Why The West Craves Materialism & Why The East Sticks To Religion: By Imran Khan
One of my favorite online articles that I thought I should share with all the authors, readers & visitors of Mideast Youth.
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periodically shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ in school functions, I considered my own culture backward and religion outdated.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.

Join the Conversation
Very deceitful article with very subjective and delusive ”facts,” especially to Westerners who’ll read it.
Some of the illusions stated by Mr Imran
The connection between religion and morality is very fake. There’s no direct relation between religion and morality, but it merely depends on individual variances.
The elusive link between so called ”rise of crimes” in 70′s and materialist society is a mere lie. Actually materialism, philosophy-wise, is believing in the existence of only what can be only perceived by human senses. Not all the Westerners are materialists, or all the Easterners are idealists, because of religion. I can’t believe how elusive this understanding is!
If Mr Imran meant economic materialism, then it’s something to be praised, because it’s the reason behind my possession to the world’s most advanced lap-top and mobile. And it’s the same reason behind your Chinese sneakers.
I don’t like when people eat a luxurious cuisine, and then swear at the chef. This is irrational to me, and Imran has did that.
Meanwhile what he has stated about ”visits to psychiatrists” is not because the Westerners aren’t Muslims, God bless them, but on the extreme opposite, because they’re technically advanced and socially civilised enough not to categorize psychiatric patients as ”madmen.”
@Ahmed Zidan: It is a fallacy for you to label an argument “deceitful” because it clashes with your opinion. I found the article to be a valuable contribution to dialogue. Your criticisms tend to distort the essay’s generalizations into crude dichotomies: I.K. was not, if you pay attention, condemning all things Western or extolling all things Eastern.
As a Westerner myself, I find the description of the reactionary dynamic between secularized elites and fundamentalist fringe to be enlightening.
I do think I.K. presents a distorted view of Darwin’s thought, confusing his accepted scientific theory of evolution — which has nothing to say or imply about the existence of God — with the racist social theories that lesser thinkers derived from what they called “Darwinism.” It’s an important distinction. Believers’ (Muslim and Christian) indignation with “Darwinist” authoritarianism and white supremacism has unfortunately transferred to a rejection of anything to do with Darwin, a humane scientist who was innocent of the abuses carried out in his name. Darwin’s self-appointed champions often add to the confusion rather than clearing it up.
Sorry allot of incorrect info here.
Making some false dichotomy describe the west one way and the east another opposite way to be wrong and incorrect.
First of Darwin was not a philosopher he was a scientist known for his accepted theory regarding evolution by the means of natural selection. And it explains the diversity of life not the origin by the means that the species most well adapted to change in environment will survive and pass there genes forward trough variance of mutations some will be beneficial to the specie and some not if they are good for the specie it will help those individuals that have that mutation in that specific environment that they live and thus that mutation will sooner or later be widespread in that group of the specie .
If a two sub groups of a specie can no longer get a fertile offspring then two subgroups have become different species.
Evolution says nothing about the concept of god or gods. And it says nothing about the start of life.
So one can believe in a god the same time accept evolution.
Also Social Darwinism shall not be confused with Darwin’s theory of natural selection.
And when has science replaced religion ? It might be so that science has made many people question religion but not all scientists are completely without religion so that fails.
Also morality have nothing to do with religion.. Morality is A subjective and have varied from culture to culture the basics like thou shall not kill is basically universal and exist in small isolated tribes with no established religion. We are pack animals and killing each other randomly would hurt our species and in fact no species that just murder each other would survive.
Also if you mean that only archaic morals are morals then you have a fallacious absolute moralist view.
Morals cannot be objective and cannot be absolute.
Also the typical Abrahamic morals can be find in earlier texts. Ever heard of Hammurabi’s code of laws ? Written in Akkadian the earliest Semitic language ever written. You also find many of the same ideas in the Egyptian book of the dead an old religious text preceding the Abrahamic religions.
The point being morality is older then religion.
Also no connection between crime rates and being more secular exist. If so the in the USA the most secular people like American atheists would top the prison rate per capita but that is not the case instead it shows that it is the religious Americans who do most crime. Thus your theory collapse like a deck of cards.
For me stoning, killing of apostates , male supremacy in public life. hate against homosexuality , theocracy , religion in politics and not having full 100 % freedom of religion and to much regulation on to be deeply immoral.
Also I see Imran Khan like to go around with old myths .. I live in Sweden and the idea of the highest suicide rate is incorrect in fact alot of other nations have higher suicide rates. The myth was born from a miscalculation in the 50′s and later used by the USAs right wing for an argument against welfare states and socialism in general. So I wonder what source have you checked ?
If you would have checked you would have known that Sweden is 29th in the list and Switzerland is not in the top 2 .
Also Denmark is said to be the worlds most happiest nation and they are not very religious at all.
So again there is no connection between religion and overall happiness. Religion may tough make individuals happpy but others are happier without it.
Also even if your where right would not make organized religion more right or wrong.
You talk about Indonesia as prime example of how great Islam is and how great and peaceful it spread there ? Well what about Islam’s early spread to Persia and Egypt was that peaceful ? Not really.
Also you do a fallacy about being unreligious leads one to materialism if you mean with it to only focus on stuff and self.. That is again BS I am an atheist and I do not focus on self solely or only caring about gaining stuff or getting successes. In fact I do not care about getting rich or having allot of stuff and I do care allot about my fellow people.
I may tough add that the western focus of science has given us a development in medicine , technology and development then ever before . Creativity and rationality breeds that technology
Also if materialism you mean only on believing there is only a material world. Then not all westerners believe that at all. Again a fake argument.many westerners that do not have organised religion belive in some kind spiritual force.
Also the same my be applied to areas for an example in the very unreligious Sweden people care less about material gain then the more religious USA..
And yes science speak nothing of the meaning of life.. because that is a subjective thing natural science only explains how things in nature work and is a growing set of knowledge.
And what happens after we die why should science care about that ? Again a subjective thing based on belief.
Meaning of anything cannot be taken from science because that would be a value judgment science only explains how things are and why but not meaning nor how things ought to be.
So sorry the article is factual incorrect. And has a lot of overused arguments.
Kind regards any way