In the name of Allah the most merciful and peace be upon his prophet.
The concept of non-violence by professor Said Dajwdatز
For the professor, this concept is based on the Two Brothers’ attitude toward each other. One of them chose to kill his brother. The other adapted the word as a way to solve the problem.
The professor concluded immediately the concept of non-violence. He tried to convince people that it is the only legal way in any changes’ procedure and he generalized it. It means that all humans are obligated to adapt it in their conflicts any time. The violence is, thus, not acceptable any way. He didn’t expel neither the Algerian revolution in the 50s, nor the Palestine- Israelian conflict that began many years ago. He considered non-violence as the only legal way.
The 1st matter to be taken in consideration is that there are two types of conflict, the natural one and the synthetic one. The first one may take place between the followers of a religion raised in a given society and the oppressors who targeted them in their peace and safety. As it may take place between the colonizers and the people of a given society who want peace and freedom. However, the conflict which takes place between the people of the same society or the same nation is a synthetic one. Its bases are created by other intellectual circles which make use of the extremism. To make it easier, I can say that the conflict’s reasons are present only in its creators ‘mind. However the natural conflict justification lies in the difference between freedom and tyranny.
When we grasp the difference between the two kinds of conflict, we can grasp the concept of non-violence. Then we can say that the conflict between the Two Brothers is a synthetic one. Thus the violence was neither acceptable nor legal because it started in the same unit. This violence cut down all the family ties. When Cain killed his brother, he got out of this unit. This is what the Curan explained later. However, Abel understood the nature of the conflict and chose to be non-violent. The justification of this conflict was legal only for Satan who created it. For that Coin regretted what he did.
However, the conflict that took place between Mohammed (peace be upon him) and his companions and the unbelievers in Mecca (Badr and Ohod) is one example of the natural conflict. The reasons for that conflict were to prevent the danger of the unbelievers who formed a great danger for the companions in El Medina. Thus, the fight here became legal and justified as there were two different states. One of them formed a great danger for the other. In addition Mohammed (PBUH) didn’t adapt the violence in Mecca before El Hidjra because he belonged to that society and the fight was illegal. Especially that Mohammed was conscious about that. So, he was desirous to preserve that society’s characters.
Another example is the Algerian people who adapted the violence or the fight. That violence was justified by the presence of an independent society in all ways and another strange unity, the colonizers who formed a great danger for the first one. Thus, the violence became necessary to preserve the life necessities. The same thing can be seen in Palestine where there are two different nations. The first is independent. The second is an intruder. In this case, the fight is legal and justified.
However the conflicts that took place in the same unit are neither necessary nor legitimate because it constituted a great danger for this society’s concepts. The events that happened in Algeria in the 90s or in Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Syria are not an exception. Even the separation of Pakistan from India can be classified in the same way because it prevented the widespread of Islam. This reason justifies Professor Malek Ben Nabi’s sadness when the separation took place. And you may ask yourself about what happened in ‘Seffin’, the continuation of what happened in ‘El Djamel’ (the Camel) battle. Was it natural or synthetic conflict? The answer can be derived from the nature of the event. Thus, where can we find the justifications? Was it justified by the companions? The reasons can be found only in the enemies’ minds. For that it was called the Great Seduction. From here, it is preferable to say that it was a synthetic conflict.
However, the way we deal with it in our times is far from wisdom. Insulting and cursing are not ours. They are different from the messenger’s path. Would Fatima Bint Mohammed, Ali, Elhassan, El Hussein or all the family of Mohammed (PBUH) insult any one? Is it fair to insult the Messenger’s wife or his companions? Is it fair to insult each other? This way may only grow the conflict. Thus, we have to take care when we analyze that event.
Without doubt, the concept of non-violence is partial and not absolute. It is not likely to generalize it.
Indeed the verse N° 215 El Baqarah (the Cow): (And if it were not for Allah checking (some) people by means of others, the earth would have been corrupted, but Allah is full of bounty to the worlds) assures that the fight is legal to preserve the concepts of the same unit because the harm done to earth is as equal as the one done to human being. And I mention here that the violence or the fight is not absolute. It is legal only to prevent the harm done to both environment and human being. The verse N°8 El momtahinah (the Examined): (Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes- from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly) proves that the adaptation of the fight is limited. This verse shows that we can adapt the violence only in a given situation in one hand. However it is legal in the other hand.
If we use the conflict to solve the problem in a limited and partial way, it must come after trying to solve it peacefully. The verses N° 33-34 Fusilat show that: (And who is better in speech than one who invites to Allah and does righteousness and says, “Indeed, I am of the Muslims- And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel (evil) by that (deed) which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity (will become) as though he was a devoted friend).
You may see that before using violence, it is preferable to show the difference between Muslim society and others which is Islam. If you convince a Christian that his ideas are wrong, the disagreement will vanish and all people will be Muslims. However, if you don’t commit to Mohammed (PBUH) way and you fight unjustified wars based on insulting and cursing, the conflict will upgrade.
In the same verse, you will notice that being good and nice is preferable than being Muslim. In other words, you have to be a good Muslim. And you have to take in consideration that the word is the best way with the enemies. It comes before all other legal ways.
The professor Said Djawdet tried to bring a new concept in a good manner without doing any harm to anyone. And when he says:’ Democracy means worshipping God (Allah) because it means that no man must be worshipped.’ his words are justified for many reasons.
1- Democracy is not an independent system to be judged as corrupted.
2- Democracy is not a monopoly.
3- Democracy cannot be tied to another concept to define it.
4- Democracy is a human need by found by in Athena during the 5th century BC when man was looking for freedom instead of tyranny. Broccolis clarified that when he said: ‘Democratic states must look for equality between all people in front of the law and give the citizen his general freedom. Where is the injustice here?
5- Is the relation between Muslims and other nations especially the Christians a relation of hostility? The origin of this relation is that of testimony. Its base is the invitation to worshipping God (Allah) in a good way. Let’s read the verse N° 64 Imran’s family (EEL Imran): (Say,”O People of the Scripture, come to a word that is equitable between us and you- that we will not worship except Allah and not associate anything with Him and not take one another as lords instead of Allah. “But if they turn away, then say,” Bear witness that we are Muslims (submitting to Him).)
6- In the Messenger’s word:” The believer look for wisdom; It is his right where he finds it. Wisdom cannot be mixed with corrupted works. Thus, its benefit comes from the profit related to the reform. As it is said, wisdom means to be conscious of what must be done? How and when? This cannot be done by anyone. It is given only to the wise men.
In short, we understand Djawdet’s ideas in a good way as the healthy environment make it easier for the Muslim to deliver the message of worshipping God (Allah) to others and minimize the tyranny.
Perfect is God, mistake is human.
Bachir Djabelkhayr
9 June 2016
