Connect with us

Opinion

AbdulJabbar’s Shiite agenda and blasphemy

Published

on

By Ibrahim Ado-Kurawa

Abduljabar Nasiru Kabara has confirmed that he is a Shiite. But there is need to examine the trajectory of Shiism in Nigeria and their strategies since they first manifested as internationalist propagandists.

Sunni Islam is predominant in Nigeria since the arrival of Islam in the Sudan. Shehu Usman Danfodio and his successors reinforced this position.

In 1979 Ayatullah Khomenei led the Shiite Revolution in Iran, which he called Islamic Revolution. He gained the sympathy of many Muslims across the world because of American antagonism towards his Shiite State.

In Nigeria many students sympathized with the Iranian cause. One of such students was Ibrahim Yakubu (aka ElZakzaki). He recruited many followers in the university not in the name of Shiism because at that time he did not profess to be Shiite. He was more inclined to Muslim Brothers (Ikhwan of Egypt and Syria) and he used their books for preaching and propagation of his ideas.

Even Khomenei at that time did not insist all Muslims should become Shiites. In fact the Iranians even pledged to edit and translate the literature of the Sokoto leaders.

This was in the formative stage. It was a deliberate action that enticed innocent people who thought Khomenei was genuine. I visited Iran in 1983 and since then I realized that their aim was not Islam but Shiite propagation and recruitment for Iranian imperialist expansionism.

All the rhetoric against the USA is only a deceitful deviance. After all Iran is now a major financier of terrorism and other high stake crimes such as drug dealings and laundering of counterfeit currency. These are not Islamic actions.

Many student activists visited Iran but ElZakzaki became the focal person. Abdulkarim Kaura Namoda met Khomenei who promised and directed that Nigerian version of Hizbollah terrorist organization should be founded under his command. This did not materialize because of his rivalry with ElZakzaki.

Gradually ElZakzaki transmuted and became a full Shiite. The Islamist political activists deserted him and his Shiism became public knowledge.

Others who went to Iran to study returned as Shiites some were trained as theologians while others in the natural sciences.

Shiites were recruited from the rural areas and from the urban vulnerable. They established their cells in many states of Northern Nigeria. The Shiite Republic of Iran and its clients supported Shiite groups across the country. They established schools in many parts of Northern Nigeria. They commenced the recruitment drive.

The first targets were Islamists in educational institutions where they recruited as much as they could. The next targets were followers of Sufi brotherhoods (Darikas).

The reason for targeting them was political as most of them were against Saudi religious propaganda. This was the soft point of people like Abduljabar and some of them were eventually converted.

Meanwhile Ibrahim ElZakzaki became the de-facto leader of Shiites in Nigeria even though some who were trained in Iran resisted because of his intellectual deficiency. They even claimed that they are apolitical and that they have nothing to do with ElZakzaky’s confrontation with the State.

The incapacitation of ElZakzaki has created a vacuum up for the grabs. Abduljabar is about to fill that vacuum. He has requested Iran to support him. This is a clear manifestation of his agenda. He uses misrepresentation of Islam propagated by orientalists, out right lies and virulent narratives to entice the many ignorant and unemployed youths.

This was the same strategy used by Maitatsine earlier and ElZakzaki, who subsequently eliminated Abdulkarim Kaura, the Zamfara prince who eventually became a psychiatric case.

Abduljabar’s agenda is to recruit as many gullible people into Shiism as possible. This could be achieved through the mass media by exploiting the intellectual and material weaknesses of the society and the secularist contradictions of the Nigerian State.

He falsely claims, through his postures that he wants to purge Islam of adulteration according to him as a result of the lies fabricated against the Prophet (SAW), which have remained in the books of Ahl Sunna. He claims that all the Ahl Sunnah are misguided and by extension Shaykh Nasiru Kabara his father who lived as a scholar of the Ahl Sunna doctrine and never challenged the books of Hadith, Fiqh or even the Ash’ari School of Theology.

All these according to the claims of Abduljabar must be discarded. And he has nothing to offer apart from disjointed quotations since he is not even grounded in Fiqh.

Sometimes when it suits him, he condemns the great Muslim Jurists who espoused the rules of Fiqh. His aim is to confuse the listeners and eventually recruit them into deviant Shiite doctrine since most of them are ignorant.

Abduljabar is not a scholar but a propagandist so he assumes everyone is ignorant. There is nothing original or scholarly in his ranting.

Every student not even scholar knows that Christianity, Islam, Shiism have their epistemology. They have the rules upon which they establish their beliefs. So if anyone wants to reform any practices of any people that claim to be adherents of these faiths he must follow the established rules.

For example when Martin Luther decided to reform the Church he did not challenge Trinity or the fundamental practices approved by the early Church.

Those engaged in polemics against Christianity can bring so many phrases that contradict each other in the Bible. Such polemics can even prove that the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD was a later contrivance presided by unbaptized Christian and it made Trinity the Final Doctrine of Christianity.

But no Christian will ever accept this as a reason to discard Trinity or even shake his faith in it. This is because Christ said to Simon the fisherman: “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16: 18).

According to Christian teaching the Holy Spirit guided the institution of the Church after Christ and it has final authority on Faith hence it promulgated all the important creeds especially that of Chalcedon in AD 451.

It was the Church not Christ that decided what should even be in the Bible. Thus “St. Paul in writing letters to the congregations of disciples in Rome and other centers had no idea that he was helping to construct a New Testament” of the Bible (Wilfred Cantwell Smith The Meaning and End of Religion Fortress Press Minneapolis 1991 p. 94). In this respect Shiism is closer to Christianity than Islam because it was created after the Prophet (SAW).

In Islam not Shiism, there is no clergy or Church as in the case of Christianity. There are certain principles outlined which all scholars know and they use them to discern any issue hence it is possible reach consensus without any meeting.

This was how every issue was resolved since the time of the companions. As it is clear now on the blasphemy of Abduljabar, when he equated himself with the Prophet (SAW) in widely circulated video.

Shiism, on the other hand is different as it was invented after the Prophet (SAW) because of politics. Everything revolves around their Imams who are infallible and they came after our beloved Prophet (SAW). Anything that does not elevate them must be interpreted to have that meaning.

Some Shiites do not even pray the Juma’a because the Imam of the time is hidden until Khomenei elevated his own status to that of Velayat-e Faqih, a new concept in Shiism, which he introduced to assume the role of the representative of the Imam and he directed them to pray.

His authority to his followers is similar to that of the Pope hence he made decrees in absence of the Imam who is the supreme Shiite authority.

So the positions of Ahl Sunnah on the Qur’an and Hadith are different from those of the Shiites but Abduljabar will never say this. Because his aim is to use his fraud to hoodwink the ignorant and disconnect them from the Sunnah and then introduce them to his Shiite false doctrine that was invented after the Prophet (SAW).

The Qur’an is the Word of Allah and is recited by Muslims as revealed, to our beloved Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Qur’an is unadulterated and has remained as revealed ever since and it shall forever remain because the Muslims have the Qur’an in their memory. Not all Shiites believe this. This is because of their hatred for Sayyiduna Usman and the fact that their false doctrines cannot stand if they accept the Finality and Divinity of the Qur’an (Word of ALLAH).

Anyone who doubts the authenticity of the Qur’an is not a Muslim. Some Shiites, who did not reach the level of kufr (unbelief) do not out rightly reject the Qur’an but misinterpret its meanings whenever it does not satisfy their desires.

But this is more difficult for them to openly declare hence the only strategy is to attack the Hadith literature and generate confusion in the minds of the ignorant and the gullible. If Abduljabar succeeds in this adventure he will begin to openly attack the Qur’an.

Sunnah is the sum total of the “divinely guided” life style of the Prophet (SAW) as transmitted through an impeccable chain of narrators in authentic Hadith.  It includes all his statements and actions “as well as the statements and actions of others done in his presence which did not meet his disapproval. Hadith is the record of actions and sayings of the Prophet (SAW).”

Hadith, is also the record of sayings and actions of his companions done in his presence” (Philips, A. A. B.  1995 The Evolution of Fiqh: Islamic Law and the Madh-habs Riyadh p. 29), which he approved.  Hadith therefore is the record of the Sunnah.

Scholars of Ahl Sunnah have categorized Hadiths and the majority of the Muslims accept these categorizations. There are scholarly disagreements on Hadiths and also critiques of all Hadith collections. Analyses were done before using them for any Shari’ah rulings, which are accepted based on the principles outlined over one thousand years ago.

One of the most important differences between Ahl Sunnah and deviant Shiites is in the principles accepted for authentication, rejection of Hadith and using them to make legal judgments.

Yet Shiites with evil intention such as Abduljabar quote Hadith authenticated or rejected by Ahl Sunnah, make additions, misinterpret them and even translate the Arabic wrongly where possible since it is all about polemics not principles of knowledge.

This is because they have no Hadith collections to use in authenticating their heretic interpretations or engage in polemics but only have the fabricated sayings of their Imams and fabricated or misinterpreted Hadiths of the Ahl Sunnah.

The Shiites are able to engage in these evil actions because the Ahl Sunnah revere all the companions and most of the Shiite Imams therefore it is easy to find traditions in the collections of Ahl Sunnah that are attributed to these pious leaders.

It is a similar case with Christians it is an article of Faith of Ahl Sunnah to believe in the Prophets mentioned in the Bible even though Christians do not believe in our beloved Prophet SAW.

So why is Abduljabar different? He claims that he wants to purge Islam of contradictions according to him people are leaving the Faith because of such contradictions. Therefore he has appointed himself as a reformer, committed to refining all the corpus of knowledge of the Ahl Sunnah.

This is deliberate to deceive the gullible. In his rhetoric he does not adhere to any principles. And he is not able to outline his own new principles since he does not even have the capacity to do that.

For example Al-Sayid Sabiq decided to write Fiqh Sunnah because he was not satisfied with the principles of the Schools of Islamic Law (Madhahib) and Shaykh Nasirudeen Albani wrote Sifat Salat Nabi because he was not satisfied with the description of many scholars.

Abduljabar on the other hand is only interested in creating confusion not even the critique of the Hadith collections. He claimed that he studied Bukhari with his father Shaykh Nasir Kabara but was that how he taught him?

Abduljabar is totally disrespectful to our beloved Prophet SAW because he does not adhere to the principles outlined in Ash-Shifa of Qadi that has been in Kano and continuously used for over 500 years.

His father Shaykh Nasiru Kabara was very proud of Ash-Shifa and lived by its teachings. Based on the rulings in Ash-Shifa part four the chapter on ‘The Legal Judgment As Regards the One Who Characterizes Oneself with the Prophets’ Qualities”, Abduljabar should be indicted and punished for committing this blasphemy.

Some people are claiming that Abduljabar should be allowed to continue with his heresy because Nigeria is a democracy. But every democracy has certain values.

For example nobody dares to deny that there was Holocaust or even criticize Jews or the Lesbians and Gays (LGBT) in the Western countries. This support to LGBT is unchristian but it is strong in the West.

This is because “the Europe once coterminous with Christendom is now post-Christian and neo-pagan” (Roberts J. M. 1996 A History of Europe Oxford p.583) hence they elevated their desires above God’s prohibitions.

Muslims can never accept elevating man above Allah’s Law. Therefore in Kano, according to the position of Ahl Sunnah it is a crime to denigrate the Prophet (SAW) his family and companions. Those who oppose this position are either Shiites who want to damage the reputation of the Sunnah or ignorant people.

Some of the Shiites, including the terrorist organization IMN and their sympathizers are angry that all Ahl Sunnah are united against Abduljabar so they invoke polemics against Ibn Taimiyah and Saudi-Iran rhetoric to seek support.

The IMN Shiite agents of Iranian imperialism in their naivety think they can gain the sympathy of the Tijaniyya followers they mentioned in their release. They will never because the Prophet (SAW) is too important to Ahl Sunnah.

But to these Iranian imperialist agents their politics is more important than the integrity of the Prophet (SAW) because politics invented theology in Shiism. They use the Prophet (SAW) only for political gain as Khomenei did.

They claim that Abduljabar has denied his insults against the Prophet (SAW), that this reason why he should be tried before a competent court, not to be exonerated by terrorists like, the IMN. All Ahl Sunnah are united including those they mentioned in their press statement this is the position of the truth because our beloved Prophet (SAW), his family and companions are more important than any sect or affiliation.

Is there any need to engage Abduljabar in a debate? All the issues concerning critique of Hadith have been discussed and understood by Ahl Sunna for over 1200 years culminating in the magisterial work of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (1372-1449).

Abduljabar’s positions are very clear. He is Shiite. So there is no need to debate with him. The only thing that needs to be done is for him to face trial for blasphemy nothing more. If he is found guilty he should be punished according to the Shari’a Penal Law of Kano State.

There is need for decisive action against him. This is not an infringement on his religious freedom. There is difference between religious freedom and criminality.

He can be Shiite or an atheist but if denigrates our beloved Prophet SAW he is a criminal as far as the Law of this land is concerned. He should not be allowed to use public platform to propagate Shiism using out of context quotations and outright lies.

The Americans stopped Trump’s hate propaganda in the social media so those who look up to the West for guidance even there, they have red line. The red line in Muslim societies is the integrity of our beloved Prophet SAW. There is no place for that blasphemy in Kano State the choice was made over 1000 years ago just as one cannot go to Iran and propagate anti-Shiism of any kind.

The strategy of Abduljabar is to use rabble-rousing, creating confusion and finally offering Shiism to his audience. Most of his listeners are unaware that Shiism was invented after the Prophet (SAW) because of politics.

Their politics created a new theology for them based on the supremacy of their Imams and belief in them is an article of faith in Shiism.

Therefore the Iranian imperialist agenda is to confuse innocent people through this propaganda of people like Abduljabar who misinterpret, wrongly translate Hadiths and interpolate with outright lies.

Through this, they hope to recruit as many as possible and a gain foothold for imperialist Iran in the largest concentration of African Muslims. This must be stopped.

Kurawa is a public commentator in Kano.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Election-Era Extravagance: Why Nigeria Must Reject the Latest Debt Plan

Published

on

 

 

Dr Saleh Adamu Kwaru

 

Adding a staggering $20.52 billion and €1.05 billion to Nigeria’s debt burden is more than an economic miscalculation; it is a source of heartbreak for a nation already brought to its knees. At a time when millions of citizens are struggling to afford a single meal, grappling with historic inflation and watching their futures slip away, the government’s response appears to be to pile yet another mountain of debt on the country. This raises a painful question for every suffering Nigerian: When will our leaders finally acknowledge the pain their decisions inflict, and when will the bleeding stop?

 

The timing of this massive loan request is particularly troubling. Seeking to secure huge foreign loans on the eve of intense political activity and election seasons, when public anxiety is high and attention is divided, risks depriving citizens of the robust accountability the country deserves. Rather than looking inward, exercising fiscal discipline and improving public revenue management, the government appears to be rushing to mortgage the nation’s collective future. It feels less like responsible governance and more like a desperate attempt to lock in liabilities before the public can challenge them.

 

Nigeria’s national debt profile is already a ticking time bomb, placing enormous pressure on every sector of society. Every additional dollar borrowed increases the country’s financial obligations and diverts revenue that could otherwise support schools, equip hospitals and protect vulnerable citizens. Adding more than $20 billion to this burden risks pushing the country closer to the brink of a debt crisis, threatening to leave future generations trapped in a cycle of economic dependence. How much more hardship can ordinary Nigerians endure before the consequences of unsustainable borrowing become overwhelming?

 

We are repeatedly offered the same promises that these loans will transform electricity, roads, healthcare and education. But good intentions without transparency and accountability are not enough. Where is the visible evidence that previous loans have translated into better living conditions for ordinary Nigerians? Instead of seeing the promised improvements, many citizens continue to grapple with rising poverty while the country’s debt burden grows. When projects fail to generate sufficient economic returns to justify their costs, the burden ultimately falls on ordinary citizens through higher taxes, deteriorating public services and deeper economic hardship.

 

Before anyone commits future generations to repaying billions of dollars in new loans, the government must look Nigerians in the eye and explain how existing public resources are being managed. Why does borrowing appear to be the easiest option while systemic corruption and inefficiencies in public spending remain major concerns? Nigerians are exhausted by a system that leaves them bearing the consequences of decisions over which they have little control.

 

The country does not need another mountain of debt built on promises alone. It needs leaders committed to transparency, fiscal discipline, prudent resource management and the welfare of the people they have sworn to serve. Any new borrowing must be justified by clear development objectives, independently verifiable benefits and a credible repayment plan.

 

Nigeria cannot borrow its way out of every economic challenge. The government must demonstrate that it has exhausted reasonable alternatives, established safeguards against waste and corruption, and put the public interest above political convenience. Without these assurances, further borrowing risks deepening the hardship Nigerians already face and transferring an even heavier burden to generations yet unborn.

Dr Saleh Adamu Kwaru, is former staff of Central Bank of Nigeria. 

Continue Reading

Opinion

Sheikh Masussuka’s killing: why sectarian blame must not replace justice

Published

on

 

Imam Murtadha Gusau

 

The killing of Katsina-based Islamic preacher Sheikh Yahaya Ibrahim Masussuka should serve as a warning against the dangers of religious extremism, sectarian hostility and the reckless attribution of blame before investigations are concluded.

 

Sheikh Masussuka was reportedly shot dead alongside his associate, Adamu Abubakar, by gunmen in Dutsin-Ma, Katsina State, on Monday, October 26, 2026. His death has generated tension, with allegations circulating on social media and among religious circles that members of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, particularly the Salafiyyah and Izalah movements, were responsible.

 

Those allegations have been complicated by an audio statement in which the terrorist group Ansaru reportedly claimed responsibility for the killings. The group was also reported to have cited Masussuka’s religious views, advocacy for interfaith dialogue and condemnation of violent extremism among its grievances against him.

 

These claims must be properly investigated and independently established. However, they underscore an important point: religious disagreements, however intense, must never become a licence for violence, and suspicion must never be mistaken for proof.

 

The danger of collective blame

Masussuka was a controversial religious figure whose Qur’an-centred teachings, including his rejection of the authority of Prophetic Hadith, brought him into theological disagreements with mainstream Islamic scholars.

 

In November 2025, he reportedly petitioned the Katsina State Government over alleged insults and threats from members of the Izalah movement. Such a history of disagreement may explain why some people quickly suspected his religious opponents after his killing. It does not, however, establish their responsibility for the crime.

 

In a society where religious identity can easily become a source of division, the temptation to blame an entire movement for the actions of individuals is dangerous. It can inflame tensions, provoke retaliation and endanger innocent people.

 

No religious group should be held collectively responsible for a crime without credible evidence. Equally, no individual or organisation should be shielded from investigation merely because of its religious affiliation or public standing.

 

The appropriate response to the killing is a thorough, impartial investigation that identifies the perpetrators, establishes their motives and brings those found culpable to justice.

 

The Katsina State Police Command and other relevant authorities must be allowed to carry out their responsibilities without pressure from partisan interests or religious factions. Members of the public, meanwhile, should resist the temptation to spread unverified allegations or mobilise others against people they suspect.

 

Justice cannot be secured through rumours, online accusations or reprisals. It requires evidence, due process and the courage to accept the outcome of a credible investigation.

 

Islam’s position on the sanctity of life

As a Muslim, I consider the protection of innocent life a fundamental obligation. The deliberate killing of an innocent person is a grave offence, and no interpretation of religion should be used to justify murder, intimidation or acts of terror.

 

Allah says in the Qur’an:

 

“Whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption done in the land—it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one—it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.” (Qur’an 5:32)

 

This teaching places an enormous moral responsibility on every believer. Human life cannot be treated as disposable simply because someone holds a different opinion, belongs to another religious group or challenges a particular interpretation of scripture.

 

The Qur’an also instructs Muslims to invite people to the way of their Lord with wisdom and good counsel, and to engage them in the best possible manner (Qur’an 16:125).

 

This principle is particularly important when religious differences become contentious. Disagreement should be addressed through scholarship, dialogue and reasoned argument—not threats, intimidation or violence.

 

Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, like other Muslim communities, should be judged by the conduct of its adherents and the teachings they uphold, rather than by allegations that have not been established. Those who identify with the Sunnah must demonstrate through their conduct that their commitment to the faith is inseparable from justice, mercy and respect for human life.

 

At the same time, the rejection of terrorism must be universal. Violence does not become acceptable because its perpetrators claim to defend a religious cause, and no group can acquire immunity from scrutiny by invoking Islam.

 

Knowledge must defeat extremism

One of the most effective ways of confronting religious extremism is to promote sound Islamic scholarship and responsible religious leadership.

 

The history of Islam offers examples of scholars who confronted dangerous interpretations through knowledge and dialogue. Abdullah ibn Abbas, a Companion of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), is widely remembered in Islamic tradition for engaging the Khawarij, an early extremist group, in theological argument and challenging their interpretations of religious texts.

 

The lesson is that mistaken beliefs should be confronted with evidence, patience and sound scholarship. Violence against people suspected of holding erroneous views only deepens division and makes peaceful engagement more difficult.

 

Religious leaders therefore have a special responsibility to ensure that their sermons, teachings and public statements do not encourage hatred or legitimise harm against others. They must distinguish between correcting an idea and attacking the dignity or safety of the person who holds it.

 

This responsibility extends to social media, where provocative messages and unverified allegations can spread rapidly. Religious disputes that might otherwise remain confined to scholarly discussions can become public confrontations when users circulate inflammatory claims without checking their accuracy.

 

Muslims should refuse to participate in online campaigns that dehumanise opponents, encourage collective punishment or portray entire communities as enemies. The pursuit of truth requires intellectual honesty, while the defence of religion requires good character.

 

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have said that a Muslim is one from whose tongue and hand other people are safe. This teaching offers a practical standard by which believers should assess their conduct.

 

If our words expose innocent people to threats, or our actions endanger their lives, we must examine whether we are truly reflecting the values we profess.

 

Mercy is not weakness

The distinction between religious conviction and religious intolerance must be clearly understood. A person can hold firmly to a theological position without insulting, threatening or persecuting those who disagree.

 

Indeed, mercy does not require Muslims to abandon their beliefs. It requires them to uphold those beliefs without violating the rights of others.

 

The Prophet’s conduct provides a model of restraint and compassion. In a well-known account in Sahih al-Bukhari, a Bedouin urinated in the Prophet’s Mosque, prompting some Companions to react angrily. The Prophet instructed them to leave the man alone and have the affected area cleaned, explaining that people had been sent to make matters easier, not harder.

 

The lesson is not that wrongdoing should be ignored. Rather, correction should be proportionate, informed and directed towards addressing the problem instead of humiliating or destroying the person responsible.

 

This approach is relevant to contemporary religious disagreements. A person who expresses a controversial interpretation of Islam should be answered with knowledge and appropriate dialogue. Where conduct violates the law, the authorities should respond through lawful procedures. Neither theological disagreement nor public anger justifies private punishment.

 

Similarly, allegations of blasphemy, disbelief or deviation must not be treated as permission for individuals to take the law into their own hands. Accusations of this nature can have devastating consequences and must never become instruments for settling personal scores or advancing sectarian interests.

 

A responsibility shared by leaders and citizens

The killing of Sheikh Masussuka demands more than condemnation. It calls for a collective commitment to prevent further violence.

 

The police must investigate the killings professionally and pursue those responsible. Religious leaders must calm their followers and reject attempts to exploit the tragedy. Political and community leaders must discourage inflammatory rhetoric, while media organisations and social media users must verify information before publishing or sharing it.

 

The government should also pay attention to the conditions that allow extremist groups to recruit, intimidate communities and spread violent ideologies. Effective security measures must be accompanied by credible religious education, community engagement and opportunities for young people to seek guidance from knowledgeable and responsible scholars.

 

Above all, the authorities must ensure that the pursuit of justice does not become a pretext for harassment or reprisals against innocent people.

 

The killing of one person must not lead to the persecution of another. Nor should the grief of a victim’s family be exploited to deepen divisions within the Muslim community.

 

Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah adherents have a responsibility to reject violence committed in the name of Islam and to demonstrate that their commitment to the Sunnah is reflected in patience, compassion and respect for justice. Other religious communities and ideological groups have the same obligation to reject violence and hold their members accountable for wrongdoing.

 

The protection of innocent life is not the exclusive responsibility of one sect. It is a shared moral and civic duty.

 

Justice, not vengeance

The circumstances surrounding Sheikh Masussuka’s death must be established through a credible investigation. If Ansaru’s reported claim of responsibility is substantiated, the group’s involvement must be confronted through lawful security and judicial measures. If evidence implicates any other individuals, they too must answer for their actions.

 

Until then, Nigerians must resist the urge to turn suspicion into certainty or religious disagreement into collective condemnation.

 

The true test of religious commitment is not the intensity with which one denounces opponents, but the willingness to uphold truth and justice even when emotions run high. Faith should encourage self-restraint, protect human dignity and inspire people to seek peaceful solutions to their differences.

 

Nigeria has already paid a heavy price for violence driven by extremism and communal suspicion. The country cannot afford to allow another killing to become a trigger for fresh hostility.

 

Let the death of Sheikh Yahaya Ibrahim Masussuka strengthen, rather than weaken, our resolve to protect innocent lives, promote responsible religious dialogue and ensure that every allegation is tested against evidence.

 

Islam must not be used as a cover for terrorism, and religious disagreement must never become an excuse for murder. The path forward is clear: reject extremism, condemn false accusations, protect the innocent and allow justice to take its course.

 

Imam Murtadha Muhammad Gusau is the Chief Imam of Nagazi-Uvete Jumu’ah Mosque and the late Alhaji Abdur-Rahman Okene’s Mosque, Okene, Kogi State, Nigeria.

 

Continue Reading

Opinion

Malam Ibrahim Mu’azzam: A Teacher of Teachers and a Lifelong Inspiration

Published

on

 

Prof Ibrahim Bello-Kano (IBK)

 

Malam Ibrahim Mu’azzam is arguably the most influential person and university teacher in my academic and intellectual development. Although I studied Sociology rather than Political Science, I audited his courses and attended his lectures throughout my early and later undergraduate years.

 

One of the qualities that distinguished him then, and which he has retained to this day, is his charismatic personality and the natural attraction he exerts on students through his wide-ranging knowledge, teaching expertise and remarkable ability to inspire intellectual curiosity. Students passionate about ideas and critical thinking were always drawn to his approach to introducing complex concepts to an often bewildered classroom.

 

Malam Mu’azzam, as we fondly call him, was a magnet for ideas and a model of critical intellectual engagement. In those days, he probably had one of the largest personal libraries or private studies. Scores of undergraduate and postgraduate students trooped to his home, which he moved to after leaving the university quarters.

 

We marvelled at his extraordinary collection of books spanning numerous disciplines, far beyond his formal academic specialisation and teaching responsibilities. His study contained, and continues to contain, books on a wide range of subjects, including the philosophy of science, theology, education, English, linguistics and, of course, classic and highly acclaimed works in the social sciences, Political Science and Geography.

 

I still remember an incident in 1988 when Malam and I travelled to the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, for an Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) delegates’ conference. I accompanied him to the university bookshop and watched him purchase books across a variety of academic disciplines. That experience inspired me to follow his example by building a collection of books from different fields—a habit I have sustained to this day.

 

Despite his formal retirement after a long career at Bayero University, Kano (BUK), Malam remains intellectually active. He continues to work with us at the Ibrahim Mu’azzam Institute of Philosophy, organised by the Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD).

 

His continued engagement is a remarkable testament to his enduring contributions to teaching, critical scholarship and the advancement of knowledge within and beyond the academic community. Malam Mu’azzam’s influence extends far beyond the classroom, inspiring generations of students and scholars to embrace intellectual curiosity, independent thought and lifelong learning.

Prof Ibrahim Bello-Kano (IBK), teaches at Bayero University, Kano. 

Continue Reading

Trending