Fundamentalists and Sacred Texts

Marty, Nagata, Antoun, and Lifton take only passing interest in a question that was of primary interest to earlier scholars of fundamentalism: the attitude of fundamentalists towards sacred texts. Nevertheless they make some interesting observations on the subject. Almost by definition, fundamentalists are textual literalists; but this literalism does not preclude selective interpretation. They chose their texts carefully: sacred poems and other open-ended texts suit their purposes better than straightforward prose works, since they are more open to interpretive manipulation. Poetic texts are viewed not as works of the imagination, but as prosaic sources of instruction that fundamentalists read “as engineers read blueprints” (Appleby & Marty 2002: 17). Complexity is not permitted: complex teachings are reduced to a set of simple doctrines that are meant to provide unambiguous answers to any question that might crop up.

Fundamentalism: the Underlying Causes

Finally, fundamentalism has less to do with scriptural purity than with “underlying issues of identity” (Nagata 2001: 485). Fundamentalists are harassed by a sense of insecurity. In an increasingly complex world, they long for an unshakeable sense of certainty. This can be found, they believe, only by drawing lines. Everything that cannot fit in their narrow worldview must be shut out or destroyed. The motto “Live and let live” is one that the fundamentalist can never accept.

Characteristics of the Fundamentalist: A Summary

We now are in a position to arrive at a summary description of the fundamentalist mind set. We will arrange the points noted by Marty, Nagata, Antoun, Lifton and others under two main heads: psychological (dealing with mind set) and practical (dealing with action).

Psychologically, fundamentalists crave certainty and reject complexity. They are obsessed with textual and doctrinal purity. They feel threatened by anything that appears to challenge their assumptions, and are inclined to be authoritarian and oppositional. Exclusivist or anti-pluralist, they are opposed to open discussion. In addition, they are reactionary or anti-evolutionary. Rejecting modernity as a whole, they selectively appropriate aspects of modernity that help them in their action.

Practically, fundamentalists set rigid boundaries and try to control the flow of information. They interpret sacred texts in a way that supports their convictions, and use manipulative language, by which they attempt to rouse the masses. They are  not averse to the use of violence. They demonize those they believe to be their enemies, casting themselves as heroes in a great cosmic drama.

In a separate section we will see whether these characteristics are present in the leaders of the anti-Heehs movement and, more generally, among those who are trying to turn the teaching of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother into a narrow religion.

Works Cited

Antoun, Richard T. 2001. Understanding Fundamentalism. Walnut Creek CA: Altamira Press.

Appleby, R. Scott, and Martin E. Marty. 2002, “Fundamentalism.” Foreign Policy 128 (Jan.-Feb.): 16–18, 20–22.

Lifton, Robert Jay. 1989. Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of “Brainwashing” in China. Chapel Hill NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Marty, Martin E. 1988. “Fundamentalism as a Social Phenomenon.” Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 42 (2 Nov.): 15-29.

Nagata, Judith. 2001. “Beyond Theology: Toward an Anthropology of Fundamentalism.” American Anthropologist, New Series, 103 (2 Jun.): 481–498.