Fundamentalism?

Today there is much talk of fundamentalists, both Islamic and Christian. Certain scholars and theologians have painted them as locked in a final struggle. But are these two branches of Christianity and Islam really fundamental? It seems to me the the fundamentals of Islam can be seen in the Five Pillars of Islam. Declaration of faith, prayer, alms, fasting and the pilgrimage. Some say Jihad makes up a sixth pillar, but certainly Muhammad didn't see it that way. Jihad, to Muhammad, was a struggle and, although it could be war, it was also the inner struggle. Much of Islam's interpertation of law comes from the Sunnah and Hadith, which lay out Islamic law according to how it was recollected that Muhammad lived. So we have second and third hand information here. In these documents we find the laws that Islamic "fundamentalist" revel in.Muhammed, for instance, prefered to wear his gown exposing his ankles, so the Taliban armed religious police with scissors to trim the faithfu's robes. Muhammad's fundamentalism was the Five Pillars, nothing more.
Similarly, Jesus, as quoted in Matthew( more second and third hand information, as Jesus is not the historical personage that Muhammad is.)

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

This is the first and great commandment.

And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

This is Jesus' fundamentalism. Todays "fundamenatlist" draw their doctrines much more from Paul and the Revelation of St. John than from Jesus. Both Jesus and Muhammad would be shocked to see what fundamentalist clerics put in their mouths. One thinks, of course, of Pope UrbanII"s call to crusade in 1095, which pretty much started this long running "Holy War". Urban's idea was to find a place for his knights to expend thier martial energies, rather than battling each other.

So these "fundamentalists" by no means represent anyhting close to the pure teachings of their founders. Jews, too suffer from similar differences in the interpertation of the Law of Moses.

Perhaps these branches of Abrahamic monotheism would be better served by calling them radical( or as my companion suggested, reactionary). Reactionary would be the better term, I think.

Both these reactionary branches have neglected the major tenet of their faiths, the love of God. They have hijacked Islam and Christianity and set them on a collision course that no one will win.