The Arya Samaj as a Fundamentalist Movement: A Study in Comparative Fundamentalism.

• Author: McLeod, W.H.

This book is really two separate books. The first two chapters (corresponding to part I) are one book, and the next two chapters (corresponding to most of part II) deliver the second. At the very end comes the brief chapter five, which carries the reader back to the first book.

In the first book (or part I) the reader is presented with a comparison of three movements, each of which is held to be fundamentalist. The first is Christian (the Bob Jones University); the second is Muslim (the Jama at-i Islami of Pakistan); and the third is Hindu (the Arya Samaj). These three are compared in accordance with the definition of fundamentalism advanced by Martin Marty, director of the Fundamentalism Project of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Each of the three movements is considered under the same twelve headings of that definition.

The second book (part II) deals with the Arya Samaj and Hindu scriptures. Dayanand's classification of the Hindu scriptures into three groups is first covered. These are the actual Vedas (absolutely reliable), the arsa texts or commentaries on the Vedas (generally reliable), and the anarsa literature (not at all reliable). Finally, an examination is made of Dayanand's own works to determine whether or not the evidences which he uses actually measure up to his own standards of reliability.

The quality of these two books differs considerably. In the case of part I, the discussion begins with a clear acceptance of Martin Marty's definition of fundamentalism without a preliminary enquiry concerning its validity. This gets the work started on a track which many readers will find leads in the wrong direction. The word "fundamentalism" has certainly been loosely used by journalists as a term embracing radical movements with an explicitly religious base (particularly a Muslim base), but not everyone agrees that scholars should be following suit. It was an expression which developed within the Christian context and there are some who feel that as a scholarly term it should properly be confined to this context. Others may agree that the term can be carried across into other cultural contexts, but believe that it must necessarily be limited to the exclusive meaning which it has acquired in its Christian origins, namely a rigorous belief in the infallibility of holy scripture.

Marty's definition goes well beyond either meaning and for this reason many readers will be dissatisfied with a work which simply takes the...