`Fundamentalism' or `fundamentalist' generally evokes a spontaneous negative stir, for it is often associated with acts of terrorism in the name of religion. But fundamentalism and the fundamentalist groups originate in religion, however much they tend to misinterpret it. Historically, the birth of fundamentalism can be traced back to the so-called 'Bible Belt' in the USA around 1909. By 1925 it took a more restricted meaning, when, John T. Stopes, a science teacher, was tried and convicted officially for teaching the theory of evolution in the school. The immediate issue then was whether the defendant had or had not violated the provisions of the state law regarding the subjects to be taught in public schools. The wider issue, however, was the extent to which the state, in its control of public education, may or may not determine the nature of religious formation. Thence fundamentalism began.

In his detailed article 'Militant Religious Movements', Majid Tehranian, describes 'seven models in search of fundamentalism'. He identifies these as anti-secularist, anti-elitist, anti-imperialist, anti-communist, Anti-Modernism, Anti-Feminist and Anti-Decadence. What emerges from his analysis, in short, is that fundamentalism is primarily a reaction to secularist tendencies in the world. These have marginalised religion by dislocating the sacred from the centre of people's lives, as had been the case generally, to the periphery. In addition, modernity, with all its promises of progress and development, has not provided answers to the problems facing humanity.

David Craig used the word `fundamentalism' in the sense of the fundamental demands of a religion, particularly faith in the Almighty, observance of moral principles and love of humanity. This obviously is a good thing. In fact going back to the genuine fundamentals of religion is commendable and can be said to be the need of the hour for modern societies. 'Faith' on the other hand evokes positive emotions. Generally, a person of faith is held in high esteem. People even approach him for advice on various matters. Faith is as old as the human person himself. Unlike fundamentalism, one cannot trace the historical origin of faith. Even the atheist denying the existence of God often has faith in a value system.

Faith is deeper than the belief in a set of value system. It is thrusting of oneself on the Almighty with no certainty of any response. It is believing in the power of the Almighty even when everything seems to be going wrong.Thus, a fundamental faith in a certain value system or in the Divine, is what gives meaning to one's life. It is that which fulfills the human need for something beyond oneself. And human soul is forever in search of that something which the mind can neither grasp nor fathom. Only great sages and saints, with unwavering faith, may have reached some degree of success in that search.

Fundamentalism, as understood and practised today, kills this search for the Divine. For fundamentalism by its many restrictions, prevents individuals and societies from evolving in the spirit of freedom. It dictates everything. Faith for fundamentalists is prescribed in black and white. It forces the rule of the letter on individuals. It is this kind of narrow religious philosophy that had Galileo condemned and issued a fatwa on Salman Rushdie. It is this kind of fundamentalism that is at work in the current Hindutva project in India. While fundamentalism presented in its current form may sound attractive to the masses in search of the sacred, what is required now is to go to the real fundamentals of true religion. It means an emphasis on the ultimate search and faith in the Divine rather than on the external expressions of a certain way of life.