SIKH FUNDAMENTALISM

The Sikh community is found all over the world. The community is famous for its enterprise and creativity. It turns everything to profit. Ludhiana in Punjab is known for garment manufacturing. It makes woolens, shirts and fabrics for export. Leather and sports goods are also made in Punjab. Besides the industrial entrepreneurs, Sikhs are also skilled agriculturists. The credit of the success of Green Revolution in the late sixties and seventies goes to Punjab. The state still remains the bread-basket of India. Wheat, rice, pulses, sugarcane are just some of the crops grown here. In many ways, Punjab is known all over India as a potential economic Superpower. Sikhism was founded by Guru Nanak. Guru Granth Sahib is the sacred work, a holy book like Bible for Christians and Quran for Muslims. Historically, Sikhism emerged out of the injustices done to them by the Mughal emperor, Aurangzeb. Anandpur Sahib is the pilgrim centre of Sikhs which took its present form in 1699. It is here that the tenth Guru, Govind Singh urged Sikhs to become warrior-saints against their Muslim conquerors. He said that the Sikhs are Khalsa – the pure ones. 

Describing the incident of Khalsa faith Anandpur Sahib, Fernandes observes:

Guru Govind Singh's view of the religion had been irrevocably shaped at the age of nine, when his father, the ninth Guru Tej Bahadur, was executed in Delhi by the Mughal Emperor, Ahadur had gone to plead the case of the same and had asked for his intervention after facing of Hinduism to Islam. The Emperor also advised to renounce his faith or face death. He chose death. He was beheaded on November 11, 1675.

The site of his death is marked by a Gurudwara on Old Delhi’s fort his body could be quartered, a devotee head and bore it on horseback to the ated at Anandpur Sahib.

The death of Tej Bahadur Singh inspired Guru Govind Singh to pledge the Sikhs to prepare themselves to defend their faith unto death if necessary. The Khalsa faith thus is born of the desire for a distinct Sikh identity.

The Sikh identity or the identity of Khalsa consists of five ‘k's', 

kes; they would keep their hair and beard uncut; kangha: they would wear a comb in their hair, kachha, they would wear an undergarment shorts; kara: they would wear a steel bracelet on their right wrist; and kirpan: they would be armed all times with a small sword. 

Alcohol, tobacco and meat from animals who bled on death were prohibited. The molestation of Muslim women was prohibited. Guru Govind Singh's formation of Khalsa panth was a kind of fundamentalism in religious frame. He waged battles, built fortifications to protect his domain, developed arsenals of weapons for the holy cause and ma clear in writings that he meant to defend the faith of Sikhism with deed as well as word.

Sikh fundamentalism first fascinated the West in 1978, when the blazing preacher Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale allegedly led a march to break up a congregation of the Sikh Nirankari movement (from Punjabi nirankar, formless, reflecting the movement’s belief in the nature of God), which orthodox Sikhs considered sacrilegious. Bhindranwale, like other fundamentalists, stressed the need for orthodoxy to a sacred text (the Adi Granth) and for the creation of a Sikh state governed according to sacred law. But, as in the occasion of the Protestants of Northern Ireland, such fundamentalist concerns were subordinated to nationalistic ones.

Sikh fundamentalists of the late 20th and early 21st centuries sought to fashion an independent Sikh state in the Indian province of Punjab. Although images of holy war permeated their rhetoric, their chief adversary was the Hindu state of India rather than secularism per se. Sikh fundamentalism was thus principally a nationalistic separatist movement.

In June 1984, Indian army captured the Golden Temple in Amritsar and killed Bhindranwale and hundreds of his armed followers. The homicide, as well as what Sikhs considered the defilement of their holiest shrine, enraged the Sikh civic and led to the murder of Indira Gandhi, then India’s prime minister, by two of her Sikh bodyguards in October 1984. This in turn ignited rebellions in which Hindu mobs killed more than 2,000 Sikhs . By the early 1990s, the central government had succeeded in defeating Sikh militancy in India.

The Sikhs by now had become antagonistically aggressive towards opposing faiths and resorted to dharam yudh or the battle of faith. This proves that they are historically fundamentalists. 

Image Source: http://static.dnaindia.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/22/387681-pti-sikh-protest-in-jalandhar.png

Read More

HINDU FUNDAMENTALISM

Compared to Islamic fundamentalism, Hindu fundamentalism is new. It appeared during the period of our struggle for independence. Two-nation theory is based on Muslim fundamentalism. It was argued that Hindus and Muslims were religiously two distinct communities and if these communities were separated into two nations, the problem would be solved. But, this did not happen. The Hindus created a new identity. They argued that India belongs to Hindus and the Muslims are outsiders. Muslims should be driven out or should be given the status of secondary citizens.

Variety of Hindu Fundamentalism

Hindus constitute an ethnic group. It is a cultural formation. And, what is a caste group? Both anthropologically and sociologically, Caste is social and cultural. It is very difficult to differentiate caste from religion. There are several theories which show that caste has its origin from religion. If caste is religion, there is caste fundamentalism also. Most of the castes in India have their temples and what is worse, the marginalized castes have now created their own temples. Thus, there are as many castes so there are as many temples. The whole question of fundamentalism is related to identity. Caste identity is common today. When we discuss Hindus fundamentalism, we are concerned with caste fundamentalism also.

This is a grand narrative charged by falsehood and However, those who have theoretically diagnosed fundamentalism agree to its two-fold division. It’s one variant is political. One objective is to transform fundamentalism into nationalism is argued that Hindus, notwithstanding their schisms, are in a majority and therefore they are entitled to have Hindu Raj. The second variant of fundamentalism is cultural or non-political. 

The Frontline (Vol. 21, March 13-20, 2004) argues:

Hindus who have percolated to the nooks and corners of South India and the routes of fundamentalism have often been socio-cultural and educational rather than political. In the north fundamentalism took to the acquisition of power. In their effort Hindutva forces were helped by the fact that they had the Bharatiya Janta Party in power at the Centre. The BJP became a political force to spread its net in the north. It gave a new identity to majority of Hindus. As the fundamentalists often do the Hindutva forces dealt with the past of the country. It took to the Indus Valley Civilization and argued that it was a Hindu culture. The Vedas, the epics, the Bhagwat are all carriers of Hindu culture. On the basis of culture and ancient scriptures, the Hindutva forces planned to bring together the followers of differentiated religious faiths. Religion, that is, Hinduism became a vehicle for cultural unity of the country. 

Nationalism was defined as cultural nationalism. Vedas are the cultural heritage of the nation.

The comments made in The Frontline” (Vol. 21, No. 6, 2004) argue:

The concept of cultural nationalism, conceived and propagate by Hindutva, is based on a misrepresentation of national identity.

There is no denying the importance of culture in the makeup of national identity; yet culture alone does not mould the nationalism of any country.

The Hindutva brand of fundamentalism not only talked about cultural nationalism, it also evolved a strategy to bring heterogeneous Hindu elements together. For instance, it started constructive programmes of education, medicine and public works to draw the tribal groups into the Hindu mainstream. They gave Hindu identity to the tribals. They were labelled as Hindus. Their traditional naming pattern was changed to Hindu naming pattern. The Hindutva forces entered into the arena of politics through culture.

Culture in the contemporary Indian society has lost its meaning and relevance. It is anything which fulfils our interest. Even sociologists show their fondness for the use of culture for anything which they please. Sociologists are propagating ‘Hindu sociology’ in the name of culture. The concept is very notorious. It must be used with care.

It has created a large number of organizations which are called cultural organizations. Explicitly, these organizations have no relation With politics or any movement. Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Bajrang Dal and a large number of organizations covering all the sectors of society – youth, women, marginals, tribals, students, trade unions, urban and rural. The Hindutva umbrella is very large – extended and wide. All these are clubbed together and are known Sangh Parivar.

Image Source: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/24/article-2612386-1D3E6ECF00000578-989_634x427.jpg

Read More

ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM #1

Muslim fundamentalism can be correctly examined when we look from historical, social and cultural perspectives. Though Islam believes in community brotherhood or it is a relational group founding small groups of the country. When they are found in villages, they mix up with the local people and start speaking their dialect. It is the politics, which makes them to take to fundamentalism, which might give some relief. In India, the Muslims have experienced a history which also inspires them to follow the track of fundamentalism, which might give some aid. In India, the Muslims have experienced a history which also inspires them take to the path of fundamentalism. Fundamentalism can also be seen in a game like cricket, when there is a match between India and Pakistan, the emotions are at their zenith.

The Start of Islam

The advent of Islam is sketched back to 6th century, when the Muslims lived a nomadic life in Arabia. Barbaric practices like female infanticide, human sacrifice and others were the norm. Prophet Mohammad was born in this scenario. He was troubled by the happenings around him and took up the task of revolutionizing the then existing society by campaigning Islam. He, along with his over-growing followers, had to cross overwhelming barriers to have a relatively humane and civilized society in that era.

Drinking was forbidden as it was considered influential in the occurrence of all animal instincts in human beings; usury which was causing large-scale destitution was forbidden; slavery was discouraged (not forbidden); females were given the right of inheritance up to half that of the males; some impression of democracy was introduced by creating an electoral college which elected the leader; a system of redistribution of meals, through zaket was made obligatory; idol worship and human sacrifice were forbidden; widow marriage was encouraged; and egalitarianism between haves and have nots and those belonging to diverse tribes during congregations for prayers instilled a feeling of brotherhood in society.

These and many other changes created a devoted mass of followers who fanatically tried to spread the message of Islam far and wide. During the lifetime of Prophet Mohammed and four Caliphs, the spread of Islam was due to its lofty ideals and the earnestness and good examples of those who led.

TO BE CONT...

Read More

THE CONCEPT OF FUNDAMENTALISM #1

Anthony Giddens (Sociology, 2001) has defined fundamentalism in sociological perspective: It is belief in returning to the literal meanings of scriptural texts. 

Fundamentalism may arise as a response to modernization and insisting on faith-based answers, and defending tradition by using traditional grounds.

Fundamentalism, thus, has its roots in traditional, historical prejudices and modernity. It looks at postmodernity with enmity. Postmodernity is against authority of traditions and modernity. Before the advent of modernity, there was also fundamentalism But, it was, in the Indian context, interpreted by the colonial and feudal rule. The fundamentalists today mobilize themselves on the rules of rationality and bureaucracy. This has given rise to new strength in them. There is relationship between fundamentalism and postmodernity. The postmodernity has cried aloud against grand narratives. The universalizing theories tried to establish the authoritarian generalizations on the society. This was rejected The postmodernity also rejected modernity in the west. In India, however, it did not happen. Here, in our situation, modernity was dominated by high-castes, elites and affluent groups. The authority of these groups continued to survive. And, they exercised their influence and authority. Fundamentalism attacks postmodernity as it is against authoritarian domination.

Despite the claims of postmodernists that there is weakening of grand narratives, the facts are otherwise. Fundamentalism is a grand narrative. It has its various dimensions. There is religious fundamentalism, market fundamentalism, political fundamentalism, and development fundamentalism. Fundamentalism takes the shape of terrorism. In most of the cases, fundamentals are also terrorists.

Postmodernists deny authoritarian dominance; contrariwise the fundamentalists and terrorists show all faith in commitment to authority. The postmodernists are skeptic everything. The fundamentalists do not argue, they are committed to faith. Stuart Sim (Postmodernism, 2005) says, Institutional authority is once again accepted unquestionably, obliged blindly, and allowed to direct the individual’s life in the name of a larger cause. Faith, rather than reason or skepticism, becomes the basis of the cultural process (emphasis added). In its more extreme form – as with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan – Islamic fundamentalism is effectively a return to a pre-modern society, where almost all the modern world is rejected (with the significant exception of its weaponry).

Fundamentalism is a movement of the authoritarian-minded people. It gives them safety and security in an individual believer. The postmodernity does not have any such assurance. Admittedly, both fundamentalism and postmodernity are cultural movements. But it is clear, there is a larger market for traditional system of beliefs. In India, traditions and cultural practices have a great role for the origin and growth of fundamentalism. 

The ethnic formations make coalition with fundamentalism and as a consequence of it the social order gets polluted. The social pollution gets severe when it links itself with politics. In fact, fundamentalism in India is politicized and has weakened our democracy too.

Read More