Saturday, February 04, 2012
Become a Member

Current Articles | Categories | Search | Syndication

Saturday, November 08, 2008
Why the West craves materialism & why the East sticks to religion: By Imran Khan
By Imran Ghazali    |    5989 Views    |    Article Rating    |    Opinion Articles, Pakistan, UK, US
 
Why the West craves materialism & why the East sticks to religion
By Imran Khan
 

My generation grew up at a time when colonial hang up was at its peak. Our older generation had been slaves and had a huge inferiority complex of the British. The school I went to was similar to all elite schools in Pakistan. Despite gaining independent, they were, and still are, producing replicas of public schoolboys rather than Pakistanis.

I read Shakespeare, which was fine, but no Allama Iqbal — the national poet of Pakistan. The class on Islamic studies was not taken seriously, and when I left school I was considered among the elite of the country because I could speak English and wore Western clothes.

Despite periodically shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ in school functions, I considered my own culture backward and religion outdated. Among our group if any one talked about religion, prayed or kept a beard he was immediately branded a Mullah.

Because of the power of the Western media, our heroes were Western movie stars or pop stars. When I went to Oxford already burdened with this hang up, things didn’t get any easier. At Oxford, not just Islam, but all religions were considered anachronism.

Science had replaced religion and if something couldn’t be logically proved it did not exist. All supernatural stuff was confined to the movies. Philosophers like Darwin, who with his half-baked theory of evolution had supposedly disproved the creation of men and hence religion, were read and revered.

Moreover, European history reflected its awful experience with religion. The horrors committed by the Christian clergy during the Inquisition era had left a powerful impact on the Western mind.

To understand why the West is so keen on secularism, one should go to places like Cordoba in Spain and see the torture apparatus used during the Spanish Inquisition. Also the persecution of scientists as heretics by the clergy had convinced the Europeans that all religions are regressive.

However, the biggest factor that drove people like me away from religion was the selective Islam practiced by most of its preachers. In short, there was a huge difference between what they practiced and what they preached. Also, rather than explaining the philosophy behind the religion, there was an overemphasis on rituals.

I feel that humans are different to animals. While, the latter can be drilled, humans need to be intellectually convinced. That is why the Qur’an constantly appeals to reason. The worst, of course, was the exploitation of Islam for political gains by various individuals or groups.

Hence, it was a miracle I did not become an atheist. The only reason why I did not was the powerful religious influence my mother wielded on me since my childhood. It was not so much out of conviction but love for her that I stayed a Muslim.

However, my Islam was selective. I accepted only parts of the religion that suited me. Prayers were restricted to Eid days and occasionally on Fridays, when my father insisted on taking me to the mosque with him.

All in all I was smoothly moving to becoming a Pukka Brown Sahib. After all I had the right credentials in terms of school, university and, above all, acceptability in the English aristocracy, something that our brown sahibs would give their lives for. So what led me to do a ‘lota’ on the Brown Sahib culture and instead become a ‘desi’?

Well it did not just happen overnight.

Firstly, the inferiority complex that my generation had inherited gradually went as I developed into a world-class athlete. Secondly, I was in the unique position of living between two cultures. I began to see the advantages and the disadvantages of both societies.

In Western societies, institutions were strong while they were collapsing in our country. However, there was an area where we were and still are superior, and that is our family life. I began to realize that this was the Western society’s biggest loss. In trying to free itself from the oppression of the clergy, they had removed both God and religion from their lives.

While science, no matter how much it progresses, can answer a lot of questions — two questions it will never be able to answer: One, what is the purpose of our existence and two, what happens to us when we die?

It is this vacuum that I felt created the materialistic and the hedonistic culture. If this is the only life then one must make hay while the sun shines — and in order to do so one needs money. Such a culture is bound to cause psychological problems in a human being, as there was going to be an imbalance between the body and the soul.

Consequently, in the US, which has shown the greatest materialistic progress while giving its citizens numerous rights, almost 60 percent of the population consult psychiatrists. Yet, amazingly in modern psychology, there is no study of the human soul. Sweden and Switzerland, who provide the most welfare to their citizens, also have the highest suicide rates. Hence, man is not necessarily content with material well being and needs something more.

Since all morality has it roots in religion, once religion was removed, immorality has progressively grown since the 70s. Its direct impact has been on family life. In the UK, the divorce rate is 60 percent, while it is estimated that there are over 35 percent single mothers. The crime rate is rising in almost all Western societies, but the most disturbing fact is the alarming increase in racism. While science always tries to prove the inequality of man (recent survey showing the American Black to be genetically less intelligent than whites) it is only religion that preaches the equality of man.

Between 1991 and 1997, it was estimated that total immigration into Europe was around 520,000, and there were racially motivated attacks all over, especially in Britain, France and Germany. In Pakistan during the Afghan war, we had over four million refugees, and despite the people being so much poorer, there was no racial tension.

There was a sequence of events in the 80s that moved me toward God as the Qur’an says: "There are signs for people of understanding." One of them was cricket. As I was a student of the game, the more I understood the game, the more I began to realize that what I considered to be chance was, in fact, the will of Allah. A pattern which became clearer with time. But it was not until Salman Rushdie’s "Satanic Verses" that my understanding of Islam began to develop.

People like me who were living in the Western world bore the brunt of anti-Islam prejudice that followed the Muslim reaction to the book. We were left with two choices: fight or flight. Since I felt strongly that the attacks on Islam were unfair, I decided to fight. It was then I realized that I was not equipped to do so as my knowledge of Islam was inadequate. Hence I started my research and for me a period of my greatest enlightenment. I read scholars like Ali Shariati, Muhammad Asad, Iqbal, Gai Eaton, plus of course, a study of Qur’an.

I will try to explain as concisely as is possible, what "discovering the truth" meant for me. When the believers are addressed in the Qur’an, it always says, "Those who believe and do good deeds." In other words, a Muslim has dual function, one toward God and the other toward fellow human beings.

The greatest impact of believing in God for me, meant that I lost all fear of human beings. The Qur’an liberates man from man when it says that life and death and respect and humiliation are God’s jurisdiction, so we do not have to bow before other human beings.

Moreover, since this is a transitory world where we prepare for the eternal one, I broke out of the self-imposed prisons, such as growing old (such a curse in the Western world, as a result of which, plastic surgeons are having a field day), materialism, ego, what people say and so on. It is important to note that one does not eliminate earthly desires. But instead of being controlled by them, one controls them.

By following the second part of believing in Islam, I have become a better human being. Rather than being self-centered and living for the self, I feel that because the Almighty gave so much to me, in turn I must use that blessing to help the less privileged. This I did by following the fundamentals of Islam rather than becoming a Kalashnikov-wielding fanatic.

I have become a tolerant and a giving human being who feels compassion for the underprivileged. Instead of attributing success to myself, I know it is because of God’s will, hence I learned humility instead of arrogance.

Also, instead of the snobbish Brown Sahib attitude toward our masses, I believe in egalitarianism and strongly feel against the injustice done to the weak in our society. According to the Qur’an, "Oppression is worse than killing." In fact only now do I understand the true meaning of Islam, if you submit to the will of Allah, you have inner peace.

Through my faith, I have discovered strength within me that I never knew existed and that has released my potential in life. I feel that in Pakistan we have selective Islam. Just believing in God and going through the rituals is not enough. One also has to be a good human being. I feel there are certain Western countries with far more Islamic traits than us in Pakistan, especially in the way they protect the rights of their citizens, or for that matter their justice system. In fact some of the finest individuals I know live there.

What I dislike about them is their double standards in the way they protect the rights of their citizens but consider citizens of other countries as being somehow inferior to them as human being, e.g. dumping toxic waste in the Third World, advertising cigarettes that are not allowed in the West and selling drugs that are banned in the West.

One of the problems facing Pakistan is the polarization of two reactionary groups. On the one side is the Westernized group that looks upon Islam through Western eyes and has inadequate knowledge about the subject. It reacts strongly to anyone trying to impose Islam in society and wants only a selective part of the religion. On the other extreme is the group that reacts to this Westernized elite and in trying to become a defender of the faith, takes up such intolerant and self-righteous attitudes that are repugnant to the spirit of Islam.

What needs to be done is to somehow start a dialogue between the two extreme. In order for this to happen, the group on whom the greatest proportion of our educational resources are spent in this country must study Islam properly.

Whether they become practicing Muslims or believe in God is entirely a personal choice. As the Qur’an tells us there is "no compulsion in religion." However, they must arm themselves with knowledge as a weapon to fight extremism. Just by turning up their noses at extremism the problem is not going to be solved.

The Qur’an calls Muslims "the middle nation", not of extremes. The Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) was told to simply give the message and not worry whether people converted or not, therefore, there is no question in Islam of forcing your opinions on anyone else.

Moreover, we are told to respect other religions, their places of worship and their prophets. It should be noted that no Muslim missionaries or armies ever went to Malaysia or Indonesia. The people converted to Islam due to the high principles and impeccable character of the Muslim traders. At the moment, the worst advertisements for Islam are the countries with their selective Islam, especially where religion is used to deprive people of their rights. In fact, a society that obeys fundamentals of Islam has to be a liberal one.

If Pakistan’s Westernized class starts to study Islam, not only will it be able to help society fight sectarianism and extremism, but it will also make them realize what a progressive religion Islam is. They will also be able to help the Western world by articulating Islamic concepts. Recently, Prince Charles accepted that the Western world can learn from Islam. But how can this happen if the group that is in the best position to project Islam gets its attitudes from the West and considers Islam backward? Islam is a universal religion and that is why our Prophet (peace be upon him) was called a Mercy for all mankind. (Internews)

 

www.arabnews.com/

Comments
By Shan @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 5:00 AM  |   (shanrizvi)
A perfect article! This man is a leader.

By migel9 @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 5:22 AM  |   (miguel9)
As usual a leader who understand the problems facing ummah.

The colonialist have left sub-continent still the smell of inferiority among the ruling elite has not left. The stench is still here after almost two hundred years after the death of bahadurr shah Zaffar.By the way british killed his two sons by chopping thier necks off and showed to zaffar on a platter.

The mental yoke of slavery in the older generation has kept pakistan backward.

No one has a monopoly on knowledge period.The criminal mental slave elite has kept education as lowest priority, An uneducated populace is easy to manipulate and can be controlled.

By sajjadkhan @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 7:06 AM  |   (sajjadkhan)
Very informative,as living in west i see my self in this subject & its so true.turn on tv you see bunch of arrogant white anchors who never visited east,spend time with muslims or study quran are talking ignorently about islam or muslims.when you come in east you find same ignorence in understanding islam & west in muslims.what really out their is bunch of ignorent are acting scholors or knowledgable but spreading wrong info for personal gains only our study,quest & hunger can save us insh'allah

By Muzamil Anwar @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 7:29 AM  |   (ProudPaki)
I agree with Imran about Selective Islam being practiced in the muslim world, especially Pakistan. This is one of the must read articles.

By Rashid Awan @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 8:25 AM  |   (rashidawan)
Very Nice Article, Must Read, I was wondering if an urdu version of this article is available.
Similiar articles from PTI platform should be published in newspapers in Pakistan so that people specially our elders understand where we are heading toward through this movement.

By sirius @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 8:55 AM  |   (sirius)
Great Artice!

By frazbama @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 10:55 AM  |   (frazbama)
I think this is an old article.

While one can appreciate Chairman Khan's personal journey and how Islam effected him to become a better person, when he starts to use it to 'moralize' it for everyone else, it lessens the validity of his arguments. Particularly when it comes to demarcating 'West' vs. 'East'. These are merely rhetorical statements. If we read our own history, we'll see how invalid this 'east' vs. 'west' argument becomes.

Unfortunately too many Muslims prefer to completely ignore the first five hundred years of Islamic history, jurisprudence and evolution.

Unfortunately Muslims prefer to jump over these five hundred years of their own history when they were the super powers of the world, the civilized race, and prefer to only focus on the rag tag era of the 'khulfa-e-rashideen' etc or the contemporary era where their contribution is zilch.

These first five hundred years, when Muslims were the civilized race and the torch bearers of knowledge, would give us a better understanding of the essential contradictions between science and faith that Muslims like Ibn-e-Sina and Al-Razi faced. These are the same conflicts the West faces today.

Because we have conveniently skipped hundreds of years our own history, it leaves an empty vacuum and it becomes easy to constantly compartmentalize humans as 'western' or 'eastern' whereas such categorization is hackneyed.

Let us read Muslim history, how their governance changed, how their laws evolved, how hundreds of Sunni schools of jurisprudence were eliminated and the politics behind this (read Indonesia's most renowned Islamic scholar, Abdur Rehman Wahid), and of course, the great Muslim scientists who were hundreds of years ahead of their time. If the printing press were invented 1200 years ago, Muslims would be in the driving seat of science and witnessing the same contradictions and conflicts that the West is facing (although in a few years, Muslims will start to face them eventually).

More than the church, it was science that destroyed the foundations of Christian religion. In this regard, the great Muslim scientists like the Ismaili Muslim Ibn-e-Sina or Muhammad Abu-Bakr Al-Razi had also begun to upset the foundations of Islam. Al-Razi, though perhaps the greatest physician in human history, went so far as to dismiss both the holy Quraan as a 'book without much use' as well as anyone who claimed divine revelation.

These Muslim men were not westernized. While they read Greek books, they ended up contributing much more than what the Hellenian of old could. The ultra-rationalism characterized as 'westernern ideology' and thus 'alien' to contemporary Muslims, was the hallmark of Muslim scientists in the 8th, 9th and 10th centuries. There is nothing alien about pure rationalism for Muslims.

Here is Al-Razi's quote on reason being supreme from his book al-Tibb al-Ruhani:

"God, glorious is His name, has given us reason in order to obtain through it from the present and future the utmost benefits that we can obtain; it is God's best gift to us… By reason we perceive all that is useful to us and all that makes our life good – by it we know obscure and remote things, those which are hidden from us…by it, too, we succeed to the knowledge of God, which is the highest knowledge we can obtain…If reason is so highly placed and is of such an important rank, we should not degrade it; we should not make it the judged while it is the judge, or controlled while it is the controller, or commanded while it is the commander; on the contrary, we should refer to it in everything and judge all matters by it; we should do according as it commands us to do."

Can any 'western' scientist today give such overwhelming supremecy for reason? Should Al-Razi's ultra-rationalism foreign to us as Muslims?

If we read our own history - rather than just confused philosophies of Allama Iqbal - we can gain a better understanding of why modern society feels so overwhelmed. It will help us realize that economics more than morals eventually not only guide, but create new ideas.

For practical purposes, there is no 'east' or 'west'. We are all at different phases going through different economic phases. The basic breakdown of our societies - division of labor, shifting from agriculture to urban and post-industrial environments etc - are occurring 'here' like they occurred 'there'.

If we read our own history, we'll understand this better.

By sarahfazal @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 1:14 PM  |   (sarahfazal)
Pakistan needs more of optimistic people like Imran !

By Saleem Bajwa @ Saturday, November 08, 2008 7:31 PM  |   (Mohammed Saleem)
Thank you Imran Khan for sharing you experiences with us all.

When the blessings of Allah start showering, then even the perched grain can grow.

Note, how the devilments of Stannic Scholars have appeared as blessing in disguise for Imran Khan. He has picked a right path - May Allah guide everyone.

By ahmed qadri @ Sunday, November 09, 2008 12:15 AM  |   (ahmedqadri)
Imran Khan indeed has proven track record, great insights…

By sialkot da raja @ Sunday, November 09, 2008 5:08 AM  |   (sialkotdaraja)
A Legend with a perfect Vision

By Hassan Niazi @ Sunday, November 09, 2008 5:10 PM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
@Frza Shafique

I really liked the thorough view you laid out for readers. However if you can help me understand three questions I have on your article, would be really appreciated.

You mentioned that "it is economics and not morals that lead to ideas". Respectfully, if I may, let me say that I have an opposite view as it relates to economics and morality. If there isn't morality stepping in first, there would be no concept of "perfect competition" and, if moral laws don’t restrict them, all will become "monopolies". If you could elaborate on that would be helpful.

Also I could not understand where your overall opinion led to. In terms of scientific scholars who disapproved of Quran's values or views, do you see that as logical? I don't see anything to suggest that in Al-Razi's quote.

Finally please help me understand your statement of Iqbals's "confusing" philosophies. What did you find confusing. I do no intend to say we should not read history. In fact I completely agree with you on this point. However finding Iqbal's philosophy confusing is one thing I want to understand more.

It was Moualana Roomi (rehmatullah alahe) who is the "kaleem" and "hakeem" in Iqbals' vision. He praised Moulana Roomi (rehmatullah alahe) by saying:

"Mushid Roomi Hakeem Pak Zaat
Sirr-e- marg o zindagi bar ma kushad"

Whoever has studied Moulana Roomi (rehmatullah alahe) will never find Iqbal's philosophies confusing. Please help me identify these confusions.

Jazakullah.

By frazbama @ Sunday, November 09, 2008 6:28 PM  |   (frazbama)
Hasan:

The main objective of the last post was to dismiss notions that there is an 'east' and an inherently different 'west'. I do not find this dualism anywhere in human history. This dualism is merely rhetorical.

On your first point, 'necessity is the mother of all inventions' hopefully explains it. Morals and laws step in afterwards to regulate (which can be good) but the idea or thought process is created due to economic compulsions (not by morals). These economic compulsions and conditions exist in all societies everywhere in the world. If we wish to change direction of a people, it is the economic conditions (source) that need to be changed and not morals (effects). And the economic processes of division of labor, urbanization, post-industrial paradigms are the conditions that are occuring irrespective of belief systems or geography. The consequences will be more or less the same for everyone as well.

So while I agree with your assessment that regulation is required to give everyone a fair change to compete, I was mostly dealing with the source of change and not its consequences.

Secondly, the view that ultra-rationalism is something alien to Muslims is proven incorrect by the experiences in Muslim history. Unfortunately we do not read our history, therefore, we jump to the populist arguments based on rhetoric such as 'east is east and west is west and the twain shall never meet' etc. There was a point in history that science and rationalism was exclusively the domain of Muslims. Whether in the process some rejected the Koran or not is irrelevant in this discussion. My point is, that the challenges of science that the people in the west have bowed to were the same ones faced by Muslims five hundred years earlier. The people in the west however had the advantage of the printing press and so science won out.

To read about Allama Iqbal's critics (there are very few - although any philosopher worth their salt has hundreds of critics - but at least till three years ago Iqbal Academy in Pakistan didn't even carry Javed Iqbal's books :) ), please read Allama Iqbal's son, Javed Iqbal's views. Allama Iqbal was a great poet, I enjoy his poetry, but there is a reason no one cares to give much credence to AI's philosophy elsewhere. But you can read Javed Iqbal's views.

I hope it clears the confusion.

By Hassan Niazi @ Sunday, November 09, 2008 11:28 PM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
I appreciate your views and clarification.

However I wish to disagree completely very respectfully. If I empathize your point that had the Muslims carrying a printing press and hence were able to "carry forward" their evolution of science, all Muslims would have rejected faith by now and established science as a religion of rationale as happening in the developed countries right now. In other words we are "developing nations" and not "developed" nations since we still carry faith as we "lost" our "knowledge" of science 1000 years. Correct me if I wrongly interpreted you.

Surely rationalism has never been alien to Muslims and you rightly pointed that it was Muslims' trade mark. However do not put a ceiling on the word "rationale" to scientific rationales. Quran is full of rationales. But through the same book Allah has mentioned many people will mislead themselves also by not using their "rationale". Also for Muslims there had been more than Rationale. "Belief", where evidence comes only after truly believing which is quire opposite to science approach wise. You can only understand my point once you encounter this approach.

I also am dissimilar of the view that Christianity was shattered by their advancement in Science. Had this been the case, Jews would have been the latest victims of Atheism. In modern era there were an overwhelming majority of scientists which were Jews. Advanced Science is a phenomenon of modern era (and I do not ignore the middle ages advancement of science). Christianity was already destroyed at the advent of Islam, in point of fact much before that. Whether there are still followers in Christianity do not matter, their fundamentals had gone wrong defying monotheism. If you focus on the Jews, they still "cling' to their religion and at the same time most advanced in science. The point that Muslims were so advanced in science (and no doubt they were in 9th, 10th & 11th centuries) and hence reached the dilemma of faith vs science then and if continued would have lead to "modern era" then is completely false. If Ibn-e-sina got bewildered (which I don't find in any of remains of his writings, although I have not been lucky enough to say that I read all of his work) it did not mean that he was reaching to ultimate truth that no one had reached before him.

Also the point of West and East which Imran Khan made is surely not metaphorical. I do not disagree with your notion of Economic shifts and that economic compulsion leading to inventions, but bear in mind these economic compulsions is an after effect of creation of human beings. If Allah had willed, there would have been no need for us to get hungry or to posses many other feelings that necessitate economic transactions (power, greed, lust etc). Angels were enough.

When I use the term "Morality" it is far more than regulations. It is a direction of belief that defines the existence of human beings. You are right that if we have to change the direction of people, one must look at the source you use. But you are just referring to shift of economic direction of people (be it through capitalism or communism means). "Idea" or encroachment as it relates to science may be due to economic compulsions but even that is not wholly true. Morality comes first or economics is a senseless debate. My point is that "Morality" as it relates to beliefs encompasses economics, societies and values. So they may be concurrent or separate. Hence you see this divide of West and East Imran Khan is talking about having different aspects (like spiritualism or materialism). Read "The Gift of the Jews" by Thomas Cahill who describes Jews as the Inventor of "Western" "culture".

Our history is replete with examples of those who have refused to see what the Muslims were, through "Intellectual blindness" or racial chauvinism or xenophobia. Be it anyone including Javed Iqbal with all due disrespect. Allama Iqbal was far more than a philosopher. Also let me know any specific point of "confusion" regarding his philosophy.

I would stress that we carry this conversation offline since it may bore many readers and this is not the forum to exchange personal views.

Email me at [email protected]

Jazakullah.




By Hassan Niazi @ Sunday, November 09, 2008 11:30 PM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
My last post was intened for @Fraz Shafique.

Jazakullah.

By Saqib @ Monday, November 10, 2008 4:15 AM  |   (Saqibt)
Some quotations of Imran Khan:


Imran Khan knows what he is talking about. He is not a “desk general”, who has read some books and not been around the world to watch and analyse other people/societies. Between many other sharp observations Imran Khan has hit nail on the head here:

” In Western societies, institutions were strong while they were collapsing in our country. However, there was an area where we were and still are superior, and that is our family life. I began to realize that this was the Western society’s biggest loss. In trying to free itself from the oppression of the clergy, they had removed both God and religion from their lives.”


And here


“Consequently, in the US, which has shown the greatest materialistic progress while giving its citizens numerous rights, almost 60 percent of the population consult psychiatrists. Yet, amazingly in modern psychology, there is no study of the human soul. Sweden and Switzerland, who provide the most welfare to their citizens, also have the highest suicide rates. Hence, man is not necessarily content with material well being and needs something more.”

These are balanced views from a capable man, who posses inside knowledge of western societies and his own “desi” society. Read, understand learn from it!


By Saqib @ Monday, November 10, 2008 4:16 AM  |   (Saqibt)
@Hassan Niazi

Please continue the debate on this forum. It is quite interesting. After all those who get bored have the opportunity ignore the thread.

By Hassan Niazi @ Monday, November 10, 2008 9:29 AM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
@Saqib Tasneem
InshaAllah I will. I just did not want to use the forum for a conversation which had become one to one.
Jazakullah.

By frazbama @ Monday, November 10, 2008 9:36 AM  |   (frazbama)
Hasan:

Let me sum up my points by saying that there is a direct connection between the shifts from tribal to agrarian to industrial and post-industrial economies and the institution of social order with the emergence and breakdown of the family structure.

The economic order plays the most important role in how social relations are defined.

Economic order is the fundamental and the overriding factor in determining social relations and yes morals.

The change and evolution in the economic order has occurred in Europe and North America for a longer period of time. Thus the consequences of this change are more pronounced on the people. 100 years ago, a majority of American lived on farms, divorce was something unknown and there were large families. Today, less than 2% of America bases income on farms while 80% of the population is urban. These are the conditions that compel a reshaping of social relations and negate the traditional significance to institutions like marriage (since marriage only emerged after humans settled into an agrarian life).

More recent examples of changes resulting in social mores can be witnessed in Far Eastern countries.

The processes of division of labor and urbanization do not discriminate against religions. Neither will the cosequences.

On our part, we can either dimiss that the increasingly high divorce rates, fewer kids per family, pre-marital relations, pyschological disorders witnessed in Pakistan and other Muslim countries nowadays is due to our 'westernization' or we can try to understand why we are going through the same problems as those in Europe, America or Far East have done.

If a hammer hits you on the toe, you will feel pain. Whether you are Muslim, Hindu, Kafir, Christian or Atheist. Economics doesn't discrimiate between faiths. The consequences may not be exactly the same for all as there are other smaller factors of history, but we can all see the bigger effects occurring in our societies.

As for Allama Iqbal, we can discuss his philosophies another time as my reading of his 'reconstruction of religious thought in islam' found him trite to say the least. He can be discussed at another time.

Cheers!

By Hassan Niazi @ Monday, November 10, 2008 12:58 PM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
@Shafiq Fraz

Brother I appreciate your thoughts but completely disagree with them. With all due respect I consider these views very naive.

Let me just clarify first and foremost that no one is blaming the "west" for own failures. It is the "West" who coined this term with a lot of pride to differentiate themselves from the "barbarians of the East" as mentioned in so many of their books/writings/media. I just mentioned one of them in my earlier post. And they define it for their superiority and that is the most rhetoric statement one has ever given.

I am completely at loggerheads with your notion of the economic order role being overriding factor in determining social relations and morals. This is complete lack of understanding of fundamentals of economics and sociology itself.

While there is a directional similarity and pattern in 1) shifts from tribal to post-industrial economies and 2) decline in social order. This is a notion driven by reading the headline only and not the study in detail.

The only thing this pattern proves is that "morality" started taking a back seat while people became more attractive towards the "gains/wealth" of economics. This lust of gain became the mother of invention resulting in advancement of "science" (only in one aspect) which resulted in progress in economic terms (in the form of Industrial revolution) but decline in moral society.

This is how it happened. This is just one variant of a philosophy of relationship between economic shifts or progress with the advancement of societies. But to conclude that it always will work in this pattern (advancement in economics / science and decline in morality) is seriously wrong and naive. Specially if you link science with economic progress in a way that religions and beliefs stands out of all the economic effects is seriously flawed and I must say this conclusion is extremely misleading whose ultimate form, if allowed to be progressed, is the replacement of faith with knowledge of Science. I must caution you to be very careful in your conclusions. Science has helped in so many ways to develop faith. It is the way you analyze it.

The most important point I am making now is that the moral values in societies can DICTATE the after effects of economic trends. This is the key to understand the whole notion of faith and morality. We need to understand the Islamic principles to even talk on similar frequency.

Let me just give you an example of how morals (beliefs/ Islamic principles) directly contribute to the economic after effects (not the economic shifts themselves) and hence social values. It is mentioned in Quran (not exact wordings) that Allah has forbidden Interest (Riba) and given HIS blessings in Sadqah.
Keep in mind that any haram takes away the blessings of Allah, in other words "rizq may barkat nahi rehti".
This is morality. Now I am sure you must have heard about the economic "credit crisis" in the world. This has every top economists' scratching their head how could this had been avoided. Everyone pointed to the sub-prime mortgage lending mismanagement practices resulting in the collapse of real state prices, which resulted in the recall of securities already half in value which resulted in the write offs by banks and re-isurers which resulted in the lack of availability of credit which is resulting in a recession now.
Only a few economists pointed out the "immoral" aspect of "greed" as a factor that 'started" all this.

The biggest point missed is that you can never ever have "barkat" from an interest based economy (the immoral factor). This economic melt down is just the mismanagement of their bankers' lending practices who wanted earlier gains now than tomorrow (greed) boosting real estate demand and hence it's prices. But the real blow is to the society. Look at anyone in the US. Every one work so much more for so much less in return. Let me rephrase that actually. Everyone "has" to work so much more to earn so little. The spouses don’t have a "freedom" to work, but a "compulsion" to fulfill their basic needs.
"Barkat" is something that you feel happy and satisfied in ten times lower amount and stay calm and satisfied. This "Afra tafri' is a trade mark of an "Immoral" economic system.

Above is just a small example of how Morality has direct effects on societies. Morality for Muslims comes from our religion. Islam is so superior because Prophet PBUH laid the rules (even economic rules) at so detailed level that one wonders how he knew so much and only concludes that Islam is indeed a true religion applicable in any era, a way of life in all senses.

It is this "Eastern" philosophy that differentiates us (not divide us). I was really pleased to read Imran Khan's understanding of Islam and was astonished that he gained the spirit of Islam in so little time MashaAllah.

Again being eastern or western is just to differentiate the school of thought/ the philosophical difference and nothing else. Yes our problems are our own but independent of economic shifts and the absence of practice of our own beliefs. We could have been the most "progressed" nation by remaining the least "developed". It just depends how you view "progress".
Our founders had already proven that if you put morality (Islamic beliefs and principles) into every aspect of life, may it be economics; people will flourish along with knowledge (may it be the knowledge of science). Majority non-muslims converted to Islam after trading with Muslim traders. Not by sword.

I am sure everyone will be tired of these long exchanges. My objective is not to disagree. My objective is to spread the real principles of Islam where I find them misinterpreted. However I must say Fraz you laid down your views articulately and hopefully would have found nothing personal in my replies. I just happen to belong to a different school of thought. We are here to gain from each other. As for your comment on Allama Iqbal's views being "out dated", I would encourage you to enlighten us with your's.

Jazakullah Kher.

By frazbama @ Monday, November 10, 2008 6:12 PM  |   (frazbama)
Hasan writes:

"Let me just give you an example of how morals (beliefs/ Islamic principles) directly contribute to the economic after effects"

This quote from your post summed up your poor attempt to offer a counter explanation to the historical evolution of societies based on economic shifts. In fact, it reiterates what I've stated. That morals emerge in the 'after effects' of consequences from shifts. They are not the determinant.

I have also agreed and said that there need to be regulations (based on morals etc.) for these changes.

The determinants of major changes are economic patterns. Everything else is a response (morals, laws etc.). A response. The difference between a developed nation with strong institutions and an underdeveloped one is in the manner of a response. In essence, they are similar.

Good having a discussion with you. Keep learning :)

By AB07869 @ Monday, November 10, 2008 7:51 PM  |   (AliBukhari2012)
@ Fraz Shafique

You commented

"The determinants of major changes are economic patterns. Everything else is a response (morals, laws etc.)".

Seems like you respond only to the economic patterns? OK... I would want you to tell us more about your beliefs and would like you to select one of three sentences below which best describes you. You can write four or five lines about your choice (please be concise) but first make a selection.

1) I prefer honor/morals/laws over economy (a disguised term for wealth).
2) I sometime (depends) prefer wealth over honor/morals/laws and vice versa.
3) I prefer economy (wealth) over honor/morals/laws etc.

My friend, the problem with your approach is that you have an inappropriate benchmark (economy) based on which you are judging principles/rules which infact are far bigger/superior and without which no economic system can prosper or prevail.

By frazbama @ Monday, November 10, 2008 9:20 PM  |   (frazbama)
Ali Bukhari:

It seems we're going in circles.

It is not a matter of preferences. It is a matter of understanding.

To restate my earlier post:

"On our part, we can either dismiss that the increasingly high divorce rates, fewer kids per family, pre-marital relations, psychological disorders witnessed in Pakistan and other Muslim countries nowadays is due to our 'westernization' or we can try to understand why we are going through the same problems as those in Europe, America or Far East have done. "

It is not because we want to be like the West. But it is because the economic forces are universal in their evolution.

Example: Because the extended family unit emerged from the foundations of an agricultural set-up (as before the agrarian society, there was no need for the institution of marriage), take away the agri. economic foundation, and you suddenly find the extended family structure coming down like a house of cards. I think we are all witness to this collapse. 60 years ago, Arains only married within Arains. Jutts only with Jutts. Today, in urban centers such practices are seen as irrelevant. As urbanization takes root, more 'sacred cows' of traditional institutions will be torn up. Take away the foundation and practices will change.

Again, this has nothing to do with preference.

Finally, your last comment in previous post again reaffirm what I have already agreed to - that a new system needs regulation to be made functionally sustainable.

Since we're repeating the same thing, we're done with this valuable discussion.

Cheers!

By Hassan Niazi @ Monday, November 10, 2008 11:11 PM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
@Fraz Shafique

Dein majo undar kutub ae bay khabar
elm o hikmat az kutub dein az nazar
(Iqbal)


@Ali Bukhari
Brother dont waste your time since:

khrofay nay keh bhi diya La ilaha to kia hasil
nigah chaheye israr La ilaha ka liye
(Iqbal)

Jazakullah

By Saqib @ Tuesday, November 11, 2008 5:04 AM  |   (Saqibt)
@Hassan Niazi

“But the real blow is to the society. Look at anyone in the US. Every one work so much more for so much less in return. Let me rephrase that actually. Everyone "has" to work so much more to earn so little. The spouses don’t have a "freedom" to work, but a "compulsion" to fulfill their basic needs.”

You hit the nail on the head. In fact it is not only in US, but all over the western world you find the above mentioned trend. Personally I am in favour of copying practices from the West, but it MUST be done with due consideration. I am not advising anyone to live in an (over) protected environment. After all there is no harm in copying others after a due consideration (I am not talking about religion). I can find several points, where we as Muslims and Pakistanis could copy the Western practices, but on the other hand I can also find numerous other points where we should never ever try to copy them. There is no point in leaving old traditions/beliefs if they benefit you and above all the society.

We also need to understand that the West has been severely subdued by their clergy to an extent we haven’t witnessed from our own home grown clergy (mullahs). I am not saying that the mullahs haven’t tried and is still trying to mislead us. Once the West got out of the clutches of the church they wanted to re-invent almost everything. They cut loose and opted for limitless freedom on various fronts – be it clothes or moral, which has left the society as greedy and with moral boundaries moved to a dangerous extent. Where will it end? In the ravine?

My prediction is that lack of moral will be the cause of the downfall of the western dominance.

- The youngsters (especially) the girls are exploited to an extent that many of them consider taking their own lives in spite of all the welfare including psychologists.

- Drugs are commonly used for “fun”. It is difficult to find youngsters who haven’t been (mis)using drugs.

- Girlfriends/Boyfriends leave each other frequently. The “life partner” is changed frequently. In other words the family values are downtrodden. In fact our family values are very much appreciated. Many people I know admit we have superior family values, and they also admit that the downslide they have started maybe cannot be stopped with the current set of “values”.

- The burden is getting (too) heavy in economical terms. If you want to keep the pace i.e. pay mortgages, food, restaurant, movies, your own “needs”, childrens “needs” etc. then both wheels need to keep running.

We may have similar problems in Pakistan, but the origins of the problems are not necessarily the same and therefore the cure may not be the same as the Western (f.ex.the massive use of psychologists). In other words we need to find our own solutions rather than blindly copying the “success” of the West! We need to be re-educated in Islam, read our history and study our own norms!

By The insider @ Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:26 AM  |   (The insider)
Hasan ,

you are invited to join IAC

If You wish to join , please email at the following address.

Hammad cheema : Deputy Coordinater IAC

[email protected]

He will guide you to the rest of the process.

By Hassan Niazi @ Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:43 AM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
@Saqib Tasneem
Brother your comments reflect that you have seen the Western society closely. Especially the issues you recognized are so many warning sign of the underlying predicament in their society you have already pinpointed.

Nabi (SAW) ki hadees-e-mubaraka hay:
"Achi baat momen ki meeras hay. Jahan milay usay utha lo".

So yes there is no harm to gain knowledge of the west, with exhaustive analysis and vigilance, as you yourself mentioned very intelligently so that we don't end up where they are right now. I really like you conclusion which I quote;

"We may have similar problems in Pakistan, but the origins of the problems are not necessarily the same and therefore the cure may not be the same as the Western (f.ex. the massive use of psychologists). In other words we need to find our own solutions rather than blindly copying the “success” of the West! We need to be re-educated in Islam, read our history and study our own norms!"

Jazakullah Kher

By Hassan Niazi @ Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:44 AM  |   (Hassan Niazi)
@The Insider
Jazakullah Kher.

By Amad @ Tuesday, November 11, 2008 12:36 PM  |   (amad99)
Very inspirational....really hit out of the park!

By st17 @ Tuesday, November 11, 2008 7:57 PM  |   (shabanatunio)

I strongly agree with Imran especially his perspectives on Pakistani Islam and western double standards for instance, dumping toxic waste in third world countries and using third world countries as guinea pigs to experiment life saving drugs that are other wise restricted (by FDA etc.) in western countries.

I have gone through very similar experience in my own life. I used to be influenced by western culture. After I moved to United States after 9/11, I was victim of discrimination in my university by a so called educated niche' a PHD professor, she made my life a living hell only because I had Pakistani background.
Only then I realized how much west hates Islam and Muslims, it was the first time I started learning more about Islam in depth, through achieving understanding of Quran which truly brought peace within my mind and soul.
I now only care and work for Allah's will, detest materialism, I strongly believe that Islam makes man a better human being.
Who work for the betterment of other human's to please Allah.


By Saqib @ Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:33 AM  |   (Saqibt)
@Hassan Niazi

Thanks for your kind reply :-)


*****************************************

I have pointed towards some negative aspects of the Western society. One must be fair and also point towards areas, where they are far ahead of us. We find very good examples of how to behave and work for the betterment of the society. One important aspect is going according to a time schedule. If a meeting is arranged at 2 pm, then it is not acceptable for anyone – be it a big “gun” or an ordinary worker/employee – to appear 2.30 pm or 3 pm. as per our norms (nowadays). It is not only meetings but gatherings in general. People are brought up to automatically to run on schedule. This behaviour also includes respect for other participants of the gathering/meeting. We know how irritating it can be to wait for someone. I need not to tell how we perform in this field.

The way they perform their duty in whatever jobs they have. Most European countries have working hours between 35-40 hours/week. Compared to how much work load there is in poor countries it is relatively a few hours, but still they manage to produce significantly more. This is reflected in almost every industrial sector – be it traditional production or the IT-sector. Normally the problem is lack of “ownership” of the project. The only way to remove such behaviour is to introduce justice to the society in order to give due credit to those who deserve it. Only then we can have honest and hard working people in general.

The voluntary work in associations/clubs of all kind is also a positive aspect of the Western society – especially the northern European countries are excellent in this field. It can be association/clubs for football players, basket ball, tennis, clubs for stamp collectors and “you name it”. Western people work in these associations/clubs mostly for free (I am not talking about professional sports clubs). There is a huge voluntary work load in this field almost entirely done for free. That’s a great achievement compared to our contribution in this regard. I have met numerous “desi” people – especially the first generation - who almost refuse to believe that people are doing so much work for FREE. Thank God that they are slowly learning the art :-) I am not saying that Pakistanis don’t do this kind of work. There many examples, but we don’t do it on a massive scale as the Westerners.

The way they have implemented democracy to the grass root level is yet another factor also reflected in the above mentioned voluntary work for associations/clubs. The democracy is reflected through f. ex. the way committees are chosen. We don’t find such behaviour anywhere in Pakistan or for that sake anywhere in the Muslim.

By Dr. Khurrum @ Saturday, December 20, 2008 6:41 AM  |   (ksy)
Well In summary what Imran said , the Real Meaning of Islam is Understanding Quran , this can only be done when we understand Quranic Arabic , which is simple to undestand.

furthermore where we stand :

1. Total 56 islamic countries in World.
2. Less than a billion in World population out of 6 Billion.
3. Not a single country can be called true Islamic Model.
4. less then 1 percent understand Quran by reading it .
5. Most of islamic countries are Undemocratic.

By Anonymous User @ Tuesday, January 27, 2009 2:39 AM  |   (Anonymous)
Good to read the thoughts of Imran, and he very rightly points out some shocking facts about attitude of west towards east. but many more like him are aware of these facts. but no one is looking to answer these.
only answer i could find was
"Allah ke rasi ko muzboti say thame rakho or tafarkay main na paro" also see my post wit title "two party system in pakistan"

By  @ Monday, February 23, 2009 5:01 AM  |   ()
A very nice and fact filled Article

@ Friday, September 04, 2009 10:40 AM  |   (Anonymous)
Comments from the following blog entry: http://khudi.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/why-the-west-craves-materialism-why-the-east-sticks-to-religion/

 

USA   Canada   UK   Australia   New Zealand

© 2011 by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf