. Afterwards he became a doctor in Jedda and Mecca, where he attended to the Foundation of Tatar-Kazan Immigrants, and died in 1965 [6, p. 505]. Another Arabic source, written by an Uzbek descendant called al-Bukhari al-Andijani, indicated that Fehmi Murad Ramzi was the person who founded the first pharmacy shop in Mecca around 1940-1945 [22, p. 81]. According to the same source, Ramzi traveled around Eastern Turkistan, visiting all the major cities including Urumchi, training
scholars and political activists such as Muhammad Sultan al-Ma'sumi, Ibn Yamln al-Sa'ati, and Muhammad Amln Bughra, as we mentioned above. This small but precious document shows that the last years of RamzT's life as a bold scholar of Islamic disciplines were spent as a mentor of members of the Eastern Turkistan movement [22, p. 81].
III. Ramzi's works and other references
Ramzi authored several books and succeeded in publishing them. His articles on the cultural problems of Muslims or religious polemics were also published in Kazan, Orenburg, and Istanbul. He generally sent his articles to the periodicals Te'aruf-i Muslimin and Din ve MaJshat. First, I will present his best-known works in chronological order, followed by a discussion of his lesser known works.
1.Tarjamat Rashahat 'Ayn al-Hayat fi manaqib mashayikh al-tariqa al-Naqshbandiya 11 q i li 2_Ljj_LJi ^jlJl* \ « ^CjU^Sj jj). This is a translation of the Rashahat, a Persian hagiography written by Fakhr al-din 'Ali Sail Kashif dealing with the Naqshbandi Sufi masters of Central Asia, especially with the Saint of Samarkand, Nasir al-din 'Ubaydullah Ahrar (1403-1490), who was commonly known by the epithets "Hadrat Ishan" and "Khwaja Ahrar". Much of the Rashahat is related to Ahrar's speeches and his method [15, p. 59-75]. Murad Ramzi's translation of the Rashahat [47] must have been very popular among the Muslim intellectuals and authors of the early 20th century. The well-known Bashkort historian and political figure Zeki Velidi Togan mentioned that he had read Murad Ramzi's translation of the Rashahat and enjoyed comparing this "translated Rashahat" to its Persian original in his uncle's library [64, p. 22]. Ahrar, the wealthy and charismatic Sufi sheikh, should be among the most important persons in Murad Ramzi's spiritual world. At the age of 24, Ahrar went to Herat where his interest in Sufism began. His spiritual master was Ya'qub Charkhi (d. 851 AH/1447 AD), one of the principal successors ofBaha' al-din Naqshband [65].
2.Dhayl Rashahat 'Ayn al-Hayat ('¿L_^Jl -J j J-p) or Nafa'is al-Sanihat fi TadhyTl al-Baqiyat (<—iLjbLJI Jjjii CjU^UI . This is a work on the Naqshband! Sufi path and its last sheikhs around Mecca, Medina (al-Madma), Central Asia, and the Volga-Ural region [36]. A manuscript of this book can be found in the Egyptian National Library and Archives (Dar al-Kutub al-Misriya, Cairo) under the number: 5/394 [31]. As a supplement to the Rashahat it provides short biographies of some unmentioned saints and contemporary Naqshbandi Sufi masters with whom Murad Ramzi was already connected. Dhayl was printed in the left and right margins of the translated text of the Rashahat. There is an independent section on the method and manners of the Naqshbandiya in the last pages of Dhayl in which Murad Ramzi explained some practices of his special
branch of the Naqshbandiya [36, p. 189]. This is one of the most important sources on 19th century Naqshbandi masters such as Muhammad Mazhar [36, p. 114], 'Abd al-hamid al-Shirwani [36, p. 131], Sayyid Muhammad Salih al-Zawawi [36, p. 139], and Mawlana Khalid al-Baghdadi and his important deputies [36, p. 160]. Mawlana Khalid is central to our understanding of the Sufi movements of modern Turkey, the Caucasus, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq [23, p. 44.]. In just one generation after his death, his followers were found everywhere from the Balkans and Crimea to Southeast Asia (namely Indonesia) [23, p. 44]. He also discussed Zaynullah Rasuli, the most prominent figure of the Volga-Ural region who was also a sheikh from Khalidi branch of the Naqshbandi order. The majority of contemporary Muslim Tatar authors, intellectuals, and educators appreciated Rasuli's work and activities [16, p. 76-92]. For this reason the Dhayl is a very important source.
3 .Mu'arrab al-Maktiibdt al-Shanfa al-Mawsumbi al-Durar al-Makniinat
. This work is a detailed translation of the "Collected Letters of Ahmad Sirhindi" from Persian into Arabic. In the beginning of this translation Murad Ramzi wrote a beautiful dibaja, a classical preface decorated with literary flourishes [37, p. 1-10]. This dibaja shows that Ramzi had a firm grasp of the major themes of Sufi thought and Arabic literature. Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi, also known as Imam Rabbani (1564-1624), was an Indian Islamic scholar from Punjab, a Hanafi jurist, and a prominent member of the Naqshbandi Sufi order within Ahrari tradition [9, p. 189.]. When he was 28 he went to Delhi and joined the Naqshbandiya order and soon received khilafa (the mission of deputy) from Khwaja Baqibillah [11, p. 7-14]. Most of the Naqshbandi suborders today, such as the Mujaddidi, Khalidi, Saifi, Tahiri, and Qasimi suborders, trace their spiritual lineage through Ahmad Sirhindi, often referred to as "Naqshbandi-Mujaddidi" [28, p. 11]. Ahmad Sirhindi's Maktubat is widely studied in Turkey, Syria, and the Balkans with the help of the Arabic translation undertaken by Ramzi. Ramzi's translation of Maktubat is so popular and compelling that some publishers and readers in Turkey think that Ahmad Sirhindi originally wrote these letters in Arabic.3 One cannot study socio-religious thought in Turkey after 1950's, without referring to the Naqshbandiya culture formed around the Maktubat and other classics.
4. Tarjamat Ahwal al-Imam al-Rabbani Ahmad Sirhindi
. This booklet is about the life and defense
3 I saw an interesting statement in the introduction of a Maktubat publisher: "Elinizde tuttugunuz bu Mektubat, imam Rabbani hazretlerinin dostlarina yazdigi mektuplarin Arapfasindan Turkfemize tercume edilmi§ halidir!" (Dear Readers! The Maktubat you receive right now is the Turkish translation of the letters that the Honorable Imam Rabbani wrote [originally] in Arabic and sent to his friends!") The publisher wished to emphasize the "originality of the translation" whereas in reality it is another translation of a creative translation by Ramzi! See the introduction section and cover [18].
of Ahmad Sirhindi, printed as an independent section in the second volume of the translation of Maktubat [41]. Ramzi added a lengthy "question and answer section" about Sirhindi, including a biography and reports of other scholars. In this section he explains why Imam Rabbani is very important for Muslims in general and for Sufis in particular [42, p. 1-70]. Even though the book has many reports and sentences excerpted from other sources, it is a new work unnoticed before by biographers of Murad Ramzi, including Ahmet Temir. As Ramzi clearly wrote at the end of his work, he collected the data in 1309 AH/1891 AD. After correcting and summarizing some points, he finished this work on the first day of Rajab, 1314 AH [Sunday, December 6, 1896] [42, p. 70]. It is possible that Murad Ramzi was concerned with the crisis emerging among the Sufi members of Arabian peninsula and other parts of Islamic world. He must have thought that Ahmad Sirhindi's Maktubat would give them a fresh breath to revive Sufi ideas among the younger generation.
5. Tanb al-Mabda' wa al-Maad (^j This work is a translation of the Mabda'wa al-Ma'ad of Sirhindi, which is about the key points of Sirhindi's Sufi theology and spiritual experience [42, p. 125-176].
6. Tacrib Fiqarat al-Khwaja Ubaydnllah Ahrar
( J <0)1 ^ djijsa vyj*j). This work is the translation of the Fiqarat al-'arifin of 'UbaydullahAhrar from Persian into Arabic. It is about some difficult issues within intellectual speculative Sufism, including an explanation of key concepts such as macrifa, Hbada, and haqiqa [42, p. 110-120].
7. Tarjamat Ahwal al-Mu arrib (^j*-^ JLH y). This work isa short autobiography of Murad Ramzi which he published in the back matter of his translation of the Maktubat. This autobiography is important to understand the intellectual world of Ramzi, even though it was very short and incomplete [42, p. 301-307].
%.Talfiq al-akhbar wa Talqih al-Atharfi Waqa 'ic Qazan wa Bulghar wa Muluk al-Tatar (j^i j^Lj u1^ t^j ¡J jW^Vi j^) [44]. This is a very detailed
work (1250 pages in large format, printed in Orenburg in 1908) concerning the history of the Muslim Turkic peoples of the Volga-Ural region, Crimea, Eastern Turkistan, the Uzbek cities, and the Kazakh steppe. Talfiq al-akhbar claims to cover all major events of those peoples from their appearance in history down to the late 19th century. Even though he mentions only the names Tatar, Bulghar, and Qazan in the title of his work, the book covers the huge area once dominated by the Muslim descendants of Chingiz Khan and the Kipchak (Kipgak) Turkic tribes. The main body [42, p.12-150] is about the history of the Muslim Turko-Mongol peoples from the second half of 13th century (the age of Chingiz Khan) to the conquest of the Khanate of Kazan by the Muscovite Grand Duke Ivan the Terrible in 1552. The author offers detailed information about this era based on different sources written in Arabic, Turkish, and Persian. The last parts of the
book (vol. 2, p. 150-532) include the most important and unique sections on the history of the Turkic peoples under the rule of the Russian Empire, including details of local Muslim military leaders, Kazakh tribes, and Muslim scholars [42].The details he gives here are very vivid because it is a first-hand account of Ramzi's close friends, social network, and struggles.
9.Mushaya'at Hizb al-Rahman wa Mudafa'at Hizb al-Shaytan [21, p. 354]. This book is written to criticize Musa Jarullah Bigiyev on the history of religions and the theory of "universal divine mercy" which was highly problematized in the end of 19th century among young Muslim reformist intellectuals. The work was published as a series of small booklets, one section after another, in the famous Orenburg-based Qadimist review Din ve Ma'ishat in 1917 [12, p. 1]. He wrote it in Kazan Tatar.
10.QasTde-i Hurriyet (^Ip- This work is a didactic poem about freedom written in Tatar language and printed in Orenburg in 1917 [46]. The historian Zeki Velidi Togan mentioned some of its verses in his famous book Bugunku Turkili (Turkistan) [63, p. 541-543].
Other works mentioned by the scholar Ahmet Temir
We do not know much about his other works, except for some names mentioned by the Turkish scholar of Tatar origin, Ahmet Temir, son of Rashid Jarullah, who was a student of Ramzi in Mecca [6, p. 505]. Some of the works with their obvious names indicate that Ramzi changed his focus from Sufism ('Irfan) and national history to his particular approach to the Arabic and Qur' anic studies (Bayan). Here are those last works mentioned by Temir:
1 .Translation of Talfiq al-akhbar into the Turkish language. I have clear evidence that some parts of the book were translated from Arabic into Ottoman Turkish. However, Ramzi may not have done the translation. After thorough research in Istanbul libraries, I discovered a short manuscript, a clear translation of some sections from Talfiq al-akhbar, but no more [60]. The collection, including this manuscript, was brought from the private library of the famous scholar Tahirulmevlevi (1877-1951), the spiritual master of the Mevlevi order. He was a poet, journalist, well-known intellectual, "Mesnevi" reciter , and literary historian [7, p. 83]. I consider Tahirulmevlevi to be the likely translator of this work. Because this small manuscript was named "the second notebook", it must be a part of a larger project undertaken by the translator.
I observe as well that some introductions without signature to Tatar history might have been influenced by Talfiq al-akhbar or an abbreviated translation of it. A small but well-organized Ottoman Turkish booklet about the history of the Muslim Tatars in Russia was published in Cairo in 1318 AH/ 1900 AH [55]. This booklet might been written by another author, Abd al-rashid Ibrahim.
However, I observe some crucial similarities between this booklet and some sections of Talfiq al-akhbar. Obviously, at that time (1900), the Talfiq al-akhbar was still being written by Ramzi, but the approach in this booklet resembles Murad Ramzi's style. Salih Jamal easily adapted this Turkic book (88 pages) into Istanbul Turkish. On the cover of the book is: i§bu tarihge Kazan fuzalasindan bir zatin eseridir, 'This small history book is written by a person from the noble scholars of Kazan'.
2. Tanzih al-Kashshaf 'amma fihi min al-'Itizal wa al-Inkishaf This is most likely a collection of critical annotations on the famous Qur'anic exegesis al-Kashshaf by Abu al-Qasim Mahmud ibn Umar al-Zamakhshari (d. 1144). Even though al-Zamakhshari was a hard-core Mutazila (rationalist) scholar, his al-Kashshaf was one of the best- received works of Qur'anic exegesis in all medieval Muslim scholarship, Sunni and Shiite alike4.
3. Translation of the meaning of the Qur'an into Turkish. Even though Ahmet Temir said "Turkish", he might have translated it into Tatar. In the time of Ramzi, many authors used the term "Turki" as a general description of a Turkic orthography that was commonly understood by intellectuals among the Anatolian Turks, Crimean and Kazan Tatars, Bukharan Uzbeks, and Azerbaijani Turks. However it was mostly influenced by the Istanbul dialect of Turkish [6, p. 505].
4.Mawlid al-Nabiy. This might be a short poetical work especially composed for and recited at the Prophet's nativity celebration.
5. 'Arud. This might be a traditional study of Arabic poetic meters.
6.Al-Nahw al-'Arabi. This was most likely a treatise on Arabic syntax.
7.Al-Sarf al-'Arabi. This was probably a treatise on Arabic morphology.
Major periodicals to which Ramzi submitted articles:
Ramzi also sent articles to:
1. Sirat-i Mustaqim (1908-1925). This periodical (Sirat-i Mustakim in modern Turkish orthography) was one of the most influential political-cultural periodicals of the late Ottoman and early Republican era. After 1912, its name changed to Sebilu'r-Re^ad. Ramzi sent his letters to this periodical from Mecca and wrote about his projects and the problems of education there. As an Istanbul-based periodical, it supported a progressive Islamist agenda with an extremely wide range of authors, including the nationalist Yusuf Akfura, the Islamist Mehmet Akif, and the nationalist-liberal Ahmet Agaoglu. Some researchers described it as the intellectual center of the national progressive movement based on Islam as the religion of "spiritual culture" and western-style technology as "material culture" [57]. It was opposed to the British invasion of Istanbul. Its readers sent
4 I myself studied many Suras such as Taha and al-Baqara from this exegesis when I was a student of classical Arabic studies in Istanbul during the period 1982-1987.
their letters from almost every city of Anatolia, the Balkans, Central Asia, and even from Cairo and Kazan. The first detailed exposé on the Kazan Tatars and other Turkic minorities in the Volga-Ural region was also published here by Ayaz (Gayaz) Ishaki (1878-1954), a famous figure of the Kazan Tatar national movement who was later an emigré author in Turkey [20].
2. Te'aruf-i Muslimin (1910-1911). This was another center for opposition to Western colonialism. This review was under the leadership of Abd al-rashid Ibrahim, the famous Tatar traveler and pan-Islamist political figure. As Nadir Ozbek notes, this periodical was published in Istanbul by Muslim Tatar authors opposed to both Russian and English colonialism [48, p. 45-67]. Ramzi sent several letters to this periodical on freedom of speech in Islam, the legality of freedom of the press [32, p. 78-80], and the declaration sent from the Japanese Ajia - Gikai Daito ("Great East Society") [35, p. 365-368]. It seems that here Ramzi was involved in anti-colonialist discussions that would be continued until his death in Eastern Turkistan (today the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region of the Peoples Republic of China).
3. Din ve Ma'ishat (1906-1918). This was an Orenburg-based periodical occupying a special place among Tatar periodicals in the early 20th century. It was the advocate of Tatar traditional religious scholars and middle class conservatives. This periodical severely attacked the Jadidist authors, conducting an ideological struggle against the opponents of the traditional approach [43, p. 51-69]. On the other hand, it also included much valuable and detailed research onfiqh and hadith published with the help of great traditionalist scholars. Ramzi's longest refutations against the revolutionary theological approach of Müsa Jarullah Bigiyev were published in this periodical. He wrote his longest polemics on the theory ofuniversal divine mercy and other problematic issues [32, p. 467-469].We see here a sad and angry face of the scholar Ramzi. He was deeply concerned with the confusion and loss of Islamic identity among the Muslims living under Russian rule. In his first refutation against Müsa Jarullah, he started to blame him in a strong yet lofty tone, similar to Shakespearean English:
Müsa herifin oteden berü bustan-i §eriat-i garraya girüp hayli e§car-i §eriat-i garrayi koparup atmaya mühavele itdügini mü§ahede iderek bununçun ezhercihet canim sikilmada iken...
Since I was totally disturbed with the observation of this fellow called Müsa who had already entered the radiant garden of Shari 'a and attempted to cut so many trees in this garden... [32, p. 467-469].
Ramzi continued to write about similar issues under different titles [33, p. 744-747]. It seems that these long theological (and literary) discussions were the major focus of his last book Mushaya'at Hizb al-Rahman ve Mudafa'at Hizb al-Shaytan. The other issue Ramzi wrote about was the social-political attitude declared in both the First All-Muslim Congress of Russia in Moscow (May 1917)
[58, p. 21-47] and the All-Muslim Scholars Congress in Kazan (July 1917) [40, p. 359-361]. This series of articles was written from a traditional standpoint about the problems of the Russian Muslims, especially Muslim women. Ramzi was very conservative on issues related to women and family. He supported technological material culture (outer domain) coming from Russia or the West, but was a staunch opponent of any changes in religious creed and the social position of the family and woman (inner domain).
Other references
We have some historical records about Ramzi in the Ottoman Archives related to the Muslims from Kazan in Mecca [61, p. 188-189], the German Orientalist Spies' records on Ramzi's private library in Mecca [51, p. 87, 91], some personal evaluations by the Tatar traveler Abd al-rashid Ibrahim [2, p. 487-488], the Bashkort scholar and political figure Zeki Velidi Togan [63, p. 542; 64, p. 4445], the leader of the Eastern Turkistan Movement Mehmed Emin Bugra [25, p. 36], and some Arabic ijaza documents (certifications of mastery) he gave to his students in the Islamic disciplines, such as the ijaza he gave to Abd al-sattar ibn Abd al-wahhab al-Dihlawi (d. 1936) [30]. However, these should be considered only very limited records for such a remarkable translator whose translations have been read or translated again and again into regional languages in Anatolia, the Balkans, and Southeast Asia.
It could be possible that a rich source of documents and narratives exists in the personal papers of his pharmacist son Fehmi Murad, if they have not been lost after the death (2003) of the scholar Ahmet Temir. Ahmet Temir's father, Jarullah Rashid, was a student of Ramzi in Mecca. The both were from the same region of Almat in Russia. When Fehmi Murad died in 1965, his remaining documents were mailed to Ahmet Temir in the same year. According to Ahmet Temir, this package included manuscripts of Ramzi such as small booklets, travel accounts concerning Eastern Turkistan, Afghanistan, and India, some essays he wrote in Mecca and Medina, and the memoirs of Fehmi Murad [6, p. 495-505]. Unfortunately, we do not have any knowledge of whether these precious remnants ever survived and, if so, where they might be located5.
IV. Conclusion
Many questions revolve around why Ramzi did not become a more active and powerful player in Tatar intellectual life compared to other Tatar scholars of that era, such as Turkist nationalist thinker Yusuf Akfura (1876-1935), Islamic scholar Musa Jarullah Bigiyev (1875-1949), and Tatar national poet Gabdullah Tukay (1886-1913). Even though he was a great Sufi translator and a prominent
5 I asked the relatives of Ahmet Temir in Turkey about this package. They know nothing about the fate of this shipment.
scholar, he is rarely mentioned in the literature, except by a few experts of history and Sufism. On this point, Bourdieu's explanation may help us to understand the situation of Ramzi.
According to Bourdieu, the dual structure of the academic world indicates two different kinds of scientific capital for scholars. A scholar or author can increase his/her power and fame either through membership on official boards, contributing to decisions taken by those boards, close relations with those who have power, or else through his/her outstanding works, translations, research, and titles published and appreciated in the milieu of high culture. However, under practical conditions, it is difficult to have these two different investments at the same time. Besides, this "field of power", as an arena of contest, is structured around on-going struggles amongst scholars, authors, and social actors because of a desire to have "distinction" [59, p. 229-231; 52, p. 12-13].
It seems that Ramzi was among the second category of authors and scholars who had nothing to do with the "official world of scholarship", even though he was a great scholar. He had no membership on any boards or official societies, and no help from political structures. Perhaps he did not want to be visible as a "distinguished" scholar at all. This is why we see only a few witnesses to his achievements and a small number of admirers among his coevals. Bashkort historian Ahmed Zeki Velidi Togan mentioned that Ramzi was a close friend of his family and that he sometimes stayed with them in the Togans' big villa. Zeki Velidi was influenced by Ramzi's ideas on national history, Sufism, and Islamic disciplines, as he reports in his memoirs [64, p. 44-45]. The traveler Abd al-rashid Ibrahim (1857-1844) also mentioned that Murad Ramzi was a devoted Muslim, a great scholar of tafsir (Qur'anic exegesis), hadith (prophetic tradition), usul, andfarti'.6According to Abd al-rashid, Ramzi was fluent in the Ottoman Turkish, Kazan Tatar, classical Arabic, and Persian, and he could easily expound in these languages on any social or religious topic. Abd al-rashid said:
Nobody knows the value and the importance of this great humble man! He lives here by the sweat of his hard work and the books he wrote. There is no help to make life easy for him [2, p. 487-488].
Murad Ramzi also mentioned that he lived in Mecca with the help of revenue from his books and the generosity of his fellow citizens [39, p. 192]. He spent almost half of his life around Mecca and Medina without entering into political
6 As I know from my experience in the classical Arabic and Islamic disciplines, if the term of usul is used in a general way (without subordination), it means the two major Islamic disciplines: "creed system" and "methodology of Islamic jurisprudence". If it is used as usul al-din it means "creed system". However, if it is used as usul al-fiqh it means the "legal theory of Islam" (i.e., the methodology of Islamic jurisprudence). Furu' means the "secondary problems offiqh". This testimony is very important, inasmuch as Ibrahim was a smart "sui generis" person who could evaluate the level of Ramzi in Islamic disciplines.
discussions, just writing books, translating Sufi classics, and living mystical experiences. Furthermore, he had never taken an official position from the Russian authorities in Kazan or the Ottoman bureaucrats in Istanbul.
However, we have a unique document including his small petition about the Muslim students from Russia in Hejaz. He and his friend §ukur Efendi sent a short request to Mehmed Emin, the deputy of the Ottoman governor in Mecca-Medina, where Ramzi wanted to establish an official "Research Center for the Kazan Student Community". His petition was eventually accepted [56, p. 188-189].Another similar document is a Turkish letter sent by the "Kazan Student Community in Medina" (Medine Kazanli Talebesi Cemiyeti) to Sirat-i Mustaqim, the Istanbul-based periodical in which Tatar students explained how they established on Muharram 18, 1327 AH/February 9, 1909 AD a small new institution based on scientific standards with regular exams and evaluations. Murad Ramzi helped them to determine reasonable standards for exams in this small center of Islamic disciplines [24, p. 127].
Another question relates to his political and ideological position among Volga-Ural intellectuals. Was he a Qadimist or Jadidist? We can say briefly that he should be considered a complex intellectual who traveled between Qadimist, Jadidist, modernist, and nationalist movements throughout his life. Because he wrote a strong critique of Musa Jarullah Bigiyev, a prominent Jadidist Islamic scholar of that time, some researchers considered Ramzi to be a Qadimist [4, p. 54-57]. In fact, Murad Ramzi was close to the Qadimist movement only in his thoughts pertaining to religion and family, whereas he supported the political and educational ideas of Jadidist / progressive intellectuals without hesitation. Furthermore, he also supported the notion of a "nation" around the Volga-Ural region, in a very modernist way.
He bridged the pre-modern and modern eras with a critical soul from the past and a dignified exterior with which to face the future, as we saw in his photograph from 1927 taken with his three boys [6]. It is a portrait of a family rich in meaning, depicting the struggle and the changes occurring at that time. In this picture, he appears confident with the surcoat of a Muslim scholar, still ready to write without stopping. His smallest child Enver (Anwar, seated to Ramzi's right) displays the sour taste of emigration in his nervous face with a working class hat; his middle son Munir (standing to Ramzi's left) in a cap in the style of the local Muslim population. The older son Fehmi Murad (standing to Ramzi's right) looks westernized, but has a hidden concern in his lips, wearing a European-style hat and overcoat, one that he must have bought in Berlin when he was a medical student. Fehmi Murad was to go to Mecca and open a pharmacy. He would stayin Mecca until his death there in 1965.
REFERENCES
1. Abd al-Latif Duhaysh. al-Maktabat al-Khassafi al-Makka al-Mukarrama. Mecca, Matba'aal-Nahda al-hadltha, 1408 AH [1988].
2. Abdurre^id Ibrahim. Alem-i Islam. Ed. Ertugrul Ozalp. Istanbul, 2003, vol. 2.
3. Adeeb Khalid. ThePolitics of Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism in Central Asia. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1998. 335 p.
4. Ahmet Kanlidere. Kadimle Cedid Arasinda Müsä Carullah: Hayati, Eserleri-Fi-kirleri (Istanbul: Dergah Yayinlari, 2005). 279 p.
5. Ahmet Özel. Remzi, Muhammed Murad. Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi (TDV) Islam An-siklopedisi, vol. 34 (Ankara, 2007), p. 567-568.
6. Ahmet Temir. Dogumunun 130. ve Ölümünün 50. yili dolayisiyla Kazanli Tarih-Mehmet Remzi, 1854-1934. Türk Tarih Kurumu Belleten, vol. 50, no. 197 (1986),
p. 495-506.
7. Alim Kahraman. "Tähirülmevlevi". Türkiye Diyanet Vakfi Islam Ansiklopedisi. Ankara, TDV, 2010, vol. 39, p. 407-409.
8. Allen J. Frank. Islamic Historiography and "Bulghar" Identity among the Tatars andBashkorts of Russia. Leiden, Brill, 1998. 232 p.
9. Aziz Ahmad. Studies in Islamic Culture in the Indian Environment. Oxford University Press, 1964, p. 189.
10. A. Sait Aykut. Ten Üzerine Ki§ Gecesi ilhamlari [Winter Night revelations on the body: An aphorismic essay on the nature of human as an author]. Cogito, no. 46. Istanbul, 2006.
11. Burhan Ahmad Faruqi. The Mujaddid's Conception of Tawhid. Lahore, 1940. 107 p.
12. Din ve Ma'Tshat, no. 2, January 1917, p. 1.
13. D. Garifullin. Morat Rämzi - Bikchura Khan Onigi [Morad Ramzi-The grandson of Bikchura Khan]. Gasirlar avazi - Ekho vekov [The Echo of Ages], 2001, no. 1/2, p. 223-227.
14. Gainetdinov R.B. Tyurko-tatarskaya politicheskaya emigratsiya nachala XX veka - 30-ye gody: Istoricheskiy ocherk [Turco-Tatar political emigration at the beginning of the XX century-30s: Historical essay]. Naberezhnye Chelny, Kama, 1997.160 p.
15. H. Beveridge. II. The Rashahät Ainal-Hayat.Journal of the Royal Asiatic SocietySociety of Great Britain & Ireland. New Series, 1916, vol. 48, no. 01, January, p. 59-75.
16. Hamid Algar. Shaykh Zaynullah Rasulev: The Last Great Naqshbandi Shaykh of the Volga-Urals Region. Muslims in Central Asia, ed. Jo-Ann Gross. Durham, Duke University Press, 1992, p. 89-112.
17. ibrahim Maraj. idil-Ural Bölgesinin Cedidci Dini Lideri Zeynullah Rasuli'nin Hayati ve Görüjleri. Dini Aragtirmalar, 1998, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 76-92.
18. imam Rabbani. Mektubat-i Rabbani, trans. Abdulkadir Akfifek. Istanbul, Qelik Yayinevi, 2011.
19. Itzchak Weismann. The NaqshbandTya: Orthodoxy and Activism in a Worldwide Sufi Tradition. Routledge, 2007. 224 p.
20. Kazanli Ayaz. Alem-i Islam-Rusya Muslumanlari. Sirat-i Müstakim. Istanbul,
August, 1909, vol. 02, no. 51, p. 398; vol. 02, no. 52,August, 1909, p. 415-416; vol. 03, no. 53, August, 1909, p. 014-016.
21. Khayr al-dln Zirikll. Qämüs al-A 'lam. Beirut, Dar al-'Ilm li al-MalayTn, 2002, vol. 7, p. 95.
22. Mansür 'Abd al-baqT al-Bukhäfl al-Andijänl.' Ulamä'Mä warä al-nahr. Medina, Dar al-Mirath al-NabawT, 2013, p. 81.
23. Martin van Bruinessen and Julia Day Howell. Sufism and the 'Modern'in Islam. London, I. B. Tauris, 2007, p. 384.
24. Medine Kazanli Talebesi Cemiyeti. "Muharrir Efendi!" Sirät-i Mustaqim, no. 20, 1327 AH [1909 AD], p. 127.
25. Mehmed Emin Bugra. Sharqi Turkistan Tarikhi. Ed. Dr. Yakup Bugra. Ankara, 1998.
26. Mehmet Silay. Ankara ístiklal Mahkemesi Cumhuriyetin Engizisyon Aygiti. Derin Tarih, 2013, no. 20, November, p. 83.
27. Michael Kemper. Sufis und Gelehrte in Tatarien und Baschkirien, 1789-1889: der islamische Diskurs unter russischer Herrschaft. Islamkundliche Untersuchungen 218. Berlin, Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1998.516 p.
28. Muhammad Abdul Haq Ansari. Sufism and Shari'ah: A Study of Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi's Effort to Reform Sufism. (Leicestershire, UK, The Islamic Foundation, 1997.
29. Muhammad Ma'sümi in the magazine. Majallat al-hajj, no. 7, p. 354.
30. Muhammad Murad al-QazänT.I/äza li- 'Abd al-sattär ibn 'Abd al-wahhäb al-Dihlawi. Library of the Haram al-Sharifayn in Mecca. Saudi Arabia, manuscript no. 3/752, date: 1307 AH [1889].
31. Muhammad Murad b. 'Abdullah al-QazanT. Nafa'is al-Sanihat fi Tadhyil al-Baqiyat, manuscript no. 5/394.
32. Muhammad Murad Mekki. Müsa'ga Mekke Polemiti. Din ve Ma'ishat, 1909, no. 30, p. 467-469.
33. Muhammad Murad Mekki. Nasihat li erbabi'd-diyane. Din ve Ma'ishat, 1910, no. 47, p. 744-747.
34. Muhammad Murad RamzT. íslamiyette Hürriyet-i Kelam ve Serbesti-i Matbua-tin Me^ruiyeti. Te 'äruf-i Muslimin, vol. 1, no. 5, June 9, 1910, p. 78-80.
35. Muhammad Murad RamzT. Asya Gi-Kay Cemiyeti Riyaseti tarafindan gönde-rilen mektup münasebetiyle. Te'äruf-i Muslimin, vol. 1, no. 23, November 24, 1910, p. 365-368.
36. Muhammad Murad RamzT. DhaylRashahät 'Ayn al-Hayät. Mecca, 1890, p. 156.
37. Muhammad Murad RamzT. Mu'arrab al-Maktübät al-sharifa al-marsüm bi al-durär al-maknünät al-nafisa. Mecca, 1316 AH [1898], p. 188.
38. Muhammad Murad RamzT. Talfiq al-akhbär wa talqih al-äthär fi waqä'i' Qazän wa-Bulghär wa mulük al-Tatär. Ed. IbrahTm Shams al-dTn. Beirut, Dar al-kutub al-'ilmTya, 2002, vol. 2, p. 339-340.
39. Muhammad Murad RamzT. Mu'arrab al-Maktübät. Istanbul, íhlas Vakfi, 2002, vol. 3, p. 302.
40. Muhammad Murad RamzT. Kazan'da Nedvetu'l-ulemada hatun kizlara muteal-lik meselelerni tarika hal kilindi. Din ve Ma'ishat, 1917, no. 32, p. 359-361.
41. Muhammad Murad RamzT. Tarjamat Ahwal al-Imam al-Rabbani, in the margin of vol. 1 of Mu'arrab al-Maktübät. Mecca, 1316 AH [1898 AD].
42. Muhammad Murad Ramzi. Muharrab al-Maktwbat. Istanbul, îhlas Vakfi, 2002, vol. 4, p. 1-70.
43. Mukhametshin R.G. Problemy Tatarskogo Traditsionalizma na Stranitsakh Zhurnala "Din Va Magishat": 1906-1918 [The problems of Tatar traditionalism on the pages of journal "Religion and Life": 1906-1918] Ph.D. dissertation in History. Kazan, Tatarstan Academy of Sciences, 2004.
44. Murad Ramzi. Talfiq al-akhbar. Orenburg, 1908.
45. Murad Ramzi. Mu'arrab al-Maktübat. Mecca, 1316 AH [1898], vol. 3, p. 192.
46. Murad Ramzi. Qasïde-i Hurriyet.Orenburg, 1917.
47. Murad Ramzi. Tarjamat Rashahat 'Ayn al-Hayat.Mecca, 1890.
48. Nadir Özbek. îkinci Meçrutiyet îstanbul'unda Tatar îslamcilari: Teârûf-i Mûslimîn Dergisi.Muteferrika. Istanbul-Kadikoy, Summer, 2002, no. 21, p. 45-67.
49. Nuriya Garayeva. Kem ul Morad Rämzi? [Who was Morad Ramzi?]. Kazan utlari [The lights of Kazan]. 1990, no. 2, p. 171-174.
50. Nuriya Garayeva. Traditsii tatarskoy istoriografii XIX v. i "Talfik al-axbar" M. Ramzi [Traditions of Soviet historiography at the beginning of the XIX c. and "Talfik al-axbar" by Ramzi]. Problemapreemstvennosti v Tatarskoy obshchestvennoy mysli [ The problem of succession in Tatar public opinion]. Kazan, 1985, p. 84-96.
51. Otto Spies. Die Bibliotheken des Hidschas. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, vol. 90, 1936, p. 87, 91.
52. Pierre Bourdieu. Les usages sociaux de la Science. Paris, INRA Editions, 1997, 80 p.
53. Rafis Abazov. Palgrave Concise Historical Atlas of Central Asia. New York, 2008, 125 p.
54. Ramzi's two letters as examples: A letter about his translation of Maktübat: Kazanli Murad Remzi (Mekke-i Mukerremede mukim), "Ta'rib-i Maktübat-i Imam Rabbani". Sebïlu'r-Re$ad, vol. 12, no. 299. Istanbul, 1914, May, p. 244.
55. Rusya'da Müslümanlar yahut Tatar Akvaminin Tarihçesi. Trans. Salih Jamal. Cairo, Matbaa-i Osmaniye, 1318 AH [1900 AD].
56. Sarinay Yusuf. Osmanli Belgelerinde Kazan.T.C. Baçbakanlik, Devlet Arjivleri Genel Müdürlügü, Osmanli Arçivi Daire Bajkanligi, 2005. 546p.
57. Selçuk Akçin Somel. Sirat-i Müstakim: Islamic Modernist Thought in the Ottoman Empire, 1908-1912. M.A. Thesis in History. Bogaziçi Üniversitesi, 1987.
58. Shafiqa Daulet. The First All Muslim Congress of Russia, Moscow, 1-11 May 1917. Central Asian Survey, 1989, vol. 8, no. 1,p. 21-47.
59. Taner Timur. Marksizm, insan ve toplum. Balibar, Sève, Althusser, Bourdieu. Second Edition. Istanbul, Yordam Kitap, 2011, p. 229-231.
60. Terceme-i Telfiq. Fethi Sezai Türkmen Section, Süleymaniye Library. Istanbul, Turkey, manuscript no. 144, folia 78-130.
61. Yusuf Sarinay. Osmanli Belgelerinde Kazan. Ankara, T.C. Bajbakanlik Devlet Arjivleri Genel Müdürlügü-Osmanli Arçivi Daire Bajkanligi, 2005, p. 188-189.
62. Zaytsev Il'ya. Murad Ramzi i Arminiy Vamberi [Morad Ramzi and Armeniy Vambeti]. Gasirlar avazi-Ekho vekov [The Echo of Ages], 2001, no. 3/4, p. 71-75.
63. Zeki Velidi Togan. Bugünkü Türkili (Türkistan) ve Yakin Tarihi. Istanbul, Enderun Kitabevi, 1981, p. 541-543.
64. Zeki Velidi Togan. Memoirs:National Existence and Cultural Struggles of Tur-kistan and Other Muslim Eastern Turks, trans. H.B. Paksoy. Create Space Independent Publishing Platform, 2012. 255 p.
65. Hamid Algar. Ahrär, Encyclopaediaoflslam, Second Edition. Brill Online, 2015. Available at: http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/ ahrar-SIM_8303
66. Tacheng. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacheng
About the author: Aykut Abdulsait - Ph.D (history), professor, University of Wisconsin, Madison (53715-1149, Dayton St., 1308 W, Suite 329, Madison, WI, United States); [email protected]
Мухаммад Мурад Рамзи (1855-1935) и его труды
Абдулсаит Айкут
(Висконсинский университет, Мэдисон)
Аннотация. В статье рассматриваются основные вехи биографии Мухаммада Мурада Рамзи. Здесь мы видим, что значительную часть своей жизни он посвятил тщательному и кропотливому изучению классических трудов мусульманской богословской науки. Исследователь внес огромный вклад в развитие суфизма в Волго-Уральском регионе, Анатолии и во всей Османской империи.
Благодаря этой работе мы узнаем о его идеях и взглядах, получаем информацию о направлениях, в которых работал ученый. Кроме того в исследовании рассматриваются наиболее значимые труды ученого. Они посвящены различным богословским вопросам, в том числе книги по арабской грамматике, комментарии к Корану, тюркский перевод Корана.
Статья полезна для тех, кто интересуется библиографией и историей ислама.
Ключевые слова: Мухаммад Мурад Рамзи, Исламские учения, суфизм, Исмаил бей Гаспринский, Джадидизм, Кадимизм, Волго-Уральский регион.
Сведения об авторе: Абдулсаит Айкут - доктор философии (по истории), профессор, Висконсинский университет в Мэдисоне (53715-1149, ул. Дейтон, 1308 W, каб. 329, штат Мэдисон, США); [email protected]
