Religion

By Prof. Abdussamad Umar Jibia

The trending topic that every Nigerian is talking about is the execution of a young woman who insulted the personality of the Prophet of Islam (May peace be upon him). There is not too much I have to say on it. It is clear that Nigerian Muslims have spoken. We have a redline; no one would insult the Holy Prophet of Islam and get away with it. If democracy is all about what pleases the majority and protects the right of all, then there should be a law criminalizing any attack on the personality of our Holy Prophet with the appropriate punishment; unless some people feel it is part of their right to insult him. If, on the other hand, democracy is about being anti-Islam and crossing its redlines, then our problem has just begun.

The discussion on the Sokoto incident as I followed it on social media has revealed the level of hypocrisy in many of those who claim to be Muslims. Many commentators were not worried about the magnitude of the evil the woman committed but the way she was executed. Others would say, “She should be taken to a court of law”, etc., as if they are not the same people who would condemn any law that applies execution as the punishment for blasphemy.

Specifically, in a Whatsapp group I belong a particular person was so deep into his attack of the “perpetrators of the murder” that he went out of his way to be making other unsavory comments about Islam. The particular point I took him on was his association of slavery to Islam. To him it was the British who liberated slaves relying on a colonial document written by Lugard.

But he is not alone. A Northern writer with large followership among Northern elites once accused the Arabs of killing slaves because we don’t have African Arabs like we have African Americans. That, to the best of his imagination was because Arabs killed their slaves.

The danger is not about these people but the unsuspecting followers they can influence. Unfortunately, most social media followers are fascinated by beautiful grammar even if it is bereft of facts. In particular, I have always wanted to respond to the claim on the killing of African slaves by the Arabs. With my discussion with another Northerner I decided to write a few lines on this.

It is well known that it is not Islam that came with slavery. Islam came and met the practice of enslaving fellow humans well established not only in Arabia but in all other societies. The methods of acquiring slaves and the way they were treated were devoid of sanity in most societies. These methods were practiced before Islam came and continued to be practiced after the coming of Islam in societies where the impact of Islam was yet to be felt. Sadly, even in some Muslim societies where ignorance or selfish desires prevailed some of these methods were practiced.

One way slaves were acquired was through war. In war, the victor could treat the vanquished enemy the way he liked. They could simply kill them, torture them to death, put them under their control as soldiers or otherwise make them slaves.

Another way slaves were made was through guardianship. A father or grandfather had absolute authority over his offspring. He could sell or gift them away as slaves; could lend him or her to someone else, or exchange him or her with another’s son or daughter. A community chief could sell out one or more of his subjects as slaves.

Invasion was another method. In many cases, strong communities invaded weaker ones, enslaved all men, women and children and sold them. This is chiefly how many Africans found their way to other continents as slaves.

Other methods include pawning, tribute, etc. depending on the geographical location and time in history.

Islam restricted the means of enslavement to only one method. Jihad. The Qur’anic meaning of the word is maximum struggle in spreading and defending the message of Islam. As long as falsehood is confronting the truth and evil is opposing good and mischief and its doers are standing in the way of reform, Islam does not allow Muslims to seclude themselves with rituals and look the other way. Just like a Muslim is enjoined to give Zakah that symbolizes kindness, he is enjoined to perform another form of worship that symbolizes opposing evil. That is Jihad. Of course this write-up is not about Jihad.

When Jihad becomes an armed struggle and prisoners are taken, a favour is done to them. Instead of being killed they are taken to Muslim community as slaves to serve as house helps, on the farm and help in other activities not beyond their ability.

Of course, it is not a rule in Islam that war captives must be enslaved. Captives can be released freely by the leader or after payment of ransom (Q47:4). Both of these happened during the lifetime of the Prophet (Salllahu alaihi wa sallam). Peculiarities of situation would always guide the leader. Islam also prohibits torturing the enemy or mutilating their body as practiced in other climes.

The rules of treating slaves are summarized in the following Hadith, quoted in parts, “They are your brothers and servants. Allah Has put them under you. Whosoever has his brother under him, he should feed him from what he eats and clothe him from the type of cloth he uses. Do not assign them to do any work that is too much for them. When you assign them, help them.” (Bukhari and Muslim reported it).

In addition to this golden rule of treating slaves, Islam introduced incentives for freeing slaves. For example, freeing a Muslim slave would emancipate the freer from hell fire on the Day of Judgment, according the Holy Prophet (May peace be upon him) himself. Kaffara (expiation) for incorrect breaking of fast, abrogation of oath, killing by mistake, zihar, etc. can be done by freeing of slaves, sometimes as the first option.

The claim that Arabs killed their slaves stems from ignorance of the above and the fact that intermarriage took place between Arabs and freed slaves. Even in modern day America or Europe, how many whites marry blacks? The former still look at the latter as slaves. The fact is that even among themselves, enslaved people in America were not legally allowed to marry until recently. One woman was allocated to several slaves to share, so she gave birth to another slave whose father did not matter. This beastly practice was unheard of in what our ‘liberals’ condemn as “puritan” Islamic societies.

The Shiite-brainwashed “intellectuals” probably forgot that in Islam a master can have intercourse with his female slave subject to laid down conditions and when she gives birth to any child she qualifies for her freedom and her child has full rights of a child. Some of the famous early generations of Muslim rulers were children of such slaves. A handy example is Abdurrahman bn Muawiya of Spain. The only maid slave the Holy Prophet had, Maria, was an African and she gave birth to his son Ibrahim. This is unheard of in western societies.

I challenge any believer in western civilization to cite an example where a white master married a slave.

Thus, slaves were integrated into the Arab/Muslim society. Not only were they integrated but many of them learned Islam and excelled in Islamic scholarship. The list is long but a few would suffice. Nafiu m. Abdullahi bn Umar, Ata’ bn Abi Rabah, Tawoos bn Kaisan, Yazid bn Abi Habeeb, Makhul, Maimoon, Addhahhak, Ibrahim Annakha’iy are some of the famous scholars of early Muslim generation who were originally slaves.

Coming down to recent history of West Africa, what confused many who get their knowledge of Islam from secondary sources is the conduct of some West African kings. For example, Kano and Zaria were Muslim states and war between them was far from being Jihad. People enslaved as a result of that war were enslaved unjustly and Allah will judge between them and those responsible for their enslavement.

Another wrong pre-colonial enslavement method was raiding of minor tribes by major tribes for the purpose of generating slaves. Such slaves were kept in the palaces of traditional rulers or sold out to foreigners. This is clearly outside what Islam permits, regardless of whether or not such major tribes are predominantly Muslim.

Sheikh Abubakar Gummi had very tough times trying to educate some traditional rulers who still kept such slaves in their palaces that such practice was unIslamic.

Most western-educated people in Muslim societies are misled by Shiite propaganda. It is well known that Shiites have deep animosity towards Arabs and Islam.

Prof Abdussamad Umar Jibia

By Zakariyya Shu’aib Adam

Blasphemy, especially against the Prophet, is the sacreligous utterances about anything related to his personality. Scholars have written books exclusively on the subject. Some of the books include Ar-risalah by Muhammad Ibn Suhnun; As-saarimul Maslool by Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah; As-saiful Maslool by Taqiyyuddeen As-subkiy; As-saiful Mash’hoor by Muhammad Ibn Al-qasim; Tanzeehul Anbiyaa by Jalaaluddeen As-suyutiy; Rashqus Sihaam by Ibn Tuloon and Tanbihul Hukkaam by Ibn Abideen.

Other scholars have, although not exclusively, mentioned the ruling of blasphemy in their books. Among them are Ibn Hazm in his famous Al-muhallaa and Al-qadhi Iyaad in his magnum opus As-shifaa. With this, we can conclude that the ruling for blasphemy is not new to the Islamic scholastic circle. In this article, by Allah’s will, I intend to critically dissect the concept of blasphemy and the Islamic ruling on mob justice.

Blasphemy, as Ibn Taymiyyah defined it, is to use words that show a lack of respect and are perceived by all people, regardless of their beliefs, to be profane, exactly like cursing, condemnation, etc. Islamic scholars, as discussed in the aforementioned books, unanimously agreed that blasphemy leads to apostasy, and that anyone that is found guilty of it should be executed. The basis for their consensus is evidences from the Qur’an and Hadith.

Allah says: “Indeed, those who abuse Allah and His Messenger – Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment. And those who harm believing men and believing women for [something] other than what they have earned have certainly born upon themselves a slander and manifest sin.” (Qur’an 33:57-58).
In these verses, as stated by the scholars, Allah (SWT) differentiates affronting Allah or His Messenger from maligning believing men and women; the former deserves curse and humiliating torment in the worldly life and in the Hereafter, while the latter is a calumny and manifest sin. The curse in the world means execution. There are other Qur’anic verses that support the execution of a blasphemer. These are Qur’an 5:33, Qur’an 9:61 and Qur’an 33:60-61.

Secondly, there are instances in the lifetime of the Messanger (SAW) that he ordered the execution of blasphemers against him. Bukhari and Muslim narrated in their authentic books from Jabir Ibn Abdillah that Allah’s Messenger (SAW) said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’ab Ibn Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad Ibn Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Messenger (SAW)! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet (SAW) said, “Yes,” Muhammad Ibn Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Ka’ab). “The Prophet (SAW) said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad Ibn Maslama went to Ka’ab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.” On that, Ka’ab said, “By Allah, you will get tired of him!…”

This hadith clearly shows that the Messenger (SAW) ordered for the execution of Ka’ab for his blasphemy against Allah and His Apostle. Ka’ab used his considerable poetic talent to compose and recite derogatory verses against the Prophet (SAW), his companions and the honour of Muslim women. When he heard about the outcome of the battle of Badr, he wrote poems satirizing the Prophet (SAW), eulogizing the Quraysh and enticing them for a war against the Muslims. That was the reason the Prophet (SAW) ordered for his execution.

Abu Dawud (4361), Nasa’i in Al-mujtaba (4070), Tabarani (11/351) and Hakim (4/394) narrated from Ibn Abbaas that: “A blind man had a female slave who had born him a child who reviled the Prophet (SAW) and disparaged him, and he told her not to do that but she did not stop, and he rebuked her but she paid no heed. One night she started to disparage and revile the Prophet (SAW), so he took a dagger and put it in her stomach and pressed on it and killed her. The next morning, mention of that was made to the Prophet (SAW) and he assembled the people and said: “I adjure by Allah the man who did this to stand up.”

The blind man stood up and came through the people, trembling, and he came and sat before the Prophet (SAW). He said: O Messenger of Allah, I am the one who did it. She used to revile you and disparage you, and I told her not to do it but she did not stop, and I rebuked her but she paid no heed. I have two sons from her who are like two pearls, and she was good to me. Last night she started to revile you and disparage you, and I took a dagger and placed it on her stomach and I pressed on it until I killed her. The Prophet (SAW) said: “Bear witness that no retaliation is due for her blood.”

Furthermore, it is based on the above evidences that the Islamic scholars made an Ijmaa’ (consensus) that a blasphemer is to be killed, regardless of his belief (I.e whether a Muslim, a Dhimmi (non-Muslim living in an Islamic state with legal protection) or any other non-Muslim). The Islamic nation cannot unanimously agree on an error, as is narrated in numerous Hadiths. Tirmidhi (2167) narrated from Ibn Umar that the Prophet (SAW) said, “Allah will not cause my ummah to agree on falsehood; the hand of Allah is with the Jamaa‘ah (the main body of the Muslims)”.

In As-shifaa’, Al-qadhi Iyaad listed the names of some of the scholars that made the above mentioned consensus. They include great companions like Abubakar As-siddiq and other pious predecessors such as Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, Imam As-shafi’i, Imam Ahmad, Layth Ibn Sa’ad, Ishaq Ibn Rahuyah, Sufyan At-thauriy, Al-auzaa’iy, Imam Abu Yusuf and Muhammad As-shaibaniy among others. At the end, he said, “We do not know of anyone among the scholars and pious predecessors that disagree with the execution as a punishment for blasphemy.”

In As-sarimul Maslool, Ibn Taymiyyah quoted Ahmad Ibn Hanbal saying, “Whoever affronts the Prophet (SAW) or defames him (whether a Muslim or a non-Muslim) should be executed.” Ishaq Ibn Rahuyah maintained, “Muslims agree unanimously that whoever blasphemes against Allah or His Messenger (SAW) is deemed a disbeliever due to this blasphemy, even if he recognizes what has been revealed by Allah.”

Imam Muhammad Ibn Suhnun said, “There is a unanimous agreement among the Muslims on the apostasy of a blasphemer against the Prophet (SAW) and the one that defames him. His punishment is execution and whoever doubts his apostasy is also an apostate.” Imam Al-khattabiy said: “I do not know of anyone among the Muslims that is doubtful of an execution as a punishment for a blasphemer.”
Ibn Qudamah wrote, “Whoever blasphemes against Allah shall be a disbeliever, whether he is kidding or serious.”

Ibn Taymiyah said, “Blasphemy against Allah or His Messenger (SAW) is an act that nullifies faith, both outwardly and inwardly, whether the blasphemer knows that this is haram (forbidden), deems it halal (permissible), or is not aware of the ruling at all.” As-san’aani in Subulus-salaam, while commenting on the Hadith of the blind man, said: “This report indicates that the one who reviles the Prophet (SAW) is to be executed and no blood money is to be paid for him; if he is a Muslim his reviling of him (SAW) is apostasy for which he deserves to be executed.”

The only part in which the scholars differ is whether or not the blasphemer would be asked to repent. Some of them uphold that if a Muslim commits blasphemy, he becomes an  apostate and would therefore be killed without asking him to repent. While others uphold a contrary opinion. They said he would be asked to repent. If he fails to repent, then he would be killed. Regarding a non-Muslim who commits blasphemy, some of the scholars said that he would be punished by death. However, if he converts and becomes a devout Muslim, the punishment is nullified as it happened with Ka’ab Ibn Zuhayr.

However, as eager as we are to see the ruling of Allah being applied on the blasphemer, it is instructive to reemphasize that Islam does not allow its adherents to take law into their hands. To be specific, the execution of a blasphemer is an exclusive responsibility of constituted authorities. This is the ruling established in Islamic law and recorded by scholars in their books.

Al-imam Al-qurtubiy, a highly-acclaimed Malikiyyah jurist, who authored one of the most widely known exegesis of the Noble Qur’an, said in the interpretation of verse 178 of Suratul Baqarah: “There is no dispute among the scholars that qisaas (retaliatory punishments) such as execution cannot be carried out except by those in authority who are obliged to carry out the qisaas and carry out hadd punishments etc, because Allah has addressed the command regarding qisaas to all the Muslims, and it is not possible for all the Muslims to get together to carry out the qisaas, which is why they appoint a leader who may represent them in carrying out the qisaas and hadd punishments.”

Ibnu Rushd, another respected Malikiyyah jurist, said in his book Bidayatul Mujtahid: “With regard to the one who should carry out this punishment – i.e, the hadd punishment for drinking alcohol – they agreed that the ruler should carry it out, and that applies to all the hadd punishments.” This ruling is also affirmed by scholars of Hanbaliyyah school. Ibnu Muflih, a Hanbaliyyah jurist, in his book Al-Furoo, said: “It is haraam for anyone to carry out a hadd punishment except the ruler or his deputy.”

In his widely celebrated magnum opus Al-mugniy, Ibnu Qudamah said: “It is not permissible for anyone to carry out execution except in the presence of a leader.” He also said, “This ruling is supported by jurists that are affiliated to Shafi’i school of thought.” Imamul Haramain Al-juwainiy, who is a Shafi’iyyah jurist, said in his book Al-giyaathiy: “Regarding hadd punishments, how they are established and when to execute them are recorded in the books of Islamic jurisprudence. And all are exclusive responsibilities of the leader. It is not permissible for anyone, including the families of the victims, to carry out such executions without the consent of the leader.”

The aforementioned submissions by scholars of different schools of thought are the ruling on mob justice. It’s not allowed in Islam. Although in Nigeria, most mob justices related to blasphemy are as a result of negligence from the constituted authorities. They never execute blasphemers that have been tried before a court of law and found guilty. That is why some analysts refer to this type of mob justice as frontier justice, where extrajudicial punishment that is motivated by the nonexistence of law and order or dissatisfaction with justice is carried out. To prevent its future occurrence, the authorities concerned must always do the needful and execute court order.

Lastly, in every religion and culture, there are redlines that aren’t supposed to be crossed. In Islam, one of the redlines that cannot and should never be approached, let alone be crossed, is the dignity of our Noble Prophet. That is why whenever an uncultured bigot blasphemed against the Prophet, the entire Muslim Ummah react. Muslims love and regard the Prophet more than anything. They can sacrifice their lives in his defense. You can’t insult our Prophet and expect us to be tolerant. We cannot tolerate an abuse to the personality of our Noble Prophet.

*Conclusively, I pledge to sacrifice my parents, my life and whatever I posses in defense of the Noble Prophet (SAW).*

By Dr Bala Muhammad

His name is Muhammad. And all of us, now One and a Half Billion Souls and counting, love him beyond compare. In fact, we so love him that others just can’t understand or comprehend. They don’t get it, and they can’t get it, for they know not this kind of love. We love him more than we love our parents; indeed we love him more than we love ourselves! The moment we hear his name invoked, we immediately add: “May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.” O we so love him, Muhammad!

He left us more than 14 centuries ago, yet it is as if he daily lives amongst us. There is no day that passes without his name being called, and praised, by each one of us. To us, he is inviolable, unjokable. He is leave-alonable. We don’t joke about him. To us, Muhammad the Prophet is a serious matter. In anything concerning him, we are, we swear by Allah, fanatical, fundamental, impatient. We love him; you don’t, and you can’t understand. So we say to them, just leave him alone.

We are so many, and O how we so love him! A billion-plus loves! Yet some people who don’t understand us, or our Prophet, think they can just play with his name, and his person, and his dignity, and hide under ‘freedom of expression’ or similar Western jargon. We say to unto them: just leave him alone! May our fathers and our mothers be a ransom for you, O Muhammad! O Rasulullah!

They have done it again! Filmmakers and cartoonists and writers who think they can make fun of our Prophet and go scot-free should know this fact: you may abuse a Muslim’s father, you may abuse a Muslim’s mother, you may abuse everyone abusable, but never poke fun or abuse our noble Prophet Muhammad. On that, we are fanatical, we are fundamental; end of discussion. May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon you O Rasulullah!

But we should all remember that the forefathers of these insensitive filmmakers and cartoonists and writers were not like them. They acknowledged and praised our Prophet as the greatest person to have ever lived. His name Muhammad, indeed, means praiseworthy. SallalLahuala Muhammad.
Michael H. Hart in his book on ratings of people who contributed towards the benefit and upliftment of Mankind chose Muhammad at the top of his list of the Greatest Hundred. He writes: “My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels.” (The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History: New York, 1978).

George Bernard Shaw, the great philosopher, said about the Prophet: “He must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it much needed peace and happiness.” (The Genuine Islam, Singapore, Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936).

Historian John William Draper in his well-known work, ‘A History of the Intellectual Development of Europe’, observes: “Four years after the death of Emperor Justinian, was born at Makkah, in Arabia, the man who, of all men, has exercised the greatest influence upon the human race.”

Dr Annie Besant in her book, ‘The Life and Teachings of Muhammad’ (Madras, 1932) says: “It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great Prophet of Arabia, who knows how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel whenever I re-read them, a new wave of admiration, a new sense of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher.”

David George Hogarth (1862-1927) English archaeologist, author, and keeper of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford says of Prophet Muhammad:

“Serious or trivial, his daily behaviour has instituted a canon which millions observe this day with conscious mimicry. No one regarded by any section of the human race as a Perfect Man has been imitated so minutely. The conduct of the Founder of Christianity has not so governed the ordinary life of His followers. Moreover, no Founder of a religion has been left on so solitary an eminence as the Muslim Apostle.” (Arabia, Oxford, 1922).

Edward Gibbon (1737-1794), considered the greatest British historian of his time, says of our Prophet: “The greatest success of Muhammad’s life was affected by sheer moral force without the stroke of a sword.” (History of the Saracen Empire, London, 1870). Gibbon adds elsewhere: “His (i.e. Muhammad’s) memory was capacious and retentive, his wit easy and social, his imagination sublime, his judgment clear, rapid and decisive. He possessed the courage of both thought and action.” (History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, London, 1838, vol.5, p. 335).

Professor Keith L. Moore, one of the world’s most prominent scientists in the fields of anatomy and embryology, and author of the book ‘The Developing Human,’ which has been translated into eight languages, was in Saudi Arabia in 1981 during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam. Professor Moore said: “It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the Qur’an about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to Muhammad from God because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that Muhammad must have been a messenger of God.” SallalLahuala Muhammad.

Thomas Carlyle, in ‘Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History,’ (1840) says: “The lies (i.e. Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only.”

Mahatma Gandhi, speaking on the character of Muhammad said: “I wanted to know the best of one who holds today’s undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind…I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These, and not the sword, carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume of the Prophet’s biography, I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life.” (Young India).

Alphonse de Lamartine (1790-1869), the French poet and statesman, says of our Master: “Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire; that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?” (Translated from Histoire de la Turquie, Paris, 1854, vol. II).

They will continue to provoke us by mocking our Rasul. But we should be ahead of them by being circumspect in our protestations. We must remember that Allah says “Wa la taziruwaziratuwizraukhra”. The consequence of this blasphemy is a burden on those filmmakers, cartoonists and writers. And they will bear it, in sha Allah.

Please tell all of them: just leave our Prophet alone!

This article was written by BALA MUHAMMAD and first published by Weekly Trust (Nigeria) on Saturday, 22 September 2012. It’s reproduced here with the author’s permission.

• News Desk

The Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) has condemned the killing in Sokoto of a student, Deborah Samuel, over an allegation of blasphemy.

In a statement released by its director, Professor Ishaq Akintola, on Friday, 13^th May 2022, MURIC described the killing as outrageous, illegal and unlawful.

The full statement reads :

“A female student of the Shehu Shagari College of Education, Sokoto, Deborah Samuel, was on Thursday killed for allegedly blaspheming against the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). The blaspheme statement was reportedly posted on a WhatsApp group. She was asked to withdraw the statement but she allegedly refused to do so. The school’s security unit and police were overwhelmed by the crowd when they tried to rescue her.

“MURIC strongly condemns this killing and all others that have been happening in Nigeria in recent times. Those aggrieved by the student’s post should have reported her to the security agencies or to the Shariah police, the Hizbah. Mob killing is archaic and bohemian. It belongs to the Stone Age. Nobody has the right to take the law into his hands.

“The Glorious Qur’an compares the killing of a single person to the killing of the whole of humanity just as it compares the saving of life to the rescue of all homo sapiens (Qur’an 5:32) In like manner, Prophet Muhammad (SAW) himself condemned all acts of violence and advocated peaceful conduct at all times.

“But this incident should not be condemned in isolation. The recent trend whereby Nigerians now freely shed their brother’s blood should be condemned by all patriots. In this regard, we also strongly denounce the killing of several Northern Muslims in the South East in the past few months.

“We frown at the recent burning last week of a truck fully loaded with cows in the South East as well as the killing of many Muslims of South-East origin by their Igbo brothers in the same South East. We note with keen interest that Muslims in the North did not retaliate when these killings were taking place.

“MURIC calls on the Sokoto Police Command to do everything within its power to get to the bottom of yesterday’s killing of the female student over alleged blasphemy. We appeal to members of the public to remain calm and law-abiding. Nigerians should allow the police to carry out their investigations on the case. The Sokoto Police Command has started well as it already has two suspects in detention for the killing.

“Meanwhile we remind Nigerians to always exercise restraint on matters of religion. Free speech is no longer free if it amounts to religious provocation. Even the European Court has ruled that the utterance of derisive statements against the prophet of any religion is a crime.

“We affirm clearly, categorically and unequivocally that there is a symbiotic relationship between provocation, violence and extremism. While MURIC will not condone extremism and violence, the anatomy of terrorism is becoming clearer day by day. We must all ponder over the causal-effect theory. Violence and terrorism are mere symptoms. The real disease is a provocation. Violence and terrorism are mere smoke. Provocation is the fire and we all know that there is no smoke without fire.

“We, therefore, appeal to Nigerians to desist from insulting, deriding or abusing the prophets of other religions. Muslims should continue to respect Jesus (peace be upon him) whom the Christians hold very dear. In the same vein, Christians should avoid casting aspersion on the person of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). We have experienced enough religious crises in the land.

By Sheikh Prof. Muhammad Babangida Muhammad

The growing trend of conflicting religious verdicts being issued these days by the Ulama in Nigeria is alarming. That they differ and argue on issues is not in itself the problem. In fact, they should differ in order to provide the people with a variety of acceptable perspectives of the secondary teachings of Islam. At the same time, there should be no cause for Muslims to differ on the fundamentals of Islam.

The problem lies in how the Ulama express the differences in their understanding and interpretation of texts. Some Ulama resort to launching abusive missiles and questioning the integrity and sincerity of the other scholar who differs from them, which is out of tune with the ethics of differences (adab al khilaf). They create an unnecessary atmosphere of distrust, tension and ill-feeling, accompanied by intolerance, lack of moderation and self-centredness.

The institution of scholarship in Nigeria is gradually being abused by intruders who lack the basic prerequisites of scholarship. Some vacuum seems to exist somewhere as people fail to recognise who genuinely is a Malam and who is ‘ pro-Malan’ – for wealth or worldly-inspired. An era of Ulamisation (crowning the ignorant as Ulama) of the ordinary uninformed people seems to be taking over as religious verdicts are issued by ‘Awaam al nas’, disrespecting the precise position of qualified Ulama.

We are in a state of ‘Kowa Malam’- everyone claiming Islamic knowledge. There are the ‘social media Malams’ and the ‘Market and roadside Malams’. We have the ‘Amulet-vendor Malams’, ‘political-opportunists Malams’ and all sets of quasi-Malams who wriggle in themselves and slug it out with the real Malams in the religious and socio-political space. They corrupt the religious environment, promote confusion and chaos and ultimately cause societal decay. Something needs to be done to stop these people and keep them away altogether.

We all recall that Maitatsine and later Boko Haram emerged out of such a situation and, fuelled with ignorance, developed into a monstrous extremist ideology. The current race by the uninformed to take over the religious garb and platform might be a fallout from the wrong perception of freedom provided by democracy or societal disequilibrium and failure or the incapability of the real Ulama to provide the needed leadership and guidance in response to emerging contemporary issues. In any case, it is an unacceptable trend that must be arrested.

In most Islamic countries, an established Central Committee of Leading Ulama (Hai’at Kibar al Ulama) or a Fatwa Council collectively deliberates on any issue requiring a verdict. Uncertified people who issue fatwa are sanctioned. Within the Fatwa Council, the majority opinion is upheld, while the minority view of any scholar is respectfully appended, but the majority view remains the official position. It is probably high time we considered instituting such a body in Nigeria, which will consist of capable and qualified Ulama who would be saddled with the responsibility of issuing fatwa based on well-informed opinion.

The Fatwa Committee of the National Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs could be expanded to include various religious tendencies within Sunni Islam. Alternatively, a university-based Islamic research Centre may constitute a broad-based non-sectarian Fatwa body (Majma’u al Buhuth wal Fatawy al Ilmiyyah). Only the most qualified (not necessarily certificate holders) would be admitted into the body. This will go a long way in arresting the seemingly uncontrollable trend of ‘Ulamitism’ or false claim to Islamic knowledge.

Only recently, during this blessed month of Ramadan, an unnecessary controversy on Inter-religious Dialogue (IRD) was blown out of proportion. Before you know it, accusations and counter-accusations were flying all around. Some ‘Ulama’ issued fatwa literally declaring those involved in IRD and any form of a committee consisting of people of other religions as apostates. Fatwa without strings or borders. A dangerous trend indeed. Something is definitely wrong somewhere, and we need to trace our steps back to do the right things in order to right the wrongs.

Let’s begin from here. First, establish an Intra- Religious Dialogue Committee, which would promote mutual respect, understanding and tolerance amongst the Ulama and, by extension, a broader atmosphere of peace and unity amongst the Muslims. It should not be an assembly of the argumentative elements who strive in controversies. If we fail to appreciate the value and significance of intra-religious dialogue and positive engagement with one another, Inter-religious dialogue will indeed appear out of order.

In a multi-religious society like Nigeria, engagement with people of other faiths for some common good is essential. Therefore, we should use sound knowledge, wisdom, sincerity and consideration of the general good of the Muslims (al Maslahah al ‘ammah) to determine any engagement of Muslims with other faiths. Ulama who are well-grounded in knowledge should be given a chance to guide how to pursue such engagement.

At the intrafaith level, the example of the Coalition of Ulama in Kano is a commendable initiative. Ulama belonging to various inclinations, came together under a Forum to pursue and tackle shared problems related to insecurity, drug abuse, child theft and trafficking, issues of IDPs and disaster-stricken communities, orphans and related problems. The Coalition established an NGO, NUSAID Humanitarian Initiative, which since 2016 has been extending assistance and community services to the needy members of the community, including the IDPs in Borno. The Kano initiative may serve as a model for Ulama in other states to adopt to promote Muslim unity, peace and mutual assistance.

May this piece not be a source of yet another controversy. Ameen, Ya Allah.

Sheikh Prof. Muhammad Babangida Muhammad is the Director Center for Quranic Studies BUK & National Amir, National Islamic Center (Ummah Movement).

By Uzair Adam Imam

Zakat-ul-Fitr, referred to as Zakkar Fidda Kai in Hausa, as reported in Bukhari and Muslim, is a means of forgiveness to a Muslim for his minor sins during Ramadan, Sheikh Abubakar Ayuba Tangimi said.

Zakat-ul-Fitr, also Zakatur Riqab or Zakatul Abdan, is an obligatory charity for the break of the fast at the end of the month of Ramadan.

Sheikh Tangimi, who explained this to our reporter in an interview, said that woe awaits anyone who deliberately refuses to give this alms.

He said, “Zakat-ul-Fitr is an obligatory alms to any Muslim, man, woman, boy or girl. However, in the case of small kids and slaves, the responsibility of giving the alms is on their parents or masters. 

Zakatul Fitr, when and how to be given 

“Many traditional hadiths, as reported by Abdullahi Bin Umar, Abu Sa’idul Khudri and many of the Prophet’s companions in Bukhari and Muslim, disclosed that the alms is given in the morning before the Eid.

“Some Islamic scholars posited that it could also be given two days before the Eid day. The wisdom behind this is for the poor to have what to eat before going for the Eid prayer, the act that believes to put a smile on the face of the person who lacks.

“Abdullahi Bin Umar said the Prophet (peace be upon him) taught them to give one mud of date, wheat, cikwi, a food made with milk, as their alms. 

The Sheikh also called on the general public to give the alms from the kind of food they consume, adding that “it is entirely wrong to give maize whereas you cook rice.”

Woe betide anyone who deliberately refused to give the arm

Tangimi reiterated that the alms are meant to seek forgiveness for our shortcoming deeds during Ramadan. 

He said, “those people will be punished on the day of judgement for their refusal to give the alms.”

By Malam Hassan Mohammed

You see, I have a lot of issues with Mallam Dahiru Bauchi when it comes to the sighting of the moon for the commencement and ending of Ramadan. The man has been, in the past, a deliberate source of unnecessary controversy and in the process dividing the Muslim Ummah. But we have to be fair to him this time. He did not ask anyone to break his fast, eat today and also observe Eid-el-Fitr. He did not contradict the Sultan or anyone in the position of authority to make the pronouncement of the termination of Ramadan whether locally or internationally.

In fact, listening to the conversation (the audio is almost everywhere) you’ll hear that even after serious pressure from some unscrupulous dudes who were discussing with him, the man was careful to refer to the Sultan. He was clear. He initially said that though it can be accepted that the moon may have been sighted in Doma (Nasarawa) and Abuja if as they claimed there are witnesses. But he could not tell people not to end Ramadan or that they could not if they chose to. Or call them people who knowingly violate injunctions.

However, he (1) specifically asked them if the Sultan is aware or had announced, which took the dubious guys aback because they didn’t expect that push back from him. And (2) when he got tired of their pressure he pushed back by saying just wait till next tomorrow, regardless of the claims that the moon has been sighted in Doma, Abuja and Niger Republic. If you can’t listen to the all 3:42 minutes, you may fast-forward to minute 1:33 where and when he asked if the Sultan has been informed and instructed that he must be informed so he will announce. And also 3:38 where he said he will not lead Eid, so they should wait.

The man simply ceded the right to announce the ending of the fasting to the constituted authority by saying, “If you are in Nigeria, you have no justification for breaking your fast unless you have not heard (the instruction of the Sultan). For that, we will not observe Eid. We are going to wait till next tomorrow. They should wait”.

These guys that were with the revered Sheikh and many others are used to the usual rebellion that they thought the Sheikh will simply agree and announce that the fasting should end and Eid to be observed today. To be fair to him, especially this time around, he didn’t. This is because one of our major problems with respect to moon sighting is that there are people who consider not accepting to commence the Ramadan fasting or ending it with the rest of Ummah/everyone, this is an act of rebellion. It is to them, a continuation of the denominational war. So, irrespective of the religious injunction and obligations, and also irrespective of their own beliefs as at the time of moon sighting, they must reject whatever the authorities say.

That this year’s Ramadan, the commencement and ending of the fasting, is not controversial as it usually is, is a serious letdown for them. If you pay serious mind to the nearly 4 minutes discussion, you’ll hear that Sheikh Bauchi was probing as he was also careful not to reject the idea that those who said they have sighted the moon completely have done so, but to also tell them that while he is not saying they lied, he emphasized that he desperately tried to avoid that, but he will not end his own Ramadan. That’s the wisdom of elders and of the learned, not the exuberance of young people who rebel in unnecessary and unhelpful controversy.

This shows that Sheikh is always at loggerheads with authorities over when to commence the Ramadan fasting because of his philosophical conviction and not because of ideological differences. So, if you end your Ramadan fasting just chest it. Don’t lie against the old man. Don’t use him. Just say that you just feel like it. It’s just about you and you, and nothing else. Try using another excuse for why you endured 29 days of fasting but cannot take just one more day. It is you, and you. Not Sheikh Dahiru!

Hassan Mohammed is a social analyst. He writes from Kaduna, Nigeria.

By Ahmad Deedat Zakari

Haramain Sharifain reports on Saturday, April 30, that the crescent, which marks the end of the Holy Month of Ramadhan, was not sighted in Saudi Arabia and, consequently, the Eid Al Fitri celebration in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is Monday, May 2, 2022.

“The Crescent of Shawwal 1443 was NOT SEEN today. Subsequently, the month of Ramadhan will complete 30 days tomorrow and Monday, 2nd May 2022 will be the day of Eid Al Fitri”. They reported.

The astronomers of the Kingdom have reportedly been on the search for the crescent since the early hours of today before concluding.

By Abdullahi D. Hassan

Nigeria is a nation with Hydra lineament. For a long time, its narratives became a phenomenon in scholarship and startle those that are not abreast of Nigeria’s convoluted history, ethnic chauvinism, election rigging, religious intolerance, cankerworm corruption and heartless politicians with megalomaniac habits, driving pleasure in shady governance to submerge their citizens into gross poverty.

The sarcastic ‘Giant of Africa’ falls into a harrowing moment. Nearly all of the architecture of Nigeria is profoundly rotten, and its stench is sprinkled with endemic corruption, lack of patriotism, decay in moral values, transparent nepotism, and killing is crossbones across the regions. From the fanatic massacres, notably by Boko Haram and bandits.

After three decades of military tyrants and juntas, 1999 turned new dawn for Nigeria. The nation shifted from military dictatorship to civilian government. Policymakers, political pundits, and intelligentsia ascertain Nigeria’s prospect is on the trajectory of advancement. Albeit, the ultra development in multifaceted sectors. Within a decade of pseudo-civilian government, the country’s destiny is trapped in quicksand. Due to ingrained corruption by the three arms of government: executive, legislature and judiciary.

Nonetheless, the dominant ethnic groups, Hausa from the North, a Muslim enclave and fraction of Christian, Igbo from the South, a rife of Christian and Yoruba from the West, shared hybridity of Islam and Christianity. Those ethnic cleavages race for Tour de France in tribal wars, hegemonic politics, religious politics and domineering politics according to the dictum of language, faith and region. Amid the wanton rascality done by the “Zombie”, like Fela, the Afrobeat legend branded soldiers.

Thus, the failure of the so-called democratic government unbridled the ‘darkest History of Nigeria’. A typical Hausa accuses Igbo of the putsch and eliminating Northern leaders, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Prime Minister and Sir Ahmadu Bello, a remarkable figure to Northerners. In 1966 a bloody coup was orchestrated by Igbo officers. Igbo talk of persecution and pogrom against their race in the North. Among the factors that emanate the unfortunate Nigerian-Biafran war spanned between July 6, 1967, to January 15, 1970.

Furthermore, from the 1999 political dispensation to the current predicament, the country challenges twig onto gloom-ridden forms; politicians turned into confidence tricksters, parliament became the ‘House of Deception’, religious institutions metamorphosed into a commercial enterprise, journalists supplanted into puppets controlled by the connected few and higher learning academic reposition to woman’s assault domain. The former American ambassador, John Campbell, from 2004 to 2007, described politicians in his book Nigeria Dancing On The Brink “the civilian political class behaved as badly and in much the same way as its military predecessor”.

The most populous black nation on earth is about to be a Banana Republic. In the Northern part of the country, hardly a day passes, from sunrise to sunset, without disheartening news breaking in mainstream media. Boko Haram, ISWAP insurgents or bandits kidnap and maim innocent people. The terrorist marauders hold certain villages in the North-West. Similarly, hundreds of public schools are shut down for fear of abduction.

The most recurring questions preoccupying my faculty: Who will lead Nigeria to the Promised Land? When will Nigeria be exempt from being a nepotistic state to an excellent land, with leaders handling the nation based on the principles of democracy? What are the required features to alter the awful chronicles of Nigeria? Why are we divided in a discourse of religious sentiment, ethnic oblique and regional dominance rather than championing the furtherance of Nigeria?

Surreally, Nigeria is the most religious nation on earth! But in reality, it is the most irreligious in the world. The proliferation of mosques and churches crisscross the length and breadth of Nigeria. The anointed citizens were sponsored to Mecca and Jerusalem for pilgrimage from the government treasury. Despite public schools turning into rubble, pupils sat on ruined floors. Pregnant women wallowed in a dearth of medical personnel and drugs to survive early death in rural areas. Another outstanding hypocrisy of the Abrahamic faith’s leadership in Nigeria, the schools were built with the alms of followers. Such schools are barricades for the common man to enrol his children. Their subtle aim was to propagate adulterate gospel and split the masses based on emblems of Christianity and Islam.

As Chinua Achebe says in one of his pieces of literature, The Trouble with Nigeria, “There is nothing basically wrong with the Nigerian land or climate or water or air or anything else. The Nigerian problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leader to the rise to the responsibility, to challenge of personal example which is the hallmark of true leadership”. The book was written 38 years ago. The quote portrayed the decay of systematic dwindling in leadership style patterns. Although there was relative peace in the country at the time, we could travel thousands of miles from Lagos to Borno with confidence. In the absence of the highwaymen and any other obstruction.

Nevertheless, the dethroned Emir of Kano, erstwhile Governor of Nigeria’s Central Bank, Khalifah Mahammed Sanusi II. He mentioned in his impressive Tedx speech entitled Overcoming The Fear of Vested Interest, “the world’s largest producers of crude oil that do not refine its own petroleum products”. In addition, the reverend Economist, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, former minister of Finance and Director General of World Trade Organization. As stated in her book Fighting Corruption is Dangerous. She recounts how billions of dollars were siphoned in a fraud called oil subsidy intervention. Mrs Iweala’s doggedness toward deceitful oil cartels and markets led to the kidnapping of her aged mother. Those two paradigm exegeses gave a sinister view of modern-day Nigeria from the spectrum of the clandestine elite.

The absurdities mentioned above triggered the Igbo to quest for a breakaway from Nigeria and rekindle the Republic of Biafra under the tutelage of Nnamdi Kanu, the ringleader of the proscribed Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB). The Yoruba seek Oduduwa nation, as some Northerners dream of an Islamic state to govern their affairs based on Shari’a. Those juxtapositions defined the nationhood of Nigeria as a conduit of dissolution.

By Shafi’i Sheikh Jr.

Reading through posts, articles, and comments, I think I now know why our debates on almajiri/bara will never end in Northern Nigeria. And as long as it remains a debate, it will continue to ravage every fabric of our society. 

Despite being the very foundation of today’s society, a debate is no longer a discourse among people with contrasting arguments using facts, logic, and evidence to exchange views and/or ideas. 

I have realised that once a debate revolves around  Almajiri and begging, people of certain sects see it as an opportunity to bash another sect. In defence, the others also find a way to come back. In doing so, the purpose of debate suffers the consequences, and debating parties end up being more determined and confused than they were before it began.

Until debating parties start arming themselves with facts, figures, logic, and most importantly, open minds to accept or exchange ideas, the problem will always win. Parties will always return confused, and the solution to the menace of “Bara” will never be found. 

At this juncture, I will like to point out that there is a fine distinction between Almajiri, which has its roots in the Arabic word “Al-Muhajirun” and loosely translates to “Migrators”, and “Bara”, which means begging for alms from people (often done as a means of sustenance). And until our people can differentiate between the two, ours will be a confused and misguided society. 

Perhaps, further clarification will disabuse the minds of debaters on the wrong usage of the two concepts. 

The former is a term that was first used in Islamic history to refer to those who migrated with the Prophet (S.A.W) from Makkah to Medina (Ogunkan and David Victor, 2011). The term was later ‘Hausanized’ to Almajirai, which today refers to seekers of knowledge who migrate from their comfort zones to concentrate only on acquiring Islamic knowledge. 

Now, some greedy Mallams (Islamic teachers) laid a fertile ground for this misconception to thrive by taking away small children who can not shoulder the bulk of their responsibilities to major towns and cities to acquire Islamic knowledge. And because neither the mallams nor the children can shoulder their responsibilities, especially in cities where life itself is expensive, the children engage in begging and other menial jobs, the proceeds of which the mallams extort from them hence, ditching the primary reason they left home. 

This gave birth to “Bara” (begging), which many non-Muslims and even some Muslims alike erroneously ascribe to Islam. To people with such minds, they believe Islam is associated with begging and encourages its practice by declaring almsgiving (Zakat) to be so weighty that it is a pillar of the religion. Also, it is believed that the five pillars of Islam are dependent on each other. Therefore, neglecting the pillar of Zakat (almsgiving) will render the others fall and ruin a person’s faith. 

This they justify by quoting, among other things, chapter 76, verse 9 of the Holy Qur’an, which says:

“And who give food – however great be their own want of it – unto the needy; and the orphan, and the captive (saying in their hearts) “We feed you for the sake of God alone: we desire no recompense from you, nor thanks.”

Yes, Islam encourages the giving of alms. There is no doubt about that. However, it also frowns on taking begging (Bara) to be a means of livelihood. Qabisah ibn Mukhariq reported: I was under debt, so I came to the Messenger of Allah, peace, and blessings be upon him, and I asked him about it. The Prophet said, 

“Wait until we receive charity, then we will order it to be given to you.” Then the Prophet said, “O Qabisah, begging is not lawful except for one of three cases: a man who is in heavy debt, so asking others is permissible for him until he pays it, after which he must stop; a man whose property is destroyed by a calamity, so asking is permissible for him until he can support himself; and a man who is afflicted by poverty attested to by three astute members of his people, so asking is permissible for him until he can support himself. O Qabisah, besides these three, begging is forbidden, and the beggar consumes what is forbidden.” (Sahih Muslim 1044)

Hakim Ibn Hizam, a poor companion of the Prophet, also went to beg the Prophet three times. The Prophet on each occasion granted his request, but on a subsequent occasion, the Prophet discouraged him from begging, telling him that “the upper hand is better than the lower hand”. The Prophet admonished his followers, saying:

“I swear by Allah that it is better for one of you to take his rope and gather firewood on his back than to come to a man and beg him whether he gives or refuses to give.”

To sum it all up, one may be right to opine that “Almajiranci” in its truest form is a system of Islamic education that should be practised and encouraged while “Bara is not only unIslamic but also a menace that should be eradicated.

The above suggests that no relationship exists between Islam and begging. Therefore, the menace can only be attributed to socio-cultural and socio-economic realities in the region and, to a larger extent, the country. Consequently, it is now left to Islamic scholars, religious leaders, and stakeholders to embark on an enlightenment campaign to raise awareness and educate the general populace on the difference between the two practices. 

May Allah guide us, amin.

Shafi’i Sheikh Jr. writes from Jos and can reach via talk2sheikh.esq@gmail.com.