Open Access Research Article
RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM: A THREAT TO SOCIETY
Published Paper
Article Details
RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM:
A THREAT TO SOCIETY
Authored by - INDRA DAMAN TIWARI
AND NIVEDITA SINGH
Fundamentalism is a term whose reach
and importance are contentious in today’s world. Fundamentalism typically has a
close relationship with religious convictions, and this is its most obvious
manifestation.
Fundamentalism in India can take many
different shapes, but religion is always at its centre. What are its
variations, the ramifications they have for India, and how does it vary from
communalism?
Concept of Fundamentalism
Fundamentalism is described as a
tendency among certain groups to strictly and literally follow certain specific
scriptures, dogmas, or ideologies with a strong emphasis on maintaining
in-group and outgroup distinctions. This tendency is more frequently, but not
exclusively, seen in religious terms.
Fundamentalists place a significant
emphasis on purity and a strong desire to go back to earlier ideals from which
they feel their followers have deviated. This tendency frequently has the
effect of rejecting differences of opinion with regard to these established
“fundamentals” and the group’s preferred interpretation of them.
The phrase “fundamentalism” can
either be a derogatory epithet or a neutral description, depending on the
situation. It carries a number of unfavourable associations that even its
supporters are hesitant to use. Fundamentalism is a religious reaction against
aspects of modernity.
Historical development of
Fundamentalism
The four-volume “The Fundamentals”
set of publications, which were released in 1909, contains the original concept
of “fundamentalism.” These works, which were published between 1909 and 1920 by
the Bible Institute of Los Angeles (now the Biola University), encouraged
Christians to uphold some core Christian beliefs. The “ Fundamentalist
Modernist dispute” that raged among American Protestant churches in the late 19th
and early 20th centuries would come to be symbolised by this.
It soon became connected with a
specific strain of evangelical Protestantism that distinguished itself from
other Christians and modernity by taking a separatist stance towards others who
did not share its beliefs.[1]
The so-called "second wave" of fundamentalism in the US and political
developments abroad, particularly the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979,
contributed to a significant development in the conceptual history of
fundamentalism in the late 1970s. Scholars and pundits had to separate
fundamentalism from its Christian roots in order to use it to explain
occurrences in non-Christian societies, especially in the Islamic world, as a
result of a new understanding of the worldwide relevance of religion in
politics. This conceptual expansion led to a significant increase in the use of
the term “fundamentalism” in literature and media, whether it be in English,
German (fundamentalismus), or French (fundamentalisme).
This increase can be attributed to the increased popularity of this topic in
discussions of the role of religion in politics in many different parts of the
world.
Justice rationale behind
Fundamentalism
Religious beliefs are referred to as
fundamentalism, as was already stated. Fundamentalist religious practices
generally share characteristics. Fundamentalists of a particular religion
consider their sacred texts to be the actual written words of God.
Fundamentalism held that since the Bible is considered to be error-free and
that no one has the authority to alter it or dispute with it because God wrote
the Bible for His followers, there are no errors to be found in it.
Fundamentalists frequently think
liberalism and secularism are out to destroy their way of life and sacred
truths.
Fundamentalists believed that their
cause will have cosmic importance. They see themselves as protectors of a way
of life and a distinctive doctrine. Community, comprehensively centered upon a
clearly defined religious way of life in all of its aspects, is the promise of
fundamentalist movements.
Types of Fundamentalism
There are two types of Fundamentalism
·
Religious
Fundamentalism
·
Non-religious
Fundamentalism.
The forms of religious fundamentalism
are as follows:
·
Christian
Fundamentalism
·
Islamic
Fundamentalism
·
Buddhist
Fundamentalism
·
Sikh
and Hindu Fundamentalism
·
Jewish
Fundamentalism
Christian Fundamentalism
Christians are generally two types,
those who took a literal view of the Bible and the church documents and others
who have a liberal view of it. The former are the Christian fundamentalists;
they came into existence as a consequence of the impact which ‘liberals’ had on
Christianity. Liberal Christians attempted to restructure the social bases
relied upon religious principles with new secular ones such as democratic
values. Indirectly and somehow directly, that was a threat to religious values
and the family structure. Consequently, throughout the twentieth century,
through a literal commitment to the sacred documents, Christian fundamentalism
emerged to combat with such a liberal theology of Christianity by returning to
the rightful order of society. In this way, Christian fundamentalism came into
existence as an anti-modern movement in modern era, in a sense it was rejecting
the modern ideological products. Yet, it should be kept in mind that they were
not hostile to all products of modernity.
Fundamentalists use some elements of
modern world (modern technology) as a factor to prevent other elements of
modern era which they consider to be a threat to religion (i.e. materialism).
For instance, the Christian rights emerged in 1970s, believe that only
Christians and Jews are qualified to run governments; that is in a sense
rejecting the separation of church and state, among those is Robert Son who
owns the Christian Broadcasting Network (Hoffman and graham, 2006:403). Having
this Christian fundamentalism emerged as a modern movement, as Armstrong puts
it ‘religious fundamentalists are essentially modern movements that could take
no root in other time than our own’ (Armstrong, 2001:viii).[2]
The first use of the term
Fundamentalism was recorded at the Nigara Bible Conference in 1878-1897. The
Fundamentals – 12 books in 19th century funded by Milton & Lyman Stewart in
Protestant churches in U.S.A. stressed the inerrancy of the Bible and a number
of basic Christian doctrines. The general assembly of Presbyterian Church
listed their five fundamentals. The Baptist Church ranked among the
Fundamentalists. Christian Fundamentalism predominated in 18th and 19th century
in United States in different denominations all claiming to hold the true message
of Christ. According to James F. Mattil the fundamentalists hold that “ the key
to fundamentalist Christian belief is their acceptance of the inerrancy of the
Bible”. The Iran hostage crisis 1979-80 brought into existence the term Islamic
Fundamentalism as the media tried to explain the ideology of Ayatollah
Khomeini. And it has since been used to describe Muslim violence in various
parts of the world including the attack on U.S.A. in September 2001, the
attacks on British railways in July 2007 and most recently the Pune attacks in
2010.[3]
Islamic Fundamentalism
Despite their strong religious
beliefs and early indoctrination of the Koranic principles in children, Muslims
have historically faced political opposition. This is true despite their strong
religious convictions. In numerous and violent conflicts throughout history in
the Middle East and Europe, this opposition has been felt strongly. The
cultural and intellectual resources of the Arabic culture have infiltrated and
enriched European and eventually global learning beginning in the 14th and 15th
centuries, despite war and bloodshed. It is commonly known that Arabs made
discoveries in the fields of mathematics and architecture. Muslims were
properly proud of the fact that Islamic culture was, in many ways, more
sophisticated than that which was then widespread in several parts of Europe.
The Arab world disliked and rejected
British colonialism in the 19th century, and the Islamic world
placed great weight on the struggle for political power. In actuality, this has
always been a crucial component of Islam’s religious-political nature Resistance efforts have given rise to
extremist organisations.
Since the Middle Ages, millions of
Muslims have called India home. Wars were fought to establish Moghul dynasties;
there was violence and intolerance; however, it eventually calmed down and
developed into a successful empire under Akbar, who displayed remarkable
tolerance, supported Hindus, and welcomed Jesuit missionaries to his court.
Although there had been instances of
forced conversion and it was inevitable that Islamic rules and customs would be
enforced in some places, there was generally very little documented evidence of
fanaticism or fundamentalism. Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Parsis all
coexisted as Indians.
Prior to Indian Independence and
after the subcontinent was divided into India and Pakistan, Islamic
fundamentalism gained prominence. Fearful rioting followed the population
exchange as Muslims fled into their own country and Hindus from the new Islamic
state crossed into the new, liberated India.
There was a lot of hostility and
frequent bloody shoot outs as a result of the animosity that arose between the
two populations. For safety and to shield themselves and their religion from
what they felt would be oppression, migrant Muslims preferred to group together
and move into ghettos. Generally speaking, those fears never came to pass, save
for the largest incident—the destruction of the Babri Masjid—when vested
interests stirred up racial tensions by disseminating rumours that were
frequently wholly baseless. As a result, there were violent riots that caused
death and destruction and increased animosity between the two religious
communities.[4]
The Hindu majority saw the expanding
Muslim community as a threat, and after experiencing the violence of the
attack, the Muslims felt increasingly exposed and uneasy since their religion
and sacred sites were being targeted. The Muslim majority has become more and
more fundamentalist in their viewpoint and in their suspicion of what they see
to be a Hindu administration in an effort to defend their lives, their faith,
and their sacred sites. Violence that has occurred often on both sides has
hardened fundamentalist beliefs and practices among Muslims and Hindus alike.
India’s basic existence as a secular state has been in jeopardy, but prudent
leadership has prevented it from disintegrating.
Hindu Fundamentalism
The Hindu fundamentalist is based on three
Hs, “Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan” And Its members had to
share a common language, common religion and a common origin. It is a
combination of religious, cultural and political fundamentalism, incorporated
in one particular pattern of framework to cater to the needs of the dominant
group of the country. Religiously, it hascome to extent of alienating other
religions from the mainstream by oppressing, demonisingthe other and denying
the right of existence through the tactics of stigmatising, demolition and
destruction of the worship place and many other unprecedented demonstrations.
Politically, it has come to the level of capturing power in the central
government; and culturally, it is isolating the minorities as outsiders who do
not share the Hindu culture andhence, they are considered as aliens and they have
no right to live in India.
Hindu fundamentalism is rather a new
phenomenon. It is sustained through four dogmatic assertions: first and
foremost is the religious dogmatism that project the Hinduism as the only
custodian of true spirituality; the second is scriptural dogmatism that accepts
nothing but the Vedas as the depository of all the truth; third is the
territorial dogmatism, asserting India as the land of God-realization; and the
fourth is the communal dogmatism that asserts the theory of India for Hindus
alone.
The Hindu fundamentalist function
under various names in India and throughout the diaspora. There are, however,
three main right-wing Hindu organisations: the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
(RSS), the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP). The
RSS was formed in the mid-1920s, the VHP in 1964, and the BJP emerge din the
late 1970s as successor to an earlier party, the Jansangh. The BJP in the past
had been in power as part of a coalition government for two consecutive terms
of the national parliament, (and single Majority party at present). In the last
two decades, the VHP has actively worked to help the BJP gain electoral gains
by creating a ‘Hindu’ electorate which would back the BJP under all circumstances.
Gujarat's March 2002 events stunned
not only India but the entire world. India has had conflict between religious
groups in the past.[5]
When India and Pakistan were founded
in 1947, there was unheard-of levels of violence. Since that time, communal
riots—violence between religious communities—have occurred often. Nonetheless,
the violence's nature has evolved through time. Gujarat's unrest was not caused
by conflict between two communities. It was an organised and well-planned act
of genocidal violence against Muslim communities, carried out with the help of
the government. Many trained individuals from the "Hindu" communities
assaulted everything that belonged to the Muslim communities' members,
including lives, properties, and businesses.
According to the National Human
Rights Commission, “the state completely failed to protect the constitutional
rights of the people of Gujarat.” Furthermore, it was not a singular incident.
Long before that time, there was violence, and it is still happening today in
various forms. A new type of Hindu society was developing, as seen by the
makeup of the crowds who marched to the streets of Gujarat. The mobs included
women, members of lower castes (Dalits), indigenous peoples (Adivasis), and
women who have historically been subjected to discrimination by orthodox
Hinduism. They had come together due to a shared feeling of “Hindu identity,”
but this had not happened naturally. Hindu fundamentalists, who have been
attempting to establish a presence in India, achieved their goal as a
consequence of a well-planned campaign.
Fundamentalists of the Hindu religion
received assistance from the governmental apparatus, which they have actively
infiltrated during the past ten years. They have made efforts to change India's
perception from that of a secular, democratic country to that of a
"Hindu Rashtra."[6] In
this paper, I will explore the events in Gujarat in the context of how Hindu
fundamentalism and the groups that support it have historically operated.
There has been a comparable rise in
other fundamentalisms, such Islamic fundamentalism, along with growing control
by Hindu fundamentalist groups over the culture and ethos of mainstream Hindu
society.
Other fundamentalisms, including
Islamic fundamentalism, have grown in tandem with Hindu fundamentalist groups’
greater dominance over the culture and ethos of mainstream Hindu society. But
there are three reasons why we believe it is urgent to pay attention to Hindu
fundamentalism.
First, it has gained state power in a
democracy, which means it is succeeding in dividing the electorate along
religious lines and changing the face of Indian society. Second, it has
cleverly portrayed the majority population as being attacked and victimised.
Lastly, when fundamentalist groups hold democratic power, it threatens and
oppresses everyone it “other rises” in a way that spells the end for both those
people’s civic rights and democracy itself.
Religious Nationalism and India’s
Future
Modi’s success in India’s 2019
election will profoundly affect the country’s economy, foreign policy, and
state politics, as well as its future as a secular republic.
Nationalist groups with religious
roots have become increasingly popular in recent years in a number of different
nations. Due to both its size and its sustained democratic tradition, few
situations are more deserving of in-depth analysis than India. India is the
largest democracy in the world, and it is also where one-sixth of all people on
earth live and vote.[7]
Hence it is conceivable that political changes in India will have an impact on
the rest of South Asia and the democratic globe.
India is not alone in facing the
challenges that accompany religious nationalism: many democracies worldwide are
witnessing a rise in such political movements. The widespread use of
religiously inspired political appeals can be detected in places as diverse as
Turkey, Latin America, Western Europe, and the post-Soviet states.2 For
instance, in the 2018 Costa Rican presidential runoff election, voters for evangelical
populist candidate Fabricio Alvarado reportedly rallied behind the mantra that
“if a man of God can’t govern us, then nobody can.”[8]
In his recent successful bid for the
Brazilian presidency, right-wing populist candidate Jair Bolsonaro similarly
campaigned on the slogan, “Brazil before everything, and God above all.”[9] In
Indonesia, meanwhile, Islamic nationalists allied with anti-Chinese xenophobes
and economic nationalists to oust Jakarta’s Christian governor Basuki Tjahaja
Purnama and convict him on blasphemy charges.[10]
Religion appears, no doubt, as a
political force in the whole world. Politics gains at the cost of Religion. It
is equally evident that religious militancy develops from the practice of using
religion to achieve political gains. Political use of religion begets
intolerance, hatred, jealousy and Terrorism. All religions in the world
advocate peace, tolerance and brotherhood. The powerful Vested interests often
associate it with violence. Religious extremism and violence have become almost
two sides of a coin, and thus throughout the world religious violence is
spreading fast. All the major countries of the world have witnessed, over the
past few decades, the rise of dangerous forms of religious militancy and
extremism.[11]
The growing extremism of religious
militants has mounted crises of democracy in the world. Terrorism on the whole
originated from extreme religio-political fundamentalism, from religious
Intolerance and from the cherished antagonism against secular, progressive and
democratic Ideals. The scourge of terrorism is alarmingly threatening peace and
democracy and abusing Human rights leading to critical human security
situation.
The scourge of terrorism perpetrated
by the home-grown religio -political groups of Pakistan, Bangladesh, India and
Sri Lanka in contemporary period have disrupted peace, made critical prospects
of democracy and the state of Human security alarmingly in the region[12].
It has become imperative to seek measures to quell Domestic violent movements
grown out of religious extremism. Growth of terrorism never remains confined
within one’s own territory but has international ramifications. It transcends
Geographical boundary. Religious militants captured power in Afghanistan, and
now they have developed their tentacles in neighboring countries. They might
extend their dreadful claws across Continents.
Actually Indian Secularists in the
recent past did not care to put down roots in the indigenous soil of the
religious or vernacular linguistic cultures of the country. As a result, when
electoral politics enlarged the political community of India by bringing the
groups other than the middle class into it, it produced popular leaders more
inclined to the unrenewed traditions. That is to say, the dialogue between
Religion and Secularism came to a stop leaving the field to closed secularism
on the one hand and the revived communally oriented fundamentalist religion and
culture on the other.
The fundamental law of religious
freedom In the Constitution of India includes the freedom to “propagate”
religion. But the debate on it was endless. It was the announcement by Mukherji
and D’ Sousa that the Christian Community had decided to forgo special communal
representation in the legislature and other communal safeguards so that there
would not be political exploitation of increase of numbers through conversion
that there was a spontaneous decision in the Constituent Assembly to include
propagation of religion as a fundamental human right of the citizen. Though the
Court has ruled that the right to propagate does not include the right to
convert, that right is the right of the one who hears the propagated religion.
But even afterwards there were attempts to restrict this freedom by law in
Parliament.
It was Nehru’s opposition to them
that defeated them. The O.P. Tyagi Bill got the support of then Prime Minister
Morarji Desai and it was the fall of the Desai ministry that prevented it from
getting passed. But the question has continued to agitate Hindu minds. It
raises many very sensitive theological as well as social issues on which
Hinduism with its mystic orientation and Christianity and Islam with their
prophetic historical orientation differ in a fundamental sense.
But the ecumenical inter-religious
dialogues in recent years have been exploring new paths to break the deadlock.
The Indian situation certainly calls for mutual understanding at depth and
consensus about permitted parameters of religious practices, for which
inter-faith dialogues among religions and secular ideologies at various levels
may be necessary, specifically within the Indian context. Since freedom of
propagation and conversion involves not only matters of religion, but also of
culture and political ideas, any restriction at this point will affect the
fundamental rights of the human person in general.
I suppose that must be the reason for
Governor Kanth proposing a consensus of religious leaders on this matter
outside the law.
Outcomes of the paper
There is no great ferment taking
place in the world of religious ideas, beliefs, and rituals, or any marked
increase in the sum of human spirituality. What we are witnessing today is less
the resurgence of religion than of
communalism, where a community of believers has not only a religious
affiliation but also social, economic, and political interests in common. These
may conflict with the corresponding interests of another community of believers
sharing the same geographical space. The basic reason for supposing that
religiously inspired reform movements may be gaining momentum in our time is
that perceptions of inequity in human affairs and the tangible realities that
provoke those perceptions are on the increase. Population growth on the one
hand, and advanced means of communications on the other, more often than not
disrupt accustomed ways of life. They help to create personal uncertainty,
isolation, and disappointment. The resulting distress can and often does find
expression in fundamentalist movements that attempt to counteract uncertainty,
isolation, and disappointment by forming supportive communities of fellow
believers. It is no accident that these movements are based in countries where
the continuation of old village ways is becoming impossible for a majority of
the population, where urban-based mass communications, by penetrating the
villages, have begun to erode an age-old framework of peasant life.
The problem in India is that the
nation continues to keep religion and the state intertwined. In a country that
has many religions, the government and the people must realize that religion
and the state have to be separate. Mixing the two has never worked, and it
never will. The stability of the state system depends critically on the state’s
role in balancing and mediating relationships between thousands of separate
communities. Such balancing requires careful and measured degrees of
impartiality, neutrality, syncretism, and tolerance. What has bound communities
to each other has been the manufactured mechanisms and symbols of the secular
state. These structures, while supportive of local religious and sectarian
institutions, had to remain impartial, neutral, or secular.
Future conflicts will be those of
communal survival, aggravated, or in many cases caused by, environmental
scarcity. These conflicts will be sub national, meaning that it will be hard
for states and local governments to protect their own citizens physically. This
is how many states may ultimately die. As state power fades, peoples and
cultures around the world will be thrown back upon their own strengths and
weaknesses, with fewer equalizing mechanisms to protect them. The coming
decades will see us more aware of our differences than our similarities. To the
average person, political values will mean less and personal security more.
As we have already seen, Religious
Fundamentalism is intertwined with many different motives Which are often
selfish and can be a serious source of intolerance, conflict and wars. Religion
is meant to bring peace, good will, tolerance, love and social harmony among
people. Thus Religion becomes a doubled edged sword. What use we make of it
depends on human mind and Social conditions. We need to have better communal
relations, tolerance and understanding of one another.
Religion is a personal relationship
between man and God. No one can or should come between the individual and God.
The modern and contemporary Indian Philosophers are very liberal and dynamic in
outlook. They do not believe in sectarian religion. They advocate for cult
less, non-dogmatic and non-Ritualistic religion.
Ramakrishna Paramahansa, Tagore,
Gandhi and Dr.Radhakrishnan visualize A universal religion, which is open,
dynamic and all embracing. Thus Mahatma Gandhi says, “ My religion is Hinduism,
which for me is religion of humanity and includes the best of all Religions
known to me.” Ramakrishna Paramahansa emphatically says that all religions are
true and they all serve as different pathways to the realization of God. The
same truth runs in the heart of all religions. There is essential unity in all
religions and yet there is diversity. While the Renascent leaders have faith in
the truth of all religions, they all hold that one particular religion should
not be engrafted on another religion. Each religion has its value and serves
society in a particular manner. The solace and satisfaction can be derived from
religion only when it develops on indigenous lines. There should be growth in
interiority and interiorization in all religions and they should flower
independently on their own pattern. It will be harmful to reduce all religions
to a colorless form of one particular religion.
Swami Vivekananda, Dr.S.Radhakrishnan
and Mahatma Gandhi call on the Indian masses to break their narrowness and lead the life of
sanathana dharma. The soul of religion is different from its body. The myths
and rites constitute the body of a religion which are perishable. The spirit of
Indian religion is that of an open religion based on the intuitive experiences
of God. A religious person is a social reformer and a true karma yogi like
Mahatma Gandhi.
We have but one choice, the path of
secular humanism based on the principles of logic and reason. Our founding
fathers gave us a nation founded on the principle that power belongs to the
people and set us on the path of a secular democratic state that respects
religious freedom and human dignity. This alone can offer us the hope of
providing every citizen with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of
excellence. Peace (Shanti in the Indian Scriptures) is fundamental to the Hindu
way and view of life; in Islam beneficence and mercy (Rahman and Rahim in the
Koran) are the main attributes of God. With such profound similarities in mind
, all Indians- Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and
non believers- must re-examine their Past, which can give them valuable clues
on how to realize a more peaceful and cooperative future.
[5] WLUML-WSF-1h-final.indd
Sec9:61
[6] John
Harriss, Craig Jeffrey, and Stuart Corbridge, “Is India Becoming the ‘Hindu
Rashtra’ Sought by Hindu Nationalists?” Simons Papers in Security and
Development no. 60, School for International Studies, Simon Fraser University
(December 2017): 22.
[7] Milan
Vaishnav, When Crime Pays: Money and Muscle in Indian Politics (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 2017).
[8] Ben
Raderstorf and Missy Reif, “A New Trend of Religious Populism in Latin
America?” Dialogue, April 9, 2018, https://www.thedialogue.org/blogs/2018/04/a-new-trend-of-religious-populism-in-latin-america/.
Visited at April 11, 2023
[9] Catherine
Osborn, “Bolsonaro’s Christian Coalition Remains Precarious,” Foreign Policy,
January 1, 2019, https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/01/bolsonaros-christian-coalition-remains-precarious-brazil-brasil-president/.
Visited at April 11, 2023
[10] Krithika
Varagur, “The Improbable Rise and Blasphemous Fall of a Christian Politician in
Indonesia,” Foreign Policy, April 25, 2017, https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/04/25/the-improbable-rise-and-blasphemous-fall-of-a-christian-politician-in-indonesia/.
Visited at April 11, 2023
[11]
2008.http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/ji.htm visited on
April 11, 2023
Article Information
RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM: A THREAT TO SOCIETY
Authors: INDRA DAMAN TIWARI, NIVEDITA SINGH
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/04/13
- Volume 2
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.