To regime servants: take moral of first scene

Some people unintentionally or deliberately forget the scene of first creation, the one I call the establishing scene for the philosophy of human existence. They do so because it contains the important wisdom those who bury their heads in the sand of ignorance do not realize!

Before elaborating, I would like to state I am neither a cleric nor a preacher of those long-bearded shaved-moustache so-called clerics who poke their noses, hands, and feet in our religion and life affairs, those who have no decency to judge our conscience and morals if we don’t comply with their interpretation of religion while dubbing us as atheists, heretics, and depraved. All I have are attempts that do not cease to ponder through reading, thinking, contemplating and nothing else. It’s OK for me to make mistakes and commit sins; it’s human nature… we make mistakes, commit sins, and ask for forgiveness and at times we make right and ask for forgiveness as well, for some gifts and obedience to God too require man to ask for forgiveness and plead for mercy and well-being.

In the scene establishing our existence, the one we shall contemplate with our hearts and minds alerted, Lord says: “And [mention, O Muhammad], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know." verse 30 of the Chapter of Al-Baqara[1] in Quran. This was the beginning of dialogue when angels asked directing their questions to God… and in verses 74 and 75 consecutively of the Chapter of Sad[2], we find another reference for Iblees[3] and what he said in this scene. These verses mentioned above are as follows:

“And [mention] when We said to the angels, "Prostrate before Adam"; so they prostrated, except for Iblees. He refused and was arrogant and became of the disbelievers.” verse 34 of the Chapter of Al-Baqara.

“And We have certainly created you, [O Mankind], and given you [human] form. Then We said to the angels, "Prostrate to Adam"; so they prostrated, except for Iblees. He was not of those who prostrated.” verse 11 of the Chapter of Al-Aaraf[4].

“Except Iblees, he refused to be with those who prostrated.” verse 31 of the Chapter of Al-Hijr[5] of Quran.

 “[Allah] said, O Iblees, what is [the matter] with you that you are not with those who prostrate?"” verse 32 of the Chapter of Al-Hijr.

“And [mention] when We said to the angels, "Prostrate to Adam," and they prostrated, except for Iblees. He was of the jinn and departed from the command of his Lord. Then will you take him and his descendants as allies other than Me while they are enemies to you? Wretched it is for the wrongdoers as an exchange.” verse 50 of the Chapter of Al-Kahf[6].

It directly indicates they first listened, then asked and said what they wanted to say, and later obeyed Lord’s order after they had received the answer... meaning there is no blind obedience without asking and understanding.

Afterwards, Iblees entered the scene refusing to prostrate to Adam and disobeying, directly and without doubt, the divine order. Iblees was not only disobedient but also argued to justify his approach as well. Let’s see what Lord said in Quran in verse 34 of Al-Baqara Chapter, verse 11 of Al-Aaraf Chapter, verses 31 and 32 respectively of Al-Hijr Chapter, verse 61 of Al-Isra[7] Chapter, verse 50 of Al-Kahf Chapter, verse 116 of Ta-ha[8] Chapter, verse 95 of Ash-Shuaara[9] Chapter, and verse 20 of Saba[10] Chapter.

The dissident disobedient went further and replied to God’s question saying: “[Allah] said, "What prevented you from prostrating when I commanded you?" [Satan] said, "I am better than him. You created me from fire and created him from clay." verse 12 of the Chapter of Al-Aaraf in Quran.

Lord said: “[Allah] said, "Descend from Paradise, for it is not for you to be arrogant therein. So get out; indeed, you are of the debased.” verse 13 of the Chapter of Al-Aaraf.

The dissident continued his argument and demands saying: “[Satan] said, "Reprieve me until the Day they are resurrected." verse 14 of Al-Aaraf Chapter. Lord then replied: “[Allah] said, "Indeed, you are of those reprieved." verse 15 of the same Chapter.

Dialogue continued… again I repeat, dialogue, “[Satan] said, "Because You have put me in error, I will surely sit in wait for them on Your straight path. Then I will come to them from before them and from behind them and on their right and on their left, and You will not find most of them grateful [to You]. [Allah] said, "Get out of Paradise, reproached and expelled. Whoever follows you among them - I will surely fill Hell with you, all together." verses 16, 17, and 18 of Al-Aaraf Chapter.

Yes, it was a dialogue… and before whom?! Lord. And yes, the dissident expressed his opinion and disclosed his future plan to seduce all God’s creatures of Humans. He also revealed the methodology he was going to adopt to practice such seduction and defined the pathways he would hit in doing such thing. Here we witness a very important divine wisdom; it’s answering such disobedient dissident’s request to take his time until doomsday. It was not a certain hour, day, year, or even a century… but an open time period… All glory to Lord, the greatest and wisest.

After all this, I don’t think any human in place of power can decide with a pen streak to wipe out opposition and dissidents or to inhibit dialogue and argument, not to mention dialogue in our human world that is indispensible for the state stability and regime justice.

Dear reader, now you ask me: have you changed your stance from a staunch supporter of Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi since the first moment of his election, to a dissident who seeks help in sacred books and religious reference with all your past in opposing such ideologies?!

My answer is: no, I haven’t changed my stance or sought any religious reference in a way or another, but rather tried to cut it short for those pretending to be the regime and president’s most loyal servants who stand against any opposition of any level for his rule. Those people do not understand that the president and regime strength are guaranteed to continue in their achievements as long as criticism and opposition exist even from within the president and regime supporters because there is great difference between those who work for the president and government and others who work with the president and regime for the well-being of our country.

Let vapor come out and turn into energy capable of running the Egyptian mind turbines. Otherwise, no fortification can withstand the explosion resulting from the accumulated vapor. Not every critic or dissident is a traitor, biased or benefit reaper… You shall seek moral in the first creation scene if you have brains.

Translated into English by: Dalia Elnaggar

This article was published in Almasry alyoum newspaper on February 23, 2016.

To see the original Arabic version, please go to:

http://www.almasryalyoum.com/news/details/898257

#almasry_alyoum#ahmed_elgammal#opposition#dissident#Egypt#God#Lord#criticism#president#sisi#regime#power#authority

---

[1] The Chapter of Al-Baqara: (Arabic: سورة البقرة)

[2] The Chapter of Sad: (Arabic: سورة ص)

[3] Iblees: (Arabic: إبليس) the devil.

[4] The Chapter of Al-Aaraf: (Arabic: سورة الأعراف)

[5] The Chapter of Al-Hijr: (Arabic: سورة الحجر)

[6] The Chapter of Al-Kahf: (Arabic: سورة الكهف)

[7] The Chapter of Al-Isra: (Arabic: سورة الإسراء)

[8] The Chapter of Ta-Ha: (Arabic: سورة طه)

[9] The Chapter of Ash-Shuaara: (Arabic: سورة الشعراء)

[10] The Chapter of Saba: (Arabic: سورة سبأ)

إلى سدنة النظام: تعلموا من المشهد الأول

ينسى البعض أو يتناسى مشهد الخلق الأول، الذي أسميه المشهد المؤسس لفلسفة الوجود الإنساني وهم ينسونه ويتناسونه، لأن فيه الحكمة البالغة التي يدفن رأسه في وحل الجهل من لا يتدبرها!

وقبل أن أستطرد أؤكد على حقيقة أنني لست عالم دين، ولا داعية من إياهم الذين يرسلون لحاهم ويعفون شواربهم ويمدون أنوفهم وأيديهم وأرجلهم في شؤون دنيانا وديننا، ولا بأس عندهم أن يفتشوا في ضمائرنا ويشقوا صدورنا، وإذا لم نكن على هواهم فنحن مارقون زنادقة فاسقون، وكل ما عندي هو محاولات لا تتوقف عن الفهم عبر القراءة والتفكر والتدبر ولا شيء أبعد من ذلك، ولا بأس عندي أن أخطئ وأن تقع مني زلات ومعاصٍ.. فهكذا جبلت كواحد من مملكة الإنسان.. نخطئ ونعصي ونتوب، بل ونصيب ونتوب أيضًا، لأن من النعم والطاعات ما قد يستوجب الاستغفار ورجاء العفو والعافية.

في المشهد المؤسس لوجودنا الذي يتعين أن نتدبره بكل عقل وفؤاد يقول رب العزة سبحانه: "وإذ قال ربك للملائكة إني جاعل في الأرض خليفة، قالوا أتجعل فيها من يفسد فيها ويسفك الدماء ونحن نسبح بحمدك ونقدس لك قال إني أعلم ما لا تعلمون" البقرة 30.

هذه هي بداية الحوار، حيث يتساءل الملائكة ويوجهون تساؤلهم لرب العزة سبحانه وتعالى.. وسورة ص آية 74 و75 نجد ذكرا لموقف إبليس وما جاء على لسانه، وهذه هي الآيات وفق الترتيب السابق:

"وإذ قلنا للملائكة اسجدوا لآدم فسجدوا إلا إبليس أبى واستكبر وكان من الكافرين" البقرة 34.

"ولقد خلقناكم ثم صورنكم ثم قلنا للملائكة اسجدوا لآدم فسجدوا إلا إبليس لم يكن من الساجدين" الأعراف 11.

"إلا إبليس أبى أن يكون مع الساجدين" الحجر 31.

"قال يا إبليس ما لك ألا تكون مع الساجدين" الحجر 32

"وإذ قلنا للملائكة اسجدوا لآدم فسجدوا إلا إبليس كان من الجن ففسق عن أمر ربه أفتتخذونه وذريته أولياء من دوني وهم لكم عدو بئس للظالمين بدلا" الكهف 50.

الأمر الذي يعني مباشرة أنهم سمعوا ثم سألوا وقالوا ما عندهم ثم أطاعوا بعد أن تلقوا الإجابة!.. يعني ليس هناك سمع وطاعة بدون سؤال وفهم!

بعد ذلك يدخل إبليس طرفا في المشهد ويرفض السجود لآدم ويعصي الأمر الإلهي عصيانا مباشرا لا لبس فيه أمام صاحب الأمر والنهي جل جلاله، ولا يكتفي بالعصيان وإنما يضيف إليه الجدل وتسويغ موقفه. وتعالوا نقرأ ما نتعبد به لله سبحانه وتعالى.. أي آيات من القرآن الكريم، ففي سورة البقرة آية 34 وسورة الأعراف آية 11 وسورة الحجر آية 31 و32 وسورة الإسراء آية 61 وسورة الكهف آية 50 وسورة طه آية 116 وسورة الشعراء آية 95 وسورة سبأ آية 20.

ثم يتمادى العاصي المعارض ويرد على سؤال رب العزة سبحانه: "قال ما منعك ألا تسجد إذ أمرتك قال أنا خير منه خلقتني من نار وخلقته من طين" الأعراف 12.

ويقول رب العزة سبحانه: "قال فاهبط منها فما يكون لك أن تتكبر فيها فاخرج إنك من الصاغرين" الأعراف 13.

ويستمر المعارض في جدله وطلباته: "قال انظرني إلى يوم يبعثون" الأعراف 14 ويرد رب العزة: "قال إنك من المنظرين" الأعراف 15.

ويستمر الحوار.. وأكرر الحوار: "قال فبما أغويتني لأقعدن لهم صراطك المستقيم، ثم لآتينهم من بين أيديهم ومن خلفهم وعن أيمانهم وعن شمائلهم ولا تجد أكثرهم شاكرين. قال اخرج منها مذؤوما مدحورا لمن تبعك منهم لأملأن جهنم منكم أجمعين" الأعراف 16- 18.

نعم حوار.. وأمام من؟! وفي حضرة من؟! نعم قال المعارض رأيه، ولم يكتفِ بل أفصح عن برنامجه المستقبلي في غواية خلق الله من البشر، وأفصح عن الطريقة التي سيمارس بها هذه الغواية، وحدد المداخل التي سيدخل منها.. ثم ها نحن أمام حكمة إلهية بالغة، وهي الاستجابة لطلب ذلك المعارض العاصي، بأن يأخذ وقته إلى يوم البعث.. يعني ليست ساعة ولا يوما ولا سنة ولا قرنا.. إنما مسافة زمنية مفتوحة.. فما أعظم وأحكم رب العزة سبحانه وتعالى.

هل بعد ذلك كله يمكن لبشر في موقع الحكم أن يقرر بجرة قلم أن يمحو المعارضة والمعارضين، أو أن يضيق بالحوار والسجال؟! فما بالك إذا كان الحوار في عالمنا البشري منطلقا من أرضية الحرص على الاستقرار وعلى قوة الدولة وعدالة النظام؟!

وتسألني عزيزي القارئ: هل غيرت موقفك من مؤيد مناصر متحمس لعبد الفتاح السيسي منذ لحظة الترشيح الأولى، وضمن المشهد الأول التأسيسي، إلى معارض يتلمس سندا من الكتب المقدسة والمرجعية الدينية وأنت من أنت في معارضتها؟! وأبادر بالإجابة: إنني لم أغير موقفي ولا أستند لمرجعية دينية بدرجة أو بأخرى، وإنما يأتي هذا الذي كتبته كمحاولة لقطع سياق الذين يسترسلون في الإيحاء بأنهم سدنة النظام المخلصين للرئيس الرافضين لأية معارضة بأية درجة له!

ذلك أنهم لا يفهمون أن استمرار الرئيس والنظام وقوتهما وضمان استمرارهما في الإنجاز مرتبط بوجود النقد والمعارضة حتى من داخل مؤيدي الرئيس والنظام، لأن هناك فرقا ضخما بين من يعمل عند الرئيس وعند الحكومة، وبين من يعمل مع الرئيس ومع النظام!

اتركوا البخار يتصاعد ويتحول لطاقة تدير توربينات العقل المصري وإلا لن يتحمل أي تحصين ما قد يحدثه البخار المكتوم من انفجار.

ليس كل ناقد أو معارض خائنا أو مغرضا أو منتظرا لمكسب، ولكم في مشهد الخلق الأول العبرة إن كنتم من أولي الألباب.

 نشرت في جريدة المصري اليوم بتاريخ 23 فبراير 2016

Heikal…the institutional phenomenon

 

Heikal

He preferred to stay silent when receiving any invitation to talk in commemoration gatherings. He preferred to express his feelings of sorrow for those dear to the deceased in a short message or cable, likely because he didn’t like talking about death and wasn’t good at commemorating or even praising. May be if it had been possible to ask him about his eulogy or commemoration, he would immediately have refused preferring everyone should be dismissed to their assigned job. Whenever an individual turns into a unique figure in history, only then accustomed rules-disciplined scientific research can state its judgment which will definitely not be “in favor of” or “against”, but rather detecting, analyzing, and connecting incidents together in order to extract lessons out of it.

It’s the side I knew in Mohammed Hassanein Heikal and definitely others know more than I do. In my opinion, that was the trait that doesn’t necessitate to be described as the best – like professors of Principles of Jurisprudence say – but rather requires the man should be described as a phenomenon and a national and humanitarian institution.

Until scientific research in history, politics, journalism, sociology, and biography takes command regarding Heikal’s life, I believe attributes will be limited to the personal perspective when writing about his departure. It’s normal since main source of writing in this case will stem from Al-ostaz[1] Heikal’s relationship with all these parties. Those who co-worked with him and others who learned and worked under his command in journalism have their perspective and those who witnessed him in policy-making “kitchens”, presidential and monarchic palaces’ avenues, world capitals and resorts, have their own accounts as well. Even those who used to meet him in the very short distance separating his residential apartment from his office, the short distance separating his secretary staff and assistants, those who used to serve him and serve his guests, everyone of those people have his own perspective that outlines his opinion and conviction about Al-ostaz.

Many circled him in a constellation like planets do when orbiting the sun; they stayed attracted and affected by him; he was their night, day, and four seasons; their tides were linked to his existence. Many others, meantime, refused to submit to his attraction; those were either scraps wandering in wide space or planets rotating around other stars. However, those who opposed him couldn’t deny his ability, and when they do, they become worthy to be described like what the poet said:

If eye denies sunlight, it is due to blindness

And if mouth cannot taste water, it is due to illness!

The relationship between us started long time ago when we were young, when my father used to punish us if he didn’t find his copy of Al-Ahram[2] – Friday’s edition in particular –, the edition he ordered to be kept safe until next one comes out. And so Al-Ahram Friday’s edition – due to the significant value of “besaraha[3]” article – used to escape the destiny of being laid over the dining table, under chicks’ feet, or moistened with water in order to be used in cleaning windows’ glass, or even foiled for the purpose of igniting fire in furnaces and stoves! It was until I knew my way to the newspapers’ seller – this time to buy the paper for me, not for my father – when I realized there were newspapers other than Al-Ahram. That was because Al-Ahram was the only one in “curriculum” at home; I have no idea why it wasn’t Al-akhbar, Al-masry, or Al-gomhoriyea, the papers that circulated at that time in addition to Al-Ahram. Our colleague newspapers sellers’ callings were known to everyone… Read about the accident… Read…. Read… Read for Heikal.

In March, 1971 I was the post-graduate studies’ representative in Ain Shams University and faculty of Arts’ student union and in the preliminary year of my Master’s degree study as well when the culture committee of the union decided to arrange a meeting with Al-ostaz. An appointment was scheduled through his then-secretary Fawzia. We went and were seated in a room attached to his office where we sit at a round table circling him. A long discussion was conducted. I don’t know why I sought to provoke him when he said, ending my annoying attempts, “are you here in a game?!” I stopped and he, welcomingly, published almost all the debate with us in Al-Ahram Friday’s edition instead of his article “besaraha”.

Four years later, I went to his house without prior appointment. His blue-eyed blond secretary Mounir opened the door and asked me: do you have an appointment?! I said, like a big celebrity does: just tell him X from Ain Shams University group. Permission was granted and I was allowed to enter. I saw his youngest son lying in Mounir’s place watching TV. Al-ostaz came, welcoming, and immediately asked me: “aren’t you afraid to come here?! At that time, he fell out with then-president Sadat and left Al-Ahram when Sadat incited his partisans to harass and insult the man with what best suits them, not him!

Meetings and conversations between us – either individually or in groups – lasted since 1974 inside Egypt and abroad. I used to record his regard for me through the dedications he wrote to me on his books!!... Starting from “To X, the young fighter…”, to “Dear friend X…”.

A lot of situations, accounts, and heat in conversation went between us sometimes, with rare anger from his side at times. The worst was when someone – a very mean Jordanian Palestinian man – rushed to him in the morning to check on him after X – me – told him Al-ostaz health condition were bad and that he – Al-ostaz – was suffering from a terminal disease. This wasn’t true. Al-ostaz called me, while the mean guy was sitting before him, and said one short statement: “hey, Ahmed, if I’m suffering from a terminal disease, you will be the first to know”. I immediately said: “I’m sure Y is sitting before you”. Al-ostaz said “yes, talk to him”. I talked to the man and went describing him using all mean words I knew.

I discussed him in his relationship with president Gamal Abdel-Nasser, asked him about his romances, universal beliefs, his understanding for the philosophy of history. He, as usual, preferred to listen first to his guest and go on answering afterwards.

Heikal will always be a historical political sociological journalistic phenomenon… and will ever be a model for the individual who turned into a national and humanitarian institution. I stop here for he didn’t like eulogies or attending commemorations.

Translated into English by: Dalia Elnaggar

This article was published in Al Ahram newspaper on February 19, 2016.

To see the original Arabic version, go to:

http://www.ahram.org.eg/News/131821/1157/477510/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%87%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%AA%D9%86%D8%B9%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%B0/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%B0--%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B8%D8%A7%D9%87%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%

#alahram#ahmed_elgammal#Heikal#gamal_abdel_nasser#sadat#journalism#media#newspapers#politics#history#biography#writing

---

[1] Al-ostaz: (Arabic: الأستاذ) a word meaning Master in Arabic language. Heikal was named by this title to dignify and honor his long life role in journalism in Egypt and the Arab country either through his journalistic essays or his books.

[2] Al-Ahram :(Arabic: الأهرام‎; The Pyramids), founded on 5 August 1875, is the most widely circulating Egyptian daily newspaper, and the second oldest after al-Waqa'i`al-Masriya (The Egyptian Events, founded 1828). It is majority owned by the Egyptian government. Given the large dialectal variety of the Arabic language, Al-Ahram is widely considered an influential source of writing style in Arabic. In 1950, the Middle East Institute described Al-Ahram as being to the Arabic-reading public within its area of distribution, "What The Times is to Englishmen and the New York Times to Americans", however it has often been accused of heavy influence and censorship by the Egyptian government. (Source: Wikipedia)

[3] Besaraha: (Arabic: بصراحة) meaning frankly in Arabic. It was the title of Heikal’s weekly column article in Alahram newspaper.

هيكل.. الظاهرة المؤسسية

الأستاذ هيكل

كان يفضل الصمت عندما يتلقى أي دعوة للكلام في حفلات التأبين، وكان يؤثر نقل مشاعر الأسى والعزاء لمن هم أعزاء على الفقيد في رسالة أو برقية قصيرة.. ربما لأنه لم يكن يحب الحديث عن الموت ولا يجيد فن المراثي، كما لم يُجد فن المديح.. وربما لو كان ممكنًا استطلاع رأيه في رثائه أو تأبينه لرفض من فوره، ولفضل انصراف كل إلى عمله ومهمته، وإذا جاء الوقت الذي يتحول فيه الإنسان الفرد إلى مفردة من مفردات التاريخ فليقل البحث العلمي المنضبط بالقواعد المتعارف عليها كلمته التي لن تكون بالقطع "مع أو ضد"، وإنما هي رصد وتحليل وربط واستخلاصات ودروس!

هذا هو الجانب الذي عرفته في محمد حسنين هيكل، وبالحتم فإن غيري لديه عن جوانب أخرى أضعاف ما عندي، وتلك في اعتقادي الميزة التي قد لا تقتضي الأفضلية، كما يقول علماء الأصول، ولكنها تقتضي أن يوصف الرجل بأنه ظاهرة، وأنه كان مؤسسة وطنية وإنسانية.

وحتى يأتي الوقت الذي يتولى فيه البحث العلمي في فروع التاريخ والسياسة والصحافة والاجتماع والسير الذاتية زمام الأمر فيما يتصل بمحمد حسنين هيكل؛ فإنني أظن أن المعالجات ستنطلق من الزاوية الذاتية لكل من سيكتب عن رحيله.. وهذا طبيعي لأن زاد الكتابة في تلك الحالة هو تفاصيل العلاقة بين كل الأطراف وبين الأستاذ هيكل.

فمن زاملوه من جيله، ومن تتلمذوا عليه وعملوا تحت قيادته في الصحافة لهم زاويتهم، وكذلك الحال مع من عايشوه في مطابخ السياسة، وفي ردهات القصور الملكية والرئاسية، وفي المنتجعات والعواصم الأجنبية، بل وفي المسافة القصيرة للغاية الفاصلة بين مقر إقامته وبين مكتبه، وفي المسافة الأقل الواصلة بين سكرتاريته ومعاونيه، وأيضًا من كانوا يقومون على خدمته وضيوفه! كل له زاويته التي تحدد رؤيته ومن ثم رأيه وقناعته!

انتظم عديدون في مجموعته الفلكية، إذا أخذنا الشمس ومجموعتها مثالاً، ولم يفلتوا من جاذبيته وتأثيره، وكان ليلهم ونهارهم وفصولهم الأربعة، ومدهم وجزرهم مرتبطًا بوجوده.. ورفض عديدون أيضًا الخضوع لجاذبيته، وكانوا إما شظايا هائمة في فضاءات واسعة أو كواكب تدور في فلك نجوم أخرى غيره.. ومع ذلك فلم ينكر رافضوه وجوده، وإن أنكروه فكان حالهم حال من وصفهم الشاعر:

قد تنكر العين ضوء الشمس من رمد

وقد ينكر الفم طعم الماء من سقم!

تبدأ زاويتي تجاهه عندما كنا نلقى العقاب صغارًا إذا لم يجد الوالد أهرام الجمعة تحديدًا، الذي كان يأمر بالاحتفاظ به لحين صدور عدد الجمعة التالية.

ولذا كان أهرام الجمعة بكرامة مقال "بصراحة" يفلت من أن يفرش على الطبلية أو تحت أقدام الكتاكيت أو يعجن برشه ماء لمسح زجاج الشبابيك، أو تلف أوراقه لإشعال النار في الأفران والكوانين!

وما أن عرفت الطريق لبائع الجرائد لأشتري- لنفسي هذه المرة وليس لأبي- حتى أدركت أن هناك صحفًا أخرى غير الأهرام، لأن الأهرام كان وحده المقرر في الدار، ولا أدري لماذا لم تكن الأخبار ولا المصري ولا الجمهورية آنذاك.

وكانت نداءات زملائنا باعة الصحف محفوظة للجميع.. اقرا الحادثة.. اقرا.. اقرا.. اقرا.. ثم اقرا هيكل.

في مارس 1971 كنت ممثلاً للدراسات العليا باتحاد طلاب جامعة عين شمس وكلية الآداب، وكنت في السنة التمهيدية للماجستير، وقررت اللجنة الثقافية باتحاد طلاب الجامعة أن تلتقيه، وتحدد لنا موعد عن طريق فوزية سكرتيرته وذهبنا ودخلنا غرفة ملحقة بمكتبه، فيها طاولة دائرية تحلقنا عليها من حوله.. ودار حوار طويل ولا أدري لماذا سعيت لاستفزازه وجر شكله، فإذا به يحاول التلطيف، إلا أن رذالتي دفعته إلى أن يحسم: "أنت جاي تدخل مباراة معي؟!"، وأحسست بالخطر الداهم فتراجعت، وتفضل هو بنشر الحوار معنا شبه كامل في عدد الجمعة بدلاً عن مقاله "بصراحة"!

وبعدها بسنوات أربع طرقت باب منزله دون موعد سابق، وفتح لي منير سكرتيره الأشقر ذو العينين الزرقاوين، وسألني: فيه ميعاد؟! وقلت وكأنني علم الأعلام: بس قل له فلان من بتوع جامعة عين شمس! وجاء الإذن ودخلت لأجد ابنه الأصغر مستلقيًا يتفرج على التليفزيون في المكان الذي يجلس فيه منير، وجاء الأستاذ مرحبًا وسألني من فوره: أنت ما خفتش تيجي هنا؟! لأنه كان قد ترك الأهرام وانفتحت عليه أبواب جهنم السادات، وتطاول زبانيتها بما هو لائق بهم!

ومنذ 1974 لم تنقطع اللقاءات والحوارات ـــــ منفردة وجماعية ـــــــ داخل مصر.. وخارجها.. وكنت أؤرخ لنظرته لي من خلال كلمات العبارات التي تتضمنها إهداءاته لكتبه لي!!.. من "إلى فلان شابا مناضلا..."، حتى وصلنا إلى "الصديق العزيز فلان..."!

مواقف وحكايات كثيرة وسخونة في الحوار أحيانًا، وغضب منه نادرًا، وكانت أقصى حالات الغضب عندما هرع إليه أحدهم ــــــ وكان فلسطينيًا أردنيًا بالغ الرداءة ــــــ في الصباح المبكر ليطمئن على صحته التي أبلغه فلان ـــــ أي العبد لله ـــــ أنها سيئة، وأنه مصاب بمرض عضال.. ولم يكن ذلك حدث، فطلبني فيما المذكور جالس أمامه وقال عبارة واحدة قصيرة: "يا سي أحمد عندما أكون مريضًا مرضًا عضالاً فستكون أول من أبلغه بذلك"! وقلت من فوري: "مؤكد أن فلانًا أمامك"، فقال: "نعم.. خذ كلمه".. وكلمته بما يناسبه من مخزوني القبيح!

ناقشته في علاقته مع الرئيس عبد الناصر، وسألته عن غرامياته، وعن اعتقاداته الكونية، وعن فهمه لفلسفة التاريخ، وكان كعادته يؤثر الاستماع إلى ضيفه أولاً حتى إذا جاء دوره انطلق!

سيبقى الأستاذ هيكل ظاهرة تاريخية وسياسية واجتماعية وصحفية وإعلامية.. وسيبقى نموذجًا للفرد الذي صار مؤسسة وطنية وإنسانية، وهنا أتوقف لأنه لم يكن يحب الإسهاب في الرثاءات ولا المشاركة في التأبينات.

 نشرت في جريدة الأهرام بتاريخ 19 فبراير 2016

Our immunity system…. greatest calamity

We talked before about the injuries that hit our Egyptian immune system starting with the duplication of education system resulting in another terrible duplicity in both conscience and culture. Then, we talked about discontinuity in the graphical line representing Egyptian history. Later, we talked about Egyptians’ migration to oil-rich Arab countries and what came next as a result like domination of individual salvation philosophy, attitude of lavish consumption, and squandering our national deposits over industries that do not establish real renaissance.

Today, we continue talking about the part left in the third injury that has to do with Egyptians’ migration to oil-rich Arab countries; the part we should call the greatest calamity for it’s an injury that hit our Egyptian mentality in the heart affecting both conscience and social relations. The most dangerous was that it had a significantly devastating effect on Egyptians’ relation with their country and their citizenship.

History has proved that the conqueror, whatever his source of power is, is the one who can impose his culture and ideology on the conquered. In very rare cases, the conquered was able to fight back in many ways; one of them was to digest what is imposed over him by the conqueror and then transform it into a new version that guarantees his identity in a way that benefits him. It’s what Egypt has succeeded to do through its long history when conquered by foreign invaders. The invader occupied its land but ended up being digested in it while Egypt stayed as it is. Although Egypt was affected by the Greek-Roman invasion, adopted Christianity, and later Islam, but through all this, it was able to affect and impose its own character on all those, especially on Christianity and Islam as well.

After Infitah[1] and what followed later as to stealing the achievements of October 1973 victory attained by all classes of the Egyptian people, especially lower and middle classes and a little bit of the upper one – Classes here have to do with the economic and consumption criteria – Egyptians decided to leave their country. That exodus had two routes. The first was to North America; Canada and the U.S.A, Europe, and Australia, where most migrants were Egyptian Christians. Some of them were not allowed to do anything useful in their homeland Egypt, so they stayed in their migration country, while some came back and later immigrated. This kind of migration was different to that one heading to oil-rich Arab countries. Since the first usually deepens your feelings of homesickness and nationalism. The second, meanwhile, was the one I call the greatest calamity.

Days proved that Egyptians, if conquered in their homeland, used to deal with the invader as we described earlier but they can never lose their unique Egyptian identity. The dangerous variable affecting this equation was the one I guess nobody paid due attention to when Egyptians had to leave their homeland to the land of the conqueror or the most powerful and stay there temporarily for a pre-decided set of years or for long times, where they behaved totally different to when they were conquered in their land. After leaving their homeland, Egyptians have lost their identity and points of influence and distinguish in their society when they went to Iraq, Gulf Arab countries, and Yemen. For example, they lost their cohesion as an agricultural community and as a civil middle class. Both of these two characters; agricultural and civil, were distinguished by cohesion and solidarity, not to mention the integration quality popular among residents of the countryside community due to the nature of the agriculture activity.

In migration to oil-rich Arab countries, everyone sought his own benefits even if it was on his fellow Egyptian’s dead body. We heard a lot – like in my case as I was one of those who migrated for several years – about differences between Palestinian, Lebanese and Sudanese communities’ behavior in oil-rich countries and that of the Egyptian community since Egyptians were not accustomed or trained to migration mechanisms or protocols if we can say. Migrating Egyptians lost very important qualities. Some losses were due to harsh reality circumstances, while others were nothing but deviant behaviors acquired during years of migration.

The concept of Arab nationalism, both its political and cultural parts, was severely damaged, with the Palestinian cause in the heart of it, which is a matter of direct national security to Egypt. Expatriate Egyptians migrating to oil-rich countries were subjected to unfair legal systems like al-Kafil[2], and also did not enjoy the same benefits like those of the citizens of those countries. In addition, some had a negative point of view of Egypt as they had images like Share’ el-Haram[3], foul and falafel[4], pickpockets and prostitutes, and others in their minds. Some, meantime, denied Egypt’s past role in education, culture, art, and political role. Moreover, competition in work fields among Arab expatriates of different nationalities started to have negative effect; many talked about Palestinians persecuting Egyptians and Sudanese denying their mutual history with Egyptians. In this way, concept of Arab nationalism along with its political context was hit in the core in the Egyptian mentality.

After this, the concept of nationalism and citizenship was badly damaged in the mentality of many expatriate Egyptians through two ways. The first was cultural brain washing performed through religious discourse dominated in some Gulf Arab countries’ communities by hard-liners’ interpretations like that of Ibn Hanbal[5], Ibn Taymiyyah[6], and Ibn Abdel-Wahhab[7]; such interpretations that do not recognize concepts of nationalism or citizenship. In those hard-liners’ ideology, such concepts are regarded either as pure fanaticism or cults, and that dying for them is not for the sake of God and hence those who die defending their countries or seeking their independence and freedom of land are not considered martyrs. The other way that killed nationalism was the consumption mentality that identifies homeland in terms of cash, balance in bank account, and real-estate properties.

Things became worse when all this took place during Sadat’s ruling era that lasted until 1981 and continued through the corruption era of his hand-picked successor Mubarak for thirty years. Egyptians used to travel and work in oil-rich Arab countries accumulating what they thought was enough to fulfill their needs like affording to have an apartment, car, household facilities, place to spend the summer, and maybe a bank account in case they needed more money for educating their children and preparing them for marriage, not to mention their commitments toward their big families living in the countryside or city. But when deciding to come back to Egypt thinking it is the last year away from their beloved homeland, Egyptians found inflation, soaring prices, and corruption going higher and eating away their savings. And so, again they migrate back desperate and heart-broken for not being able to afford a good life in their homeland, wondering, whether exclaiming or ironically-speaking, “Where is homeland? It no longer exists!” feeling deep in their hearts that it’s the country where they couldn’t afford to have their basic needs or even allowed to although they travelled, left his beloved people behind, and worked hard day and night.

I here recall an account of domestic migration that happened long time ago in our village when my father found a job as an Arabic language and religion teacher in the mid forties. We moved out to the city of Quweisna[8] for my father to work in al-Massa’e al-Mashkoura school. I remember the grief, crying, and insistence to provide us with all we might need before we travel after every mid-year or summer vacations, including flour and Gella[9] dried plates in order to find fuel to bake the bread. Distance separating our village in Gharbia governorate’s countryside and Quweisna was not more than 70 kilo meters… you can imagine how Egyptians feel thousands of miles away from their country despite having planes, phones, internet, and other technology-facilitating tools available.

We shall talk later about the rest of the greatest calamity aspects.

Translated into English by: Dalia Elnaggar

This article was published in Al Ahram newspaper on February 18, 2016.

To see the Arabic article, go to:

http://www.ahram.org/NewsQ/477359.aspx

#alahram#ahmed_elgammal#our_egyptian_immune_system#Egyptians_mirgrating_to_oil_rich_Arab_countries#alkafil#Sadat#Mubarak

---

[1] Infitah: (Arabic: إنفتاح) the Arabic word for the open door policy adopted by President Sadat in the years following 1973 October war. (Source: Wikipedia)

[2] Al-Kafil: (Arabic: الكفيل) is a legal system emerged in Gulf Arab countries when oil started to appear there prompting millions of job opportunities in those countries. According to this system, al-Makfoul (Arabic: المكفول) – the foreigner looking for a job – is put under the responsibility of al-Kafil – the business owner or the oil-country citizen responsible for “importing” those workers. As per this system, al-Makfoul is not allowed to leave the country or leave his job to another unless his Kafil approves this, the matter that is regarded as some kind of slavery performed under the pretext of securing the country against the incoming laboring force.

[3] Share’ el-Haram: (Arabic: شارع الهرم, or el-Haram street) a street in Cairo famous for its night clubs.

[4] Foul and Falafel: (Arabic: فول وفلافل) are two very popular food in Egypt made from beans but in different styles which are affordable for the poor. The writer here means some used to remind the Egyptians with these two dishes in specific in a hint at their current poverty.

[5] Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal: (Arabic:أحمد بن حنبل ‎) was a Muslim scholar and theologian. He is considered the founder of the Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence. Ibn Hanbal is known for his restricted opinions and religious jurisdictions in Islam.

[6] Aḥmad ibn Taymiyyah (Arabic: ابن تيمية) known as Ibn Taymiyyah (22 January 1263 - 26 September 1328) was an Islamic scholar, theologian and logician. He lived during the troubled times of the Mongol invasions, much of the time in Damascus. He was a member of the school founded by Ahmad ibn Hanbal and is considered by his followers, along with Ibn Qudamah, as one of the two most significant proponents of Hanbalism. Ibn Taymiyyah sought the return of Sunni Islam to what he viewed as earlier interpretations of the Qur'an and the Sunnah.(source: Wikipedia)

[7] Muhammad ibn ʿAbdel-Wahhab: (Arabic: محمد بن عبد الوهاب‎; 1703 – 22 June 1792) was a Sunni Muslim preacher and scholar from Nejd in central Arabia who claimed to "purify" Islam by returning it to what, he believed, were the original principles of that religion as the salaf, that is first three generations of Muslims, understood it. (Source: Wikipedia)

[8] Quweisna: (Arabic: قويسنا) is a city in Monufia Governorate, Egypt. It has an area of 49009 feddans (210 square kilometers). (Source: Wikipedia)

[9] Gella (Arabic: جلة) or Dung cakes, made from the by-products of animal husbandry, are traditionally used as fuel for making food in a domestic hearth. They are made by hand by village women and are traditionally made from cow or buffalo dung. One dung cake of an average size gives 2100 kJ worth of energy. This bio-fuel has been used for a long time primarily of two reasons 1. for easy disposal of cow dung 2. easily available and cheap fuel. After burning the residue ash is used to wash hands since it becomes germs free as bi-product of burning and sprinkled also on crops to get rid of certain pests. (Source: Wikipedia)