_Thought and Divorce between de Bono and the Imam and the art of crafting judgements_ _(The people of Sudan for the people of Sudan is the safety valve)_ Capt. Mohammed Hassan

Date: October 18, 2026

Thought is not stored information, but as Foucault says, it is the dynamics of ideas. Thought cannot be rigid:

– If ideas are rigid, there is no thought

– And the society whose ideas do not move, its members divorce each other, a major irrevocable divorce or divorce by three…

And here we enter the most dangerous manifestation of thought in our lives to end accord with divorce, and here the question emerges:

– Why did the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, describe divorce as “the most hateful of permissible things”?

And the answer is because it is the meeting of two opposites in one moment, for it is

– Legally permissible when accord becomes impossible

– Emotionally hateful, not liked

So divorce is not only a legal failure, but it is an intellectual failure. It is a moment

– In which the system of ideas declares its bankruptcy.

– The dynamics of ideas between the two parties stopped, so the dynamics of hearts stopped.

And here comes the question, why do ideas stop?

And the answer comes because balanced thought is linked to two states that have no third:

_1. The mental state:

– I think that this person resembles me, is close to me, belongs to me.

_2. The emotional state:

– I feel that I belong to him.

If the mental and emotional belonging is disturbed, the dynamics of ideas is cut off, communication dies, and divorce comes.

So every political dispute in its origin is a project of intellectual divorce that must be controlled, and from here we praise philosophy that it has put for us a universal rule that says

– Like is attracted to like

And it is the rule of belonging that made the poet Elia Abu Madi stand before the sea and ask his eternal question:

> Am I, O sea, from you?

> Did your waves smile from the volcano of my sadness?

Elia was not asking about the sea, he was asking about belonging.

– Am I part of this universe or a stranger to it?

Every successful political thought is an attempt to answer Elia’s question about belonging as a mechanism and identity. So if the citizen feels that he

– Is from the state, he is attracted to it.

– Is a stranger to it, he separates from it, even if he lives in its middle.

Separation does not begin with weapons, but begins with the question of belonging:

– I am not from you.

This emotional state has objective mental justifications that the science of mechanics of ideas must bring with reason (the most divided thing among people) for the science of tricks with mechanisms for solving problems.

First, solving problems by reversing the question which all people know by their instinct.

It is told that a man had a stubborn wife, if he asked her for a cold juice, she brought him hot tea out of stubbornness.

So what did he do? He did not divorce her. But he learned _the trick of reversing the question_.

He started if he wanted juice, he asked for tea. So she would bring him juice

This is a simple trick, but it is the peak of realistic political thought.

He did not change his wife, but he changed the form of his question.

Many of our politicians ask for juice in the form of an order, so tea comes to them, then they curse the people and do not think of reversing the question, and here the saying becomes true: in the dark night the full moon is missed, to show the role of scholars as adornment.

Second, the role of the Imam and solving disputes by changing time:

It is narrated that a man came to Imam Abu Hanifa

And said: I swore to my wife while she was angry with triple divorce, so I said to her: “You are divorced if you do not talk to me until the muezzin calls to prayer.” And she is now silent out of stubbornness, and divorce will occur at the adhan.

If we applied vertical legal thinking, we would say:

– Wait for the adhan and divorce occurs.

But Abu Hanifa used _creative thinking_. He did not argue with the wife, nor did he blame the man. But he called one of his aides and said to him: “Call to prayer now.”

The muezzin called to prayer before the time of adhan. When the woman heard the adhan, she spoke. So the condition of divorce fell.

The Imam did not solve the problem within its time, but changed the time of the problem.

– The problem was saying: speech must be before the adhan.

So he brought the adhan closer by ending the time in which divorce occurs.

This is wise political thought in its most beautiful form. It does not solve dispute with dispute, but by creating an exit with inspiration and good understanding.

De Bono and the Imam in crafting judgements:

What Abu Hanifa did a thousand years ago was renewed by Edward de Bono in the twentieth century through distinguishing between

First, vertical thinking:

And it means sequential logical thinking. Premise and result.

The husband says: If you do not talk until the adhan, you are divorced.

The adhan has not yet come, she did not talk, therefore divorce occurs logically, but it destroys the family.

Second, horizontal thinking:

It is creative thinking that jumps outside the chain to ask:

– What if we bring the adhan forward?

– What if we change the angle of view?

De Bono says:

In order to make an agreement, you must break the mold through

Creative verbal manipulation techniques

_Verbal Manipulation Techniques

In order to solve any dispute, play with the idea as follows:

– Use it for other than what it was put for: Adhan is not only for prayer, but to end disputes.

– Adopt the other’s idea: Adopt the wife’s stubbornness and do not fight it.

– Modify: The time of adhan.

– Magnify and minify: Magnify the value of the word, minimize the value of stubbornness.

– Substitute the juice question with the tea question.

– Rearrange: Do not say talk before divorce, but make speech what prevents divorce.

– Reverse the question

– Combine opposites in one formula: An adhan that saves a marriage.

And this is what de Bono calls the What if game?_

> What if we call to prayer now?

> What if I asked for tea instead of juice?

> What if the opponent resembles me

This game allows you to let the idea roll freely with imagination._

Do not judge the idea as soon as it is born, but let it roll. Why

In order to remove the mental block?

Every divorce, political or social, is a mental block that must be overcome with de Bono’s mechanisms that include the elements of the solution below:

_1. – Visualize the problem:_

– Do not think of it as words, but visualize it. The Imam visualized the problem: a man and a woman and between them an adhan that separates them, so he brought the adhan closer.

_2. Review it from many angles:

Look at it from

– The husband’s angle,

– The wife’s angle,

– The adhan itself angle.

*3. Maximize the use of association:

– Remember that like is attracted to like.

The wife does not act stubbornly because she hates you, but because she resembles you in stubbornness.

You are attracted to each other because you are similar. As Elia said:

> I am from you, O sea, and you are from me.

If you understand that your opponent resembles you, you are attracted to him instead of separating from him, and the words of Salah, Sudan is our country (O wise men of Sudan, unite) remain.

So politics is the art of preventing divorce for which everyone possesses its mechanisms with idea and instinct.

Our politics today needs

An early adhan by posing the question

– What if we call to prayer now before the big divorce occurs between us?

– What if we understood that, despite our stubbornness, we resemble each other, Sudan is our country and we are all brothers, and the people of Sudan for the people of Sudan remains the safety valve.