Kano

By Abdurrahman Nasir Salis

The emergence of Abduljabbar Kabara is a blessing and not entirely a curse to the Muslim Ummah from this part of the world. Abduljabbar is a common enemy to variegated clans of foes, to wit Izala, Tijjaniyya, Qadiriyya and Salafiyya, among other sects, who could neither share a shade to rest, mosque to preach and pray nor a home to shelter.

The aftereffect of fighting the common enemy has taught all the clans that the commonalities they share as Muslims far outweigh the differences. It taught all the sects that they have for long overtired themselves on trivialities that are neither a passport to paradise nor a ticket to hell.

Yesterday, I saw three or four different sects I mentioned hereinbefore, who, to an extent and often attribute infidelity or disbelief to each other gathered amicably in a mosque in Kano belonging to one sect (Tijjaniyya), preaching together and praying together. I saw their guards, “Yan Agaji“, working side by side in complete harmony and feeling of togetherness, considering themselves brother’s keeper.

From the onset, seeing Izala guards together with Qadiriyya’s and Tijjaniyya’s “Yan Agaji” at the doors of Tijjaniyya Mosque named SHEIKH IBRAHIM INYASS MOSQUE bewilderedly caught my eyes and attention. Despite the saying that curiosity kills the cat, I entered the mosque with no fear of being killed as the cat. I saw scholars of all the sects on a single table and a crowd of onlookers, the loud cheerers, from all the sects, listening to their Sheikhs filled with feelings of togetherness and inclusivity, and above all, seeing each other as Muslim with Islam at the top of the priority scale and pushing all other considerations to the bottom of the scale.

Life is indeed the best teacher. This happening is not just an ordinary incident that will pass by time. Muslims and their Sheikhs should take this as a lesson that should symbolise how we should behave like Muslims. Unity shall be our sigil. Let me conclude by the saying of the Almighty Allah in the Holy Qur’an Chapter 8 Verse 73: “The Unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless you do this, (protect each other), there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief”.

Abdurrahman Nasir Salis writes from Kano.

abdurrahman00800@gmail.com

+234 806 578 7324

By Muhsin Ibrahim

Religion is one single thing Nigerians of whatever dispensations take in high esteem. Religion is often viewed as the opium of the subjugation of the masses or as their Achilles’ heel. To Rahama, the story is different; religion means nothing to her. It is simply an identifier that she’s a Muslim lady. One might think having grown up in a multi-religious house would intuitively teach her to have respect of some sort for religion, wrong. Her Imams and pastors do not use Qur’an or Bible.

A 28-year-old, stout Rahama Tsoho belongs to a disreputable family of three. Her father, an ex-serviceman, divorced their mother when she was only two. She stays with the father, and her sister with the mother. She had longed to marry since her teenage, but she couldn’t. She always attributes this to her look and family. So, she vows to live a better life in the future by hook or crook and begins to use highly effective and expensive bleaching creams to brighten her skin. She also hunts for a suitor via dubious ways such as flaunting her bosoms and derrière at the workplace and visiting the so-called Malamai, fortune-tellers and sorcerers.

After long and tedious trials and retrials, she meets a fine young man in their office, a newly transferred staff from another state. Without a doubt, she knows he’s beyond her league, but she believes it’s worth a try. But, as feared, the fine-looking new staff turned down her offer right away.

“I swear I will marry that guy by all means”, she declares. Soon after that, she starts consulting her fixers for the aid of whatever nature. “All I want”, she confesses to one of them, a mighty sorcerer who lives atop a high mountain, “is to marry him”.

“That’s easy for us as drinking water”, he assured her. “There are, however, rules, as you well know”.

“I am more than ready to abide by them. All of them, provided my wish will be granted”.

For a start, she’s instructed to visit their family house, which is far away, which is uncommon in the culture of that locality. She unhesitatingly goes. She introduces herself as his colleague. Simple. She, throughout her stay, behaves the most innocent girl-type and spreads greetings to his stepmother and siblings and everyone who cares to respond.

“Oga Rabiu has been very helpful”, she warily announces. “I, therefore, felt duty-bound to visit his family as I am here for another reason, actually a relative’s wedding”.

In the evening of the same day, I saw Rabiu looking bothered and lonely. I was about to ask him what was up when he told me about Rahama. He said she was a magic-savvy lady who shamelessly told him their marriage would yield many blessings. When he asked her how she knew that, she said her Mallam told her.

I was bewildered. I quite well know that she’s neither fit for him nor his scholastic family. He halts my busy mind, which is trying hard to dissect the whole scenario: “Muhammad”, he calls my name, “marrying Rahama would be the greatest mistake in my life”. That relieved my besieged mind, for I was contemplating whether or not I should tell him not to accept her proposal. “So, rest assured; I will avoid it like the plague”.

A few days or weeks, I can’t recall exactly, passed by, and I heard nothing from my dear neighbour cum friend, Rabiu or about Rahama’s blunt, in fact, unheard-of proposal. I had just started thinking the issue was dead and buried for good when he came to me with a bombshell.

“I am getting married next week”.

Wow! I said. I know he and his younger brother have been searching for a fitting life partner for him in the neighbourhoods. I also know he’s rich enough to solemnise his marriage within a few days if both parties agree. Thus, I ask:

“Who’s the lucky girl?”

His look changed from thrilled to timidity in a split second. I wish I could retract my question. But, in this deportment, he managed to respond: “Rahama”.

After calculating the atmosphere, I feel convinced that there is no need for any further explanation on how it comes to that. Her magic, shameless pursuit and insincere insistence have ultimately worked out. Therefore, I pray for the Almighty to bless the union and call it a day.

A few years later, I began to think that we all, who earlier condemned her, were proven wrong. She seems a wife everyone would want to have: caring, loving, dutiful, and generous towards him and his family. Yet, her significant frailty remains in how she handles religion. That too, we reason that she’s from a different background. Therefore, we shouldn’t expect her to behave the way we do or as we want.

Unbeknown to us, she’s simply buying time to portray her authentic self. She’s a wolf in sheep’s cloth. She is now doing the unthinkable; Rabiu has literally been her “yes man”. He worships her; he does everything to please her and parts with everyone she doesn’t like, including his brothers and sisters. He’s, to sum it up, blanketed in her world.

Rabiu is known for much discretion, but not any longer. You dare to tell him your undisclosed secret; you would hear it spoken of in the neighbourhoods. If you ask who told them, they would say Rahama.

Uncharacteristically enough and against Islam, Rabiu has, on several instances, bequeathed his wealth to be given to her should he die, as they don’t have any children yet. He cannot even reflect or recall that his father, who should rightly get the lion’s share, is still alive.

There is a single path to get to Rabiu now, and that’s through Rahama. Rabiu is for Rahama, and Rahama is for her family and pocket. He sees, but he cannot decipher. So everyone believes that he’s conjured. And that doesn’t last forever.

Muhsin Ibrahim is a student and staff at the Institute of African Studies, University of Cologne. He can be reached via muhsin2008@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Sabiu

Paul Owne, the suspect who stood trial on charges relating to the abduction and sale of some nine children from Kano, has on Friday been sentenced to serve a 104-year jail term by the Kano State State High Court.

Pleading guilty to the 38-count charges against him, Mr Owne was convicted accordingly by Justice Zuwaira Yusuf, who ruled that there was no any option to pay a fine.

However, reports have indicated that other suspects who stood trial alongside Mr Owne pleaded not guilty.

Pronouncing the judgement, Justice Yusuf stated, “I find Owne guilty on counts two, eight, nine, 27 and 34. I hereby sentence him to seven years imprisonment on each of the counts without an option of fine, in addition to paying the sum of N100,000 fine.

“The court also found Owne guilty on counts three, five, 10, 11, 22, 28 and 38. I sentence him to seven years in a correctional centre on each of the counts,” she added.

According to the justice, the convict was also found guilty on counts four, 12, 13, 29 and 38. Therefore, he was sentenced to serve a 4-years jail term on each of the counts without giving him the option to be fined.

Therefore, the years for each charge put together equal 104 years.

Recall that in October 2019, a hashtag #JusticeForKano9 had trended on social media, especially Facebook, in the aftermath of the abduction and trafficking of the nine kids from Kano to Anambra. They were also alleged to have been forcefully converted to another religion.

This later led to the arraignment of Mr Owne alongside six others on November 13, 2020.

Press Release

Kano state government has described as fallacious a trending story on social media platforms on a purported plan to officially disallow women regardless of any faith from getting behind the wheel.

The state commissioner for Information, Malam Muhammad Garba who made the clarification in a statement issued on Thursday, said government had at no time contemplate on the matter.

He said the story, which could not be traced to any credible source, was nothing but the imaginary thinking of the authors.

“The trending story lacks any credibility and that is why it is wholly attributed to a source that cannot be substantiated,’’ it added.

Malam Garba pointed out that if at all there was such plan, the state government does not have to be involved in any secretive meeting to decide on a critical issue that has to do its teeming populace.

The commissioner stated further that even Saudi Arabia which for decades had laws that sanctioned women from driving has, after all, lifted the ban in 2018.

He said it was interesting that some of the scholars quoted to have supported the alleged ban have already dissociated themselves from the story.

MALAM MUHAMMAD GARBA

Hon. Commissioner for Information, Kano state

By Muhammad Sabiu

President Muhammadu Buhari has on Monday patted his Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi, on the back over what he described as a “task of transforming and modernising every aspect of Nigeria’s national transport infrastructure.”

This is coming four days after the president visited Kano and performed the ground-breaking ceremony of the segment of the Kano-Kaduna railway modernisation project.

Commending the minister via his verified Facebook handle, the president said, “I commend the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi, the Ministry, and all the project implementation partners contributing to this national effort of railway infrastructure development.”

Recall that on June 10, the president was also in Lagos to commission the Lagos-Ibadan Standard Guage Rail Line. He also inaugurated its “full commercial operations.”

By Uzair Adam Imam

The embattled Islamic cleric, Sheikh Abduljabbar Nasiru Kabara, remains in police custody since his arrest yesterday (Friday) evening.

Kabara is a famous Kano-based controversial cleric whose commentaries and preaching the Coalition of Kano Ulama describe as blasphemous. On July 10, 2021, Kano State Government organised a debate between Kabara and some of the state’s scholars to defend himself.

However, according to the statement made by the judge of the debate, Professor Sani Shehu, Kabara failed to clear his name or defend his utterances.

The Sheikh was charged for blasphemy, incitement and insulting Prophet Muhammad (SAW), his companions, among others. A statement issued by the Commissioner of Information, Malam Muhammad Garba, on Friday states that Abduljabbar will remain in police custody until Monday, when he would be sent to prison.

The statement, in parts, reads: “The development followed the receipt of the First Information Report from the police by the Office of the Attorney General and Commissioner for justice which prepared charges against the cleric.

“Abduljabbar was subsequently arraigned on Friday, July 16, before an Upper Sharia Court Judge, Kofar Kudu, Alkali Ibrahim Sarki Yola, where the charges that included blasphemy, incitement, and sundry offences were mentioned.”

By Muhammad Sabiu

Twenty suspected internet fraudsters, otherwise known as Yahoo! Boys, have on Friday been nabbed by the Kano Zonal Office of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in Katsina State’s Dutsinma Local Government Area.

Announcing the apprehension via its official Facebook handle, the Commission said, “The suspects who were mostly youth in their early twenties were arrested by a team of operatives of the Commission following intelligence indicating that some Internet fraudsters were perpetrating fraudulent activities around Dutsinma.”

Investigations into the matter are ongoing as, according to the Commission, the suspects would be charged to court in due course.

There has been an increase in cybercrimes in recent times as the Commission has on several occasions made similar raids and apprehension in different parts of the country.

By Muhammad Mahmud

The recent debate between AbdulJabbar and representatives of Kano Ulama on the former’s reprehensible method of uttering unprintable words on the person of the Messenger of Allah (Peace be Upon Him) on the pretext of deduction and/or inference has opened yet another question on the freedom of expression. Some few supporters of AbdulJabbar decided to hinge their support on the hype of freedom of expression, saying that they are supporting him because he represents their free speech advocacy.

Nevertheless, a simple glance will expose this fallacy because if criticising other ideas is sanctioned by the freedom of speech article, AbdulJabbar himself does not seem to believe in it given his radical stance on the right of different sects to propagate their understanding. He condemns other people (sometimes using all available invectives) for no reason other than expressing opinions that contradicts his stance. He attacks other sects with impunity, descending on the personalities of many revered sheikhs, who were not even aware of his existence, in order to hurt emotionally and psychologically injure their admirers who disagree with him on one issue or another.

It is, therefore, hypocritical to premise supporting the man on the shaky ladder of free speech advocacy. This is even more evident as the peddlers of this chicanery never, even for once, voiced their dissatisfaction with the man’s assault on others who spoke their minds.

Now that the issue of freedom of expression is introduced into the unfolding drama, it is pertinent to ask what precisely this freedom of expression is? What is its scope, length and breadth? To what extent is it applicable? Who determines what it is and who will decide who is guilty of violating its principles?

We must address this because without fully knowing and understanding these, we may never have the much sought “liberty” to express ourselves. Unfortunately, many questionable elements will hide under it to deny us our own right to express ourselves.

It looks like almost every blasphemer or assaulter of people’s sacred places and/or scripture will find a supporter among the advocates of freedom of expression. Are the majority of people whose religion is attacked NOT free to express their anger? Why the intolerance against intolerance? It seems we are faced with what we can call a tyranny of the minority.

Section 39 (1) of the Nigerian constitution says: “Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.” Why should this only be applicable when those opinions are from the minority?

Am I not free to hate and despise anyone who infringes on my liberty and attack me, my religion or culture? Put aside those reasons, am I not free to hate anyone, including AbdulJabbar, for no reason at all? Why should someone then try to gag me when I have a reason to hate and express my anger towards him when he attacks what I hold dear?

Some of them used to argue that we abhor dissent. This is also not true. We have been living with dissent throughout our history. Even after Sheikh Dan Fodio’s Jihad, there were non-Muslims who went about their businesses without any harassment. Throughout our towns, there are a handful of brothels known as Gidan Magajiya. There were singers and dancers. There were even ‘yan daudu in addition to prostitutes. They live here. None of them was reported to have been attacked by the people or the authorities, to the best of my knowledge.

Also, the Ulama differ. They write books for and against what they believe and what they do not believe. People follow any sect they feel they are more at home with. They form and join groups. All these existed in Arewa before Nigeria even existed; they still exist. What gave the impression that we hate dissent is yet to be enumerated. Therefore, this is not about disagreement; it is about attacking and insulting what people hold dear and sacred while waving the card of free speech.

By Abubakar Suleiman

No thanks to his polemics, fiery tongue and boastfulness, AbdulJabbar Nasiru Kabara, the scion of the famous and revered Islamic scholar Shaykh Nasiru Kabara, has dominated the tongue and pens (though in the negatives) of most Hausa-speaking Muslims after the long-awaited debate has been laid to rest. He stirred the hornet nest and got stung from all directions.

Over the years, he has gained currency due to his unrestrained and unhinged attempts during preachments to create a hole in the validity of the Sunni Canons, especially Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih al-Muslim. Plus, he has also never relent efforts in casting doubts into the minds of his gullible and unsuspecting followers on the narrative integrity of the Companions of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW). He is actually not the first to cast doubts on authentic Prophetic traditions, but he is the most reckless one I have come across.

Tellingly, in all his attempts, AbdulJabbar bucked context, methodological principles in the science of Hadith, Arabic nuances and even cultural conceptualisations or idiosyncrasies, especially in translations. And these translations ended up impugning the sacredness of the Prophet. Moreover, save for Allah’s intervention through the Kano state government, his dogmatism and preachings might have led to bloodshed and loss of lives and property.

This saga should once again bring to the front burner the issue of regulating preachers and preaching in Nigeria. One’s ability to translate Arabic text or to graduate from an Islamic university or a Christian theological seminary in Nigeria or abroad should not automatically confer on anyone the authority or absolute freedom to preach or use media houses to propagate ANY kind of religious ideology devoid of a vetting process.

There is no gainsaying that some religious clerics have exploited or abused the freedom of religion or expression for both personal and even political gains through dangerous indoctrination, misinterpretation of religious diktats and the preaching of skewed versions of religion. AbdulJabbar is a good specimen of how to throw decency to the dogs with the help of jarring sounds from a cheering and unsuspecting crowd in preference for personal gains.

Unfortunately, as a society, we most times abhor regulations on seemingly everything. Unfortunately, this nonchalant attitude has often come with a huge and devastating price, as we have witnessed in the case of Maitatsine and, now witnessing in the aftermath of Muhammad Yusuf’s death and the subsequent upsurge of the Boko Haram insurgency and, also AbdulJabbar’s preachments.

Regulation in religious matters is a sensitive issue. Still, it is a pertinent key in taming extreme tendencies, reducing margins of errors in religious fatwas and enhancing positive social policy and social integration. Yes, we can contemplate the government’s tendency to enact laws on preaching in erecting barriers that would insulate them from accountability or criticisms as humanly possible. However, we cannot underestimate the effects or the grave consequences of leaving preachers of any kind unchecked in our current realities.

The government at all levels should, as a matter of urgency, collaborate with relevant religious organisations in building or tweaking existing institutions which shall be backed by law. The institution should be shouldered with the responsibilities of, among others, screening and issuing a licence to preachers, judiciously and sincerely implementing the enacted rules and periodically revising and amending the laws in tandem with current realities or evolving peculiarities.

The solution, as mentioned earlier, is not a one-size-fits-all. Still, we desperately need a system or mechanism to check religious excesses and undue preachments before the next ‘AbdulJabbar’ or religious demagogue rears his ugly head and throws us into another quagmire that may be costly to our lives, religion, time and wealth.

Abubakar Suleiman writes from Kaduna and can be reached via abusuleiman06@yahoo.com.

By Abubakar A. Bukar

In an attempt to demystify what he regards as Salafists’ deification of Bukhari, ‘Jabbar ended up with this raw Rushdification of the Prophet (SAW). All these references and inferences of indecency attributed to the Prophet (wa’iyaz billah, except for the debate, very few knew that the profanity is such great in its filthiness) remind one of many passages in the Satanic Verse. To which, Kano cannot keep silent. To which, the North cannot be indifferent. Nay, nor the Muslim world as a whole. When Rushdie attempted, the Ummah reacted. No less when similarly caricatures oozed with the stench from Denmark. While France’s Charlie Hebdo got more than what it bargained. Of recent when Macron assented to such insanity, we’re all appalled and nearly went berserk in search of lines from Namangi’s Wakokin Imfiraji:

         Wa ya kai, wa yai kamarka?

         Wa ya san asali ya naka?

        Wa ya san matukar rabonka?

        Tun da Allah ya yabe ka,

        Duk wanda ya ki ka ma yi gaba

Where the honour of the Prophet is at stake, an average Muslim would accept being intolerant, antediluvian and worse descriptions far readily than expected in lieu of the desecration. The interrelation of the Prophet’s personality and its sanctity with a Muslim devout is beyond mere belief, obedience and homage. It’s about the latter’s existential significance. It is on this note the Muslim relates with any threat thus – which appears incomprehensible to non-Muslim. This signification is beautifully captured by the American anthropologist Saba Mahmoud in her engagement with Judith Butler. See Religious Reason and Secular Affect:…where she says, ‘the Aristotlean term schesis captures this living relation because of its heightened psychophysiological and emotional connotations and its emphasis on familiarity and intimacy as a necessary aspect of the relation.

What interests me in this iconophile tradition is not so much the image as the concept of relationality that binds the subject to the object of veneration. Those who profess love for the Prophet do not simply follow his advice and admonition to the umma (that exist in the form of the hadith) but also try to emulate how he dressed; what he ate; how he spoke to his friends and adversaries; how he slept, walked, and so on. These mimetic ways of realising the Prophet’s behaviour are lived not as commandments but as virtues where one wants to ingest as it were, the Prophet’s persona into oneself… Muhammad, in this understanding, is not simply a proper noun referring to a particular historical figure but the mark of a relation of similitude…  The sense of moral injury that emanates from such a relationship between the ethical subject and the figure of exemplarity (such as Muhammad) is quite distinct from one that the notion of blasphemy encodes. The notion of moral injury I am describing no doubt entails a sense of violation, but this violation emanates not from the judgment that “the law” has been  transgressed but from the perception that one’s being, grounded as it is in a relationship of dependency with the Prophet, has been shaken’.

And I think it is from this prism Bala Mohammed, former Trust columnist, wrote that where the Prophet is involved, we are fanatics or something of that import in his reaction to the Danish cartoons.

The Sheikh in question obviously feels so much saturated (if not intoxicated) with counter-argument that he severally warned his interlocutors not to send a “tiny” representative, which he would bulldoze in a matter of seconds. But they defied by seemingly playing out this logical David-Goliath with him. I have never heard of this Rijiyar-Lemu Jnr. beforehand. And since the Sheikh’s encounter with Alkasim Hotoro, one could notice his ill-preparedness for conventional debate; that he’s more well-exercised and blabbermouth only in the absence of an antagonist. In a word, he’s a disappointment to the usual assertiveness of dissident voice. This becomes clearer when one juxtaposes Tal’udis vs Ja’far Adams debate. You may argue that besides the clerical establishment, the government too is posed against the dissenting Sheikh, making it nearly impossible to win the card. The fact of the matter is that since Socrates and Milton, dissidents grapple in/with the same circumstances. It’s the power of their argument, the logicality of the presentation of their stand – which considers and surmounts their opponents’ in Millian fashion – that extricate and exonerate them at least in the view of current sympathisers and later generation of dispassionate examiners.

In all this, the biggest lesson is on the centrality of humility and sincerity in the acquisition and transmission of knowledge.

Similarly, I’d also felt our teacher shouldn’t have been the moderator in this debate. But upon listening through the 5 hours of exchanges, nothing could be fairer than Professor Salisu Shehu’s handling of the interlocking scenario. Partisan, yes he is, but I think he has ably transcended that with calmness and justice. After all, it was not a stark case of the Sufi-Salafi divide as many framed it to be, misleadingly. Among Sheikh Jabbar’s interrogators are representatives of Tijjaniya, Qadiriya, JIBWIS and Salafi.

Beyond winning and losing, the debate, to me, raises more questions than answers which calls for re-debate, or, once more, putting ‘Jabar on the dock – as it was. The Sheikh was, for instance, caught complaining that what was presented to the public by his debaters as his scholastic stand on the controversy was only a ‘text’ – with utter disregard to the context. In the name of fairness, could he be granted, in hindsight, the chance to hear him out through and through on the context? Or he just be asked to produce a book exhausting whatever burhan he has on this? Wouldn’t it be creditable if the classical Baytul Hikmah is reincarnated thus? To what extent is our toleration of dissent and dissidents in the name of freedom of opinion and expression thereof? Or are these concepts alien in our tradition? To what extent are the canons open to critique? What are the political and economic dimensions of these blasphemous shenanigans? And the international connections – how does it lubricate the engine of globalisation? Is it true that all the ahadith wherein the Prophet prescribed capital punishment were mere fabrication and distortions as the Sheikh lately claimed? Is the Sheikh alone in this, especially with regard to blasphemy? In the power asymmetry and contestation between the fringe and the mainstream, how do we save the truth from being the first casualty  – with apologies to Phillip Knight? Ad infinitum.

Bukar wrote in from ABU’s Mass Communication and can be reached via aabukar555@gmail.com.