Courting Controversies In Cassocks And
al-Kimbas
28 August 2012By Abdulwarees Solanke
As a student of religions, I like to pick on issues,
development and controversies in all faiths with a
view to understanding how well each faith is faring as
an instrument of human liberation from the slavery of
self-desires and exploitation and oppression in the
Lord's vineyard. I do this because I want to confirm
or debunk the Marxists' notion that religion is the
opium of the masses and the view of the father of
Modern Turkey, Kemal Ataturk that religion is
antithetical to modernization and civilization.
The positions of the two schools are based on their
experiences in Western Europe on the one hand and the
Ottoman Turkish Empire or on the other. Turkey is or
was also Europe, but Muslim. In the case of Turkey,
the entire Europe had begun to see the country as the
Sick Man of Europe by the turn of the 20th century. To
revive the country therefore especially after the
first world war, Kemal Attaturk finally liquidated the
Islamic caliphate that the ottoman empire symbolized
so as to belong the modern Europe.
In a no nonsense revolutionary manner, he extinguished
almost all traces of Islam in Turkey as he promoted
all sorts of vanities in the name of the new culture.
With the Kemalists is power in Turkey, the Muslim
scholars were silenced; religion became a private and
personal affair; Arabic script was replaced with roman
letters; the large masjids were shut; the minarets
lost their grandeur in Turkey; the state house became
a big banquet for parties; the veil, hijab was
removed; the fez cap gave way for the bowler hats;
robes and turbans of the muallims became offensive to
don in the public; the new men of culture and
civilization in Turkey went about in their sartorial
suits and shining walking sticks while their women
became fanciful in frolics and skirts. That was Turkey
of the 1920s. From then, a new Turkey emerged on the
world stage, a Turkey that shed all its garb of Islam.
Now, Turkey is returning to her Islamic past.
In European Christendom, the Renaissance, followed by
the 18th and the 19th Century French Revolution was to
determine the attachment to the church and the
relevance of the clergy. The clergy or the
ecclesiastical order was to lose its honor and respect
in the years following the French revolution and the
Napoleonic Wars through the ideas of philosophers like
Montesquieu and Rousseau. But the greatest blow was
dealt on the church when philosophers like Karl Marx,
influenced by the ideas of Hegel and supported by
Friedrich Engels began to expose and attack religion
in Europe while propagating the materialist communist
philosophy.
However, as the 19th Century wore on and the search
for raw materials to fuel the Industrial revolution in
Europe, Africa and Asia became the field of
competition for the European powers, who in 1815 at
the Berlin Conference, marshalled out plans for the
sharing of territories in the continents. In the
scramble for and the partition of Africa, the colonial
agenda was to assist the spread of Christianity in
Africa and Asia even though its influence was
curtailed in the lives of the Europeans who saw the
Church and the clergy as retrogressive. The reason why
the rulers of modern Europe were suspicious of the
church is simple: religion was superstitious in their
view while the clergy held so much power and influence
over the minds and fate of the ordinary people. In
that process, the clergy was very exploitative,
cornering the best land and properties. The church was
stupendously rich while the masses were poor. The
church also validates and anoints the royalty and the
aristocracy in the medieval Europe. So, the concerned
men of letters and philosophy see the problem of the
ordinary folks as the making of the clergy and the
ulama.
The Christian clergy and the Muslim ulama of the past
were indeed influential. They were the voice behind
the throne. The righteousness of the rulers or the
debauchery of the kings are to be seen in the
endorsement or guidance provided by the religious
leaders and scholars close to the royal courts. So, if
the state is well run, check their spiritual guides.
But these spiritual guides can also lapse into error
and forgetfulness. In the height of the dalliance with
the royalty, they may forget they are god sent. They
may become engrossed in the luxury and opulence of the
aristocrats and the nobles. They may join the
bandwagon of exploiters of the ignorance and poverty
of the common folks.
They may also be engaged in the rat race and scramble
for the loot; they may begin to see one another as
enemies in the competition. And so, religious leaders
may become partisan and party loyalists. They sing the
praise of the kings and the nobles even if they are
debauches. Among the religious scholars, dog may begin
to eat dog. Condemnation and curses may become their
pastime. In the hate under their cassocks and al-kimbas,
they may begin to invoke fire and brimstone on one
another. The pulpits and the lecterns that should be
used to purify souls become stand posts of
incendiaries against their perceived competitors. The
mimbars that should used for tezkiyyahs, or
purification of the soul, may be turned pillars of
controversies and curses.
When religious leaders descend on one another, the
congregation draw pull out daggers. Brothers in faith
become enemies in the fold. The whisperings of shaitan
is mistaken for the message from the above. When
mischievous rulers want to push through their bad
intentions, they find a good voice in one derailed
pastor or a sheikh. Whey they want to confer
legitimacy on and enjoy their loot, they seek
sanctification from certain misguided bishops and
imams. In this game of corruption religious leaders
become accomplices.
Because the Christian missionaries in Nigeria are
media savvy, I get to know many of the controversies
in the church. So, lurid details of how a shepherd is
hoodwinking his flock usually do not escape me, nor
are the rot behind the razzmatazz of the crowd pulling
televangelists. I am always availed the inside
knowledge of the clash between pastor-mentors and
their protégés, expectedly leading to split in the
rank and file of the congregation. Behind most of the
conflicts in the house of the lord is the quest for
fame and glory, control of the tithes in billions,
scandals around the skirt and hot legs of choristers
of praise.
That is why I sympathized with a certain public
affairs commentator who openly declared in his column
few months back why he would not be in the church on
Sundays because of the inanities of some so called
shepherd who are actually leading their flock on the
path perdition and eternal damnation in their
messages, dress sense and taste for the things of the
flesh. I did not know such also exist among sheikhs of
Islam until I took a BRT ride recently.
It was around half past three on this particular day
in Ramadan, the Muslim month of fasting. I took a
convenient seat in one of the red painted
air-conditioned BRT or Lagbus buses. Many unlettered
call it Fashola. The distance to cover is just in
about 25 minutes, enough for me to recover from some
sleep shortage. No soon had I closed my eyes lids did
I lapse into 'dreaming'. I found myself in front of TV
watching a Muslim scholar in some combative mien
lashing at his fellow ulama. He thoroughly castigated
them. I never knew aafaas nurture such hate against
one another. I woke up just five minutes to my bustop
to see two clean shaven muslims walking by me to
alight from the bus and telling each other, tomorrow
will be hot on MITV. Sheikh will shake them more. Won
a tun bo lola. My senses were returning. I was
connecting their last statement with my experience in
the dream world. I realize that I was just half asleep
and have been listening to the conversation of the two
young aafaas who were reviewing the e ji saari
programme on telly.
Later that night, I had a good night rest and woke
around 4.00 am to ease myself. As sleep eluded me
after the toilet routine, I decided to skim the TV,
changing channels. Every channel I tuned to was
featuring one Muslim enlightenment programme or the
other. My last was MITV when I stumbled on one sheikh
talking about controversy. He was in the midst of his
lecture. 'why are they running from controversy? My
brain did some juggling connecting with the
dream-discussion of the previous day during my BRT
ride. I wanted to hear more. The sheikh was literally
raving. His words were uncomplimentary of people he
called callers. He accused them of insincerity. He
said they had no reason to be presenting themselves as
people of faith. He said they are not knowledgeable.
He said they had no business being in the missionary
work since they had no background in kewu. He
challenged them to stick to their own respective
professions as doctors, lawyers, engineers etc and
leave aafaa work for the professional aafaas. I was
amused. I never knew that as we have pastor on pastor
violence, muslims also have a variant.
That edition was cut off with a call to prayer
sponsored by another Muslim. Then another sheikh took
stage. I wanted to listen to what he has in stock,
perhaps I might enjoy another round of controversial
talk. This second sheikh was just harping in
reformation of the soul. I noticed that the audience
before this sheikh were too attentive, too serious as
if they were waiting for the last day, unlike the
previous show where fun and laughter were always in
large dose as the sheikh on show lampoons others.
With that early morning show and my BRT ride dream of
the previous day, I came to realize that indeed Muslim
scholars can be the problem of the muslims. I realize
that it is the scholars that are behind the attitude
of their followers. I conjecture that there is no way
you will listen to the ranting like of the first
sheikh and you will not be flippant and frivolous,
jiving and mis-jiving And there is no way you will
hear the sermon as of the second sheikh and you will
not become calm, bleached of some stains on your mind.
So, as a student of religion, I made it a ritual to
watch the first and the second shieikhs of Islam on
MITV for comparison of their messages just as I watch
a KICC Femi Faseru and a Christ Embassy Chris
Oyakhilome at midday in to see who is more fiery even
in the flamboyance of their dressing and the vanity of
their presentations. I conclude from my experience of
the messages of the two religious groups and the four
spiritual mentors that while the new day pastors drive
their flock towards the worldly competition and
vanity, the sheikhs leave their followers on the mid
road of stagnation and purification, because while one
group of Muslim scholars call to reform, another group
of sheikhs finds fault with those calling for
purification and reform of the souls. Which of them do
they follow? It was my BRT ride encounter with two fun
loving brothers in islam that motivated me to listen
to the sermons of Muslim scholars. And I found that
there are two sets of Muslim scholars in Nigeria, the
controversial and the caller. In reality, a caller can
call to righteousness or to perdition. You can easily
see from his message and decide or not to follow him.
But a controversial leaves you confused on what path
to follow and you may end up hard hearted or stubborn
because the issues he addresses are not to uplift your
soul but to condemn and criticize and justify and
analyze out of rationality and abuse others for
nothing, throwing caution to the wind as if whatever
others say are targeted at his shortcomings.
The controversial is usually very arrogant too. I
never knew aafas can be arrogant. I always think all
aafas are gentle and saintly. Eni olohun laafaa, the
Yorubas use to say. But I was wrong. A controversial
aafaa is as combative as a street fighter. And muslims
can afford to put money sponsoring his ranting on air?
Haba! What a waste of precious air time! What a waste
of resources! What a waste of people's mind and souls!
I think muslims should regret such waste!
To be sincere however, I think time is now to radio
and TV stations to questions on the preachments
contained in the religious programmes aired on their
stations. More than anything, pastors and Muslim
scholars owe this nation the duty of reforming the
souls, preparatory to building good citizens. The
nation needs the beauty and guidance from the Quran
and the bible and not the hate that spews forth from
the minds of selfish pastors and ambitious sheikhs in
flowing cassocks and billowing al-kimbas.
AbdulWarees Solanke, Head, Voice of Nigeria
Training Centre (Transmitting Station, ikorodu),
Lagos, studied Mass Communication at the University of
Lagos and Public Policy at the Universiti Brunei
Darusslam and writes
viakorewarith@yahoo.com ,
korewarith@voiceofnigeria.org
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments