Advertisement

Everyday Lived Islam of Young People from Muslim Migrant Families in Germany

  • Franz ErhardEmail author
  • Kornelia Sammet
Chapter
Part of the Boundaries of Religious Freedom: Regulating Religion in Diverse Societies book series (BOREFRRERE)

Abstract

In this chapter we examine the appropriation of religion in everyday life among young people in the religiously diverse context of West Germany. We adopt the concept of ‘everyday lived religion’ to analyse the cases of two young Muslims who find their own ways of including Islam into their identity work and their everyday lives. The two cases are not considered as just exemplifying individual religiosity, but as typical solutions to a general problem: how to adapt, transform, and thus appropriate religious traditions in a migratory context? Referring to methodology which is oriented to Grounded Theory and to biographical narrative interviews, we identify contrasting patterns of how traditional religious restrictions concerning family hierarchy, alcohol, sexuality, and the relations between men and women are dealt with by young Muslims. Their modes of adapting and appropriating religious heritage can be condensed to concise types of selective and creative ways of maintaining religious traditions in German society. The construction of a Muslim identity refers to the family background, to an unquestioned faith in God, and to an understanding of religious belonging as primarily expressed in everyday life practices.

Keywords

Qualitative research Biography Biographical interview Sequential analysis Sociology of religion Everyday lived religion Young Muslims Islam in Germany Religiosity Secularisation Individualisation 

References

  1. Ammerman, N. (2006). Everyday religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Arweck, E., & Nesbitt, E. (2010). Growing up in a mixed-faith family: Intact or fractured chain of memory? In S. Collins-Mayo & P. Dandelion (Eds.), Religion and youth (pp. 167–174). Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  3. Bade, K. J., & Oltmer, J. (2004). Normalfall Migration. Bonn: BpB.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutionalized individualism and its social and political consequences. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Bracke, S. (2008). ‘Real’ Islam in Kazan: Reconfiguring the modern, knowledge and gender. In K. Aune, S. Sharma, & G. Vincett (Eds.), Women and Religion in the West (pp. 183–194). Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  6. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Day, A. (2010). ‘Believing in belonging’: An exploration of young people’s social contexts and constructions of belief. In S. Collins Mayo & P. Dandelion (Eds.), Religion and youth (pp. 97–103). Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  8. Dessing, N., Jeldtoft, M., Nielsen, N. J. S., & Woodhead, L. (2013). Everyday lived Islam in Europe. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  9. Erhard, F. (2013). Pluralisierte Todesdeutungen: Religiöse und nicht-religiöse Umgangsweisen im Kontrast. SWS Rundschau, 53(3): 298–319.Google Scholar
  10. Gärtner, C., & Ergi, Z. (2012). The relation of religious identity and national heritage among young Muslims in Germany. In F.-V. Anthony & H.-G. Ziebertz (Eds.), Religious identity and national heritage: Empirical-theological perspectives (pp. 73–90). Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hahn, H. P. (2005). Materielle Kultur: Eine Einführung. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.Google Scholar
  12. Haug, S., Müssig, S., & Stichs, A. (2009). Muslimisches Leben in Deutschland: Im Auftrag der Deutschen Islam Konferenz. Nürnberg. http://www.bamf.de/SharedDocs/Anlagen/DE/Publikationen/Forschungsberichte/fb06-muslimisches-leben.pdf?__blob=publicationFile. Accessed 28 October 2015.
  13. Hopf, C. (2000). Forschungsethik und qualitative Forschung. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung: Ein Handbuch (pp. 589–600). Reinbek b. Hamburg: Rowohlt.Google Scholar
  14. Hurrelmann, K. (2010). Lebensphase Jugend: Eine Einführung in die sozialwissenschaftliche Jugendforschung. Weinheim: Juventa.Google Scholar
  15. Kammholz, K., & Malzahn, C. C. (2015). ‘Der Islam gehört nicht zu Sachsen.’ http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article136740584/Der-Islam-gehoert-nicht-zu-Sachsen.html. Accessed 10 March 2016.Google Scholar
  16. Jeldtoft, N. (2013). The hypervisibility of Islam. In N. M. Dessing, N. Jeldtoft, J. S. Nielsen, & L. Woodhead (Eds.), Everyday lived Islam in Europe (pp. 23–38). Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  17. Lee, L. (2016). Recognizing the non-religious: Reimagining the secular. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Luhmann, N. (1998). Religion als Kommunikation. In H. Tyrell, V. Krech, & H. Knoblauch (Eds.), Religion als Kommunikation (pp. 135–145). Würzburg: Ergon.Google Scholar
  19. Maiwald, K.-O. (2005). Competence and practice: Sequential analysis in German sociology. FQS: Forum Qualitative Research, 6(3), Art. 31. http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/21/45. Accessed 28 October 2015.
  20. McGuire, M. B. (2008). Lived religion: Faith and practice in everyday life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nohl, A.-M. (2007). Islam als religiöse Praxis der zweiten Migrationsgeneration: Eine ‘Medrese’ von Anhängern Said Nursis. In M. Wohlrab-Sahr & L. Tezcan (Eds.), Konfliktfeld Islam in Europa (pp. 305–326). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  22. Nökel, S. (2003). Islam, Interkulturalität und Bio-Politik: Überlegungen zur Integration des Islams im europäischen Kontext. In M. Rumpf, U. Gerhard, & M. M. Jansen (Eds.), Facetten islamischer Welten: Geschlechterordnungen, Frauen- und Menschenrechte (pp. 290–312). Bielefeld: transcript.Google Scholar
  23. Oevermann, U. (2000). Die Methode der Fallrekonstruktion in der Grundlagenforschung sowie der klinischen und pädagogischen Praxis. In K. Kraimer (Ed.), Die Fallrekonstruktion: Sinnverstehen in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung (pp. 58–156). Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  24. Pickel, G. & Sammet, K. (2014). Einführung in die Methoden der sozialwissenschaftlichen Religionsforschung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Przyborski, A., & Wohlrab-Sahr, M. (2008). Qualitative Sozialforschung: Ein Arbeitsbuch. München: Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
  26. Ramji, R. (2008). Being Muslim and being Canadian: How second generation Muslim women create religious identities in two worlds. In K. Aune, S. Sharma, & G. Vincett (Eds.), Women and religion in the West (pp. 195–206). Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. Rosenthal, G. (2004). Biographical research. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silvermann (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 48–64). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Salvatore, A. (2005): Muslims in the new Europe: Between religious traditions, multiple identities, and the conflicted emergence of new secular space. In S. Nöckel & L. Tezcan (Eds.), Islam and the New Europe: Continuities, changes, confrontations (pp. 94–113). Bielefeld: transcript.Google Scholar
  29. Sammet, K. (2007). Religion oder Kultur? Positionierungen zum Islam in Gruppendiskussionen über Moscheebauten. In M. Wohlrab-Sahr & L. Tezcan (Eds.), Konfliktfeld Islam in Europa (pp. 179–198). Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sammet, K., & Erhard, F. (2014). The observation of the unobservable: Ideas of afterlife in a sociological perspective. In M. Rotar, A. Teodorescu, & C. Rotar (Eds.), Dying and death in 18th–21st century Europe. Volume 2 (pp. 338–350). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. Schönwälder, K. (2007). Gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt und kulturelle Differenz: Muslime und Debatten über Muslime in Großbritannien. In M. Wohlrab-Sahr & L. Tezcan (Eds.), Konfliktfeld Islam in Europa (pp. 241–260). Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schütze, F. (2006). Verlaufskurven des Erleidens als Forschungsgegenstand der interpretativen Soziologie. In H.-H. Krüger & W. Marotzki (Eds.), Handbuch erziehungswissenschaftliche Biographieforschung (pp. 205–237). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Statistical Offices of the Federation and the Länder (Statistische Âmter des Bundes und der Länder). (2014). Zensus 2011: Bevölkerung nach Geschlecht, Alter, Staatsangehörigkeit, Familienstand und Religionszugehörigkeit. Endgültige Ergebnisse. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/Bevoelkerung/Zensus/ZensusBuLa5121101119004.pdf?__blob=publicationFile. Accessed 28 October 2015.Google Scholar
  34. Vincett, G., & Olson, E. (2012). The religiosity of young people growing up in poverty. In L. Woodhead & R. Catto (Eds.), Religious change in modern Britain (pp. 196–202). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. von Wensierski, H.-J., & Lübcke, C. (2012). ‘Als Moslem fühlt man sich hier auch zu Hause’: Biographien und Alltagskulturen junger Muslime in Deutschland. Opladen: Barbara Budrich.Google Scholar
  36. Wohlrab-Sahr, M., & Sammet, K. (2006). Weltsichten—Lebensstile—Kirchenbindung: Konzeption und Methoden der vierten EKD-Erhebung über Kirchenmitgliedschaft. In J. Hermelink, I. Lukatis, & M. Wohlrab-Sahr (Eds.), Kirche in der Vielfalt der Lebensbezüge: Die vierte EKD-Erhebung über Kirchenmitgliedschaft. Band 2: Analysen zu Gruppendiskussionen und Erzählinterviews (pp. 21–32). Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlag.Google Scholar
  37. Woodhead, L. (2012). Strategic and tactical religion. http://www.religionandsociety.org.uk/attachments/files/1337692875_Woodhead-Tactical%20Religion-Edinburgh%20May%202012.pdf. Accessed 10 March 2016.Google Scholar
  38. Woodhead, L. (2013). Tactical and strategic religion. In N. M. Dessing, N. Jeldtoft, J. S. Nielsen, & L. Woodhead (Eds.), Everyday lived Islam in Europe (9–22). Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  39. Woodhead, L. (2017). Wie der Feminismus die Religionsforschung revolutioniert hat. In K. Sammet, F. Benthaus-Apel, & C. Gärtner (Eds.), Religion und Geschlechterordnungen (pp. 37–48). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for the Study of CultureUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations