Recently, the Nigerian Muslims came under yet another attack from a section of the secularists or the so called ‘liberal’ Muslims, for joining the world in condemnation of the Zionist’s genocide in Gaza. Their condemnations were echoed, by some Muslims who, though, ostensibly, sincere in their condemnation, failed to understand the mutual exclusivity of the situation. Their core argument is that the Nigerian Muslims did not do (an unspecified) “enough” about the Boko Haram crisis, after which they could worry about Gaza. Though palatable to them, their argument is as faulty as their attempt to draw a similitude between our situation and the Gaza Genocide. It is, also, as absurd as the claim that the Zionists are “defending” themselves from the people whose lands they, forcefully, occupied. I addressed this some days back. Curiously, these “intellectuals”, seem not to see anything wrong with some Nigerian Christians who publicly supported the Genocide. None of them, as far as I am aware, even contemplated calling to order Christian extremists, like Femi Fani Kayode, who publicly gloated over the Genocide, justifying killings of Palestinian women, and went as far as wishing same to happen to Nigerian Muslims. They maintain a loud silence on that.
Some elements, among the Muslims, seemingly, appointed themselves as attack dogs against Muslims, they are always ready to condemn Nigerian Muslims on any position they take, on national or international issues affecting their religion. They are, almost, always in conformity with the Nigerian Islamophobes who are on an incompatibility or auto oppose mode with anything Islamic, but who accuse Muslims of divisiveness. Incessant, unwarranted and generalized attacks, most often, based on misconceptions, arrant ignorance or half baked Islamic education and/or disingenuously crafted conjectures to smear the Muslim, has became the hallmark of these “intellectuals”.
The dearest words in their mouths, always willing to call Muslims with, are the extremists, terrorists, intolerants and other derogatory and subjective names, used on all Muslims by the Islamophobes. To them, Muslims, the world over, and particularly Nigerian Muslims, have themselves to blame for Islamophobia, the across the globe and particularly in Nigeria, for their “stubborn obsession” with Islam and failure or refusal to “go with the civilized world”. This is despite the fact that Islamophobia reaches far back in history, and deep within the Western psyche. Exploration and colonization of the Islamic world brought with it a wave of propaganda that characterized Muslim as inferior, primitive, violent beings. This was part of the justifications for invading and occupying Muslim lands. The deep-rooted misconceptions are part of what is being used to inflame people against Islam and Muslim in the west. Just as so many lies and misconceptions against the Nigerian Muslim, that predated independence, and inflamed as a political weapon breeds Islamophobia here.
To them, for identifying with Muslims and anything that affects Islam the world over, for what they call “obsession with Islam”, for joining the rest of the Muslim world in been angry with cartoonists who chose to castigate the venerated Prophet in Denmark, for depending themselves against attacks in Jos, Kaduna, etc, for even wearing Hijab in public places, for agitating for Shari’a, for putting religious attachment to, almost, everything, the Nigerian Muslims are guilty of extremism, intolerance and other pejoratives. They are guilty of jeopardizing ‘The National Spirit’ and inflaming dissensions. Why shouldn’t they relegate their religious over-zealousness (whatever that means) into the mosques? Do they, necessarily, need to be this ostentatious?
Most often, the, supposedly, honest criticisms serve as a cheap cover to smear the Muslims and, in some cases, attack their core belief. There is, absolutely, nothing wrong in drawing attention to the best way(s) to tackle issues or highlighting certain realities, which seem to elude attention. In fact, we (Muslims) actually need to take a deep look at the way we confront issues. Mob action or spontaneity is never a way to attend to issues. Both the Qur’an and the sayings of the prophet addressed this extensively. Any and every action of the Muslim should be guided by the Qur’an and Sunnah. The use of wisdom, prioritization, goal achieving, longer lasting, far reaching move and efficacy should be fully taken into considerations while taking any action. You can’t just attack your non-Muslim neighbor, for instance, because a non Muslim elsewhere wrote a book castigating your religion, or because Muslims are attacked elsewhere. You cannot torch your Christian neighbor’s property or kill him because a Christian contested a position with a Muslim and won. It is both un-Islamic and totally ineffective. During the time of the Prophet (SAW), any attack on Islam is countered in kind or better approach that will make a lasting impact. We have so many instances that backs this. When idolaters’ poets, for instance, ridicule the Prophet or the religion, Muslim poets replied in a far better tone and content. Just as the Qur’an cautioned Muslim not to desecrate anything or person being worshiped by any people, as doing that will result in them paying back in kind. It is wrong to reject or detest everything that comes or emanates from non-Muslims. Things are defined by their permissibility or otherwise in Islam. There are many things that, honestly, need to be put in their respective places or position but which we, wrongly, give similar and/or equal treatment. On the other hand, it will be very insensitive and insensible to expect Muslim not to be worried or angered when their religion is mocked, insulted or attacked. Just as it is a surprise that a man with common sense will find it difficult to understand why Muslims shows exasperation whenever fellow Muslim elsewhere are being killed.
When admonitions seek to disrobe or strip us from the religion, boldly questioning or faulting the texts and/or ideologies, intrinsic to the religion, on which our actions (or reactions) are based, there is no doubt of a possible hidden agenda therein. It is one thing to proffer better and intelligent way(s) for the ummah to face its problems; it is another to attempt detaching them from their religion by demanding they put aside the basics of their religion. The most essential part of any activity, to Muslims, is the intention, motive or purpose. If the niyyah (intention) is to acquire the pleasure of Allah, or to comply with the commands of Allah, or to avoid the wrath of Allah, that work or undertaking is for Allah, and Allah will reward it, as the prophet of Allah said. If you demand that I put Allah out of it or I do it as a human being, not a Muslim, you are literally saying I do the same activity not to please Allah but, to please his servants, or for nothing. Worst, that connotes a call to irreligiousness. It is very important to understand that it is one thing to engage in activities or undertakings without any intention or motive to please Allah; and it is another to do such as an irreligious person or with an atheistic mind. The latter is what these “intellectuals” think we should do. As the Qur’an explained “…When Allah is mentioned ALONE, the hearts of those who do not believe in the Hereafter shrink with aversion, but when those OTHER THAN HIM are mentioned, immediately they rejoice” (emphasis mine).
Premised on the wrong understanding or belief that we are first humans before being Muslims, these “intellectuals” believe that we should detach ourselves from religion on one thing and attach back on another. But in Islam, as the Prophet said, every human is born a Muslim, his parent turn him into Christianity, Judaism or Idol worshiper. A day old child of a Muslim is entitled to inherit and be inherited, because to Muslim he is a Muslim. Before we come to this world, we took a covenant that we will be Muslim, as the Qur’an clearly pointed. In addition, Muslims are commanded to “enter Islam completely” and not to “follow the footsteps of Satan”. They are not to obey some parts of the Qur;an and disobey other parts”. The whole of Qur’an is meant to be complied with any time anywhere, as the circumstances warrants.
Some of the problems of these “intellectuals” seem to arise from the way they view religion, particularly Islam. By commission or omission, sometimes, they have the same understanding of Islam with the extremists, just as the Islamophobes interpret the qur’an and sunnah the way the extremists do. There is a striking resemblance, ironic as that looks. Just as the extremist, wrongly, assume that any non Muslim is an “enemy” (despite Qur’anic verses to the contrary), the Islamophobes, and some of their “intellectual” friends, assume that identifying with Islam is automatically being oppressive to non-Muslims. They seem to, erroneously, believe that it is not possible, just as the extremists believe it is un-Islamic, for Muslims to work together with non-Muslims for the achievement of certain goals. They ignore the fact that some non-Muslims actually fought alongside the Prophet, in some of his Jihads, and so many other non-Muslims held higher positions during the Caliphate. The issue of extremism will be discussed later, in sha’allah.
For sure, some of these “intellectuals” might actually be sincere in their submissions, only that some of them lacks the ability or capacity to discuss those issues form a vantage point that demands wider knowledge and good understanding of Islam. Abstracts are insufficient for discussing Islam in a way some “intellectuals” do publicly, just as the use of “common sense” (which is relative) only could never form the bedrock of religiously attached issues.
The “intellectuals” need to understand that they need to talk to the Muslims with the language they understand, not a foreign one. That is they need to talk to the Muslims within the framework of Islamic Jurisprudence, which sufficiently provided capacious means of dissecting any matter on earth taking into cognizance the purpose of shari’ah. When and if you want to “talk” to the Muslims, the best way is to go to their source that stimulates them and talk to them using same and open their eyes to things that might have escaped their attention. That will definitely make impact. As we shall see in subsequent papers to come on this, there is a huge disconnect between the “intellectuals” and their audience.
There is nothing new or disturbing in having different views or opinions among Muslims, and it is, to some extent, permitted.
There is a consensus among Ulama, as recorded in many Islamic books, like Sheikh Danfodio’s Ihya’us Sunnah, that any matter or issue that is subject to interpretation and, consequently, the Mujtaheedeen differ, nobody should be accused of following or choosing any of the opinions. In other words, people are at liberty to go by the School of Thought they consider to have superior argument, or the one they feel is closer to truth, based on the points it presented. Those opinions of the Ulama, as we all know, are presented based on and within the framework of Islamic jurisprudence. But this is not to say any matter that the Ulama differ is open to this rule, there are exceptions. One cannot come up with something that contradicts what is unanimously accepted as basic in Islam for another to cite that rule as a reason to follow, accept or insist that it should be followed.
Based on this, any judgment, change, moderation, amendment and so on, that affects the spiritual and/or physical life of a Muslim should be based on and within the framework of Islamic jurisprudence.
The Usul al Fiqh ie sources of Islamic law or Principles of Jurisprudence, provided dynamic rules and procedures that made it possible for Muslim to live according to sharia, anywhere, anytime, from the medieval to modern times.
Written by Muhammad Mahmud.
meinagge@gmail.com
@nagangara
08065880423
