"THE STRUGGLE FOR FAITH AND THE MOSQUE" IN THE STATEMENTS AND COMPLAINTS OF MUSLIM TATARS OF THE ULYANOVSK REGION IN THE 1940s AND 1980s. 1

The article examines the complex views of believers about the mosque and its role in the public life of the country and the religious community. It was reflected in numerous statements of Muslims of the Ulyanovsk region in the 1940s and 1980s about the opening of new mosques and the return of old ones sent to local and central Soviet authorities. The ideas and arguments expressed in the statements about the need for the normal functioning of religious buildings were elements of the collective identity of Muslim Tatars. They allow us to reveal the nature of their relations with the state, their perception of the existing system, their social position and historical and legal culture. The total number of requests to open mosques and the structure of the arguments themselves on the part of believers were related to the changing position of Islam in the country, its internal evolution, and fluctuations in the atheist policy of the Soviet state. All the arguments presented in the written sources are divided into several groups: 1) legal arguments that go back to ensuring social justice and equality of ethnic groups and confessions, 2) religious and everyday arguments, and 3) state-oriented (statistic)arguments 4) ethno-cultural, 5) patriotic, going back to the ideas of duty and service of Muslims for the benefit of the state and the fatherland.

Keywords: Islam, Tatars, mosque, atheist politics, believers, Ulyanovsk region, freedom of religion in the USSR.

A person's religious identity is a complex system of representations about faith and its fundamental elements, such as the duties of a believer, God, the other world, and holy places. For Muslim Tatars, one of the sacred places is a mosque, the behavior in which is determined by the system of religious and moral requirements of Sharia law. In particular, in the mosque it is not allowed to make noise and talk about extraneous (earthly) topics that are not related to prayer. The sacred attitude to the mosque can be traced in the traditions of believers to come to the mosque in clean and neat clothes, take off their shoes before entering it [Zagidullin, 2007, p. 136]. Sharia law is quite jealous of the prestige and status of the mosque. For example, it is forbidden to destroy or sell a mosque, or to use the construction material of a dilapidated mosque for the construction of residential buildings and other institutions. The materials of a dilapidated or collapsed mosque that has fallen into disrepair should be used exclusively for the construction of a new mosque [Kerimov, 2010, p.74].

During the Soviet era, the reverence for the mosque and the attitude of believers towards it as a temple of God and a sacred place did not change, although the religion was severely persecuted and many mosques were closed, destroyed or converted into grain fields-

1 This article is a revised report delivered at the international conference "Religious Practices in the USSR: Survival and Resistance in the Face of Forced Secularization", RSUH, February 16-18, 2012.

page 79
health centers, clubs, schools, and health care centers for the population. The people of Io continued to treat the mosque with religious zeal. The use of mosques to meet other, non-religious needs of the population sometimes caused a backlash from Muslim believers. So, in 1934, the Middle Volga Regional Executive Committee closed a mosque in the village of Novye Timersyany, Bogdashkinsky district. An outpatient clinic and a maternity hospital were placed in the mosque building. However, in 1939, local authorities were forced to transfer these institutions to a private home, since Tatar women refused to go to the former mosque for medical treatment and maternity care because of their religious beliefs [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 14, l. 2.].

In the post-war period, Muslim believers, taking advantage of the liberal decisions of the state in 1941-1945, repeatedly submitted numerous applications for the opening of mosques. In these statements and complaints about the actions of local authorities that closed mosques, believers tried to defend their interests, citing a variety of arguments in defense. Based on their totality, it is possible to find out the nuances of believers ' relations with the state, the peculiarities of their perception of the existing social system, some elements of collective religious identity and historical and legal culture of the Tatar-Muslim community of the region.

During the period from 1947 to 1990, out of a large number of petitions2 in the files of the State Archive of the Ulyanovsk region, 23 were identified, which clearly set out the arguments in favor of opening mosques. By decades of the second half of the XX century They are unevenly distributed: 1940s - one statement, 1950s-10, 1960s-4, 1970s-0, 1980-1990-8. Apparently, this circumstance may be connected with the change in the position of Islam in the Soviet Union and its internal evolution, with the softening or tightening of state policy towards religion. The era of the "Khrushchev thaw" is the period of another anti-religious struggle. At this time, believers filed applications to protest the actions of local authorities to close religious buildings. In the 1970s, there were clear signs of a crisis in the institutional foundations of Islam, and during the Brezhnev era, not a single application was submitted by believers to open a mosque. Finally, in the 1980s and 1990s, until the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was an intensification of socio-political processes, the liberalization of public life, and the beginning of a "religious" revival. The issue of not only opening new mosques and building new ones becomes urgent for believers, but also about their return, as previously unfairly taken away.
All the arguments presented in the written sources can be divided into several groups: 1) legal, going back to ensuring social justice and equality of ethnic groups and confessions, 2) religious and everyday, 3) state-oriented (statistic), 4) ethno-cultural, 5) patriotic, going back to the ideas of duty and service of Muslims for the benefit of the state and the fatherland. Let us consider all these arguments successively.

The essence of the first group of arguments in most statements is reduced to the references of believers to the Constitution and other legislative acts of the state that guarantee freedom of religion. Relying on their legal force, believers regarded the actions of the authorities aimed at closing mosques and imposing bans on religious rites as illegal. For example, the statement of believers in the village of Staroe Timoshkino dated August 25, 1955 stated::

"...if you performed your prayers in the mosque, then you did not bring any harm to the state, the mullah teaches us only good things. This was stated by Comrade Khrushchev in his report of November 10, 1954.

2 A total of 47 applications were found, of which applications submitted by believers in the 1940s were not taken into account. In the wake of the liberal decisions of the state, believers did not need to disclose in detail the motives for opening the mosque. A similar need arose later, when the state decided to stop the wave of applications for registration of religious communities.

page 80
he expressed what we citizens pray to the government for, that it has given us the opportunity to practice religion, this is our desire and freedom granted by the constitution of our state " [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 34, l. 5-6 vol.].

Residents of the village of S. Kalda wrote in a statement dated September 8, 1957.:

"...local authorities have recently banned even these basic rights of believers... the Constitution refers to the free right to perform religious rites... " [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 33, l.50-51 vol.] 3.

The Muslims of the village of Yertuganovo, in a statement of January 9, 1958, pointed out that although the church is separated from the state, "the religion of each nationality is not prohibited ...and our Soviet government has given the right to all citizens to practice their religion" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 33, l. 58].

Naturally, in such cases, the refusal of local authorities to register religious communities was regarded by believers as a direct violation of existing laws and the rights of believers to freedom of religion, as actions that contradicted state policy and led to directly opposite results. Religion, forced out of the walls of the mosque, found support in the family. Thanks to the older generation of believers who observed religious traditions and rituals, the influence of religion on the household was preserved [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. ch. 33, l. 4; ed. ch. 45, l.14-15, 23; ed. ch. 73, l. 12-13]. A whole series of complaints by Muslim Tatars in the Ulyanovsk Region illustrates these views. In 1966, religious residents of the village of Novye Timersyany complained about the actions of the commissioner P. F. Simonov, who decided to close the mosque in their village [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. hr. 73, l. 12-13]. Two years earlier, a similar complaint was received from believers in the village of Novye Zimnitsa. As follows from the text of their statement of October 26, 1964, believers regarded P. F. Simonov's actions as "not entirely satisfactory" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 45, l. 23.].

This group of arguments also includes references by believers to the precedents of opening mosques in major cities of the USSR. This, in particular, was stated in the statement of residents of the village of Staroe Zelenoe, Staro-Kulatkinsky district, dated June 10, 1958: "... we are surprised why it is not allowed to open a mosque in the village, when in the city (Moscow, Leningrad, Ulyanovsk) they are open..."[GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 33, l. 72]. In 1982, Muslim Tatars of the city of Dimitrovgrad, in an application for registration of the community and transfer of the mosque building to them, referred to a precedent that took place in Sverdlovsk, where Muslims obtained the transfer of the former mosque [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. ch.148, l. 1].

There were also statements that emphasized the lack of equality in the profession of faith between ethnic groups in the country. Thus, in the statement of the Muslims of the city of Dimitrovgrad, sent to the Council for Religious Affairs in 1983, the following phrase was reflected: "it is possible for Russians, but for some reason it is impossible for Tatars, the mosque was built with our money, it belongs to us" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 144 L. 15.]. The statement of May 15, 1990 by the believer Kamaev from the village of Kalda was characterized by a strong emotional intensity. The applicant attached to it an article from a local newspaper. It said that Russian churches were being restored. Commenting on it, Kamaev wrote that not a word is said about mosques and Muslims of the Baryshsky district - "they don't even mention us and don't consider us people" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. ch.176, l. 3-4].

In this regard, it is appropriate to mention one more motive of Muslim believers that was voiced in the statements about the opening of mosques - the idea of restoring historical and legal justice. Its meaning boils down to the fact that in the past, before the October events of 1917, mosques were built with "people's" money and public funds.-

3 Here and later, the original spelling and grammar are preserved in the quotations.

page 81
In the 1930s and 1940s, mosques were illegally taken away from believers and closed. In the statement of the believers of the village of Staraya Kulatka dated January 20, 1991, it was stated::

"We believe that the return of the premises to the descendants of the rightful owners is a practical step towards social justice and a moral justification for the decision of the session during perestroika in the issues of tolerant attitude towards believers and atheists" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 4, ed. chr. 45, l. 1ob. 2].

At the end of the 1980s, some statements of Muslim believers supplemented such judgments with ideas about the general humiliated and oppressed situation of the Tatars in Russia, a distorted historical vision of their past, and the official historiography's silence of actual facts. An example of this is the appeal of the executive body of the Dimitrovgrad mosque demanding the return of the mosque, dated no earlier than 1990.:

"For centuries, the oppression of peoples in Russia continued. Among the most oppressed peoples are the Tatars ...Batu's invasion is still presented at school as a Tatar-Mongol invasion, which already violates the dignity of the Tatar people. On the routes of Batu's troops, the Tatars suffered the most. The capture of Kazan by Ivan the Terrible and the conquest of the Tatar Khanate as a noble act are regarded in history in schools. What really happened? The conquest of the Tatar Khanate was the greatest tragedy for the Tatars. Hundreds of villages, mosques, and madrassas were burned, and residents were exterminated. The population was forcibly baptized, and recalcitrant residents were exterminated. The children of the Tatar Khanate and the khan's daughter Suyumbika were taken to Moscow and oppressed. Equality was granted by the Soviet government, but not for long. During the years of Stalinist repression, the mosque was taken away, imams were exiled to camps, and no one returned from there " [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. ch. 177, l. 16.].

It is no coincidence that such ideas were in demand precisely at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s, when a radical rethinking of the entire body of historical knowledge began, which related not only to the pre-revolutionary past, but also to the realities of Soviet reality and the new historical mythology built by the state. This revision concerned the whole society, descended on ethnic and religious niches, and was updated by non-Russian ethnic groups to realize and protect their interests.

Religious and domestic motives in the statements and complaints of Muslim Tatars directly related to the issues of ensuring the necessary and convenient conditions for believers to observe religious traditions and perform religious rites. In particular, the importance of the mosque as a religious center necessary for performing prayers on weekdays and holidays was pointed out. However, not all Tatar villages had mosques, and if they did, they were closed by the decision of local authorities. Therefore, believers had to perform religious rites in the open air or in private residential buildings. Or get to the officially opened mosques that were located dozens of kilometers from the village. It is clear that such difficulties were most often encountered by elderly believers - the main group of believers who pray in the mosque. At the same time, the mosque served to store the necessary equipment for religious rites, for example, for funerals. An example of such argumentation is a fragment of a statement made by residents of the village of Allagulovo in December 1962.:

"We pray: return the mosque to us, don't let us suffer. Let them die in peace. Then there will be no need to close or prohibit the practice of religious rites. The service will stop automatically. However, the need of the building will have its own meaning for a long time to come. At least based on the fact that life on earth is not eternal, and the death of people is natural. If a person has died, they must be buried, and for this our faith has a law. For burial, you need equipment, here is its minimum: a funeral stretcher, washing boards, a wrapping bag, six dressing gowns, armbands, basins, buckets, kumgans, a towel and more. They should only be in the mosque, so the mosque should be in the hands of the elderly. The funeral rite is probably on the same level as in the heyday of religion. Consequently, the mosque is also necessary from the funeral point of view" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr.45, l. 15].

page 82
When explaining to the authorities the importance of opening a mosque, the applicants often referred to the total number of worshippers in the village and the number of Muslims who had previously visited the mosque [GAAO, f. 3705, op. 1, units 33, l. 42-42 vol.; units 33, l. 45-46, 50-51 vol., 53-54 vol. 45, l. 18-19]. A number of statements stated that using the mosque for other than its intended purpose violates Sharia law. In the already mentioned statement of Kamaev dated May 15, 1990, it was said that Sharia and the Koran categorically prohibit having entertainment facilities in the form of a club in a mosque, for Muslims - "this is a disgrace" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. ch. 176, l. 3-4].

Closely related to this group of arguments are the references of ethno-cultural believers to the indissoluble connection between religion and an ethnic group and its culture, ethnic and confessional identities. In the texts of statements and complaints addressed to the authorities, Muslim believers noted that as a result of long historical development, religion has become an integral part of many peoples ' culture, everyday life and self-consciousness. Therefore, a forced, violent rejection, separation from religion is inevitably painful for any nation and sometimes tragic. In this regard, granting the right to freedom of religion, opening a mosque for Muslims meets the specifics of their culture. This was stated quite clearly in the statement of residents of the village of Staroe Zelenoe, Staro-Kulatkinsky district, dated May 8, 1958.:

"Where are the believers?.. we didn't apply, we didn't find any understanding anywhere, and this case has a long history. It is clear to everyone that every religion has its own history, an ancient beginning, has its own deep roots in the people, that its eradication does not go painlessly" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. ch. 33, l.71-71 vol.].

An important place in the statements about the opening of mosques was occupied by motives that are conditionally defined as state-oriented or statistic. They included a set of ideas describing the relations between religion and the state, religion and society, and the place of religion in the public and political life of the country. Muslim believers justified the idea of a conflict-free coexistence of religion and atheism in the USSR, compatibility and consistency of the population's religiosity, civic activity of believers with socialist construction. Religion, in particular Islam, not only does not prevent this, but also contributes to some extent. In 1957, in a statement by the Tatars, S. In Maklaushi, it was said that Muslims have two holidays a year, during which, in addition to performing religious rites, "the achievements made on the socialist front are celebrated" [GAAO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. hr. 33, l. 42-42 vol.]. Muslims of the village of Staroe Zelenoe in a statement dated May 8, 1958 city of it was noted that prayers do not interfere with work, since the first prayer takes place in the morning before work, the second during the lunch break, and the third in the evening after work, but if a person is in the field, then religion allows combining the second and third prayers [GAO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 33, l. 71-71 vol.]. In the same year, the inhabitants of S. Yertuganovo, referring to the statements of political figures of the country, wrote::

"We are all members of the collective farm with advanced age, worked on the collective farm together, but at the same time believers, which does not prevent us from building a communist society from a socialist society, which is even confirmed by N. S. Khrushchev with the correspondent of America Herret in a conversation" [GAO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. xr. 33, l. 58].

Demonstrating their loyalty to the existing system and the authorities, the faithful Muslim Tatars of the Ulyanovsk region proved the socio-political security and harmlessness of religion and mosques for society, the state, its ideology, and the course of domestic and foreign policy. On the contrary, religion, in their opinion, plays a positive socio-political role, calls people to honest work, mutual respect and respect for peace. For example, the Tatars of the village of Stary Atlas promised in a statement dated December 12, 1988 that "their actions will not harm the production and ideological activities of our society" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 4, ed. chr. 31, l. 1.]. They also wrote in their statement of March 13, 1989::

page 83
"We have prayed, and we will continue to pray, for friendship among peoples, for a happy future for humanity, for the implementation of the well-intentioned plans of our government for Perestroika and WORLD PEACE" [GAEO, f. 3705, op. 4, ed. ch.31, l. 4].

A statement issued by residents of Novye Maklaushi village on 2.07.1958 stated:

"We undertake to comply with all the requirements that will be imposed by the village community, and we will not allow violations that are harmful to the state, as well as to the people" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. hr. 33, l. 89].

The Tatars of the village of Staroe Zelenoe also noted in a statement of June 10, 1958, that the state would not be harmed by the opening of the mosque, on the contrary, "there will be a lot of useful things in the mosque, we will call for peace between peoples, harmony and love between people, this, in our opinion, is consistent with the policy of our state" [GAU, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. hr. 33, l. 72]. Finally, in the text of the statement of the residents of Allagulovo village in 1962, it was stated::

"We have not conducted and do not conduct any anti-Soviet and anti-party policies. They did not find fault with our activities even during the period of intensive work of the state security service during the cult of personality... we do not detach people from collective farm production, on the contrary, we call for the rapid completion of agricultural work all for the benefit of the individual and the country" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr.45, l. 14].

Revealing the positive aspects of the functioning of religion and Islam in Soviet society, Muslims did not see any serious contradictions between the official atheist policy of the state and the religious worldview of certain categories of the population. First of all, this concerned older believers, while for the younger generation religion has already ceased to be a necessary spiritual core of life [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. ch. 33, l. 42-42 vol.]. Such statements seemed to confirm the state's thesis about the gradual death of religion and its remnants in consciousness and the social life of Soviet citizens. The Muslim believers of Novye Timersyany village wrote about this in their statement of March 13, 1964:

"...we, since we are obsolete, ask to stay or visit the mosque as for the entertainment of self-feeling... and we guarantee that we will not give the politics of religion to our future generation..."[GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 45, l. 18-19].

Moreover, according to believers, the actions of the authorities aimed at a complete ban on religion result in arousing interest in it on the part of the younger generation of Tatars, and thus, allowing the opening of a mosque for the elderly, rather than banning it, will be a more logical step in implementing the atheist policy of the state. Very interesting arguments of such a plan are reflected in the statement of the Tatar Muslim believers of the already mentioned village of Allagulovo:

"We are all old people, out of years, people with a religious outlook, it is too late to deprive us of this. Let the mosque be our mosque, and the doors open for its worshippers... As for the further expansion of the influence of religion, we declare that young people cannot be dragged into the mosque by force, they have no idea what is religious, but they do not despise us either. This mosque is small and the last of five, located at the end of the village, far from the club, school, board and other public institutions... If earlier, before the mosque closed, our prayers and rituals were not known to many people, now everyone from young to old listens to us and sees us. It is hardly possible to assume that we will be expelled from the homes where we are going to pray? They invite us themselves, but this causes difficulties for us old people. Don't force us to go home, don't deprive us of our needs... and the religion began to spread throughout the village, reaching every house. So gradually increasing religious influence among the population is already contrary to the policy of the party and the government. No, let us go to the mosque alone, we will not practically agitate the population in our favor" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 45, l. 14-15].

In this statement, when asking the authorities to open a mosque, the faithful also noted that the state and society do not need to further reduce the number of religious buildings that are transferred for other non-religious needs. This argument can be called economic and communal. In the text of the statement, this idea of believers reads as follows::

"The village does not need a building, there is a spacious club, a second building was recently built for the school at the expense of the collective farm, and it is engaged in the first shift. This year the collective farm has built

page 84
granary, two large cowsheds, poultry house, warehouses, stables and more... It would be a different matter if there were a need for premises and building materials" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 45, l. 15].

Concluding the analysis of the motives of this group, we should mention one more thing - foreign policy, which demonstrates the image of the USSR as a country where believers are granted the right to freedom of religion, and a state that supports religious organizations. In particular, such a motive addressed to the authorities was voiced in March 1980 in a statement by Muslim citizens of Ulyanovsk. The mosque that exists in the city is a peasant's house, so "there is nothing to boast about... in order not to lose face" in front of foreign tourists, "to show that the Muslim religion is not being pushed aside in the Soviet Union" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 135, l. 10].

After the end of the Great Patriotic War, a situation developed in the country that resembled the expectations and feelings of Russian society after the Patriotic War of 1812. In the minds of Soviet citizens, including Muslims, who had borne on their shoulders all the hardships of the past pre-war years and the war itself, hopes for changes for the better revived, and the idea of freedom suffered as a kind of reward for hardships and troubles was formed. Directly in the statements of Muslims who wanted to open a mosque, such expectations and hopes resulted in the motive of a socio-historical reward for tireless work on collective farms before the war, during the war, for equal participation with non-believers in the struggle for the freedom of the motherland at the front and in the rear during the war [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, units of hr. 33, l. 50-51 vol.In 1947, Fakhreev Suleymanov wrote in a letter on behalf of the old people of the village of Tatarskoe Uraykino::

"We are old men... before the war and before the Patriotic war, we worked tirelessly on the collective farm and tried to strengthen the power of the collective farm, and at the same time there were opportunities for us old people to pray to God. During the war, we constantly helped to quickly defeat the enemies of humanity. But after the end of the war, the local intelligentsia took all the mosques away from us and are not allowed to pray to God" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 19, l. 25-25 vol.].

No less clearly, the historical award for service to society and the state was mentioned in 1983 in the statement of the Muslims of Dimitrovgrad, sent to the Council for Religious Affairs:

"We work in production, there are heroes of the Soviet Union, heroes of labor among us, are we really not worthy to receive a mosque?" [GAUO, f. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 144, l. 15].

The set of arguments of believers in applications and petitions for the opening of mosques before and after the October Revolution is fundamentally different. In pre-revolutionary Russia, the petitions of Muslim peasants of the Simbirsk province were mostly based on religious and everyday motives. The believers did not have to prove why they needed faith or a mosque by resorting to other non-religious arguments. In Soviet times, however, under the conditions of an atheist state and society, other aspects were added to religious and everyday life-socio - political, ethnic, legal, patriotic, historical and cultural.

Of course, the obvious differences in argumentation were due to the nature of the state in the Russian Empire and the USSR, the socio-political conditions of the existence and functioning of confessions. The Russian Empire is a typical confessional organized state, where religion occupied one of the key places in the social structuring of society and the organization of self-consciousness. In the USSR, the fundamental incompatibility of religion with the existing social system and political regime was initially declared. Believers, including Muslims, had to find new reasons to defend their right to freedom of religion and the opening of mosques in the face of forced atheism. The wide range of arguments presented above demonstrates the strength and flexibility of Islam and its adherents, the ability of religion and believers to successfully adapt to harsh, external conditions of existence. In this regard, it is no accident that a number of arguments had to be built so that they corresponded to

page 85
the interests of the Soviet state, met its specific ideological and foreign policy priorities and needs.

It is also necessary to take into account the fact that the Soviet state and believers had different views on the place of religion in the life of Soviet society. The authorities have repeatedly and consistently affirmed the thesis of eradicating religion and its incompatibility with the ideology and social life of the USSR. Believers, on the contrary, were forced not only to defend, but also to prove the opposite, revealing the socially positive principle of faith and its necessity in the life of a person and society, to prove that religion and its adherents serve for the benefit of society and the state. The views of Muslims, the position of the state interpreted by believers, the formal legal situation in the country and the real situation of confessions were integral components of the polemic that Muslims waged in their statements and appeals about the opening of mosques to the authorities and the state.

The significance and appearance of certain arguments were related to the historical stages of the evolution of Soviet society and the state, its internal policy, and the events experienced. Peculiar constants throughout the second half of the 20th century were legal issues related to ensuring the constitutional rights of believers, and religious and everyday motives caused by the need to meet the religious needs of Muslims. In the 1940s and 1950s, the idea of a "socio-historical reward" for believers in connection with their common patriotic position and loyalty to the state became very relevant in the views of Muslims of the Ulyanovsk region. At the same time, the idea of a conflict-free, productive functioning of religion in Soviet society was put forward. In the early 1980s, an argument appeared about the ideological significance of building a mosque to create a positive image of the USSR before the Islamic world. At the end of the 1980s, for the first time, motives related to ensuring interethnic and interfaith equality in the context of "religious revival"were voiced. Such motives can be attributed to the emerging ethnic mobilization of the Tatar population. At the same time, the idea of restoring historical justice and returning religious buildings that were previously taken away from believers became relevant.

list of literature

The case for an inactive mosque in the village of Echkayum in the Novo-Malyklinsky district (1946-1950) / / State Archive of the Ulyanovsk region (hereinafter GAUO). F. 3705, op. 1, ed. chr. 19.

Documents on the transfer of the old mosque building in the city of Dimitrovgrad to the religious society of Muslims (decisions, applications, references, appeals, etc.) (1990-1992) / / GAUO. f. 3705, on. I, sd. hr. 177.

Complaints and statements of believers (1980). F. 3705, op. 1, sd. hr. 135.

Complaints and statements of believers (1990). F. 3705, op. 1, sd. hr. 176.

Complaints and statements of believers (Baptists and Muslims) (1965) / / GAUO. F. 3705, sd. hr. 73.

Complaints and statements of Muslim believers (1955-1956) / / GAUO. f. 3705, op. 1, sd. chr. 34.

Complaints and statements of Muslim believers (1955-1959) / / GAUO. f. 3705, op. 1, sd. chr. 33.

Complaints and statements of Muslim believers (1960-1964) / / GAUO. F. 3705, ed. chr. 45.

Zagidullin I. K. Islamic Institutes in the Russian Empire: Mosques in the European part of Russia and Siberia. Kazan, 2007.

Kerimov G. M. Sharia: The Law of living of Muslims. Sharia answers to modern problems. St. Petersburg, 2010.

Correspondence with the Soviet (1983) / / GAUO. f. 3705, op. 1, sd. hr. 148.

Registration case of the mosque in the village of Novye Zimnitsy (1989-1990) / / GAUO. f. 3705, op. 4, sd. chr. 45.

Registration case of the mosque in the village of Stary Atlas (1988-1989) / / GAUO. f. 3705, op. 4, sd. chr. 31.

References and information about the religious situation in the region, submission by the authorized Council to the Regional Committee of the CPSU by the Regional Executive Committee (1982-1985) / / GAUO. F. 3705, op. 1, sd. chr. 144.

page 86

Permanent link to this publication: