Fundamentalism and the Sikh Religious Tradition by T.N. Madan

Communism, Fundamentalism or any other system would hardly be a remedy of the
problem. A century of human efforts, we Find, leaves man equally helpless and
unequipped to face problems of social cohesion and ethics. Neither Communism, nor
Capitalism has been able to do so. In any case, this problem remains as acute as ever
before.
Our difficulty has been twofold. Most of our scientific and intellectual drives
have been to gain power over nature, which logically led man not to love his neighbour,
but lo move for his control and annihilation. Hence the power instinct of man, instead of
being checked by any internal discipline, has been fed to an exhibition of brutal strength.
Secondly, in order to find the roots of moral values, we start for a search of their base in
the animal life. That search gave us the dogma of "survival of the fittest." This answer
instead of giving us any moral health, or enlightenment, only gave us a maxim of
tautology without any theory of ethics, and, we came to the conclusion that "all morality
is a defence mechanism" and "a reaction formation" against the environment of man. In
short, our search for the roots of morality in the animal life has virtually been a failure,
the difficulty being that while the moral problem is a social one, we could only
experiment and probe in the field of life that is lower than human. Obviously, the results
have been far from illuminating. On the other hand, the pursuit of power over nature has,
in the absence of moral brakes, inevitably led to threatening results, First, to the
concentration of unbridled nuclear and fire power in some states, and a serious risk to the
environment of the planet; and, second, to Consumerism and Individualism that militate
against all social harmony and amity between classes, societies or nations. For,
Schweitzer in his survey of the entire fields of Greek and Western thought comes to the
dismal conclusion that there is no trace of the ethical in the working of the world or any
sound basis for ethics in the world of thought, or any purposive evolution in which our
activities can acquire a meaning.
In the above context, the religious men of yore were faced with two questions
and answered them. The authors of dichotmous religions have proclaimed that the world
and life are a suffering, maya or mithya or illusory. Accordingly they recommended
withdrawal from its tangled webs. But the whole-life religions have a positive approach.
They suggest not only participation but also total responsbility in all realms of life.
Participation raised another problem as to the means or the use of force. Judaism, Islam
and Sikhism accept its use, as a last resort, in defence of justice and freedom, and for a
righteous cause. Christanity, although a societal religion, because of the Sermon on the
Mount, gives a pacificist answer. While it is unnecessary to give the long history of
pacificism and other worldiness in Christian Society, we may indicate some landmarks.
St. Augustine, had come to believe that "the spread of Christianity would not ensure
political and economic improvement. The earthy city of self-will would continue to exist
amidst the rise and fall of states and empires." The goal being a heavenly life, slowly
monasticism, celibacy and nunneries, gained roots in Christianity, which is otherwise a
societal religion. Following the Reformation, the Church accepted the virtual supremacy
of the national state. After the rise of Science, Secularism gained almost complete control
over the empirical life of man. The twentieth century brought its wars, catastrophies,
miseries and disillusionments.
The reaction of the North American Churches, as stated above, was evidently to
avoid the dismal hold of Secularism on modern culture. For similar reasons, two other