Emir Sanusi Lamido Sanusi : Shiite or Sunni?, By Mikailu Ibrahim Barau

OPINION
Jun 10, 2014

The Emir of Kano Is Too Learned to Be Shiite Or Sunni in The Modern Political And Economic Garment of The Sects; An

Excerpt From His Article In April 2007 Testifies This…

“…In theology, the ethical rationalism of the Mu’tazilites and Shiites accounts for their emphasis on the principle of ‘Adl, or justice. Politically, this was reflected in their attitude toward unjust rulers, and specifically the Umayyads, including key figures like Yazid b. Mu’awiya and Hajjaj b. Yusuf. This was markedly different from the Sunni consensus against rebellion, (a position that Ibn Taimiya, remarkably and to his credit, did not fully subscribe to). The question is also linked to the question of free will (qadar)and the extent to which humans are responsible for their actions. Indeed, many of those accused in the early days of Islam of the Qadarite( or “free-will”) heresy were subversive political activists who insisted that unjust rulers, and not God, were responsible for the injustice and corruption in the Caliphate.

In contemporary Muslim political thought, the most exemplary writers in defence of justice and the ethical foundations of the state have been, on the Shiite side, the Iranian intellectual Ali Shari’ati (particularly in his collection ‘An al-Tashayyu’ wal Thawra)and on the Sunnite side the Egyptian martyr Sayyid Qutb, not in Milestones, but in an earlier, more profound work, Social Justice in Islam (al- ‘Adalah al-Ijtima’iyyah fil Islam). Any one familiar with the above works of Qutb and Shari’ati will understand that for them, Islam is about delivering justice, and not a simple politics of identity. The major problem is that when Muslims read Qutb, they read his late work, Milestones, which he wrote while traumatized on death row, a book that has become the handbook of destructive fanatics on the lunatic fringe, such asal-Jihad and Takfir wa Hijrah. His main work on social justice has also suffered because of his condemnation of the Umayyads as a group of power seeking, cruel rulers who established corruption and nepotism in the Muslim world. This does not sit well with many Sunnites. Among the Shiites, the long running debates between Shari’ati and establishment clerics, has beclouded the profundity of his revolutionary thought. The later condemnation of Shari’ati by clerics close to Khomeini, such as Murtadha Mutahhari, has served to divert attention from his essential message, that what Muslims need is not a new dictatorship or autocracy or theocracy by any name, but a political system founded on principles of justice and equity. Many Shiites who accept the condemnation by clerics of Shari’ati on theological grounds fail to see that his political views were not only subversive to the monarchy, but a warning against the dangerous tendency and potential of an “Islamic revolution” to be hi-jacked by bazaar-owning scholars and turned into some sort of clerical despotism or “Islamic” capitalism.

In one of my earlier papers, “Shariacracy in Nigeria: The Intellectual Roots of Islamist Discourses”, I had stated my partisanship for the ethically grounded conception of Islam and Shari’ah propounded by Qutb and Shari’ati. Over the last few years, Ja’far has on various occasions made me the personal subject of his Friday sermons and radio preaching sessions in a desperate attempt to incite the population of Kano against me, labeling me a hypocrite, lover of Christians and enemy of Shari’ah. My first crime was to let Muslims know that the conviction of Safiya Hussaini and her sentencing to death by stoning was not Islamic-nor even Maliki Law-but a complete travesty thereof. Scholars like Ja’far who kept defending the judgment as consistent with the Law were not happy that I published references from authoritative sources-the Mukhtasar of Khaleel, the Mughni of Ibn Qudamah, the Muhalla of Ibn Hazm-showing them up as being either ignorant or diabolical. The problem, of course, is that ignorance and cruelty are not Shari’ah, and a man who fights them by whatever name is not against Shari’ah.

If a governor starts a legal and political project and calls it “shari’ah”, and is able to recruit some scholars who support him, that does not make what he is doing to be Shari’ah. To conclude, let me restate here my position on these issues, which has been and will remain consistent come what may. I do not accept what is happening in some northern states today, where poor thieves are amputated and poor women are harassed for adultery by incompetent and thieving politicians to be Shari’ah, I will never defend it, and I will not stop criticizing it until the governors change. I do not believe that every Muslim minister is good and every non-Muslim minister is bad, or that we will have a good government if we fill it with Muslims. In any case I doubt that many Christians consider Obasanjo or many of the Christians around him as good examples of Christianity. I believe Obasanjo’s government has failed the nation in many respects, and that it deserves serious sanction; but I do not believe it failed because it has a majority of Christian ministers. Each person is an individual with personal virtues and vices, and we must be fair in our judgment of fellow human beings.

And a final word, for those who care to listen. There are people who can be cowered, bamboozled or intimidated by glorified almajirai. I am not one of them. Period.”

By Mikailu Ibrahim Barau

Udu, Sokoto

http://abusidiqu.com/emir-sanusi-lamido-sanusi-shiite-sunni-mikailu-ibrahim-barau/

What a thought! I respect Lamido Sanusi a lot especially for his in-depth religious understanding. I hope he will use the power at his present disposal to redeem the image of muslims in the north.

However, I suggest you give another title to the thread as those in whose there is a disease of nifaq will moan that its another Sunni-shia thread.

I will suggest: "Justice, free-will, Sharia and politics in the words of Emir Sanusi Lamido"

Salam.

Over the last few years,
Ja’far has on various occasions made me the personal subject of his Friday sermons and radio
preaching sessions in a
desperate attempt to
incite the population of
Kano against me, labeling
me a hypocrite, lover of
Christians and enemy of
Shari’ah. My first crime
was to let Muslims know
that the conviction of
Safiya Hussaini and her
sentencing to death by
stoning was not Islamic-
nor even Maliki Law-but a
complete travesty thereof.
Scholars like Ja’far who
kept defending the
judgment as consistent
with the Law were not
happy that I published
references from
authoritative sources

Sharia activists can't see this. They 'll be too busy glorifying and campaigning for Sharia to even sit and define the laws and applications. So many are uneducated about this sharia, they don't all agree on its applications, limits or flexibility yet they believe it is this perfect and divine constitution, the cure to all humanity 's problems. That is why Sanusi and Ja'afar cannot agree here.

I do not accept what
is happening in some
northern states today,
where poor thieves are
amputated and poor
women are harassed for
adultery by incompetent
and thieving politicians to
be Shari’ah, I will never
defend it, and I will not
stop criticizing it until the
governors change

I try to do somewhat the same here, but the moderator can't even stand me. No one ever bothers. No one likes to talk issues that doesn't directly affect him, especially when it involves criticism, debunking or falsifying of his philosophies. That is why you see, people boycott this kind of thread.

U see usermane, ur problem is your creed is weak. At some point u may be right and i personally share some of ur thoughts but consistently shifting blames on Muslims make u unpopular.

I remember telling u that most misconceptions about Islam today from non-Muslims are media's fault. You consistently blame Muslims again and again. Unless and until u change ur view, they would ignore you. Another example is ur latest topic talking about bemoaning stuff. I chose to ignore commenting on it.

Now back to topic, there is nothing like killing apostate for changing religion. It doesn't matter how highly a Sheik supports such. Bottom line is killing apostate is not in Qur'an. It's the opposite. As for cutting hand stuff, going by the way you talk (ur creed) that Qur'an is enough to judge, now Qur'an says to "cut off"( or something close to that) thieves hands(5:38). So why don't you agree with that since you claim only Qur'an is enough? Answer that pls.
*****************You only choose and pick verses of Qur'an that suits you*************************

Using the right methodology, it's inappropriate to severed the hands of thieves in weak economy. That's adding insult to injury. I believe that Surah 5:38 is talking about "BIG THIEVES" (i:e Qintar ) folks in IMF, Bankers, politicians etc who rip off unsuspecting masses. Not average people trying to find something to eat. Average man is poor cant get a job. Has parents, siblings to feed and then "Shariah" court cut off his hand is just very stupid. People like that should be given jobs, put them in rent subsidized homes etc. Or better still, give them Shariah compliance loan (that's, riba-free loan) for those who which to open small business. That's how it should be. Shariah must be applied with wisdom.

And you should know that those who apply Shariah in naija seem weak themselves. Why not cut off hands of politicians looting taxpayers money?. This is why politicians don't want Shariah on national level bcus their hands will pay dearly. It's therefore hypocritical to apply such law on poor but declare immunity to big thieves.

As for u (unsermane) they will keep ignoring you cus you sound ignorant even you make good point sometimes that i can agree with. You off the hook in most cases

@lagosShia, as Mr. Baqir rightly said, pls change the headline from sectarian motives. Nothing to gain from that. I dont know why you brothers cant just be Muslims without sectarian string. I appreciate if you could do that. Thanks

^Thank you brother for that. Well said.

Empiree: U see usermane, ur problem is your creed is weak.

I wouldn't go there if i were you considering that your creed has been dissected and debunked here over and over by the shiites, and even the atheists know that.

At some point u may be right and i personally share some of ur thought but consistently shift all blames on Muslims makes u unpopular.

Pay attention to pronouns and adjectives whenever you read. I seldom generalise. The only thing is you "muslims" have a hard time in eating the crow.

I remember telling u that most misconceptions about Islam today from non-Muslims are media's fault. You consistently blame Muslims again and again.

I remember telling you that no doubting Thomas, fall prey to media propagandas and you can't continue to play off inadequacies like religious intolerance or killing of apostates in your ummah by bemoaning the media.

Another example is ur latest topic talking about bemoaning stuff. I chose to ignore commenting on it.

Because i went as far as exposing the baselessness in bemoaning the media for paying less coverage to the murder of a muslim convert than the judicial execution of a muslim apostate, the former driven by human grief and emotion and the latter sanctioned by the "divine laws of a religion"

Now back to topic, there is nothing like killing apostate for changing religion. It doesn't matter how highly a Sheik supports such. Bottom line is killing apostate is not in Qur'an.

@underlined, what about this hadith?

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

Narrated 'Ikrima:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists)
were brought to 'Ali and
he burnt them. The news
of this event, reached Ibn
'Abbas who said, "If I had
been in his place, I would
not have burnt them, as
Allah's Apostle forbade it,
saying, 'Do not punish
anybody with Allah's
punishment (fire). ' I
would have killed them
according to the statement of Allah's
Apostle, ''Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Your claims are at odds with your creed, all sunni schools of thought recognise death as penalty for apostacy. Of course the penalty isn't in the Qur'an but according your creed, its presence in hadith books confirms it. Did you forget that Eid-el Fitr isn't in the Qur'an, why do you mark it yearly?

As for cutting hand stuff, going by the way you talk (ur creed) that Qur'an is enough to judge, now Qur'an says to "cut off"( or something close to that) thieves hands(5:38). So why don't you agree with that since you claim only Qur'an is enough? Answer that pls.

Study chapter 12 v 31 & 50. The arabic word you translated as cut off in 5:38 is the same word used in 12:50, i don't think the Quran mean that the women amputated their hands, does it?
"Cutting hands" here can either be taken figuratively or literally as making a cut but not amputation.

As for u (usermane) they will keep ignoring you cus you sound ignorant even you make good point sometimes that i can agree with. You off the hook in most cases

Nope, lets just say they get too bitter after reading my proof backed criticisms or polemics of their "infallible" doctrines to respond, that is if at all they can man up enough to read through my complete writting and verify the proofs. You all know i don't fall for straw man or window dressers, i go for rational analysis, theisis and investigation and i deal with issues you are too afraid to consider. So usermane topics are no go areas for many of you. And thanks to the moderator, my topics always end in the recycle bin.

@usermane, sorry, I'm not here for Sunni-Shia brouhaha. If sura 5:38 is figuratively to you that's your problem. And in the Christian bibles they have bunch of kill kill kill anyone who changes religion but you have problem with hadith that not all Muslims agreed upon. keep it up.

usermane:

Study chapter 12 v 31 & 50. The arabic word you translated as cut off in 5:38 is the same word used in 12:50, i don't think the Quran mean that the women amputated their hands, does it?
"Cutting hands" here can either be taken figuratively or literally as making a cut but not amputation.

Just as much as you sound right that the same Arabic root words are used in Q.5:36 and Q.12:31 for "Cutting hands", it definitely does not mean "Amputation of hand".

Our Mujtahid believe the punishment for theft is "cutting of finger" not "Amputation of hand".

Empiree: @usermane, sorry, [u]I'm not here for Sunni-Shia brouhaha[/]. If sura 5:38 is figuratively to you that's your problem. And in the Christian bibles they have bunch of kill kill kill anyone who changes religion but you have problem with hadith that not all Muslims agreed upon. keep it up.

@underlined, I don't think he discussed Sunni-Shia here so why bring on the "shi'a-sunni?".

As per the punishment for treason against God, yes Islam doesn't shy away from that. Even going to the bible is far (username is neither a christain nor muslim), western (which I think username embrace a lot) criminal law is there to be seen. Its execution or banished from the land.

AlBaqir:

@underlined, I don't think he discussed Sunni-Shia here so why bring on the "shi'a-sunni?".

As per the punishment for treason against God, yes Islam doesn't shy away from that. Even going to the bible is far (username is neither a christain nor muslim), western (which I think username embrace a lot) criminal law is there to be seen. Its execution or banished from the land.

Oh yea? i thought he's Muslim. I read his post a while back where he portrayed himself "we progressive Muslims" So i have always thought he's. Well, it's even better if he's not. If that's the case he needs to be quiet. He goes hey hey on Muslims. I am aware of existence of "progressive Muslims". They are in us as well. They don't believe belief in Divine punishment (in Quran) should be applied. They consider it "barbaric". In 2012, it was progressive Muslims who came out publicly to support surveillance of Muslims in NY. "We progressive Muslims support govt surveillance of Muslim community". Their leader said. I remember watching that on the news.

So if usermane is not Muslim you need to pls tell him to shut up. He's acting like he's the custodian of islam and we don't know anything. If he is not muslim nor christian, why go hey hey on muslims all the time while ignoring many barbaric passages in the Bibles. Thanks man. You really made my day for telling me he's not muslim.

He consistently quote that hadith as if we all believe in such. And to even throw his claim in the garbage, if capital punishment is applied on apostates(death), why do they have many Christians in the ME?. They should all be dead long time. He needs to shut up. And how many apostates were killed as a result of the hadith?. I am sure they are countable. Bottom line is he has problem with islam and Muslims. He can pretend all he wants. i will just ignore him then. @ bold, he seems to rally around that. That nonsense needs to end. Pls tell LagosShia to change the headline. Thanks

usermane:
Sharia activists can't see this. .

Please don't bother. Every Muslim believes in Shariah - the laws of Allah. It is fundamental to Islamic belief

Hummm!

BetaThings:
Please don't bother. Every Muslim believes in Shariah - the laws of Allah. It is fundamental to Islamic belief

what did i say, did you read my post at all? You 've already jumped in defence, no one attacked sharia yet. Sanusi said he suffered prosecution from Sheikh Jaafar due to his position on Sharia and i opined that individual differences in application of sharia complicates its implementation. In our times, these differences aren't resolved. Scholars do not all agree on the statutes. Anyone calling for sharia at this point is like an individual calling for a soccer match where players and officials have varying position on it rules!

^Do you think the guy read at all? His deep hatred for everything apart from his fanatical ideology have blocked his intellectual senses.

subhanalah where was i when all these were happening