My Rejoinder To Adamu Adamu (1)

in

I share with my readers Dr. Salisu Shehu’s rejoinder to Adamu Adamu’s piece on Sheikh Abubakar Mahmud Gumi. Dr Salisu has spared me the distress of responding to Adamu Adamu on this issue. Enjoy:

With all sense of modesty, I can proclaim that I belong to a generation of Muslim activists that were intellectually nurtured and brought up, and are still being influenced in a number of ways by, among other things, the brilliant weekly write-ups and commentaries of the likes of Malam Adamu Adamu. In fact, Malam Adamu stands out quite prominently among them. Having grown up and had my primary education in a village in the late sixties through the seventies, and even while at the teachers’ college in the early eighties I was never used to reading, not to talk of appreciating the value of newspapers. I got introduced to reading them when I set my foot in Bayero University Kano, as a student in the mid-eighties. And once initiated, I immediately got hooked up to Malam Ibrahim Sulaiman’s column and Malam Adamu’s DEFINITIONS-IN-HUMOUR, both in the Sunday New Nigerian. As it were, the latter was essentially most of the time politically satirical with some blend of sarcasm. It was a unique kind of social criticism, one may further say, which was full of rare insight, appeal and  humour all of which would wholesomely engage its readers, and then at the end of it all, leave them excitedly inspired, conscientized and sensitized. What perhaps, may further demonstrate not just merely our unrelenting admiration for, but also secret discipleship to, Malam Adamu and his generation of writers, the Muhammad Harunas and co., was our following to them from the NEW NIGERIAN to CITIZEN then to SENTINEL and finally now in the Daily Trust columns. Sometimes, if it became obvious that one would miss the Daily Trust editions for a particular week, at least, necessary arrangements and even sacrifices are made to ensure obtaining that of Friday, just to read Malam Adamu Adamu. The knowledge, information, and several other benefits one derives from his Friday column are really immense and invaluable.  Usually, the brilliance, erudition, lucidity, proficiency, adeptness, articulation, candour and force that are deployed in his writings all combine to give Malam Adamu’s column a unique appeal and attraction.

The assertions above are sincere expressions of my feelings, impressions and dispositions towards Malam Adamu’s writings. I have no reasons to flatter him. In fact, only the Lilliputian can be flattered; that would not matter to giants in anyway. But as human beings, we have certain inherent limitations and weaknesses. We cannot be roundly perfect, and so we are bound to commit errors and or make mistakes. In the scholastic and intellectual sphere, even the most celeberated erudite scholars do fall into error, what the Arabs usually say, “Every invincible horse (‘dokin iska’) does have missed step(s)”. And like Imam Raagib al-Isfahaani once put it succinctly, “no writer would put down a certain piece of write-up except that if he reads it afterwards, he would surely feel , “I should have added this or deleted that, or that I should have presented this point before that”,  “Allah had Decreed that no script would be perfect and impeccable except His Book-the Qur’an”. This to my mind is the exact thing that Malam Adamu fell into, not for the first time of Course, in the second part of his  write-up – Is the North a Lip?, published in his back page Friday column of the Daily Trust of 26th July, 2013. What appeared in that write up was, to say the least, not only a manifestation of that inherent human weakness, but a demonstration of the fact that, evasion of facts or their deliberate distortion for the purpose of mischief can be its integral (human weakness) components. It is therefore, upon this premise that I wish to take Malam Adamu on some assertions he made, or issues he raised in the write up in reference.

Generally speaking, one would admire Mallam Adamu when he writes on issues that are rather not strictly religious. In this regard, one would see how courageous he can be in standing firm on the path of fairness and objectivity. But, perhaps because of sectarian chauvinism, since Malam Adamu cannot deny being affiliated or inclined to one, even though, sometimes desperately, albeit fruitlessly, he tries to play the ostrich, but the writing is very clear on the wall. His intolerance, resentment and pathological hatred for some Islamic scholars and their followers are usually very glaring. Contrastingly also, his undue reverence and veneration to a fault, one may say, of some other scholars are similarly very clear. This kind of tendency in Malam Adamu can be seen even at the global level as it relates to some Muslim countries, scholars or groups. A common element discernible in the write ups of Mallam Adamu is that the Muslim scholars and countries he seems to differ with on certain religious creeds or issues always represent everything evil. They never do anything good for Islam or the Ummah, and they do not and cannot even have the capacity or potentiality to do that. Every keen reader and follower of Malam Adamu’s writings would agree with my assertion because, as far as I am concerned, and I stand to be corrected, I have never seen any instance at which Malam Adamu says anything positive about the group of scholars and preachers that he characteristically and fondly always disparages. The Late Sheikh Abubakar Mahmud Gumi falls within, or leads this unfortunate group of scholars. But as for the other group of scholars of Muslim countries revered or anointed by Malam Adamu, they are always on a right cause. They do not fall into error, and they must, thus, be venerated and glorified at all times and at all cost. In spite of the vanities and misdeeds of some of the icons of this second group of Islamic scholars, they are to him the paragons of virtue.  

This kind of posture is obviously wrong, especially when the person associated with it is a writer of international repute that Malam Adamu depicts. It is worse if it is associated with a person who seems to be purportedly proclaiming that he is interested in fostering and promoting the unity of the Ummah. What usually pushes a person (a scholar or writer) into this kind of faulty position is the inability or failure to imbibe the Qur’anic principle of adl and insaf (fairness and objectivity in judgment and utterance). The Qur’an severally enjoins us to be just and fair in dealing with people in whatever situation, and in any case, even if we differ with them in opinion or have some resentment towards them. First of all, the Qur’an enjoins us to be just and fair in our speeches (this includes writings) about or against person(s) or people even when, and if, the interest of somebody close to us in some way is involved. Allah says in Surah al-An’aam, verse 152: “…and when you make speech (statement) be just and fair even if (it was involving/against) your next of kin…”. And in Surah al-Ma’idah, verse 8, Allah charges us to rise above our sentiments and ill feelings against a person(s) when it comes to making judgment/attestation for or against him/them. Allah says: “O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah as just witnesses; and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do.” The Qur’an gave us a practical demonstration of the kind of fairness required of us in speech and judgment when it tells us about alcohol and gamble. Although these are unambiguously prohibited by the Qur’an, but when it comes to describing the essential character of the two, it was fair enough to state the fact that they contain some benefit even though very little compared to their harms and evil. That is insaf. We also see its practical application from the hadith reported by Imam al-Bukhari, in which the Prophet (SAW) affirmed the saying of a Satan about the virtue of Ayatul Kursiyy that it gives protection to whoever recites it while retiring to bed for sleep. The Prophet (SAW) said, as far as that particular statement from him was concerned, he spoke the truth, even though he were a great liar. The point here is that because of insaf, the Prophet affirmed his statement of truth regardless of the fact that he was Satan. That is what is expected of intellectual icons like Malam Adamu Adamu, and it is this kind of fair-minded approach to issues and treatment of people that would foster and promote mutual understanding, mutual respect and unity in the Ummah. But Mallam Adamu’s failure in this regard is very glaring. When he was writing last year on the Saudis and Hajj, he was able to identify whatever sort of thing he thought was evil which the Saudi authorities and scholars did against Islam and the Muslim Ummah, but could not have the fairness to say anything positive about their handling of Hajj and other Islamic rites and institutions. Conversely however, in many of his writings, he would go to any length to defend or justify the words, actions and perspectives, postures and dispositions of Iran even if in absurdity and futility.

Let nobody make the mistake of thinking that I am out to hold brief for any particular scholar or group of preachers even when they have numerous failures, lapses and errors of omission and commission. None of our scholars is infallible, just as no Islamic group is being led by angels. Therefore, all our Islamic scholars and their various respective groups have their good and bad sides. They do right in some instances and they fall into error at other instances. Some are closer to righteousness and uprightness in creed and character, others are farther away. The point I am making, therefore, is that we must be fair to ourselves. That entails acknowledging a person’s or group’s positive side and constructively criticize his/its negative side without any sort of element of mischief, malice or vilification. That is the only way we would engender mutual tolerance, understanding and unity in the Ummah, and the nation at large.