Beyond fundamentalism

Religion (1989) 19, 2 8 1 -284

BEYOND FUNDAMENTALISM ; A critique of William Shepard ` "Fundamentalism" Christian and Islamic' (Religion 1987,17) Azim Nanji

Academics, in recent times, have been trying to catch up with and understand what has been generally referred to as an emerging fundamentalist trend among adherents of several of the world's religions . This trend is marked by its perceived vocal and conspicuous intrusion into the public realm, offsetting existing patterns and relationships between religion and public life . The situation poses a particular problem because the term `fundamentalism', which arose in a specific 20th-century context - American Protestantismembodying specifically stated cognitive elements, has come to be applied to all supposedly comparable responses and reactions in other parts of the world . If, in fact, each of these 'fundamentalisms' possesses common characteristics, then a coherent, comparative method would seem to offer the most effective way of making them intelligible . Thus, William Shepard reminds us early on, that his article is an attempt to compare and contrast Christian and Islamic `Fundamentalism' at three levels : An obvious level of similarities a somewhat more profound level of very important differences and a still deeper level of mixed and often subtle similarities and differences . It is, however, never made clear what this means nor what the choice of comparative categories implies, in terms of enhancing an understanding of what are culturally, geographically and historically, distinct phenomena . Since Bruce Lawrence has already circumscribed in his critique the problem of words and their meaning as they occur and are used in the article, my focus will be on the way in which a weak, conceptual framework and too ready an acceptance of apparently superficial affiliations, further compound difficulties in appreciating and locating developments as they relate to the Islamic context . Fundamentalism, as other expressions of religious belief, has a history . Those presumed to be expressing it are among many groups in Islam and 0048-721 \/89/030281 + 04 $03 .00/0

© 1989 Academic Press Limited

282

A . Aanji

the Muslim world, responding to the question of how to relate their present situation to a perceived historical past and stance . This is in part an expression of self-consciousness about history and in part an attempt to recover the sense and meaning of tradition in contemporary life . Among them are those who espouse a world of set rules and absolute ideas and who reject pluralism or diversity, seeking in turn a oneness of belief and practice . Since in the context of Islamic history and tradition, this form of response, like others, encompasses issues that are simultaneously religious, ethical, legal, political, cultural and economic, the study of Muslim `fundamentalism' or resurgence has brought into question established usages of concepts such as `religion', `politics', `community', `culture', etc . It is this wider context that Shepard's article misses altogether . As Marilyn Waldman has pointed out, when we seek to isolate a particular strand within the spectrum of modern Muslim formulations of Islam, 'We particularize and defamiliarize what are in fact two quite general and familiar twentieth century developments : the crisis of meaning associated with accelerated secularization and the dramatic shifts in traditional pre-modern loyalty patterns occasioned by nationalism' (Waldman 1983 :98) . A good contemporary example of how such a wide debate, brings into relief the relationship of the various strands in a specific political and legal context, is the public trial being conducted in Egypt (since the Spring of 1988), of several individuals on charges of attempting to assassinate ministers and a magazine editor in the hope of fomenting an `Islamic' revolution . It is worth noting that the Ikhwdn al Aluslimun, cited in the article as one of the original fundamentalist movements, participated in the last Egyptian elections by building a coalition, suggesting a less `radical' approach to participation in public life than what is implied by the article . This is of course also true in part of the Jama'at's participation in Pakistani politics . "hat Shepard's article fails to do with regards to the whole spectrum of responses in Islam, is to create an appreciation of the distinction that needs to be made in the cases that he has identified, which result from specific 20th-century forces and are thus relatively recent, and those that emphasize long-term continuities . The attempt to apply a narrower notion of 'fundamentalism', derived from an admittedly limited geographical and political part of the western world, and produced by a specific encounter between secular and religious definitions in one Christian group, runs aground when applied to diverse and widely spaced religious groups such as the Muslims, operating under equally diverse political arrangements, cultural and linguistic backgrounds . The attempt obscures the particular histories of Muslims in each of these areas and also undermines the divergence of approaches that are subsumed by the label `fundamentalist' . It also leads Professor Shepard to make generalizations that are very hard to sustain ; as for instance

Discussion

28 3

in forcing distinctions and categories such as `laymen' and "ulama', among both Sunni and Shia (page 358) . Such distinctions ignore obvious historical antecedents such as the role of Muhammad Ibn al Wahhab (d . 1765), who was certainly not a `layman' and would be hard to pin on Ali Shariati (d . 1977) who would not have wished to be considered as a traditional 'alim and who has been considered one of the intellectual leaders of the Islamic revolution in Iran . Equally problematic is the vague use of the terms `modernist' and 'traditional' when applied to Muslim groups, particularly when it is suggested that in the Muslim case, `modernism' has come entirely from outside the culture . Whereas one might accept, that in the case of some Muslims, components of alien culture might be viewed as intrusions or negations of Islamic identity, it is much more difficult to support the assumption that all expressions of `modernism' within Islam, have an alien derivation or that the debate between `fundamentalists' and `modernists' is over the relative merits of 'westernization' . All these groups are indeed committed to reform and change, a major area of distinction lies in their choice of symbols and rhetoric and to the particular vehicles that can act as agents of change - in fact, both avow differing views of `radical' transformation . In the context of past Pakistani politics, surely the changes envisaged in social and economic life in the election rhetoric of the party led by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto can be construed to be as `radical' as those of the,Jama`at, as was the common usage of the language of `radical third world opposition to western imperialism' (p . 360) . Given this, it is difficult to see why in both Muslim and Christian cases specific claims by fundamentalists to represent a more authentic expression of their respective tradition should be regarded as having 'considerable historical justification' (p . 361), any more than other groups . Surely the central issue in all this is the way in which different groups create, through a specific reading of past symbols and patterns, a new vocabulary and plan of action to relate to `modernity' . Such `fundamentalist' expressions may best be understood not as `radical' ways of rethinking and restating Islam, but in terms of what they wish to include, exclude and encode in their specific representations of Islam . Since such representations are meant to establish stances to public as well as private life, such responses are inevitably political and social, regardless of whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Sikh . It is such as intertwining that makes for greater commonality than difference, as suggested in the article . Thus it makes very little sense to distinguish strands by reference to whether doctrine or political stances are more at stake, since the ultimate goal of such movements is to create a total and not partial discourse . In a novel and what some might regard as an altogether quaint reading of `Islamic Fundamentalism', Ernest Gellner (1988) has suggested that in its

284

A . Nanji

basis, it is closer in many ways to the ideals and requirements of modernity than those of any other movement . He argues that a strict unitarianism, a (theoretical) absence of any clergy, hence, in principle, equidistance of all beliefs from the deity, a strict scripturalism and a stress on orderly lawobservance, a sober religiosity avoiding ecstasy and the audiovisual aids of religion - all these features seem highly congruent with an urban bourgeois life style and with the commercialism of the day . Gellner's dismissive air about other less composed reactions to 'fundamentalism' might incline one not to take too seriously the less friendlier image of it, evoked by Professor Shepard, but both readings strive unsuccessfully to reveal submerged patterns in what is essentially, in both Christianity and Islam, a minority stance on how to assimilate the past to the present . One is grateful that they provoke argument and highlight a clear need to clarify approaches and to carry the discussion further, but with a difference . BIBLIOGRAPHY Gellner, E . (1988), Plough, Sword and Book, the Structure of Human History . London : Collins Harvill . Horowitz, R . H . (1987), The Moral Foundation of the American Republic . Charlottesville : University Press of Virginia . Hunter, J . (1987), Evangelicalism, the Coming Generation . Chicago : University of Chicago Press . Lustick, I . S . (1988), For the Land and the Lord : Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel . New York : Council on Foreign Relations . Ricoeur, P . (1984), The Reality of the Historical Past . Milwaukee : Marquette University Press . Waldman, M . R . (1983), Islamic Resurgence in Context . In : The Contemporary Mediterranean World (Pinkele, Carl F . and Pollis, A ., eds) . New York : Praeger . Haverford College, Haverford, PA 19041-1392, U.S.A .