Fundamentalism is a tendency among certain groups and individuals that are characterized by the application of a strictliteral interpretation toscriptures,dogmas, orideologies, along with a strong belief in the importance of distinguishing one'singroup and outgroup,[1][2][3][4]which leads to an emphasis on some conception of "purity", and a desire toreturn to a previous ideal from which advocates believe members have strayed. The term is usually used in the context ofreligion to indicate an unwavering attachment to a set of irreducible beliefs (the "fundamentals").[5]
The term "fundamentalism" is generally regarded by scholars of religion as referring to a largely modern religious phenomenon which, while itself a reinterpretation of religion as defined by the parameters ofmodernism, reifies religion in reaction againstmodernist,secularist, liberal andecumenical tendencies developing in religion and society in general that it perceives to be foreign to a particular religious tradition.[6] Depending upon the context, the label "fundamentalism" can be apejorative rather than a neutralcharacterization, similar to the ways that calling political perspectives "right-wing" or "left-wing" can have negative connotations.[7][8]
Historic and contemporary examples of Buddhist fundamentalism occur in each of the three main branches ofBuddhism:Theravada,Mahayana, andVajrayana. In addition to the above examples of fundamentalism in Theravada-dominated societies, the reification of aprotector deity,Dorje Shugden, by 19th-century Tibetan lamaPabongkhapa could be seen as an example of fundamentalism in the Vajrayana tradition. Dorje Shugden was a key tool in Pabongkhapa's persecution of the flourishingRimé movement, an ecumenical movement which fused the teachings of theSakya,Kagyu andNyingma,[13] in response to the dominance of theGelug school. While Pabongkhapa had an initially inclusive view early in his life, he received a number of signs that he had displeased Dorje Shugden by receiving teachings from non-Gelug schools, and thus initiated a revival movement that opposed the mixing of non-Gelug practices by Gelug practitioners.[14] The main function of the deity was presented as "the protection of the Ge-luk tradition through violent means, even including the killing of its enemies." Crucially, however, these "‘enemies’ of the Gelug refers less to the members of rivalschools than to members of the Gelug tradition ‘who mix Dzong-ka-ba’s tradition with elements coming from other traditions, particularly the Nying-maDzok-chen’."[14]
In Japan, a prominent example has been the practice among some members of the MahayanaNichiren sect ofshakubuku – a method ofproselytizing which involves the strident condemnation of other sects as deficient orevil.
George Marsden has defined Christian fundamentalism as the demand for strict adherence to certain theological doctrines, in opposition toModernist theology.[15] Its supporters originally coined the term in order to describe what they claimed were five specific classic theological beliefs of Christianity, and the coinage of the term led to the development of aChristian fundamentalist movement within the Protestant community of the United States in the early part of the 20th century.[16] Fundamentalism as a movement arose in the United States, starting amongconservativePresbyterian theologians atPrinceton Theological Seminary in the late 19th century. It soon spread to conservatives among theBaptists and other denominations around 1910 to 1920. The movement's purpose was to reaffirm key theological tenets and defend them against the challenges ofliberal theology andhigher criticism.[17][18]
The concept of "fundamentalism" has roots in theNiagara Bible Conferences which were held annually between 1878 and 1897. During those conferences, the tenets widely considered to befundamental Christian belief were identified.
"Fundamentalism" was prefigured byThe Fundamentals: A Testimony To The Truth, a collection of twelve pamphlets published between 1910 and 1915 by brothers Milton andLyman Stewart. It is widely considered to be the foundation of modern Christian fundamentalism.
In 1910, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church identified what became known as thefive fundamentals:[19]
In 1920, the word "fundamentalist" was first used in print by Curtis Lee Laws, editor ofThe Watchman Examiner, a Baptist newspaper.[20] Laws proposed that those Christians who were fighting for the fundamentals of the faith should be called "fundamentalists".[21]
Theological conservatives who rallied around the five fundamentals came to be known as "fundamentalists". They rejected the existence of commonalities with theologically related religious traditions, such as the grouping of Christianity,Islam, andJudaism into oneAbrahamic family of religions.[2] By contrast, whileEvangelical groups (such as theBilly Graham Evangelistic Association) typically agree with the "fundamentals" as they are expressed inThe Fundamentals, they are often willing to participate in events with religious groups that do not hold to the "essential" doctrines.[22]
A few scholars label someindigenistrevitalization movements withinethnic andindigenous religions who reject the changes brought by the modern states and major religions in favor of a return to traditional ways as fundamentalists in contrast with syncretic reform movements. Thus, numerous new generally fundamentalistNative American religious movements include thePueblo Revolt (1680s), theShawnee Prophet Movement (1805–1811), theCherokee Prophet Movement (1811–1813), theRed Stick War (1813–1814), White Path's Rebellion (1826), theWinnebago Prophet Movement (1830–1832), the first Ghost Dance (1869–1870) and the secondGhost Dance (1889–1890), and the Snake movements among the Cherokee,Choctaw, andMuscogee Creek peoples during the 1890s.[23]
The existence of fundamentalism inHinduism is a complex and contradictory phenomenon. While some would argue that certain aspects ofGaudiyaVaishnavism manifest fundamentalist tendencies, these tendencies are more clearly displayed inHindutva, the predominant form ofHindu nationalism in India today, and an increasingly powerful and influential voice within the religion. Hinduism includes a diversity of ideas onspirituality and traditions, but has no ecclesiastical order, no unquestionable religious authorities, no governing body, no prophet(s) nor any binding holy book; Hindus can choose to bepolytheistic,pantheistic,panentheistic,pandeistic,henotheistic,monotheistic,monistic,agnostic,atheistic orhumanist.[24][25][26] According to Doniger, "ideas about all the major issues of faith and lifestyle – vegetarianism, nonviolence, belief in rebirth, evencaste – are subjects of debate, notdogma."[27]
Some would argue that, because of the wide range of traditions and ideas covered by the term Hinduism, a lack of theological 'fundamentals' means that a dogmatic 'religious fundamentalism' per se is hard to find.[28] Others point to the recent rise of Hindu nationalism in India as evidence to the contrary. The religion "defies our desire to define and categorize it." In India, the term “dharma” is preferred, which is broader than the Western term “religion.”[29]
Hence, certain scholars argue that Hinduism lacks dogma and thus a specific notion of "fundamentalism," while other scholars identify several politically active Hindu movements as part of a "Hindu fundamentalist family."[30][31]
Fundamentalism within Islam goes back to theearly history of Islam in the 7th century, to the time of theKharijites.[32] From their essentially political position, they developed extreme doctrines that set them apart from both mainstreamShia andSunniMuslims. The Kharijites were particularly noted for adopting a radical approach totakfir, whereby they declared other Muslims to beunbelievers and therefore deemed them worthy of death.[32][33][34][35]
TheIran hostage crisis of 1979–80 marked a major turning point in the use of the term "fundamentalism". The media, in an attempt to explain the ideology ofAyatollah Khomeini and the Iranian Revolution to a Western audience described it as a "fundamentalist version of Islam" by way of analogy to the Christian fundamentalist movement in the U.S. Thus was born the termIslamic fundamentalist, which became a common use of the term in following years.[44]
The termNew Atheism describes the positions of someatheist academics, writers, scientists, and philosophers of the 20th and 21st centuries.[47][48] Critics have described New Atheism as "secular fundamentalism".[49][50][51][52]
In modern politics, fundamentalism has been associated with right-wingconservative ideology, especiallysocial conservatism. Social conservatives often support policies in line with religious fundamentalism, such as support forschool prayer and opposition toLGBT rights andabortion.[53] Conversely,secularism has been associated withleft-wing orliberal ideology, as it takes the opposite stance to said policies,[6] however, various left-wing policies have likewise been deemed forms of fundamentalism,[54] notably stronger forms ofwokeness.[55]
Political usage of the term "fundamentalism" has been criticized. It has been used by political groups to berate opponents, using the term flexibly depending on their political interests. According to Judith Nagata, a professor of Asia Research Institute in theNational University of Singapore, "The Afghanmujahiddin, locked in combat with the Soviet enemy in the 1980s, could be praised as 'freedom fighters' by their American backers at the time, while the present Taliban, viewed, among other things, as protectors of American enemy Osama bin Laden, are unequivocally 'fundamentalist'."[56]
"Fundamentalist" has been used pejoratively to refer to philosophies perceived as literal-minded or carrying a pretense of being the sole source of objective truth, regardless of whether it is usually called areligion. For instance, theArchbishop of Wales has criticized "atheistic fundamentalism" broadly[57][58][59] and said "Any kind of fundamentalism, be it Biblical, atheistic or Islamic, is dangerous".[60] He also said, "the new fundamentalism of our age ... leads to the language of expulsion and exclusivity, of extremism and polarisation, and the claim that, because God is on our side, he is not on yours."[61] He claimed it led to situations such as councils calling Christmas "Winterval", schools refusing to put onnativity plays andcrosses being removed from chapels. Others have countered that some of these attacks on Christmas areurban legends, not all schools do nativity plays because they choose to perform other traditional plays likeA Christmas Carol or "The Snow Queen" and, because of rising tensions between various religions, opening up public spaces to alternate displays rather than theNativity scene is an attempt to keep government religion-neutral.[62]
In France, during a protestation march against the imposition of restrictions on the wearing of headscarves in state-run schools, a banner labeled the ban as "secular fundamentalism".[64][65] In the United States, private or cultural intolerance of women wearing thehijab (Islamic headcovering) and political activism by Muslims also has been labeled "secular fundamentalism".[66]
The term "fundamentalism" is sometimes applied to signify a counter-cultural fidelity to a principle or set of principles, as in the pejorative term "market fundamentalism", used to imply exaggerated religious-like faith in the ability of unfetteredlaissez-faire orfree-marketcapitalist economic views or policies to solve economic and social problems. According to economistJohn Quiggin, the standard features of "economic fundamentalist rhetoric" are "dogmatic" assertions and the claim that anyone who holds contrary views is not a real economist. Retired professor in religious studies Roderick Hindery lists positive qualities attributed to political, economic, or other forms of cultural fundamentalism, including "vitality, enthusiasm, willingness to back up words with actions, and the avoidance of facile compromise" as well as negative aspects such as psychological attitudes,[which?] occasionally elitist and pessimistic perspectives, and in some cases literalism.[67]
In order to carry out the fundamentalist program in practice, one would need a perfect understanding of the ancient language of the original text, if indeed the true text can be discerned from among variants. Furthermore, human beings are the ones who transmit this understanding between generations. Even if one wanted to follow the literal word of God, the need for people first to understand that word necessitates human interpretation. Through that process human fallibility is inextricably mixed into the very meaning of the divine word. As a result, it is impossible to follow the indisputable word of God; one can only achieve a human understanding of God's will.[68]
Howard Thurman was interviewed in the late 1970s for a BBC feature on religion. He told the interviewer:
I say that creeds, dogmas, and theologies are inventions of the mind. It is the nature of the mind to make sense out of experience, to reduce the conglomerates of experience to units of comprehension which we call principles, or ideologies, or concepts. Religious experience is dynamic, fluid, effervescent, yeasty. But the mind can't handle these so it has to imprison religious experience in some way, get it bottled up. Then, when the experience quiets down, the mind draws a bead on it and extracts concepts, notions, dogmas, so that religious experience can make sense to the mind. Meanwhile, religious experience goes on experiencing, so that by the time I get my dogma stated so that I can think about it, the religious experience becomes an object of thought.[69]
Influential criticisms of fundamentalism includeJames Barr's books on Christian fundamentalism andBassam Tibi's analysis of Islamic fundamentalism.[citation needed][70]
A study at theUniversity of Edinburgh found that of its six measured dimensions of religiosity, "lower intelligence is most associated with higher levels of fundamentalism."[71]
TheAssociated Press'AP Stylebook recommends that the term fundamentalist not be used for any group that does not apply the term to itself. Many scholars have adopted a similar position.[72] Other scholars, however, use the term in the broader descriptive sense to refer to various groups in various religious traditions including those groups that would object to being classified as fundamentalists, such as in theFundamentalism Project.[73]
Tex Sample asserts that it is a mistake to refer to aMuslim,Jewish, orChristian fundamentalist. Rather, a fundamentalist's fundamentalism is their primary concern, over and above other denominational or faith considerations.[74]
^Altemeyer, B.; Hunsberger, B. (1992). "Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice".International Journal for the Psychology of Religion.2 (2):113–133.doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr0202_5.
^Hunsberger, B (1995). "Religion and prejudice: The role of religious fundamentalism, quest, and right-wing authoritarianism".Journal of Social Issues.51 (2):113–129.doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01326.x.... the fundamentalism and quest relationships with prejudice are especially meaningful in light of an association with right‐wing authoritarianism. ... In the end, it would seem that it is not religion per se, but rather the ways in which individuals hold their religious beliefs, which are associated with prejudice.
^Nagata, Judith (June 2001). "Beyond Theology: Toward an Anthropology of "Fundamentalism"".American Anthropologist.103 (2):481–498.doi:10.1525/aa.2001.103.2.481.Once considered exclusively a matter of religion, theology, or scriptural correctness, use of the term fundamentalism has recently undergone metaphorical expansion into other domains [...].
^Boer, Roland (2005)."Fundamentalism"(PDF). In Tony Bennett; Lawrence Grossberg; Meaghan Morris; Raymond Williams (eds.).New keywords: a revised vocabulary of culture and society.Cambridge, Massachusetts:Blackwell Publishing. pp. 134–137.ISBN978-0-631-22568-3.OCLC230674627. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on September 10, 2008. RetrievedJuly 27, 2008.Widely used as a pejorative term to designate one's fanatical opponents – usually religious and/or political – rather than oneself, fundamentalism began in Christian Protestant circles in the eC20. Originally restricted to debates within evangelical ('gospel-based') Protestantism, it is now employed to refer to any person or group that is characterized as unbending, rigorous, intolerant, and militant. The term has two usages, the prior one a positive self-description, which then developed into the later derogatory usage that is now widespread.
^Lipner 2009, p. 8 quote: "... one need not be religious in the minimal sense described to be accepted as a Hindu by Hindus, or describe oneself perfectly validly as Hindu. One may be polytheistic or monotheistic, monistic or pantheistic, henotheistic, panentheistic, pandeistic, even an agnostic, humanist or atheist, and still be considered a Hindu."
^MK Gandhi,The Essence of Hinduism Archived 24 July 2015 at theWayback Machine, Editor: VB Kher, Navajivan Publishing, see page 3; According to Gandhi, "a man may not believe in God and still call himself a Hindu."
^"Terrorism: Growing Wahhabi Influence in the United States".www.govinfo.gov.Washington, D.C.:United States Government Publishing Office. June 26, 2003.Archived from the original on December 15, 2018. RetrievedJune 26, 2021.Nearly 22 months have passed since the atrocity ofSeptember 11th. Since then, many questions have been asked about the role in that day's terrible events and in other challenges we face in thewar against terror ofSaudi Arabia and its official sect, a separatist, exclusionary and violent form of Islam known as Wahhabism. It is widely recognized that all of the19 suicide pilots were Wahhabi followers. In addition, 15 of the 19 were Saudi subjects. Journalists and experts, as well as spokespeople of the world, have said that Wahhabism is the source of theoverwhelming majority of terrorist atrocities in today's world, fromMorocco toIndonesia, viaIsrael, Saudi Arabia,Chechnya. In addition, Saudi media sources have identified Wahhabi agents from Saudi Arabia as being responsible for terrorist attacks onU.S. troops in Iraq.The Washington Post has confirmed Wahhabi involvement in attacks against U.S. forces inFallujah. To examine the role of Wahhabism and terrorism is not to label all Muslims as extremists. Indeed, I want to make this point very, very clear. It is the exact opposite. Analyzing Wahhabism means identifying the extreme element that, although enjoying immense political and financial resources, thanks to support by a sector of the Saudi state, seeks to globally hijack Islam ... The problem we are looking at today is the State-sponsored doctrine and funding of an extremist ideology that provides the recruiting grounds, support infrastructure and monetary life blood of today's international terrorists. The extremist ideology is Wahhabism, a major force behind terrorist groups, likeal Qaeda, a group that, according to theFBI, and I am quoting, is the 'number one terrorist threat to the U.S. today'.
^Lindijer, Koert (August 24, 2013)."How Islam from the north spreads once more into the Sahel".The Africanists. RetrievedNovember 24, 2014.Hundreds of years later, Islam again comes to the Sahel, this time with an unstoppable mission mentality and the way paved by money from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Pakistan. Foreigners, and also Malians who received scholarships to study in Saudi Arabia, introduce this strict form of Islam, and condemn the sufi's [sic].[verification needed]
^See, for example, Marty, M. and Appleby, R.S. eds. (1993).Fundamentalisms and the State: Remaking Polities, Economies, and Militance. John H. Garvey, Timur Kuran, and David C. Rapoport, associate editors, Vol 3, The Fundamentalism Project. University of Chicago Press.
^Tex Sample. Public Lecture, Faith and Reason Conference, San Antonio, TX. 2006.
Appleby, R. Scott, Gabriel Abraham Almond, and Emmanuel Sivan (2003).Strong Religion. Chicago, Il; London: University of Chicago Press.ISBN0-226-01497-5
Torrey, R.A. (ed.). (1909).The Fundamentals. Los Angeles: The Bible Institute of Los Angeles (B.I.O.L.A. nowBiola University).ISBN0-8010-1264-3
"Religious movements: fundamentalist." In Goldstein, Norm (Ed.) (2003).The Associated Press Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law 2003 (38th ed.), p. 218. New York: The Associated Press.ISBN0-917360-22-2.
