My Role Models

Dedication .. Optimism .. Faith

This will be a short post, As I explained about the list of my role models before. But I would like to look at it from general angel this time. What makes a man living today or lived in the past as one of my role models? what is very common among them all? It is basically three things as I perceive, Faith, Optimism, and Dedication (D.O.F.) or "DOF Role" as I like to call it myslef.

For a man to be an immortal role model, I think he must have a faith in something or some idea or ideology, another essential aspect, he must be optimist toward his believed-in case, idea or dream. A man with no guts will never achieve realistic steps toward achieving his goals, and guts needs hope in hearts. The third factor is to be dedicated, to commit his life to achieve his faith. Important condition here is he commits himself only to a fair case, and to a fair and moral means to materialize such a faith, this excludes men like "Ben Ladin" and "Zawahry" from the list forever. They do have dedication, optimism and faith. However, their faith is falsehood itself, and their means are immoral. Now let us test my men with the DOF role, and see who fits in,

Ali ibn Abi Talib. One might think I must be a Shiite as I start my role models with Imam "Ali ibn Abit Talib" and not with Muhammad (pbuh). I do not find it a shame surely to be a Shiite. However, I am not and can never be. I am a man who refuses any power of clergy and this sets me apart from both Christianity and Shiite Islam. I do not list Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) among my role models as he was not an ordinary man. He is a man with divine inspiration. Therefore, despite of his grand achievements and glorious deeds, we can not equate him to ordinary leaders. Imam Ali was the 4th Caliph, and the one who had to fight the two poles of falsehood in humankind life. The power and wealth seekers on one pole, represented by "Muawia ibn Abi Sofian" and "Amro ibn Al-Aas", who were supported by all power and wealth seekers in the Caliphate, those who did not tolerate the justice and idealism of Ali. On the other pole, "Khawarej" stood as the blind fanaticism that turns any faith into an agony against its nature. Imam Ali had the faith and dedication to fight both until his honorable martyrdom while praying. He did not possess much optimism by the end of his days, only as he knew with his vision that the era of righteousness had gone forever. However, he persisted on the principle to death.

Che Guevara had a faith in a free & communist Latin America, he was full of belief that his people can do it, and he died for it, this is the highest degree of dedication, and he committed no immoral acts never during his fight against USA. Freedom fighter he was, with no innocent civilian blood shed at all. I loved Che the revolutionary, the freedom fighter, the life lover and the romance dreamer.

Hassan Nasrallah, the man of controversy, he has a faith in free Lebanon and for the rights of his religious group, the Shiites in it. His smile always reflects his trust in God and his people. He is dedicated to this faith to an extent of offering his beloved son to martyr in the front lines. Did he commit any attacks on civilians? No, the man only dealt with military and militias in Israel. This sets him afar from the terrorism false accusations by USA and Israel together. I loved his solid attitude, leading his small militia, compared to the semi-men and semi-leaders allover the Arab league.

Mao Zedong has his famous faith in a communist China, wherein the mainland can offer the basic needs to every Chinese equally and based on the right of nationality. He was optimist facing the most difficult situations and betrayals. He lived for what he believed till the last moment. I loved Mao the inspirational leader, although I preferred him before taking the "divine" image he had in his late days.

Mohamed Ali Pasha has a faith in an independent Egypt under his monarchy, whereby he can compete with the Ottoman Sultans themselves. He had all the optimism and dedication to achieve his vision. He is the non Egyptian man, to whom every Egyptian owe the foundation of modern Egypt. A question mark rises about his means, was it really moral? Considering his era and the nature of Mamelukes in Egypt, I will say yes, when a gang interferes with the future of a nation, the gang destiny does not matter much. The man committed a massacre against the Mamelukes militias. However, when we read the history of the era, we shall find out his options were too limited.

Gamal Abdel-Nasser had a faith in socialist Arab states, united and powerful, lived for it, and died for it after his effort in September 1970 that was too much for a man with pending myocardial infarction. The gang of two (Khamies and Baqary communists of Kafr El-Dawar) and the gang of six (Muslim Brotherhood leaders who conspired against him and arranged for his assassination trial in 1954, Saied Qotb and O'oda being included) who are used as critiques to Nasser's means, I see them much similar to Mamelukes in Muhammad Ali case. A gang hindering a nation to prosper must be set aside at any cost.

Charle De Gaulle stood alone dreaming for "Free France" while others accepted Nazi occupation of Paris and looked at it as a fact of life. He believed it will pass, and he lived for this and achieved it. Imagine if De Gaulle had abided to what is called today "Political Modesty" and "Practical Settelments", what would be the result? This man on his own, was the only French contribution to the glories of World War II. Without him, the French national dignity would have been highly degraded after the war

Martin Luther had a faith in Christianity before clergy drifting, he believed he can restore it, and he did, witness the millions of Protestant nowadays. This man was the one who liberated the western mind from the theological domination, releasing humanity to prosper in the renaissance. Later on, even the Roman Catholic Church was obliged to show some modesty and loosen its ironic hand; therefore it can keep some followers. To this man, I believe the world as we know today owes much

Galileo Galilee stood on his own in front of the Vatican power that was huge in his time, defended science and lived for it, some sees his apparent surrender later on as a defect, which I understand, but the ability to face death differs from a man to another and I can never call it immoral. The man was not strong enough to face death when exposed to it. However, this can never abolish his achievements and the horizons he opened to humankind.

Muhammad Abdo with his developed faith in Islam that fits the modern lifestyle, he faced Azhar clergy and he lived for his faith. Some visualize the period he spent in France trying to find a window to talk to people as immoral, I do not share this opinion. He was rejected here so he found another menard to voice his ideology. I do not find it immoral. Moreover, I think I might do it oneday myself, so I am the last to blame his on this.

Averroes did much closed to what Luther and Abdo did and he even lived a more tough life due to his faith. He coupled logic and Islamic faith in his writings. Also he re-introduced the Aristotle philosophy back to Europe through his translations, interpretations and elaborations. He faced a potent attack from his intellectual opponent, "Abu Hamed Gazaly", the head of Asharites. This had never reduced his faith in his own Islamic philosophical approach to life.

M. Hassanien Haikal was one of the rare calibers who did not re-consider his ideology after Nasser deceased and Sadat came-over, till this moment he is standing in the same spot, defending what he believed in one day. Comparing him to "Tawfiq Hakim" in "Consciousness Regained" and to Anis Mansour in many of his books, we shall know the difference between the man of all ages, and the man of values. When he decided to stop writing, I can say I lost the last journalist, for whose articles I used to wait.

Mahamtma Gandhi, believed in one India despite three religions. Shall the Indians follow him? We should not have seen wars between India and Pakistan and tension with Bangladesh, like what is going-on since separation and until today. He resisted a great power, Great Britain in the glory of its utmost power, and he managed to educate his people how the elephant can be kneeled before a persistent peaceful kitten. Moreover, he did it all in peace, without blood shedding.

These are my men of honor, and my role models, and what links them all. Their faith, optimism and dedication. It is all about DOF