“O people of hypocrisy! This land is yours, and the disgrace within it is of your own making. I merely wandered through and presented a scant sample of its contents for display. If you find it ugly and disfigured, do not blame me; instead, blame yourselves. Criticise the origin, not the mirror reflecting it. O hypocrites! This narrative belongs to you. Let he who is without hypocrisy cast the first stone at me.”

Youssef Al-Sibaei, “The Land of Hypocrisy”

The history of hypocrisy in Arab culture is longstanding, deeply rooted, and has extensive branches.

The mediaeval Fatimid Caliph of Egypt Al-Muizz li-Din Allah was famously praised by the poet Ibn Hani in a poem that begins, “You will what you desire, not as fate wills... Rule, for you are the one, the subduer. It is as if you are the Prophet Muhammad... And as if your supporters are the Ansar. Behold, Egypt became more enviable to other regions the moment you became its guardian.”

The Caliph did not object to these verses; he probably took pleasure in them, which likely encouraged the poet to further extol the ruler with God-like attributes, saying in his praise, “The horizons were honoured by your presence, and it was you who apportioned the provisions, the life spans, and the ages.”

These verses are the origins of a well-known Egyptian saying. When people heard this poem that excessively flattered Al-Muizz and elevated his status to that of a deity, they sarcastically commented that “the beginning of the poem is disbelief.” This phrase then evolved into a proverb that continues to be used to this day, often without knowledge of its true origin.

The poetry of the poet Al-Nabigha Al-Dhubyani similarly set a high standard for hypocrisy, surpassing another poet’s lines to the Caliph Al-Rashid, “as if you are a messenger after the Messenger,” and description of the Abbasid Caliph Al-Mutawakkil as “the shadow of God extended between Him and His creation,” as well as other lines of excessive praise sung for members of the Umayyad Dynasty.

Compared to these, Al-Nabigha Al-Dhubyani’s verses praising Al-Numan Abu Qabus, the King of Al-Hira, appear less exaggerated, despite their political hyperbole. “You are the sun, and the kings are stars... When you rise, none of them are seen,” they said.

In a more recent era, the 20th-century “Prince of Poets” Ahmed Shawki addressed the then prince, later king, Farouk as “the smartest plant of the valley and a glimpse of the forefathers and ancestors.”

These poems can be seen as expressing hypocrisy – defined as the act of speaking or behaving in a way contrary to one’s true beliefs or feelings. A hypocrite is someone who outwardly supports something while internally disagreeing with it. It involves pretending to be something one is not, often for praise, moral standing, personal gain, or out of fear of oppression and harm.

By observing those around us, we can effortlessly recognise various hypocrites.

Political hypocrisy refers to the behaviour of political leaders or parties that express beliefs or values they do not genuinely hold or practise. It also includes an exaggerated display of loyalty to power, driven either by fear of oppression or in pursuit of personal benefit. This phenomenon is common and detrimental in the realm of politics, eroding trust in political institutions and casting doubt on the legitimacy of election results. Its cumulative negative impact on society leads to widespread disappointment and public discontent.

Social hypocrisy, on the other hand, is the discrepancy between an individual’s outward behaviour and their true beliefs or values. It highlights a contradiction between the image or actions an individual presents to society and what they truly experience or believe in private. Prominent forms of social hypocrisy include conforming to the crowd and feigning devoutness and piety, while simultaneously acting in ways that contradict religious and moral teachings.

While social hypocrisy is as old as humanity itself, our contemporary crisis stems from its widespread acceptance to the extent that it is now considered a lifestyle, the language of an era, and a defining slogan of the times. In some nations, it has developed into a catastrophic state characterised by blatant lying, the obfuscation of facts, distortion of truth, and misinterpretation of words out of context.

We are also witnessing phenomena closely related to hypocrisy, such as the prevalence of gossip and the repetition of unverified statements that become perceived truths. This shifts the societal focus from seeing with the eye to seeing with the ear. With the proliferation of social media in all its forms, spreading such falsehoods has become an art and a science, with its own set of objectives.

FORM AND FUNCTION: The distinction between politeness as a form of etiquette and hypocrisy can sometimes be indistinct; excessive flattery, for example, can verge on a lesser form of hypocrisy.

The most deplorable hypocrites are those who, unable to be virtuous in truth, resort to a semblance of truth. Thus, the two-faced become hypocrites in social interactions, liars and deceivers in their relationships and principles, and inconsistent in their stances and emotions.

If physics teaches us that pressure leads to explosions, sociology also suggests that pressure breeds hypocrisy. There are varying degrees of proficiency in hypocrisy, and the most dangerous hypocrites are those whose deceit goes unnoticed because they lie with conviction. Three signs characterise such individuals: they lie when they speak, betray when they are trusted, and break their promises.

The writer Mufid Fawzi once wrote about the July 1952 Revolution and former president Gamal Abdel-Nasser by noting Nasser’s straightforwardness in personal life and his divergence from party alignments in his revolutionary role.

With the advent of military rule, the Revolutionary Command Council members that had led the revolution experimented with their approach to people. However, their early categorisation of people into those who were “loyal” and those who were “competent” fostered an environment of hypocrisy and also legitimised it.

Preference was given to loyalty over competence, with the competent often labelled as lacking “revolutionary sincerity.” This forced some capable individuals to resort to deceit and perhaps hypocrisy just to make a living. Fawzi observed that this marked the emergence and entrenchment of deceitful practices, turning subservience into a survival strategy.

In his book Sleepers Without Rest, author Tharwat Abaza argues that hypocrisy, flattery, and the death of conscience are primary maladies afflicting any society. Journalist Wagih Wahba also wrote an insightful article in the newspaper Al-Masry Al-Youm in 2018 about hypocrisy, referencing a work by Fikri Abaza Pasha written over a century ago titled “Philosophy of Hypocrisy” which satirically critiques the prevalence of hypocrisy in Egyptian society.

Abaza humorously suggested that hypocrisy is an art form and that hypocrites possess their own philosophy, using biting sarcasm to highlight the societal pervasiveness of hypocrisy.

He highlighted, for instance, the hypocrisy of the boss, often a foolish, ignorant, and absurd figure in the workplace, whom employees nevertheless often feel compelled to praise undeservedly, applaud at ceremonies, and offer tokens of loyalty despite feeling none.

Abaza ultimately identified what he considered to be “the most dangerous kind of hypocrisy” as political hypocrisy. “Political hypocrisy, in all countries of the world and not just in Egypt, is a blight on every sector and the progenitor of all other hypocrisies. It leads the various factions, sects, and companies of hypocrisy.”

Reflecting on Abaza’s view that in his time hypocrisy was a “wrecking tool,” one wonders about the state of hypocrisy today. Modern hypocrites have an arguably easier task, as they are able to exploit diminished understanding among the less informed. Hypocrisy now wears many masks, including those of “sycophants,” as described by the poet Nizar Qabbani, or “panegyrists and chorus.”

The Egyptian author Tawfiq Al-Hakim in his book Under the Sun of Thought argued that electoral hypocrisy could be reduced by setting up an “election contracting company.” This would involve a candidate in an election paying the company for campaign services, from organising speakers and erecting banners to hosting banquets, exaggerating the non-existent qualities of the candidate, distorting achievements, and unjustly tarnishing the reputation of competitors.

Yasser Thabet in his book The Making of a Tyrant illustrates this phenomenon. “What the historical hypocrite says to today’s ruler had already been said to yesterday’s ruler. As soon as the latter lost power, whether through death, murder, or overthrow, the hypocrite would vilify or disown him, waiting for the opportune moment to abandon a sinking ship.”

The most despicable hypocrites are those who flit between political eras, regardless of their differences, always prepared for any change. I have personally witnessed many who once sought favour with the former Mubarak regime in Egypt who have since done the same with each successive government.

May God protect Egypt from the harm of hypocrites and the nuisances of the obsequious and grant us the wisdom to recognise, expose, and shield ourselves from their malevolence.

A poet warns: “Do not be swayed by the public’s cheers for the nation / For the people in secret differ from those in the public.” If someone credits you with a virtue you lack, be wary; they might also falsely ascribe to you a vice that you do not possess.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 28 November, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly