Muslims

By Usman Usman Garba

Incidents of women killing their husbands in Northern Nigeria have become a disturbing phenomenon which puts some kind of anxiety in the hearts of youth and unmarried men. What was once rare is now appearing more frequently in headlines, police reports and public conversations. 

Everyone knows that Northern Nigeria is a region known for strong family values, deep respect for marriage, and a social structure built on religious and cultural norms. Yet, the recent rise in cases where wives take the lives of their husbands has forced many to question what is happening behind the façade of stability.

There are a lot of views and perceptions concerning why women kill their husbands in Northern Nigeria. Many are of the belief that forced marriage is one of the reasons such an inhumane act happens. Thus, others are married willingly without the intervention of anyone in a forced marriage, but still kill their spouses.

In my opinion, other factors should be taken into consideration, contrary to what many regard as the main cause of this dastardly act.

Mental health remains one of the least understood issues in Northern Nigeria. Depression, trauma from abusive relationships, postpartum challenges, and emotional exhaustion can push individuals to extremes. Unfortunately, many women have no access to counselling, families discourage speaking out; society expects women to “endure”; emotional crises are dismissed as weakness or spiritual problems, and this lack of support creates dangerous psychological pressure.

Similarly, domestic violence is one of the dangerous circles that causes women to kill their husbands. Many of the reported cases involve homes where domestic violence had been ongoing. Women in such situations sometimes endure physical and emotional abuse for years. With limited support systems, some feel trapped with no escape route.

This does not justify murder, but it highlights the reality. For instance, some wives act out of fear; some out of desperation; some out of retaliation; while others act because they believe no one will protect them.

Hence, the role of social media and exposure to new narratives has also contributed immensely to this inhumane act in Northern Nigeria.

Cases of women killing their husbands, though still few, spread quickly on social media, and sometimes, this creates copycat behaviour, unrealistic ideas about marriage, normalisation of revenge narratives and fake empowerment messages telling women to “fight back” violently.

Social media has become an amplifier, sometimes distorting reality and increasing tension in fragile homes

Nonetheless, a justice system that often fails women worsens the system. Many women who are abused find no one to intervene. At the station, police dismiss domestic complaints; families send them back home; religious or traditional leaders advise “patience”, and society blames women for failed marriages. Thus, when conflict turns deadly, the same system responds swiftly, after lives have already been destroyed. This is why prevention, not punishment, should be our priority.

The rising cases of wives killing their husbands are not simply crime stories; they are warning signs of deeper fractures inside marriages, families and social systems.

Northern Nigeria must confront these issues honestly and urgently. The goal is not to assign blame but to prevent homes from becoming battlegrounds. When families break down, society breaks down: when violence enters the home, it enters the community; and when silence becomes the norm, tragedy becomes inevitable.

The solution lies in awareness, support, justice and compassion, before the next headline appears. To stop this dangerous pattern in our communities, we must confront the root causes. The society must strengthen domestic violence reporting channels, improve community mediation and counselling structures, promote healthy marital communication, address economic pressures, educate people on mental health and teach conflict management to young couples.

Usman Garba writes from Kano via usmangarba100@gmail.com

By Usman Muhammad Salihu

The passing of Sheikh Dahiru Usman Bauchi shook the nation in a way words can barely hold. Bauchi witnessed a scene history will struggle to forget, millions gathered, from ordinary citizens to scholars, traditional rulers, state governors, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, and even the Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Kashim Shettima, leading the State’s delegation. It wasn’t a crowd built by influence. It wasn’t politics. It wasn’t power.

It was a divine honour given only by Allah to His chosen servants.

One elderly man at the funeral said, “What I saw today with my eyes… if Allah does not honour you, you cannot receive the kind of favour Maulana Sheikh received. This matter is beyond politics or chieftaincy. It is purely from Allah.” And truly, the atmosphere testified to that.

For decades, Sheikh Dahiru Bauchi stood as a bridge between generations. The number of people who embraced Islam through him is known only to Allah. The number of students who memorised the Qur’an under his guidance defies calculation. This, more than titles, wealth or recognition, is the legacy of a life well spent.

Yes, we feel the sting of his departure. But even in our grief, gratitude rises. Alhamdulillah for a man whose end came with honour, whose journey was marked by service, and whose impact will continue to shape hearts long after today.

Usman Muhammad Salihu writes from Jos, Nigeria, via muhammadu5363@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Sulaiman

A New Year’s Day community gathering in Daneji took an unexpected philosophical turn when a sponsor’s closing remarks sparked deep reflection on knowledge stewardship and mortality, Professor Abdalla Uba Adamu has revealed.

The January 1st townhall meeting, organized to honor ten outstanding youth from the Kano neighborhood, became memorable not just for the celebrations but for a pointed challenge issued to the honorees, Professor Adamu recounted in a Facebook post that has drawn significant attention.

The young achievers, recognized for accomplishments spanning Artificial Intelligence, Mathematics, Nursing Sciences, and Qur’anic studies, were urged by event sponsor Alhaji Ahmed Idris to “die empty”—a statement that initially puzzled attendees before its meaning was revealed.

Idris, a prominent community pillar, was invoking Todd Henry’s motivational concept that individuals should pour out their knowledge and talents during their lifetime rather than take untapped potential to the grave. “You enter your grave empty—all the knowledge has been left outside for other people to use,” Professor Adamu explained.

The academic noted that at least three of the honorees hold doctorates or specialized training in Artificial Intelligence, achieved before AI became a consumer phenomenon, while others excelled in diverse fields—showcasing what the community hopes will inspire younger residents.

Writing on his experience, Professor Adamu drew connections between Henry’s secular philosophy and Islamic teachings on amanah—the sacred trust of knowledge. “Discharging your knowledge—sharing it and imparting it on others—is therefore one of the highest acts of Islamic piety,” he wrote, adding that both the Qur’an and Hadith contain warnings against hoarding knowledge.

The professor described the event as a community response to concerns about youth engagement with “consumer communication technology” at the expense of career focus and future planning.

By Maryam Ahmad

Democrat Zohran Mamdani has made history after being sworn in as the first Muslim mayor of New York City, marking a significant milestone in the city’s political and cultural landscape.

The swearing-in ceremony, held at City Hall, drew city officials, community leaders, and supporters from across the five boroughs. In his inaugural address, Mamdani emphasised unity, social justice, and inclusive governance, pledging to serve all New Yorkers regardless of background, faith, or political affiliation.

Mamdani’s victory has been widely celebrated by civil rights advocates and minority communities, who view his election as a reflection of New York City’s diversity and democratic spirit. Supporters say his leadership signals a new chapter focused on equity, accountability, and grassroots engagement.

As he assumes office, Mayor Mamdani faces pressing challenges, including housing affordability, public safety, and economic recovery, while carrying the expectations of a city that has once again made history.

By Amara Sesay

All praise is due to Allah, the Most High, the Most Exalted. We seek His peace and blessings upon the last Prophet sent to humanity, Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), his noble household, his companions and all those who follow in their footsteps until the Last Day.

“Has not the time come for those who have believed that their hearts should become humbly submissive at the remembrance of Allah and what has come down of the truth? And let them not be like those who were given the Scripture before, and a long period passed over them, so their hearts hardened; and many of them are defiantly disobedient. Know that Allah gives life to the earth after its lifelessness. We have made clear to you the signs; perhaps you will understand.” (Surah Al-Hadid, 57:16–17).

O Beloved Muslims, Has Not the Time Come? Beloved brothers and sisters, reflect for a moment—are we content with the state we find ourselves in today? How can we exchange a seat of honor for one of humiliation? Are we not the same people who pray at least five times daily, asking Allah: “Guide us to the straight path”, yet so easily stray toward the ways of those who have earned His anger? How can we abandon the mosque, the remembrance of Allah, and the noble mission entrusted to us, only to imitate those who oppose divine guidance? Are these the actions of Ahl al-Albab (the people of understanding)? Do they reflect the character of Ibadur-Rahman (the servants of the Most Merciful)?

Will such deeds bring us the comfort of angels at the time of death, or the comforting words Angels in the darkness of the grave? O Muslims, Do You Not Know Your Worth? You are the most honored of all peoples. Allah has chosen you to lift humanity from servitude to men into the worship of the ONE TRUE CREATOR of men. You were sent to liberate humankind—from the narrow confines of this world to the vastness of this life and the Hereafter.

For this noble mission, Allah has blessed you abundantly: He gave you the Qur’an, a book so mighty that if it were sent down upon a mountain, it would crumble from humility. He sent you Muhammad (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)—a mercy to all creation. And the best of all created beings. Can there be a better role model for you? He granted lands rich in resources and strategically placed across the world.

He gave you population, wealth, heritage, and faith—blessings that many envy. But know, O servants of Allah, that these are trusts (Amanah) for which you will be questioned on the Day of Judgment. So fear Allah and let each soul reflect on what it has prepared for tomorrow. Truly, the convulsion of the Final Hour is a terrible thing!

O My Sister in Faith! You are the cornerstone of this Ummah’s future. You owe the world your purity, your steadfastness, and your sacrifice in raising a generation that will save mankind from despair and darkness. Do not be deceived by the false glitter of this fleeting world. The world praises you only when you abandon your modesty—but remember the deception of Shaytan toward your mother Hawwa (Eve). She lived in pure freedom until Shaytan promised “more,” only to strip her of dignity. Do not trade the honour of Maryam (Mary) for the cheap attention of those who see women as objects. Allah did not create you to be consumed and discarded—you were created to nurture faith, justice, and light. So fear Allah and pay attention to the kind of deeds you are sending forth for the Hereafter. Indeed, the convulsion of the Hour is a terrible thing.

O Believers, Remember your accountability know that every one of us will be questioned by Allah—about our life and how we spent it, our youth and how we used it, our wealth and how we earned and spent it, and the blessings we so often take for granted. “Then you will surely be asked that Day about pleasure.” (Surah At-Takathur, 102:8).

Will we then be grateful servants—or are we among the heedless who allowed this world to blind them from the Home of Eternal Bliss? “It [Paradise] is not [obtained] by your wishful thinking or by that of the People of the Scripture. Whoever does a wrong will be recompensed for it, and he will not find besides Allah a protector or a helper. And whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, while being a believer—those will enter Paradise and will not be wronged [even as much as] the speck on a date seed.” (Surah An-Nisa, 4:123–124).

The Promise of Allah Is True “If only the people of the cities had believed and feared Allah, We would have opened upon them blessings from the heaven and the earth; but they denied [the messengers], so We
seized them for what they were earning.” (Surah Al-A‘raf, 7:96).

Even amidst the trials facing the Muslim world—humiliation, oppression, poverty, and spiritual confusion—the promise of Allah remains true. The pious will inherit the earth, and the believers will rise again to a state of dignity, security, and leadership. The problem is not with the promise, but with the promised—all of us. If only we could temper our love for this fleeting world, conquer our fear of death, and return to Allah in sincere repentance—we would find Him Most Forgiving, Most Merciful. “O you who have believed, bow and prostrate and worship your Lord and do good that you may succeed. And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [It is] the religion of your father Abraham. He named you ‘Muslims’ before and in this [revelation], that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over mankind.” (Surah Al-Hajj, 22:77–78).

“O you who have believed, persevere and endure and remain stationed and fear Allah that you may be successful.” (Surah Aal-Imran, 3:200). The Final Word, “And Our word has already preceded for Our servants, the messengers, that indeed they would be those given victory, and indeed Our soldiers will be those who overcome. So leave them for a while and see, for they are going to see. Exalted is your Lord, the Lord of might, above what they describe. And peace be upon the messengers. And praise to Allah, Lord of the worlds.” (Surah As-Saffat, 37:171–182).

O Muslims—return to Allah before death returns you to Him. Awaken your hearts, renew your faith, and rise to the honour Allah has destined for you. Hold fast to the rope of Allah together, for He is your Protector—and excellent is the Protector, and excellent is the Helper. May Allah revive our hearts, unite our Ummah, and make us among those who hear the reminder and follow the best of it. And the final word is: All Praise is due to Allah, Lord, and Nourishers of everything that exists in the Universe. And may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon the Messenger, his household, his companions, and all those who followed them on the right path.

By Hadiza Abdulkadir

A political controversy erupted on Tuesday after Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar was seen pulling down a woman doctor’s hijab during a public event, triggering sharp reactions from opposition parties and civil society groups.

The incident, captured on video and widely circulated on social media, occurred at an official function where the chief minister was interacting with health workers. In the footage, Kumar appears to reach out and adjust the doctor’s headscarf, an action many have described as inappropriate and disrespectful.

Opposition leaders condemned the act, questioning the chief minister’s judgment and mental state, and demanding a public apology. “This is not only an insult to a professional woman but also an affront to personal dignity and religious freedom,” a senior opposition spokesperson said.

The ruling Janata Dal (United) has sought to downplay the incident, with party members suggesting there was no malicious intent. However, the controversy has continued to spark debate nationwide about consent, gender sensitivity, and respect for religious symbols in public life.

As of press time, the chief minister had not issued a formal statement addressing the incident.

By Muhammad Abubakar

The Muslim Public Affairs Centre (MPAC) has condemned what it describes as the “sectarian and deeply troubling” conduct of a recent United States congressional delegation to Nigeria.

In a statement issued by its Executive Chairman, Disu Kamor, MPAC faulted the visit of Congressman Riley Moore, who publicly emphasised meetings with Christian and traditional leaders during the trip, including bishops in Benue State and a Tiv traditional ruler. Moore, a vocal proponent of the claim of a “Christian genocide” in Nigeria, said on his X account that he came “in the name of the Lord” and held discussions on alleged Fulani-led attacks.

MPAC argued that the delegation’s failure to engage the leadership of the Nigerian Muslim community—particularly the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA)—was a deliberate snub rather than a scheduling issue. It accused the U.S. team of avoiding Muslim victims and communities affected by violence and warned that such selective engagement risked reinforcing “extreme voices and anti-Muslim narratives” within U.S. policy circles.

The organisation said the pattern of “selective listening, selective engagement, and selective outrage” threatens Nigeria’s delicate interfaith balance. It called on international partners, especially the United States, to demonstrate neutrality and ensure that foreign policy on Nigeria is not shaped by religious lobbies or sectarian biases.

MPAC reaffirmed its commitment to justice and peaceful coexistence, urging Nigerians to question why key Muslim institutions and victims were excluded from the delegation’s itinerary.

Dr Ebenezer Obadare, a Senior Fellow for Africa Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), recently testified before a joint briefing of the United States Congress on the security crisis in Nigeria. Given CFR’s extraordinary influence on U.S. foreign policy, as its analysts brief the Congress, the State Department, and the White House, the accuracy and balance of Dr Obadare’s testimony matter significantly.

At the briefing, U.S. lawmakers and witnesses made one demand that every responsible Nigerian, Muslim or Christian, would be happy with: that Nigeria must disarm armed militias and prosecute attackers. The renewed commitment we are now seeing from the Nigerian government, including airstrikes against armed militias, the planned police and military recruitment, and the declaration of a national security emergency are all a response to the mounting U.S. pressure. On this point, American engagement has been productive.

However, Dr Obadare went far beyond the reasonable. After acknowledging the recent steps taken by President Tinubu, he nevertheless insisted that “Washington must keep up the pressure.” To him, U.S. leverage should not only be used to combat Boko Haram but to pressure the Nigerian president to abolish Sharia criminal law in twelve northern states and disband Hisbah commissions across the northern region. This framing is problematic on several counts.

First, it portrays Nigeria not as a sovereign state but as a dependent client whose legal and cultural system must be restructured via external coercion. This is not only intellectually careless; it is politically reckless. Nigeria’s constitutional debates, including the place of Sharia within a federal arrangement, cannot be resolved through directives from Washington. These are matters rooted in decades of negotiation, legal precedent, historical realities, and democratic choice. Such complexity cannot be wished away by foreign pressure or reduced to simplistic talking points about religious persecution. Sharia was introduced between 1999 and 2001 through public consultation and mass popular demand by the local citizens in northern Nigeria, who are Muslims. Subsequently, it was formalised and enacted into law by the various State Houses of Assembly.

Second, Obadare’s argument misdiagnoses the root causes of violence in the north. Boko Haram and ISWAP do not derive their ideology from the Sharia systems implemented by northern states since 1999. In fact, Boko Haram explicitly rejects these systems as insufficient, impure, and corrupted by democracy. They consider northern governors apostates precisely because they operate within a secular constitution. The group’s origins lie in violent extremism, socio-economic marginalisation, and the 2009 extrajudicial killing of the group’s founder, Mohammed Yusuf. It has nothing to do with the Sharia framework implemented by the twelve northern states. In fact, Boko Haram rejects and condemns these state Sharia systems as illegitimate, and this is why the majority of their victims are Muslims themselves. 

It is therefore analytically false to imply that Sharia criminal law fuels this insurgency. This narrative does not withstand even a basic historical timeline. The Maitatsine insurgency of the 1970s, whose ideology and violence closely resemble Boko Haram, predated the introduction of Sharia in the early 2000s by decades. To frame Sharia as the catalyst of terrorism is therefore a misreading of history and to locate causality where it does not exist.

Third, the call to disband Hisbah groups ignores their actual function and constitution. Hisbah institutions are state-established moral enforcement agencies regulated by local laws. They are not terrorist actors, militias, or insurgent organisations. They are contrary to Dr Obadare’s claims that they “impose extremist ideology, enforce forced conversions, and operate with near-total impunity.” These assertions either misrepresent the facts to unfairly tarnish their reputation or reflect intellectual laziness that risks misleading American policymakers. In doing so, they also demonise millions of peaceful Nigerian Muslims who regard Sharia as a legitimate component of their cultural and moral identity.

Finally, Dr Obadare’s testimony, intentionally or not, reinforces a narrative in Washington that sees Nigeria’s crisis primarily through the lens of religious conflict rather than the multi-dimensional reality it is, that is, a mixture of terrorism, banditry, state failure, local grievances, arms proliferation, and climate-driven resource conflicts in the form of farmer-herder crisis. Oversimplification of this serious problem does not aid victims. It distorts U.S. policy and encourages punitive measures that could destabilise fragile communities further and restrict the fundamental rights of millions of Muslims to exercise their faith and adhere to the guidance of Shari’a in their personal and communal lives. 

Nigeria faces serious security challenges amid years of leadership neglect. We genuinely need pressure to put the leaders on their toes, but not the kind rooted in calculated distortion. There is a need for leadership accountability, but not at the expense of Nigeria’s sovereignty. And we need a partnership with the United States in the areas of intelligence gathering, military capabilities and a mutually beneficial partnership. 

The United States should not base its engagement on flawed analyses made by experts such as Dr Ebenezer Obadare, which risk misrepresenting Nigeria’s realities, undermining local institutions, and prescribing solutions that could exacerbate rather than resolve the country’s complex security challenges. Partnering with the Nigerian government enables a tailor-made approach to effectively address these challenges, rather than relying on experts who have long been out of touch with Nigerian realities beyond what they read in media reports.

The Nigerian state must do more, no doubt. But analysts like Dr Obadare must also do better. Nigeria deserves policy analysis grounded in accuracy, proportionality, and respect for the complexities of a plural society; not sweeping prescriptions that collapse constitutional debate into counterterrorism and treat millions of northern Muslims as collateral in the process.

Ibrahiym A. El-Caleel writes from Nigeria and can be reached at caleel2009@gmail.com.

By Mallam Shamsuddeen Suleiman Kibiya

In the long and complex story of Islam in Nigeria, the tension between Salafi reformists and Sufi traditionalists has never been merely a clash of doctrines. It is, more often than we care to admit, a clash of tempers—of the tone one uses, the suspicion one bears, and the verdict one passes on those who practice religion a bit differently. What should have remained a quiet intellectual disagreement has, over time, metamorphosed into an extremism that thrives not on knowledge but on rhetoric.

When Dr Idris Abdulaziz Dutsen Tanshi passed on, the reaction from certain Salafi circles betrayed this peculiar tendency. His admirers saw his death as the painful exit of a righteous man who had lived his life fighting against innovation in religion and straightening the Umma along the path of Tawhid. On the other side, some Sufi-leaning critics responded not with mercy but with long-stored resentment—reminding the public of his “harshness,” his “excessive criticisms,” and his uncompromising, even combative sermons. The atmosphere felt less like the departure of a scholar and more like the settling of old, bitter scores.

And when Shaikh Dahiru Bauchi passed a few days ago, the pattern repeated itself, but this time in reverse. Sufi adherents elevated him beyond scholarship—into sainthood, into miracle, into myth. The outpouring was understandable, but in some corners it crossed into something else: a triumphalism that painted all those who disagreed with his spiritual path as misguided, cold, or spiritually weak. Some Salafi commentators, instead of exercising solemnity, used the moment to revisit old doctrinal disputes—reminding audiences of “bid’ah,” “ghuluw,” and “un-Islamic practices.” Even in death, the walls between both camps seemed eager to echo old hostilities.

What is common to both episodes is that the extremists on either side were saying the same thing without even realising it: that Allah’s mercy is exclusive to their camp; that the Ummah is too big to be shared, but too small to contain disagreement. And this, in its essence, is the extremism of our time—not the extremism of bombs and guns, but the extremism of the tongue.

The Salafi hardliner tends to imagine himself as the last defender of pristine Islam, wielding a vocabulary of denunciation: shirk, bid’ah, dalala, and ghaflah ad infinitum. Every disagreement becomes a deviation, every deviation a threat, and every Sufi becomes a suspect. Meanwhile, the Sufi extremist believes himself to be the custodian of spiritual truth, seeing the Salafi as spiritually blind, stone-hearted literalist, deprived of the inner sweetness of faith and to stretch it even further, an enemy of the beloved prophet SAW himself. Each side constructs a convenient caricature of the other —and then fights that caricature as if it were real.

The danger, however, is that rhetorical extremism does not remain rhetorical over the long run. It shapes communities. It hardens hearts. It turns mosques into enclaves, scholars into partisans and differences into hostilities. What begins as doctrinal rigidity becomes social fragmentation. And what should have been an Ummah becomes a map of feuding camps.

Yet, there is something instructive about how both Dr Idris Abdulaziz and Shaikh Dahiru Bauchi were remembered by their true students—not those who fight for them online, but those who actually sat with them. I mean, their real students, across divides, spoke about their scholarship, humility, discipline, and service. They remembered their knowledge—not their polemics. They recalled their character—not their controversies. This is a reminder that the extremists on both sides, loud as they are, do not represent the whole story.

Nigeria’s Muslim community must now decide what it wishes to inherit from its scholars: the softness of their manners or the sharpness of their debates; their mercy or their anger; their wisdom or their polemics.

To insist that disagreement must lead to division is itself an extremist position. To insist that every scholar must resemble one’s preferred tradition is another. And to pretend that Islam is too fragile to survive multiple approaches is perhaps the greatest of all.

In the end, the Ummah does not collapse because its members disagree. It collapses when disagreement becomes hatred, and hatred finds a pulpit.

May Nigeria’s Muslims learn to argue with knowledge, to differ with dignity, and to remember that Allah, in His infinite mercy, did not create only one path to Him—and certainly not only one temperament.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

President Bola Tinubu has expressed profound sadness over the death of the revered Islamic leader, Sheikh Dahiru Usman Bauchi, who passed away on Thursday at the age of 101.

In a statement released on Thursday, the President described the late leader of the Tijjaniyya Muslim Brotherhood as a “moral compass” who dedicated his life to teaching and preaching.

President Tinubu stated that Sheikh Bauchi’s loss is monumental not only to his family and followers but also to the entire nation. He recalled the blessings and moral support he received from the cleric during the 2023 presidential election campaign.

“Sheikh Dahiru Bauchi was a teacher, a father and a voice of moderation and reason. As both a preacher and a notable exegete of the Holy Quran, he was an advocate of peace and piety. His death has created a huge void,” the President was quoted as saying.

The President extended his condolences to the Sheikh’s multitude of followers across Nigeria and beyond, urging them to immortalise the late cleric by holding on to his teachings of peaceful coexistence, strengthening their relationship with God, and being kind to humanity.