Dr Abdallah Usman Gadon-Kaya

By Ismail Hashim Abubakar

A few days ago, while at our university campus here in Rabat, I heard shouts outside the premises resembling a public demonstration – something quite unusual and often carried out orderly in Morocco, without the slightest chance of being hijacked by hoodlums. I could not understand what people were saying because they spoke in Darija, the local, broken Arabic dialect spoken colloquially in Morocco. I tend to pick some sentences in normal circumstances, especially when spoken to me directly.

So, I asked my Moroccan friend what was going on, and he answered that people were chanting pro-Palestinian songs and shouting anti-Israeli slogans. I found that interesting given the special place of Jews in Morocco, who, according to Aomar Boum, the author of Memories of Absence:  How Muslims Remember Jews in Morocco (and translated into Arabic as “Yahud al-Maghrib wa Hadith al-Dhakirah” by Khalid Saghir) used to number more than 200, 000 before the creation of Israel and up tp around 1950s, but in post-independence Morocco, their number slashed to less than 5000, as they engaged in gradual exodus to their newfound state. But I noticed that the small protest was officially unwelcome when suddenly security guards of the university closed its gates and prevented the intrusion of protesters, who were mostly, if not entirely,  students of the university. I would only come to know the exact cause of the protest a few minutes later when, together with my Moroccan friend, we were encouraged and directed by some officials of the university to follow a way that led us to one beautified public lecture hall to participate in a conference, about which we were neither aware nor essentially prepared to attend.

I went straight to the front row in the hall and found a seat where I could watch and listen with much attention, while my friend preferred to sit at the back.  It quickly dawned on me that the conference themed “al-Diyanat al-Samawiyah Hamilat Risalat al-Salam” (Heavenly Religions Carrying the Message of Peace) was, besides, a few delegates from a Moroccan council of Islamic knowledge, hosting the Archbishop of Rabat, Cardinal Cristobal Lopez Romero and a Jewish Rabbi, Rabbin Mardekhai Chriqui, coming all the way from Jerusalem.

I started enjoying the proceeding when the MC made her introduction in Arabic and coalesced it with the famous verse of Surat al-Hujurat upholding the spirit of humanity and emphasizing racial and ethnic diversity as a distinct human property. And I did not bother much when she switched to French, which I assumed was the translation of what she said in Arabic, though I do not understand. When I looked at my phone, as the audience awaited the Jewish speaker to take over the stage, I just clicked on my WhatsApp and saw my friend’s message, telling me that he had gone out and we might meet in the mosque. I would have also gone out, but I was lured to stay to listen to the heavily bearded Israeli Rabbi, perhaps because that was my first time to see a real, self-identifying Jew physically and, in fact, a religious authority for that matter. When the man took over the podium, he spoke briefly in Darija, which I luckily understood as he minced his words slowly as if lamenting that he had to do that before switching to French. In the Darija, the Rabbi just excused that although he spent about 40 years in Morocco, he was not good at Arabic, so he informed his audience that he would prefer to switch to French, which he then did without any ado. At this juncture, I also decided to exit, without knowing if his speech would be interpreted in Arabic or not, and without bothering if too many speakers would speak in Arabic later. (A link to the conference is https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fY6eoZ6RObA&t=703s).

The most relevant part of this story is that there are indeed initiatives of interfaith dialogue worldwide, and this seems to have come to define interreligious relations among members of heavenly religions. But it is also a fact, as this anecdote demonstrates, that some actors in the interfaith program may be unwelcome, detested or rejected. This is precisely what reminds me to offer my humble thoughts on the current brouhaha about the interfaith issue, which has just become a topic of discussion, at least in northern Nigeria.

Perhaps a few people will disagree that the matter was dragged to the public domain by the removal of Shaykh Nuru Khalid, the chief Imam of the Friday mosque at Apo Legislators’ Quarters, less than two weeks ago. That happened over a sermon he delivered on the collapsing security situation in Nigeria. The Imam would have been hailed as a hero and a  champion that deserved accolades by the entire northern Muslims, but for his flirtation with the controversial phenomenon of interfaith. After all, distinguished scholars who have become a sort of religious canons in Nigeria like the late Shaykh Ja’far Mahmud Adam, the late Shaykh Muhammad Auwal Albani Zaria and the few ones alive like Shaykh Bello Yabo, Shaykh Murtala Asada Sokoto, Shaykh Idris Abdulaziz Bauchi and a few others are known to be showing impatience toward any untoward development that affects (affected) the poor Nigerian masses. These scholars have uttered bitter homilies and persistent tirades against governments over neglect of their primary responsibilities, particularly protecting lives and properties. Their prominence and public acceptance are partly glued to their decision to maintain a frugal life, remote from the corridors of power, hence capable of speaking truth to power, no matter whose ox is gored.

Naturally, by siding with the masses, Imam Nuru Khalid, who was psychologically martyred when fired from his job, should have been catapulted to such a prestigious clerical position. But in his case, this was impeded by his affiliation to interfaith organizations, often seen with Christian groups who, it seems, trust him as one of the symbols of moderation and tolerance, which may not be entirely untrue. The attention of the Muslim public was recently attracted by his unpopular view when in the aftermath of Abduljabbar Nasiru Kabara’s blasphemy saga and the ensuing arguments, Nuru Khalid voiced views that did not go well with the majority of enthusiasts, particularly on the shortlived misunderstanding between Prof Ibrahim Maqary and Dr Abdallah Gadon Kaya, two rising scholars in northern Nigeria.

At that time, Nuru Khalid was exposed as an advocate of interfaith, which in Hausa people wrongly render as wahdatul adyan (unification of religions), thanks to the widely circulated clips of Shaykh Albani, which popularized this view and mentioned Nuru Khalid as one of its agents. Hence, when Nuru Khalid was removed from his imam position, many commentators in the North merely clung to his affiliation to the interfaith group to further endorse, celebrate or justify his removal. But the mosque did not cite that as a cause for his sack or regard it as a fundamental problem of the Imam. However, Nuru Khalid’s sudden transformation as a hero in the milieu of Nigerian Christians, some of who might not have known him before, his public revelation about some international groups proposing to finance a mosque project for him and his more open hobnobbing with Christians have further thrown him into disrepute among Muslims, who still sense that this interfaith phenomenon is nothing but attempts to eclipse the teachings of Islam and collapse all religions into one new faith.

Another figure, also seen as a vital organ in the interfaith dialogue program, coincidentally also bearing the name Shaykh Nuru Lemu. Although sounding calm and soft-spoken unlike his namesake, Nura Lemu has taken it up to himself to clear what he thought are misconceptions being circulated about the interfaith dialogue initiative. In an audio clip shared via social media, Nuru Lemu claimed that interfaith is never a new invention nor devoid of a rudimentary religious basis, tracing it to the time of Prophet Muhammad when he designed a pact of peaceful coexistence with Jews as citizens of Madinah, and when he entered into a truce with Quraysh polytheists in the famous treaty that would be known as Hudabiyyah. Nuru could have cited the pre-Islamic treaty known as Hilf al-Fudul, which the Prophet participated in, and pledged to partake in a similar one if a need for that would arise. In fact, Nuru would have cited numerous Quranic verses upholding peaceful coexistence and dialogue between Muslims and members of other faiths, as can be discerned in chapters like Surat Ali-Imran, Surat al-Ma’idah, Surat al-Mumtahanah, etc. Since the second biggest religion after Islam in Nigeria is Christianity, it is interesting to make a case with the verse that says: 

“You shall certainly find the Jews and those who associate partners with Allah the most vehement of the people in enmity against those who believe, and you shall certainly find those who say, `We are Christians,’ the nearest in friendship towards those who believe. That is so because there are savants and monks amongst them and because they are not haughty ” [Surat al-Ma’idah verse 82].

Nuru Lemu, who is one of the heads of a mega religious and educational centre in Niger State, a neighbour to Abuja, where his sacked namesake is based, added that the dialogue would also concentrate on intra-Muslim relations. Thus, it will work out ways to dent and lessen the growing discords and animosities among Muslims occasioned by ideological rivalry and sectarian division. 

From this viewpoint, it is not hard to convince Muslims that the interfaith issue is a healthy, innocuous mission that Muslims would warmly welcome as a process of living up to the expectation of their scripture and broader Islamic vision.

However, it must be clarified that interfaith dialogue may have a  unique interpretation for Christians different from what Muslims may be ready to accept. Muslims do not appear prepared to assimilate the neo-liberal interpretation of Islam in such a way that they would compromise established Islamic values and fundamental teachings. Muslims may fail to implement specific injunctions of Islam based on human weakness, but they will hardly portray them as outmoded, irrelevant and unsuitable for the modern situation.

Christians, for instance, as evinced by the obsession of Mathew Kukah in his anti-Islam columns and public discourses, may conjure that interfaith dialogue would henceforth guarantee them an institutional legitimacy of marrying a Muslim woman, or it may make Muslims feel reluctant in missionary work while they (Christians) continue to win converts either directly by luring pockets of northern animists or through the new atheism phenomenon that trend mainly in the virtual world and cyberspace. Christians may conjecture that Muslim females, especially in Yorubaland, where the controversy keeps erupting, will relinquish their fundamental right of wearing hijab. In fact, many Christians would wrongly assume that interfaith dialogue, when successfully embraced, will encourage Muslims to keep mute on tragic instances befalling their fellows, such as the series of ethno-religious crises that broke out in places like Jos, Tafawa Balewa, Southern Kaduna, Lagos Sagamu, etc. 

In retrospect, to what extent are Nigerian Christians ready to accept Prophet Muhammad as God’s apostle just as Muslims uphold Jesus as Prophet as a fundamental condition of being a Muslim, without which one will be outside the fold of Islam? Or at least, are Nigerian Christians ready to reserve some respect for Prophet Muhammad so that they will shun all utterances and actions that may be considered blasphemous, which, needless to say, fuels religious crisis and further strains relations between Muslims and Christians? 

Nigerian Muslims would be very willing to uphold peace initiatives. Still, they will be very unlikely to accept any interfaith interpretation that warrants silence and reprisals in situations where their fellows are innocently attacked and persecuted anywhere on Nigerian soil. Muslims will invoke the same scripture which warns them not to ally with their enemies –  whoever they might be, which enjoins them not to give in to treachery, which cautions them on prospects of being bamboozled and hoodwinked by their enemies and which reminds them to be prepared for self-defence. Therefore, the interfaith initiative appears to be a neutral concept that can be applied positively or negatively and can be abused or misinterpreted disproportionately.  But, clearly, its application goes hand in hand with contexts and real-life experiences.

Ismail wrote from Rabat and can be reached via ismailiiit18@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Abdurrahman

Today, the Abuja Central Mosque Imam, Prof. Ibrahim Maqari, formally withdrew his lawsuit against Dr Abdallah Usman Gadon-Kaya, seeking N20 million in damages for defamation.

The Daily Reality reported on September 1, 2021, that Dr Gadon Kaya’s lawyers had yet to receive any formal request to withdraw the lawsuit as of then. Instead, according to Barrister Ibrahim Umar Abere, all they saw was Prof. Maqari’s viral video alleging that he was compelled to withdraw it.

However, after appearing at the court today (6/9/2021) to defend their client, they got an official request from Prof. Maqari’s lawyers wherein the plaintiff withdrew the lawsuit in pursuit of peace.

Reacting to the reports that the defendant and his lawyers were preparing to file a counterclaim, Barrister Abdulrazak Kabiru Kofa said they had also shelved that plan. He cited a Quranic verse that says, “Peace is best” (4:128).

Recall that on July 23, 2021, Dr Abdallah Uthman Gadon-Kaya delivered a Friday sermon in a mosque in Kano State. That sermon did not go down well with Prof. Ibrahim Maqari. Thus, he appeared in a video warning Dr Abdallah to withdraw parts of the statement or meet him in court, which he eventually did.

The court order showed the case was due for hearing on September 6, 2021. Maqari demanded that Gadon Kaya retract the said statements, publish an apology in national dailies or pay the N20 million in damages.

By Muhammad Abdurrahman

On July 23, 2021, Dr Abdallah Uthman Gadon-Kaya delivered a Friday sermon in one of the mosques he leads prayers in Kano State. That sermon did not go down well with Prof. Ibrahim Maqari. Thus, he appeared in a video threatening Dr Abdallah to withdraw parts of the statement, or they would meet in court. On July 26, Dr Abdallah received a letter from Prof. Maqari’s lawyers, giving him a 7-day ultimatum to withdraw those “remarks” or face legal action.

Many media organisations, including online newspapers, reported the recent development. But no media reported Dr Abdallah’s side of the story. So the Daily Reality (TDR) spoke with one of his lawyers, Ibrahim Umar Abere.

Barrister Abere told TDR that “We initially received a letter from Prof. Maqari stating that his lawyers were charging Dr Abdallah for defamation. And he was given seven days to withdraw his utterances against Prof. Maqari. If not, he must appear before the court to stand a trial.

“In the letter he sent, his lawyer said that he knew Dr Abdallah had not mentioned Prof. Maqari’s name, but it was clear to them that the things said were directly referring to Prof. Maqari. [This means they were the ones who said that to their client]. We wanted to reply to them instantly. All of a sudden, the Department of State Service (DSS) from Abuja intervened, asking the two parties to sheath their sword and that both parties should report to the DSS office in Kano for reconciliation.”

“We went to the DSS office. I was there; Dr Abdallah was there, and Prof. Maqari, represented by his lawyer, was there. They said that Dr Abdallah must go and withdraw his utterances publicly on his pulpit. We said this is impossible because what happened was that Prof. Maqari spoke, and Dr Abdallah also spoke in their sermons about the things happening. Though some clerics already asked Dr Abdallah to withdraw those remarks that some people felt were harsh. He did so and apologised to all and sundry.

“The DSS stated that they were aware Dr Abdallah had apologised to anybody who misunderstood his sermon or felt any pain. We were satisfied with that. For this, there’s no reason for Abdallah to go and apologise for the second time.

By Allah, this was what happened. The DSS personnel also reminded us that both Abdallah and Maqari have followers; therefore, unless handled cautiously, the issue might become a grave conflict. That was why we did not respond to their letter. Because we take what authority said seriously, that was how our sitting ended,” said Abere.

On August 24, a copy of a summons showing that Prof. Maqari sued Dr Abdallah in an Upper Sharia Court at Rijiyar Lemo, Kano State, trended on social media.

In reaction to that, Abere told TDR that “We have seen that. It means they disagreed with the reconciliation made by the DSS a few weeks ago. That was why they went to court. On hearing that, we had to call the DSS and told them that these people took the case to court despite the fact the dispute had been resolved. For this reason, we had replied to their letter for them to know our stand. We told them that we were also charging Maqari with defamation and other things.

“In our reply on July 30 to Prof. Maqari’s lawyers, Dr Abdallah unreservedly denied all the allegations forwarded by Prof. Maqari. We also gave the lawyers a 7-day ultimatum to withdraw some defamatory remarks in their demand letter. They call Dr Abdallah derogatory names such as liar, lawless, mischievous, reckless, heartless, penchant for hate speech, high-handed and threat to public peace. Otherwise, he [Prof. Maqari] too will face a legal battle,” he lamented.

Surprisingly, Prof. Maqari appeared in yet another video on Saturday, August 28 2021, telling the public that some prominent personalities in the country had intervened on the matter. Therefore he left the case in their hands. This means there would be no court case against Dr Abdallah.

“We have thoroughly prepared to appear before the court on September 6, 2021. All our defences and counter-charges or claims are ready. Then we suddenly saw Prof. Maqari again on social media in another video saying that some people talked to him and now the case is with them.

Does that mean he had withdrawn his charges against Dr Abdallah? If that is the case, that is now how it is done. For Prof. Maqari to withdraw his charges against Dr Abdallah, it should be in a written form. Until now, we have not received any official letter. We just heard about it on social media. People should not seriously regard what has been said on social media or in a video,” concluded barrister Abere.

By Dr Muhammad Sulaiman Abdullahi

Tension grew as Prof. Ibrahim Maqari intends to sue Dr Abdalla Usman Gadon-Kaya based on what he (or his lawyers) called defamation of his character. It may be recalled that the main point of divergence between the two was their different religious affiliations, where Prof. Maqari subscribes to Tijjaniya Sufism, and Dr Abdalla is an Izala/Sunni scholar who preaches mostly against the teachings of Prof. Maqari and Tijjaniyya order in general.

Initially, the blasphemous and heretic teachings of Abduljabbar Kabara were the genesis of their misunderstanding, where Dr Abdallah erroneously cited a wrong reference when referring to an Abuja Imam. It was clear that the coalition of Kano Ulama, under the chairmanship of Dr Sa’idu Dukawa, lodged their complaint against what they found to be lies and concoctions against Bukhari, Muslim, some Sahabas, which in turn, ridicule and subject the sanctity of the Prophet’s household into questioning. These immoral teachings have negatively impacted some irate and ignorant youth, where they mockingly copy and paste anything from the sacred books and ridiculously call it a lie.

In response to this unprecedented religious turmoil, the scholars in Kano unanimously agreed to form a coalition to defend Islam’s sanctity. Abduljabbar directly targets Dr Abdalla and other prominent Sunni scholars in Kano as his reference point and as one of those at the forefront of exposing his evil antics. These altercations have taken a long time without Prof. Maqari featuring in the scene with either support or opposition to what Kano Ulamas have been doing.

After the debate session, the Muslims were happy as Abduljabbar failed to defend his heretical teachings. However, while everyone was happy and waiting for a verdict from the government, suddenly Prof. Maqari used his position from the Abuja Central Mosque and said that he perceived a form of propaganda in all that has been happening in Kano concerning Abduljabbar’s case. Thus, Prof. Maqari breathed life to all the supporters of Abdujabbar who died and buried their heads in shame.

Maqari’s submission made Dr Abdalla go berserk and even erroneously, out of emotions, mentioned many instances where an Imam in Abuja, which may be Prof. Maqari, used his position to delve into this – what no Imam in the history of Abuja Mosque ever delved into before. He cited instances where such an Imam said many things and even went to the extent of claiming to own classified audios of phone calls where that Imam, who may be Prof. Maqari, wanted to intervene in cases related to blasphemy.

In response, Prof. Maqari, in what shows his humility and humbleness, as usual, posted a video where he debunked all that Dr Abdalla said and called for peace. Later, Dr Abdalla also posted another video, clearly apologizing and calling for peace. Most poor innocent followers of these famous sheikhs were happy that the matter was settled amicably, only to wake up with another fresh video of Prof. Maqari saying he would go to court. I think this will be one of the first court cases that will generate high tension, cause a lot of damage, and divert people’s attention from the real cause of the trouble. It will indeed cause more harm than expected.

The decision may not ordinarily be  Prof Maqari’s. It may be that some people who are angry with Dr Abdallah may feel that this is the right time for them to score their cheap religious point by dragging Prof. Maqari and Dr Abdalla into the ring. How I wish it were done differently. How I wish it were not for Prof. Maqari and Dr Abdalla. Whoever knows Prof. Maqari knows a humble, soft-spoken, modest and religious personality. The way he doffs his Dara on his head can make everyone think of the kindest people of Magrib who devote their lives to the services of Islam.

On the one hand, Prof. Maqari is a Professor of the Arabic language, an Islamic scholar who triples as an Imam in the national mosque in Nigeria. He maintains a very cordial relationship with many people to whom he subscribes to their ways of religiosity and those he differs with. However, Prof. Maqari is tactically but unmistakably anti-Izali with a complete Tijjaniya Sufi disposition. These, he has never hidden and is found in many of his teachings. There are so many instances where he displayed anti-Izala inferences in his teachings, and this is not in any way bad as much as he is sure of his contrary opinions. Such disagreements and oppositions have been there among scholars since an immemorial time.

On the other hand, Dr Abdalla Gadon Qaya is a vocal, vibrant and versatile Islamic scholar who is also an Imam in an Izala mosque; he also triples as a lecturer of Islamic Studies at Bayero University, Kano. He has been known to talk during his Friday sermons fiercely against anybody who blasphemes, jokes, maligns or tries to tarnish the image of Islam. In addition, he has been known as a social media influencer, where he uses his position to viciously flatten his rude opponents, most of whom are not well-versed in Islamic studies, but trying to change the religious narratives, in the name of modernity or what they call modern Islam.

Looking at the delicate situation we are in now, I, therefore, call on these two gladiators in the ring to not allow their followers to use them to divide the Ummah further. We have many problems ahead of us, and that of Abduljabbar is not yet settled. Against whom are we to set our faces now? This may lead to another sectarian violence.

To me, both are good people. They are religious scholars; they are role models in their own rights. They are not infallible. Both have erred. Prof. Maqari emotionally chose the wrong time for his submission, while Dr Abdallah emotionally said something which Prof. Maqari didn’t say. All these are not supposed to come from Islamic scholars. Don’t allow those you call ‘YanBoko to play with your intelligence.

Your respected position will be trampled upon if you allow that. Both of you have lawyers who can give the last drop of their blood in protecting each of you; let these lawyers go and defend the sanctity of the Prophet. What will you gain if you see another person’s downfall just because you feel he wrongs you or he belongs to a different sect? What if the table turns? It isn’t socio-morally a welcome development for Islamic scholars to go to court. And who even initiated the idea of going to court? Who wants to use these reputable Malamai as his case study?

Finally, I am not in any way against going to court to look for justice. On the contrary, I support it. But, I won’t support scholars who are the mirrors to the Ummah to do that. What if one of your disciples learns from you that taking matters to court is the last good thing? Whether we like it or not, this will have sectarian colouration, and it will sow more rift than ever. Therefore, I kindly advise Malam Maqari to stop the court procession for good silently. I also kindly remind Malam Abdalla, Prof Maqari and all other Islamic scholars to guard and weigh their utterances and actions before uttering or doing anything.

Both clerics should silently sit, own the issue, discuss it and shame the detractors. Both Prof. Maqari and Malam Abdalla emotionally erred, and they apologised. That should have been enough reason to close the case. Why turning around and going to court? Otherwise, this will lead to digging more and more resolved issues by those rude supporters who don’t have much love for the religion, and it will lead to further disunity. Don’t we have other vital problems to deal with, please? And if both parties are doing it for the sake of Allah, then why court? Only the evil FOLLOWERS may propel their teachers to court cases just for them to laugh and continue to enjoy their ignorance.

Muhammad Sulaiman Abdullahi, PhD., is a lecturer at the Department of Nigerian Languages, Bayero University, Kano. He can be contacted via +234 80 65846225.