Interdisciplinary Approach to Overcoming the Persistence of Patriarchal Islamic Interpretations: Gender Equality, the Development of Empathy and Children’s Rights, and Insights from the Reformist Eurasian Scholars of Early Twentieth Century

4.1 The Role of Empathy in Understanding the Universal Equal Human Dignity

Not only reason but also emotions should play an important role in the theory and defense of human rights.^[29] Human beings intuitively “catch” and “match” other’s emotions and actions by mere observation, and they are wired to connect with others and share their feelings.^[30] Empathy can be defined “as an ideal candidate mechanism to underlie caring behaviors in response to another’s pain, need, or distress.”^[31] It is a key social skill that enables us to resonate with the pain, distress, affect, and state of mind of others.^[32]

Empathy allows us to know that all people are equal in the sense that everyone is a sentient being – susceptible to emotional and physical pain.^[33] Therefore, being based on the recognition that others feel and think as we do and that our inner feelings are similar, empathy is fundamental in understanding the universal equal dignity of human beings.^[34] In other words, the universality of human rights can be known through empathy, which connects us to other people and leads us to acknowledgment and respecting the equal agency of others.

Like any other category of human rights, women’s rights are based on respect for the dignity and integrity of women and, above all, on the idea of the universal equal dignity of human beings. Equality is not just an abstract concept or a political slogan. Rather, it must be internalized in some way through empathy.^[35] Empathy is necessary to accept gender equality as part of the universalist feature of human rights, whose defining characteristic is to belong to all, but not to be a privilege or the “rights” of a particular chosen groups.^[36] Therefore, not only can gender equality be substantiated by empathy but also empathy leads us to see injustice in gender relations as something that cannot be tolerated.

Overall, empathy is not only a faculty of healthy persons but also a foundation of healthy social relations and a key to understanding the universality of human rights.^[37] Furthermore, empathy is a key to understanding gender equality and gender diversity because it opens the way to appreciate the worth of people of other genders. Adding empathy brings emotional and sentimental aspects to the perception of universal equal dignity of human beings, which is crucial to the rationale of gender equality.

4.2 Fostering Empathy and Critical Thinking by Being Premised on the Universal Innate Nature of the Child and the Universality of Children’s Rights

It is a particular habitus or social context that normalizes and perpetuates either authoritarianism or patriarchy in a given society. To study the habitus is to understand processes of personality formation from birth.

Overall, it is crucial to study children’s rights to understand the political and social processes.^[38] A better understanding of the influence of parenting styles and education models on the individual and social life helps explain the ongoing religious, social, and political processes in the Muslim societies. Also, the epistemological crisis, manifested in intellectual minimalism and mental barriers of the “unthinkable” (touched earlier), is a result of child-rearing and education inculcating blind subordination to authority, invalidating empathy, and normalizing the acceptance of hierarchy.

The universality of children’s rights is based on the idea of the universality of the innate nature of the child. The universality of the innate nature of the child suggests that the needs of children and the laws of child development are universal. In line with the acceptance of an innate child’s nature, as with the physical embryo, where the fertilized egg passes through a formative period guided by hormonal and chemical activity, so too the “spiritual embryo” (the concept developed by Montessori) passes through various stages in its formative development guided by “inner sensitivities” and assisted by a very special type of mind called “the absorbent mind.”^[39] This mind soaks and absorbs unconsciously and at unlimited speed all emotional impressions from the environment so that these impressions form the child’s lifelong psyche and personality.^[40]

Like the physical embryo, the “spiritual embryo,” which refers to the universal emotional and psychological developmental stages of children in the formative years (from birth to age three of a child),^[41] is an indication that it is not appropriate to argue about the different natures of being a child by claiming that children in different religious and cultural communities (and different genders) supposedly have “different” psychologies, resistances, and tolerances depending on their environment. Respect for the best interests of the child, consideration of the child’s evolving capacities and care are among the most important concepts that define the model of parenting according to the contemporary notion of the children’s rights (specifically, as it is conceptualized in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the comments of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child). Overall, the universality of the innate nature of the child suggests that the needs of the child and the laws of child development are beyond cultural or religious contexts, and they are functional and “a-cultural.”^[42]

Research suggests that empathy is not unconditionally found the human capacity, but it is more a skill that is learned,^[43] although people with a healthy personality have at least the basics of empathy. Specifically, studies on psychology show that while there is evidence of genetic influences on the development of empathy, environmental factors are primarily responsible,^[44] particularly the patterns of primary caregivers in the early developmental period shape the human empathic brain.^[45] The positive emotional development of children of all genders is directly related to the empathy of parents or other primary caregivers to a child.^[46] The neural basis of empathy is longitudinally shaped by parent–child synchrony across the first decade, specifically the experience of interpersonal resonance within the mother–child attachment.^[47] Importantly, a recent meta-analysis of infants’ response to maternal still face found no main effects of gender differences in emotional development.^[48]

Studies in early child development and psychology emphasize that positive emotional development in early childhood is critically important for future healthy emotional, psychological, and physical development.^[49] The neural development of empathy is highly sensitive to caregiving and early trauma.^[50] Overall, building empathy is an ongoing, lifelong process, and it begins with how the parents cultivate it since the early age.^[51]

On the whole, the attachment types, the emotional bonds between a child and a primary caregiver, directly shape personality development, including empathy. Namely, secure attachment creates sound empathy, whereas insecure attachment hinders the development of empathy. Empathy is positively correlated with secure attachment to primary caregivers but negatively correlated with insecure attachment.^[52] It is the primary task of primary caregivers to be equipped with the skills that help instill empathy in children. Unless there is an underlying neurological disorder, the adults can go a long way to making sure to raise empathetic children. A world with empathy is a world where people understand and care.^[53] Hence, the early age development stage or primary habitus created by the family environment plays a very important role in personality development.

Human beings are often limited in using their intellect by the boundaries of the system of categories they owe to their upbringings and education.^[54] Therefore, humanistic or children’s right-friendly parenting must include not only empathy but also critical thinking (according to Montessori, it is independent thinking). Critical (independent) thinking is indispensable in humanistic education because it prepares a child to be an independent personality, and it views a child as an autonomous being. Also, critical thinking implies fulfilling the basic principles of children’s rights, such as the right to be heard and to participate. As such, critical thinking is indispensable in raising happy and mature children. To conclude, in realizing the child’s well-being, it is necessary to see that there is no contradiction or serious discrepancy between the findings of child psychology on the fundamental role of positive emotional development and the concept of children’s rights.^[55]

5.1 Socially Constructed Deficiency of Empathy

Although natural and universal, the human faculties to empathize and sympathize are in constant danger of being suppressed by different factors such as fear, hatred, cruelty, or ideology.^[56] The brain effects related to less empathetic reactions are more a function of culture or social context than innate preferences.^[57] Not only socially learned “cultural prejudices” but also socially learned authoritarianism and patriarchy impair, even invalidate empathy.

In essence, the connection is the normal condition of the human psyche.^[58] Connection is about being concerned, and it is about empathy. However, disconnection or rupturing connection causes the deficiency or erosion of empathy. Research in early child development suggests that insecure and anxious attachment of a child to their mother and other caregivers can lead to empathy gap and other psychological problems. Specifically, children and adolescents with high secure attachment tend to show more empathy than those with low secure attachment.^[59]

As Wilmer^[60] explains, rupture of connections (which is traumatic and affects both personal and social relationships) is necessary to produce patriarchal masculinity and feminine identity that normalizes and reinforces patriarchal masculinity. Contemporary Islamic reformist scholar Adis Duderija observes that with their focus on competition and domination, “patriarchal personality” traits lead to the erosion of empathy and breed arrogance, greed, disrespect for meaningful dialogue, and disregard for consideration of the legitimate needs and aspirations of others.^[61] Also, Carol Gilligan, whose works laid the grounds to develop the philosophical ethics known as the ethics of care, points out that “patriarchal culture” breaks and ruptures the human capacity for connections,^[62] which is about empathy.

The traditional patriarchal domination of gender and masculinity, authoritarian parenting and education, and indoctrination of authoritarian norms from an early age are important factors in eroding of empathy. In particular, authoritarian parenting styles and models of education not only create submissive individuals with deficient critical thinking (contributing significantly to the continuation of the epistemological crisis in conservative Islamic scholarship which exhibits a wide range of “unthinkable”) but also impair empathy and create an empathy gap. Authoritarian models of parenting and education are based on the fear of punishment. They create patterns of authority and subordination, which, following Gilligan’s concept, can also be depicted as a “patriarchal culture” (see the aforementioned discussion). Ultimately, the vicious cycle of reproduction and perpetuation of authoritarianism and patriarchal culture rooted in child-rearing and education emerges.

We can gain some insights into the conservative patriarchal habitus in Muslim-majority countries by looking at the level of development of children’s rights, the extent of abuse of children, and the nature of education models. Available research and data suggest that children in Muslim-majority countries (e.g., in the Middle East and North Africa) are frequently deprived of their basic rights. These countries generally have a poor record of upholding human rights for children and young people. Governments in some countries are simply unable or unwilling to adequately protect children.^[63]

On the other hand, traditional Islamic family law “is fundamentally premised on the notion of male guardianship over women” and consequently entails many features of inequality between men and women in relation to marriage, divorce, and similar matters. All these shape the socialization of women, who are conditioned from early childhood to submission, dependence, and learned helplessness.^[64]

The psychological basis of patriarchy not only requires a rupturing of the capacity for connectedness among male-identified citizens but also leads to the socialization of all identities to normalize that rupture by considering it an inherent and defining feature of both masculinity and the entire social world where male-is-norm.^[65] Thus, the lack of empathy in some men (and internalized oppression in women) is a result of their negative social environment, particularly in early childhood. However, the universal, innate nature of a child means that these men could have developed a sound capacity for empathy with the help of empathic and caring parents or other primary caregivers.

To summarize, patriarchal culture, which is essentially the “culture of domination,” and the lack or erosion of empathy (which is rooted in authoritarian parenting and education, among other things) are closely linked.

5.2 Empathy Should Be Teachable for Religious People

It is important to note that while empathy is not clearly related to being religious, it is positively related to the way how religious contents are processed.^[66] As such, empathy should be teachable for religious persons. While earlier research on empathy indicates that religiosity–empathy relation remained unclear,^[67] more recent studies suggest that empathy, being a teachable skill, is expected to be taught and learned by religious practitioners.^[68] We agree with the analysis of Duriez ^[69] that religiosity–empathy relation “should be understood in terms of how people process religious contents rather than in terms of whether and what people believe.”

The confinement of the role of reason within strict limits, which can be observed in the conservative religious scholarship (and a constituent element of conservative habitus like hierarchy), is an important reason for empathy erosion. Overall, the mental barriers of “unthinkable” and other cultural, psychological, and ideological reasons (which are the parts of conservative and patriarchal habitus) are the factors of empathy erosion in religious people.

The analysis of the social determination of authoritarian culture and patriarchal religious interpretations suggests that intellectuals with a more empathetic habitus sought to create inclusive and egalitarian Islamic interpretations (e.g., Musa Bigiev, a leading Jadid scholar who defended gender equality, had an intimate relationship with his mother (who was also his primary educator at home), his wife, and his children;^[70] Abai, a leading Kazakh intellectual of the early Jadid generation, was brought up by empathetic grandmother and mother (who were his first poetry teachers)^[71], later Abai confronted his brutal and religiously conservative father, the leader of local community, who tried to enforce strict medieval religious rules.

6.1 Contingency of Patriarchal Religious Norms, Rationalistic Approach

The holistic approach to Islamic sources and history shows the contingency of patriarchal Islamic interpretations. As An-Naim notes, the founders of Sharia developed what they believed to be an appropriate legal and ethical system for their communities at a very local term. It is clear that they were not involved in the construction of unchangeable and “eternally valid” Sharia, as many Muslims claim today. Rather, the authoritative scholars expressed their views as individual theoretical derivations and cautioned against codifying or implementing them as the only valid version of Sharia.^[75]

A rationalist approach to the ethical–legal injunctions in the Qur’an and Sunnah, combined with thematico-holistic approach to the Islamic sources, as well as an acceptance of the inherent contextuality of Islam, make it possible to recognize that there is no inequality and hierarchy between genders.^[76] The “Progressive Muslim Manhaj” or the methodology for producing ethically objectivist, nonpatriarchal Islamic interpretations, for example, is committed to the values and principles of human rights, such as gender equality. Therefore, this rationalistic methodology builds the conceptual compatibility between Islam and women’s human rights.^[77] Moreover, we argue that progressive Islamic interpretations or methodology accepts and reaffirms what can be called “the naturalistic conception of human rights.”

It must be assumed that the universality of human rights among Muslims can be realized only if they accept it as consistent with their religious beliefs; therefore, the concept of human rights requires a religious, namely, Islamic, legitimation.^[78] Although Islamic sources have the necessary resources for the conceptual search for the equal dignity of human beings and consequently gender equality,^[79] it is crucial to change the patriarchal conservative habitus that normalizes and internalizes patriarchal religious interpretations. Since the education system takes the place of the family in refining and solidifying the habitus,^[80] reformers should develop the cultural capital of their fellow human beings by engaging in education (e.g., by reforming the entire education system and making it children’s right friendly).

6.2 Rationalistic and Gender-Egalitarian Reformist Agenda of Ant-Colonial Jadids and Alash-Orda Intellectuals

The Eurasian Muslim societies, which used to be a constituent part of the former Soviet state, like many parts of the world, have been experiencing a resurgence of authoritarian–patriarchal Islamic religious interpretations. The collapse of the Soviet system signaled not only the end of Soviet ideology but also the embracement of hegemonic discourses on cultural authenticity and the mobilization of tradition as a tactic of governance,^[81] which empowers the social determination of conservative religion. However, in the late nineteenth and the early twentieth century, the generation of progressive Islamic scholars, writers, and political activists, who became known as the Jadids, robustly defended the affirmative action policies focused on liberation of colonized Muslim communities and emancipation of women, who were double-oppressed by external-colonial and internal-feudal, patriarchal systems.

Jadidism broadly can be conceptualized as pro-human rights (in today’s conceptualization), education, social, and political movement of the Eurasian Muslims. Particularly, it was the movement for Islamic modernization, and its approach, in Islamic theological terms, was rationalistic. Anticolonial “Alash-Orda” movement was predominantly Kazakh, but it had almost the same progressive-reformist Muslim, pro-human rights agenda of Jadidism and adopted social-democratic ideas.^[82] Jadids and Alash-Orda activists and intellectuals believed in the evolution and reform of Islamic scholarship, Muslim culture, and tradition. The Jadids encountered many formidable obstacles, especially the conservative religious leaders, poets, and the community tended to reject them. For example, the religious poet Nauan Khazret, who is well known in the Syrdarya region of Kazakhstan, castigated the Jadids, calling them mutazilats of their time who had strayed from the true path.^[83] The conservative co-religionists, the primary opponents of Jadids, even tried to engage with colonial Russian authorities to fight them.^[84]

Jadids accepted that all Islamic sciences were actual construction of human activity and contingent. For example, Musa Jarullah Bigiev, a leading Jadid theologian, pushed for epistemological reform by defending the emancipation of reason and the need to reassess and reinterpret the fundamental concepts like, “What is Islam in a new age?” (significantly, he argued that Islam is whatever good done for the sake of humankind), “Who is Muslim?” “What is justice?” Bigiev eloquently defended gender-egalitarian approach and inclusive Islamic theory (the theory of God’s all-inclusive forgiveness) based on clearly articulated rationalistic epistemology and ethical objectivism supported by empathy.^[85] Though Bigiev was confronted with strong backlash from many conservative Muslims, the Jadids like Mufti Rizaitdin Fakhretdin supported and defended his views.^[86]

For Jadids, the spirit and purpose of religion, its benefits (“masalikh”), and goodness (“manafi”) for human beings were much more important than dogmas, the external form, and rituals.^[87] The freedom of human beings and the fullness of their choice in all their actions, determined by reason, is a great rule of life. It is a great gift from God and a huge blessing.^[88] The book of Bigiev, exegesis called “Fiqh-al Quran, represents a unique example of Jadids’ epistemology of understanding Quran. This exegesis embodied almost all major principles of this reformist movement: the rejection of blind imitation and absolutization of tradition, adherence to “modern scientific approach and methods,” human (needs)-centeredness, Islamic rationalism, focus on social justice, and religious inclusiveness.^[89]

Critical thinking played a prominent role in the vision of the Jadids and the Alash-Orda intellectuals, in their education and religious reform, and in their literary works. For example, the reformist Kazakh scholar and poet Shakarim posits, “Even if it is claimed to be the words of the prophet and greatest saint said, I do not accept them if my reason does not accept.”^[90] He defended rationalistic Islamic position by declaring that, “A person who does not use reason in understanding religion is like a beast, by mis-comprehending the true meaning of the Qur’an, mullahs call me an infidel. However, the Quran says many times “use your intellect and reason.” Those who destroy the precious nature of Quranic exegesis by negating reason, annihilates Quran also.^[91]

Alikhan Bokeikhan, a political leader of the Democratic Party of “Alash” and later the chairman of “Alash Orda” government, in the article “Coffee House Surat,” based on a free translation of Tolstoy and published in the reformist newspaper “Qazaq” in 1913, critically examines the dogmatic and exclusivist views of all major religions and emphasizes the inclusive reason-based humanist position.^[92]

The Jadids and Alash-Orda intellectuals wanted self-determination from colonial powers. They demanded not only equal rights but also the inherent right of self-determination, the right to determine their own future and live by their own unique set of values.^[93] Self-determination, the aim of the Jadids and Alash-Orda intellectuals, was also about women’s rights and gender equality. In essence, the holistic and empathetic attitude to self-determination means recognizing also the individual human right to self-determination and accepting the universal dignity of human beings. Especially after the start of World War I, the Jadids defended gender equality as a part of their anticolonial struggle and reformist agenda. Gender equality has broader cultural, social, and economic benefits; therefore, the Eurasian Muslim reformist scholars and intellectuals supported gender equality or at least serious advancement of women’s status in Muslim society. In general, Jadidis emphasized the fundamentality of the “woman question.”

Many Jadids tried to achieve legal equality and equal opportunity by providing secular education for girls and fighting against harmful traditional norms and practices. The reform-minded scholar and poet Shakarim, for example, who served as a judge in Semey, became known for making court decisions in favor of women seeking their rights.^[94] Shakarim empathetically wrote, “If you abuse or oppress someone, you do not have true faith. Even if it means that you have worshipped for a thousand years, the rest should be a criticism of your shaky, corrupted religion.”^[95]

We argue that by the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917, Jadids’ general approach to the “woman question” was focused on achieving legal equality and providing women with secular education as a necessary step for the renewal and progress of the nation. For example, the First Congress of Muslims organized under Jadids’ leadership in Spring 1917 declared the political equality of males and females, which opened the way for the overall education of girls and full participation of Muslim women in public life.^[96] Also, the political agenda of the Kazakh “Alash” movement and its short-lived democratic government had an explicit gender-affirmative nature.^[97] Hence, Jadids and Alash intellectuals conceptualized the connection between gender equality on the one hand and cultural change, political development, and economic development on the other hand.^[98]

The Jadids and Alash intellectuals were not stuck in the trap of “unthinkable,” and hence, they did not have an empathy gap caused by rigid puritanical understandings, holding, inter alia, that Sharia is unchangeable. They wanted to develop human (needs)-centric religion and the Muslim Eurasian culture, which would be compatible (in today’s terms) with the core values and principles of human rights. The leading Jadid and Alash intellectuals developed a robust discourse for women’s rights and a systemic critique of the patriarchal nature of women’s oppression. They also sought to reform and fundamentally transform patriarchal culture. They believed that male-dominated interpretations and patriarchal culture obscured the true essence and power of the Quran and Islam.^[99] The Eurasian Muslim reformists wanted to produce “authentic views on Islamic gender equality.”

Following Zubovich’s^[100] analysis of the development of the universality of human rights discourse among ecumenical Protestants in the mid-twentieth century, we argue that the Jadids and Alash intellectuals created a religious, intellectual, and literary tradition with a distinctive language of the dignity of the human person. Moreover, it can be posited that Alash intellectuals and the Jadids could be more attentive to injustice and more empathetic and understanding of women’s rights because of their own colonial position since they themselves were in the position of second-class people of the empire. A contextual reading of the Jadids legacy can show that they sought to develop what can be called “human (needs)-centric” religion, traditions, and culture.

6.3 Transformation of the Conservative Habitus Through Empowering Education and a New Literature Fostering Empathy

In general, cultural and religious reforms aim to transform habitus by creating a distinct social and cultural habitus. The most important instruments are education, literature, art, and new religious interpretations. In order to create a different sociological habitus in the Eurasian Muslim communities, the Jadids and the Alash-Orda intellectuals relied on several instruments. The most important were the creation of a corpus of new literature in vernacular languages of Turkic and Persian origin (their most notable literary works aimed to promote justice, empathy, and critical thinking) and a new educational model, tentatively described as “friendly to children’s developmental needs” that encouraged critical thinking.

Jadidism emerged as an educational movement that established schools with new, more child-centered curricula. Alash intellectuals also became directly involved in education, social sciences, and humanities. Notably, leading Alash members Zhussupbek Aymautov, Akhmet Baitursunov, and Mirzhakip Dulatov sought to develop and promote child-centric, nurturant parenting, and education models.^[101] Akhmet Baitursunov, who served as Minister of Education in the Alash-Orda government and founded the modern Kazakh grammar, urged that “first of all, we must start repairing and rebuilding our society with the education of our children, because the most of our shortcomings and problems will only be eliminated if we build a new model of education.”^[102] In particular, Aymautov and Baitursunov designed and introduced children’s right-friendly education models (similar to contemporary Nordic ones) in the early twentieth century.^[103] Also, although Aymautov, who authored one of the first academic books on psychology in Kazakh, did not use the term habitus as such, he noted frequently about the fundamental importance of the nurturant, emotionally positive environment for a child’s healthy development. He stated that only this kind of parenting and education can change the negative habitus of the colonized society.^[104] Aymautov stated that the erosion of empathy in society is both a cause of colonization and a result of colonization.^[105]

In April 1917, the leaders of the Alash organized a congress in Orenburg (also attended by leading Jadids such as Munavwar Qari and Fatih Karimov), at which the issue of education was at the top of the agenda. The delegates proclaimed compulsory education for boys and girls and that education must be accessible (one school per hundred households).^[106] In Summer 1917, the Alash leaders established a 2-year teacher’s course in Semey, the eastern center of the Alash movement. The teachers designated nine courses as the most necessary (compulsory) and four courses called unnecessary, which included the Arabic language, Islamic history, religion, and measurement.^[107] On the whole, the analysis of the views of the Jadids and Alash intellectuals on parenting and education can show that they accepted the universality of the needs of the child and the laws of child development.

Notably, the seminal works of notable Jadids and Alash intellectuals were dedicated to nurturing empathy and women’s rights. For example, the first four major Kazakh novels were all about women’s fate in a patriarchal society. Moreover, it can be argued that the first books, in the native languages of the Eurasian Muslims, published in the early twentieth century, were dedicated to women’s rights. For example, the central theme of Myrzhakyp Dulatov’s (who authored also the famous anticolonial poem “Wake-up Kazakh people!,” the first edition of which was immediately confiscated by the Tsarist Government) book Unfortunate Jamal was the powerless and voiceless status of women in patriarchal Eurasian Muslim society, who was undergone multiple colonizations. This novel tells the story of a young woman who became a victim of the patriarchal–feudal system that ruled in the conservative Central Asian society. Kazakh literature critics note that the novel was written with deep compassion, empathy, and hope. Another Alash intellectual, Akhmet Baitursunov, praised this work; the first edition was published in 1910 as the very first novel in Kazakh.^[108]

Analysis of the books of Musa Bigiev shows that he developed both gender-egalitarian and inclusive Islamic interpretations driven by empathy and justice. Particularly, he emphasized that there cannot be gender bias in creation and that God calls to man and woman equally without distinguishing in gender. Specifically, Bigiev’s book Woman: Under the Light of Holy Quran was written with empathy, care, and affection for women. To challenge the widespread patriarchal stereotype that woman is allegedly the “source of vice,” Bigiev, in his exegesis of the Quran’s ayat (2:30), specifically emphasized that the concept of “fasad” (immorality, vice, a fall of morals) used in the Quran in the speech of angels only refers to “men.” And when your Lord told the angels: “I will place the ruler (caliph) on earth,” they said: Will you put on it who will create discord (“yufsidu”) on it and shed blood?” The verb “to cause vice, discord,” which comes from one root with the word “fasad,” has a clear masculine form.^{[109] [110]} We may suppose that Bigiev’s interpretation might indicate that the empathy of males compared to females is more likely to be eroded because of their social context.

Moreover, in this book, Bigiev empathetically claimed that women shed rivers of blood to keep the lineage going, what can be considered the greatest “jihad” (striving for the cause of God) and the greatest type of worship that men cannot perform.^[111] Also, in clear opposition to the widespread in patriarchal cultures attitude to regard the period’s blood as impure and dangerous, he wrote that the woman’s holiness increases in the days of monthly bleeding.^[112] His other statement shows his deep affection for women, “a man is only a throne on which a reigning woman should sit.”

Mukhtar Auezov was one of the few Alash intellectuals who survived the Stalinist purges, and he was one of the founders of modern Kazakh literature. In the public discussions on the political, social, and cultural issues of Kazakh society during the period of the formation of the Alash-Oda government, he eloquently advocated women’s rights. In 1917, he published the article “It is Woman Who Has Laid the Foundation of True Humanity,” in which he eloquently pointed out that “it is woman who has lifted man from the level of the beast (who was ready to fight, kill, and colonize others) to the level of humanity, therefore society will reach happiness and the true level of humanity only when the stinking fog over woman’s head clears.”^[113]

Alikhan Bokeikhan, the political leader of Alash, was probably the staunchest advocate of women’s rights in the Eurasian region in the early twentieth century. Under different pseudonyms, he published many materials, including the translations, about women’s rights issues in the periodicals published in Kazakh and Russian.^[114]

In summary, the Jadids and Alash intellectuals used every possible medium to raise awareness of the need to transform education (which implies also the awareness of children’s rights), to develop women’s rights, and to change the dynamics that sustain conservative and patriarchal habitus. Education reforms and the publication of books, journals, and newspapers were crucial in this regard. By means of achieving the “national and religious liberation” that would eliminate the oppressive and unequal power relations in society, including the oppression of women and children by patriarchal culture, they wanted to transform the conservative and patriarchal Eurasian Muslim habitus. However, the cultural capital of the Jadid and Alash leaders was largely lost among today’s Eurasian Muslims as a result of the systematic destruction by the Soviet regime, as evidenced, among other things, by the reproduction and internalization of authoritarian, paternalistic social norms, and religious interpretations after a century has passed since the emergence of these reformers and efforts to implement their ideas.

Overall, the intellectual and spiritual legacy of the Jadids and Alash-Orda intellectuals sheds light on the potential of Islamic rationalism to develop gender-egalitarian interpretations and the universal dignity of the human being. The anticolonial and progressive ideas of these empathetic Muslim scholars and intellectuals can offer crucial insights that are not alien or foreign (as many conservative Muslims may mistakenly accept gender equality and even the notion of human rights) to implement the humanistic Islamic and decolonial approach of contemporary progressive Muslim scholars. The conservatives’ attempts to uphold the authoritarian patriarchal Islamic norms and patriarchal culture through the prism of Jadids and Alash intellectuals can be seen as anything but a justification of oppression and coloniality, even as “anti-Islamic.” Ultimately, however, resistance to the gender binary and hierarchy that define patriarchal manhood and womanhood stems from our human nature to be inherently relational and responsive beings.^[115]