The point has been made by many scholars that one of the most noteworthy features of the Alevi tradition is its sycretic nature. Although Alevism maintained the close interaction with neighboring religious-cultural climates, thus keeping a continuous state of evolution, during every epochs of its history, certain periods proved to be more significant in terms of crystallization of the doctrinal and practical aspects. The late fifteenth and the early sixteenth century is arguably among those significant periods of congealing. It is safe to argue that both the doctrinal structure and practical arrangements (especially ritualistic aspects of the Path) of the Qizilbash/Alevi way of Islam were (re)formulated and structured during this time interval. It was during the same period that the sacred texts of the Qizilbash (Alevi) Path emerged. These texts are known under the generic name “Buyruk”, literally “The Order”, and explain doctrinal pillars and ritualistic rules of the Path. One may observe footprints of some previous and contemporary traditions in the Buyruk. More interesting perhaps is that buyruk texts have no particular author. They are rather artifact of the collective memory. My paper discusses the formation process of these religious texts as a corollary of the formation of the Qizilbash Identity in the sixteenth century.

Neither religious movements, nor religion based associability are endemic to the Middle Eastern and North African countries. Yet, the nature and scope of religious mobilization in the region, and their reflection in political behavior generated its idiosyncrasy. While this idiosyncrasy triggered a number of researches that aim to understand the shift of electoral support to the right wing parties with pro-Islamic tendencies, the emergence of Islamic NGOs, movements and/or terrorism in the region, in the particular context of Turkey while revealing the effects of religion on politics and society, such works also tacitly promoted a sectarian bias. While heterogeneity within Islam and Islamic movements was recognized, the systematic analyses of sectarian differences (Alevi vs. Sunni), as well as the relationship between heterodox Islam (Alevism) and polity remained limited. On the other hand, although since the 1990s a number of works has been published on Alevism by various scholars (Shankland, 1999 & 2003; Neyzi, 2002; Sokefeld, 2008), very few attempts were made to systematically analyze the political behavior of the community (Carkoglu, 2005). Following the shortcomings of this setting, this study concentrates on the particular case of Alevis; and discusses the transformation of State-Alevi relations in Turkey parallel to the change in the State-Islam relations particularly in the 2000s. Despite the low rates of support for (religious) right in the elections, the research questions the depiction of Alevis as hitherto followers and/or partisans of secularism, Kemalism and leftist inclinations. However, rather than limiting political behavior to voting, and quantifying Alevis and their engagement with the state, the study focuses on associations and over the analysis of in-depth interviews conducted in spring 2005 in Istanbul (as well as, the current follow-up research began in December 2008) claims that not only there was a transformation in the political behavior of Alevi community, but also were this transformation further stimulated the fragmentation of the community into two camps. While one sought recognition through difference of religion, the other emphasized indifference. Yet, the work concludes that even though Alevis are a minority in Turkey that lacks the electoral and associational power necessary to directly influence the state policies, the study of Alevis and Alevi-State relations is significant not only for limiting the sectarian bias that dominates some part of the literature, but also for understanding the scope and nature of the fragmentation and competition within the community for State’s support and recognition.