Communalism & Fundamentalism | Sociology Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Definition of Fundamentalism

Fundamentalism is a concept that exists in various religions, including Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Sikhism, though its prevalence and impact differ based on historical and geographical contexts and the structures of individual religions. In essence, fundamentalism refers to the belief in returning to the core tenets of a religion and adhering to its original texts and teachings without any interpretation or debate.

• Fundamentalists believe that these original texts are the actual words of God, and therefore their meaning is clear, unambiguous, and unchangeable. This leads them to reject any later developments, interpretations, or adaptations of these texts. For instance, Christian fundamentalists view the Old and New Testaments as God's immutable words, while Muslim fundamentalists consider the Quran and the Sunnah as such. Similarly, some Hindus and Sikhs regard the Vedas and the Gurbani, respectively, as the ultimate divine words.
• Furthermore, fundamentalists assert that all aspects of life should be governed by the true, revealed religion as embodied in the original texts. This includes society, economy, politics, culture, law, and personal life. They believe that religion is not just a personal, spiritual aspect of life, but rather a divine path that should guide all aspects of individual and collective life. As a result, they reject the pluralist principle of "many Gods, many moralities, many laws."

Fundamentalism is a belief system that advocates for a strict adherence to the original teachings of a religion, rejecting any interpretation or adaptation of its texts. This belief extends to all aspects of life, with fundamentalists asserting that the divine words of their religion should guide society, economy, politics, culture, law, and personal life.

Politics, Religion and Education

• The fundamentalists challenge the concept of separating religion from politics and the state, arguing that if God is supreme, then political rule should also fall under His domain. As a result, they advocate for a theocratic state where religion plays a central role in governance. This extends to education as well, with fundamentalists insisting on religious control over the curriculum to ensure that religious teachings are prioritized and nothing contradictory is taught.
• One example of this is the 1864 Syllabus of Modern Errors issued by Pope Pius IX, which condemned those who sought to remove the influence of the Catholic Church from education and accused them of infecting young minds with pernicious errors and vices. Consequently, fundamentalists often call for a boycott of modern state-run or state-supported schools in favor of institutions that adhere to traditional religious teachings. Some even argue that education should only be focused on learning religious texts or meeting practical needs for worldly affairs.
• Furthermore, fundamentalists believe that all laws should be derived from the founding religious texts, such as the Koran and Sunnah for Muslim fundamentalists. They tend to emphasize harsh ancient penal codes, including amputation, stoning, public flogging, and death penalties for various crimes. For instance, some American fundamentalists argue for the death penalty for crimes like murder, adultery, homosexuality, and blasphemy, based on the Mosaic Laws found in the Old Testament.
• Religious fundamentalists challenge the separation of religion from politics and education, advocating for a theocratic state where religion plays a central role in governance and the educational system. They emphasize the importance of deriving laws from founding religious texts and often advocate for harsh penalties for various crimes based on ancient religious teachings.

Fundamentalism and Equality of Religions

• Fundamentalists do not support the idea of equality among religions or even the right for all religions to coexist. This is because they believe that their religion is the only true one, and they argue that other religions should not be allowed to preach or practice their beliefs, which they consider to be false. Consequently, this mindset leads fundamentalists to reject the idea of unity among religions. In many cases, they advocate for the prohibition and suppression of other religions in countries where their own religion is the majority.
• An example of this can be seen in the Vishwa Hindu Parishad's demand to eliminate all Islamic religious or cultural influences from India. However, fundamentalists often contradict themselves by demanding the freedom to practice and preach their own religion in countries where they are a minority. In such cases, they may also call for the separation of religion from the state, particularly when it comes to the majority religion.
• Fundamentalism is generally opposed to reason, rationalism, humanism, and secularism. It often disregards science and denies the validity of any knowledge that falls outside the scope of their religious beliefs. As Professor Sadik J. Al-Azim has noted, both Christian and Muslim fundamentalists invest in efforts to "re-Christianize" or "re-Islamize" various fields of human knowledge, resulting in the development of theories and principles based on their religious texts for natural science, economics, history, law, government, politics, sociology, psychology, and more. In India, Hindu fundamentalists have recently been making claims for the existence of Hindu mathematics and other sciences.
• Fundamentalism does not accept the idea of equality or unity among religions and often advocates for the suppression of other religions in favor of their own. This mindset is opposed to rationalism, humanism, and secularism, and often seeks to incorporate religious principles into various fields of human knowledge.

Sovereignty and Religion

• Fundamentalists oppose the concept of popular sovereignty, democracy, and constitutional government. This is because they believe that sovereignty belongs to God, and all laws and policies should be based on God's words as revealed in the holy texts. Consequently, they argue that there is no room for constitutions or for people to make decisions.
• It is important to distinguish fundamentalism from devout belief, religiosity, religious orthodoxy, or adherence to the fundamental beliefs and values of one's religion. Unlike fundamentalists, the religiously orthodox are not intolerant of others' religious beliefs. For instance, in India, both Sufis and Vaishnavites demonstrate strong religious beliefs and a high degree of tolerance towards other faiths. However, fundamentalists from their own religions would likely label both groups as 'practitioners of error.'

Definition of Communalism

Communalism can be defined as the belief that people belonging to a particular religion share not only religious interests but also political, economic, social, and cultural interests. This concept has evolved through three stages in modern India, with each stage providing its own definition of communalism and transitioning into the next stage.

• The first stage of communalism emerged in the late 19th century, when it was proposed that individuals of a specific religion across India have common interests beyond their religious beliefs. This led to the idea that India consists of distinct communities, such as Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, and Christians, and that these communities form the Indian nation. Each community has its own leaders who represent and defend their community's interests. However, many nationalists adopted the language of religion-based communities without fully embracing the underlying communal ideology.
• Communalism entered its second stage in the early 20th century, when communalists began to argue that followers of a religion have separate interests from those of other religions due to their religious differences. These liberal communalists acknowledged that Indians of different religions have many common interests, especially in relation to colonial rule, but maintained that they also have additional, distinct interests. They believed that Indians could and should unite in the fight for political freedom and economic development, as long as their separate communal interests were recognized and addressed through compromise and negotiation.

Two Nation Theory

• The third stage of communalism emphasized that the secular interests of followers of different religions were not just distinct, but also entirely antagonistic towards each other. According to this perspective, what was beneficial for Hindus was detrimental for Muslims, and vice versa. Consequently, Hindus and Muslims could not form a united nation or coexist as equal citizens, as there was no common ground to unite them. This led to the emergence of the two-nation theory, which had both Hindu and Muslim communal versions.
• The Muslim League, led by Mohammed Ali Jinnah, contended that Hindus and Muslims in India constituted two separate nations due to their distinct religious beliefs. Therefore, they needed to separate and establish two different nation-states as their interests were entirely conflicting. On the other hand, the Hindu communal version of the two-nation theory, advocated by V.D. Savarkar and M.S. Golwalkar, argued that only Hindus formed the Indian nation, and Muslims were not a part of it. As a result, Muslims should reside in India not as equal citizens but under the mercy of Hindus and as perpetual foreigners.
• It is evident that both Hindu and Muslim communalists shared a similar understanding of nation and citizenship, effectively adopting a two-nation theory. They began to speak the language of hostility and conflict towards followers of other religions, fostering hatred among people and promoting violent sentiments.

Haunting images of communal violence in Godhra, Gujarat in 2001 (Left) A Muslim begging for his life, (Right)A triumphant Hindu rioteer

Fundamentalism and Communalism

• Fundamentalism and communalism are two ideologies that share several common elements, but they also possess distinct differences. Both ideologies challenge the notion of separating religion from politics and the state. They reject the idea of equal truth in all religions or the unity of different faiths. Additionally, they advocate for the control of education by the dominant religion's followers and emphasize the restoration of past values and 'greatness' rather than progress towards an unknown future. Both ideologies also believe that their societies had achieved near-human perfection during the early centuries when their religions were founded and practiced in their purest form, before decline and 'fall.' Lastly, they oppose secularism and consider it to be a corrupting force in society, as well as secular nationalism and the anti-imperialist and nationalist view of history.
• However, these shared features do not mean that fundamentalism and communalism are identical. For instance, indigenousism and post-modernism have many ideological positions in common with fundamentalism, such as opposition to science, reason, progress, secularism, and nationalism, but they are fundamentally different.
• It is crucial to understand the similarities and differences between fundamentalism and communalism. Both ideologies share a common opposition to secularism, equal truth in all religions, and the separation of religion from politics and the state. However, they differ in their approaches to specific issues and their overall goals. While fundamentalism tends to focus on the strict adherence to religious texts and doctrines, communalism is more concerned with the promotion of a particular community or group based on religious or cultural identity.

Differences of Perception

• The differences between communalists and fundamentalists are significant, particularly in a multi-religious society. In India, for instance, communal parties such as the Hindu Mahasabha, the RSS, the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Muslim League, and the Akali Dal are not necessarily fundamentalist. Similarly, Pakistan and Bangladesh are considered communal states but not fundamentalist states.
• A key distinction lies in the fact that fundamentalists actively seek to restore the past and its religious, social, cultural, legal, and political practices. Communalists, however, tend to focus on the modern world, using the past as ideology or nostalgia. Furthermore, the relationship between fundamentalists and communalists with religion is quite different. Fundamentalists base their entire belief system on religion and wish to establish the state, society, and daily life according to religious principles. In contrast, communalists primarily use religion as a tool for political power based on religious identity.
• It is important to note that a communal state is not necessarily a theocratic state. For example, Pakistan and Bangladesh are considered communal states but not theocratic states. In both countries, only a minority of communalists demand the strict application of ancient religious laws. Similarly, fundamentalists aim to spread their respective religion worldwide, while communalists focus on communalizing their own society.
• In India, several communalist leaders have not been particularly religious or fundamentalist. For example, M.A. Jinnah, Liaqat All Khan, Feroze Khan Noon, and V.D. Savarkar were not deeply religious, and some were even atheists. Other Indian politicians like L.K. Advani, Bal Thackeray, and Atal Behari Vajpayee cannot be considered fundamentalists either. Interestingly, the only Muslim communalists who were fundamentalists in pre-independent India were the followers of Maulana Maudoodi, who opposed the partition of India.

Targets of Fundamentalism and Communalism

• The targets of fundamentalism and communalism are notably different. Fundamentalists primarily target individuals within their own religious group who do not share their beliefs, while communalists usually target other religious communities. There is a crucial reason why communalists are rarely fundamentalists and may even oppose them: communalists strive to unite members of their religious community to gain political power, particularly in a democratic system.
• However, fundamentalism inherently divides and fragments a religion's followers for two main reasons. First, not many people can fully adopt fundamentalist practices or beliefs. Second, fundamentalists tend to exclude others by defining true religion rigidly, turning anyone who disagrees with their definition into a non-believer or even an enemy. Their extreme religious fanaticism often leads to internal divisions and fragmentation within their religious group.
• Communalists, on the other hand, tend to avoid fundamentalism. For example, V.D. Savarkar coined the term 'Hindutva' to prevent Hindu communalism from being defined by any particular Hindu sect, as this would divide rather than unite Hindus. This is also why dedicated Arya Samajists overlook Swami Dayanand's anti-idolatry teachings when advocating for temples in Ayodhya or elsewhere.
• To summarize, fundamentalism and communalism have distinct targets and objectives. While fundamentalists aim to strictly enforce their beliefs within their own religious group, communalists seek to unite their religious community and gain political power. As a result, communalists often distance themselves from fundamentalist ideologies to avoid division and fragmentation within their community.

Conclusion

It is essential to differentiate between fundamentalism and communalism for a comprehensive understanding and effective counteraction of the threats they pose to the democratic and secular fabric of India. Confusing the two terms can lead to political pitfalls and enable communalists to evade responsibility. While fundamentalism is currently more prevalent among Muslims, Hindu communalism represents a significant danger to the Indian society. Distinguishing between these terms allows for a better understanding of the unique challenges posed by each, enabling a targeted approach in combating them. The confusion between the two terms is a result of simplified western narratives and our continued reliance on these perspectives, emphasizing the need to challenge and critically evaluate our understanding of such concepts.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Communalism & Fundamentalism

What is the main goal of religious fundamentalism?

The main goal of religious fundamentalism is to return to the core tenets of a religion and adhere to its original texts and teachings without any interpretation or debate. Fundamentalists believe that their religious texts are the actual words of God and should govern all aspects of life, including society, economy, politics, culture, law, and personal life.

How does fundamentalism differ from religious orthodoxy?

While both fundamentalism and religious orthodoxy involve strong beliefs in the teachings of their respective religions, there is a key difference: fundamentalists are intolerant of other religious beliefs and reject any interpretation or adaptation of their religious texts, while the religiously orthodox are generally more tolerant of other faiths and may accept some degree of interpretation or adaptation of their texts.

What is communalism, and how does it relate to religion?

Communalism is the belief that people belonging to a particular religion share not only religious interests but also political, economic, social, and cultural interests. In the context of religion, communalism can lead to the idea that different religious communities should have separate political representation and that their interests may be in conflict with one another.

How do fundamentalism and communalism interact with politics and education?

Both fundamentalism and communalism challenge the concept of separating religion from politics and the state, arguing that political rule should fall under the domain of their respective religions. They also advocate for religious control over education, prioritizing religious teachings and rejecting any contradictory information.

What are some differences between the targets of fundamentalism and communalism?

Fundamentalists primarily target individuals within their own religious group who do not share their beliefs, while communalists usually target other religious communities. Fundamentalism often leads to internal divisions and fragmentation within a religious group due to its rigid beliefs and exclusionary practices. In contrast, communalists aim to unite members of their religious community to gain political power and often avoid fundamentalist ideologies to prevent divisions within their community.