Religions, from the sublime to the ridiculous, share one thing in common. Adherents of a religion always differ among themselves regarding what constitutes the essence of the religion, what is more important or less important, what is right and what is heresy etc. Consequently, in all religions we have bigots, zealots and extremist on the one hand; with moderates and even nominal adherents on the other; depending on where they stand on the continuum.

 

Let us commence this piece from the Muslim North, where I belong. A certain fixation on the past took hold alongside a deep uneasiness with the present. The glory of the pre-colonial Sokoto Caliphate is oft celebrated. Nostalgia for it is growing by the day. The Muslim North cannot be seemed to get over the trauma of colonialism. We could not overcome our suspicions of modern day political and ideological realities, the consequence of which leaves the most essential themes of our social and political destiny hanging.

 

At the centre of this problem factor stand the mallams: Islamic teachers and, in the context of this write-up, preachers and opinion leaders. Mallams, who ought to encourage change, have largely failed in that role. For the most part, they did not detach themselves from the rigid tradition of defending our cause in the face of the enemy. Their priority has not been to constructively criticize the incredible shortcomings that we live with; as a result, partially and not exclusively, there now exist in the North, a profound disconnect, a deep mutual suspicion and lack of trust among the diverse constituents of what is today known as the 19 Northern States of Nigeria.

 

In Nigeria, Islamic religious authority or power has been diffused at a local level among countless scholars or Mallams, who lack a clearly defined hierarchy, organisation, minimum standards for entry, or even a curriculum for doctrine training. While every serious member of the Ulama has a right to use all the knowledge and experience he posses in the service of Islam and the community he belongs; he must not, however, be allowed to mix-up his own prejudice, conjecture and conclusion with the interpretation of Islamic texts, particularly the Quran, which is perfectly perspicacious. Yet, the absence of a body which has the authority and legal muscle to screen and licensed all Islamic preachers in such a way that only those found worthy, both in character and learning, will be licensed to preach; make Islamic preaching in particular, and all other forms of religious preaching in general, an all comers affair along with its attendant consequences.

 

In a typical northern setting, particularly within the Hausaland, any person vocal enough to stand in the mosque or in a public place to voice his views on issues, no matter how misinformed, quoting Quranic verses, no matter how out of place, is instantly regarded as a mallam or even a sheikh. And if he happens to be antagonistic towards the powers that be, he quickly win large following as a fearless and God fearing Mallam. Thus, the vocal mallams held their followers spellbound and dogmatised. Majority of the followers accept whatever comes out of the mouth of the Mallam as the Quranic truth. To argue with Mallam is to blaspheme. Giving the impression of a form of totalitarian arrangement, that demand and get complete obedience, from people with no independent mind.

 

This brand of mallams is fatwa happy. Fatwa is open for all. Yet, one will make bold to say, without the fear of contradiction that the bulk of these mallams are ignorant of the logic, philosophy and workings of the socio-economic and political systems they were falling over themselves to give fatwa on. The fatwa are supported by distortions of facts and by appeals to passion and prejudice, often deliberately false and misleading, all in an attempt to persuade through emotional appeal. Central to most of the fatwa is Conspiracy Theory, the idea that an event was by a conspiracy; that the other side is always conspiring against us. It goes without saying that the quality of the fatwa, particularly as it borders on the subject matter of politics and economics, leaves much to be desired.

 

Examples abound of fatwa dispensed at the whim and caprices of the mallams. During the 2003 General Elections some mallams have gone to the extreme of designating any PDP stalwart an infidel. When the Kaduna No-Shariah brouhaha broke out in 2000, many a respected northern Muslim politician, statesman, and even intellectuals of repute have been ferociously branded hypocrites. Just last year, the Islamness of several northern politicians that dared to be associated with the foiled third term bid of  President Obasanjo has been put to question—fatwa clearly verge on the absurd..

 

In Islamic jurisprudence, circumstances and the environment are key factors upon which fatwa is dependent. This is why fatwa differs from one place to another and from one circumstance to the other. Any fatwa given in Nigeria that does not take into consideration the peculiar circumstances and the environment of Nigeria as a federation, a republic as well as a democracy is liable to ridicule. Fatwa like a Muslim can only vote for a Muslim, and a Muslim who dare vote for a non-Muslim shall share, in the here-after, the same abode with non-Muslims; is clearly ridiculous as it does not take cognisance of circumstances and environment. Come to think of it, what will become of the corporate entity Nigeria, if Muslims must vote for only Muslims, Christians for only Christians, and to the animist only the animist? Can the Nation or any of its constituent parts ever survive and prosper under this form of rigidity? Must it always be black or white, no chance or tolerance for the grey? Is the concept of choice between greater and lesser evil now extinct?

 

One of the major causes of this phenomenon is, perhaps, the antithetical persona of the average mallam. He desired to live a life of material splendour and grandeur, to have everything that money can buy; yet he has neither an occupation or vocation, nor any recognisable means of livelihood. In plain English, he has no job, no work and no trade; but he wanted to live like a king. This compromises any principle he may have and, consequently make him a sycophant. Was it not said that he who pays the piper calls the tune?

 

Northern Christians and church leaders are not immune to this conflict-ridden tendency. The Northern Nigeria brand of Christianity is, probably, the most politicised version of Christianity on the surface of today’s earth. Christianity in the North has a distinct meaning and flavour from anywhere else. In the North, Christianity is, more or less, a political banner, movement or platform upon which all non-Muslim Northerners flock in opposition to what they perceived as Hausa and Fulani led oppression, both real and imagine. I used the phrase ‘Hausa and Fulani’ deliberately instead of the popular misnomer ‘Hausa-Fulani’. This, northern Christian mindset is clear if one look at what the average northern Christian consider the political (read: Christian) Middle belt as distinct from the geographical Middle belt. The average southern Christian, until very recently, views issues with the Hausa and Fulani led north essentially in regional and tribal terms. The Northern Christian reduces all issues, social, political and even economic, within the North simply to Islam v. Christianity. Islam is viewed as the symbol of Hausa and Fulani corrupt power and materialism. Some church leaders indicate to their followers that the secret of their wretchedness can be explained in the prosperity of the other side. This image of the Hausa and Fulani created by the Northern Christian church leaders enabled the average northern Christian to feel that, when they fought against the Hausa and Fulani, they were fighting for light against darkness.

 

From the foregoing, it is clear how the intractable problem of conspiracy theory and the manipulation of religion to score political goals set the background for the fear of the other side. It was said that fear easily leads to distrust, to hatred, to dehumanisation and, ultimately, to death.

 

The challenge before us now, our problem, is how best to liberate our country from the shackles of religious chauvinism? A problem identified and defined is said to be half solved. Others are of the opinion that a problem shared is half solved. Here I have attempted identifying and sharing the understanding of the problem; let us all, Nigerians, come together to find a solution to this problem that has the potential of threatening our very fabric as a nation. Let us wash our dirty linen in public. Let us tell ourselves the bitter truth, for the Truth shall set us free.

 

This is a clarion call.

 

Aliyu A. Ammani,

No 11A Rimaye Road,

U/Shanu Kaduna.