Islam

Friday Sermon: The Evil Leadership and Complacent Followers

Published

2 years ago

June 7, 2024

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

“O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Apostle, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” (Quran 4:59)

One year after the coming of the present administration with its promise of ‘renewed hope’, and the complete dashing of all hopes: ‘high cost of living, hunger, starvation, food inflation, insecurity, monumental corruption, divestments by multinational oil corporations, the flight of capital to other countries, the unabating spread of a culture of hate in the country, poor governance, and bad politics’, it becomes appropriate for us to revisit the morphology of the socio-political situation in the country. Hence, a return to the sermon on ‘the Evil Leadership and Complacent Followers’.

Islam makes no sharp division between sacred and secular affairs; it expects governments to be imbued with righteousness. Likewise, Islam expects Muslims to respect the authority of such a government for otherwise there can be no order or discipline. This, however, is the bane of religious precepts in a secular environment. It is not in consonant with participatory democracy and the qualities desired from followers in modern democratic society. This is the origin of the proverbial docility, acquiescence and unquestioning acceptance of leadership and the ‘rankadede’ syndrome, an unquestioning obeisance of leaders. The above verse of the Quran (Quran 4:59) assumes a theocratic state.

Modern nation states demand a different set of qualities and paradigms. Unfortunately, most of these qualities are lacking in the followership in our society.

As followers we are too timid and complacent. Starting from the issue of social services, we do not make forceful demands on our rulers. We acquiesce and resort to self-help. We make little or no demands on our leaders for accountability and limit our complaints to rancorous discussions at the beer parlor or at social events over plates of ‘jollof rice’ and Coca Cola. Yet a culture of protest is a sine qua non of democracy.

Protest movements are struggles to be seen and to be heard. In the last 60 years protest movements around the world have mobilized against injustices and inequalities to bring about substantial sociocultural, sociopolitical, and socio-economic changes. Whilst familiar repertoires of action persist, such as strikes, demonstrations, and occupations of public space, the landscape is very different from 60 years ago when the so-called ‘new social movements’ emerged.

Protest movements are a key function of democracy. They represent an expression of ideas and principles to challenge dominant orthodoxies and have resulted in significant changes to policies and legislation as well as to attitudinal transformations in local, national, and international contexts. Protest movements show no signs of abating in the twenty-first century as people challenge governments, regimes, economic structures, austerity, material inequalities as well as advocate for global issues such as food, water, energy, healthcare, and climate change.

Protest is an operation of democratic power which can be performative; it is both an act and an enactment. Protest is a collective struggle which calls into question ‘the inchoate and powerful dimensions of reigning notions of the political’. The democratic public performs its existence through resistance: it demands recognition, embodies visibility, articulates a political voice, and communicates ideas/demands. In doing so, protest constitutes ‘the people’, and through the aesthetics of protest, ruptures conventions of doing politics.

Protests emerge when people come together to react against exclusion, inequality and injustice, usually propagated by the state or government, though other actors or structures including environmental precarity or economic instability can mobilize people to act. “The founding moment of French political history was the Revolution. Since then, French people speak directly to power through protest: Although not necessarily in such a bloody way.”

Protest movements have been recognized as significant contributors to processes of political participation and transformations of culture and value systems, as well as to the development of both a national and transnational civil society.

In the words of Prof Wole Soyinka: “Let us begin with some collective introspection. I have become increasingly convinced that, between leadership and the led, there is only a very thin dividing line, often nearly indistinguishable. There is no question in my mind that, most often, the so-called led are their own worst enemies, even to the point of self-betrayal and treachery to their own existence…” Wole Soyinka: ‘Handshake Across History’.

Public participation, therefore, as a political principle or practice, and may also be recognized as a right. … It implies that the public’s contribution will influence the decision. Public participation may also be regarded as a way of empowerment and as a vital part of democratic governance. The key role of citizens in a democracy is to participate in public life.

Protest is possible because we have inalienable rights to assemble, to associate, and to speak. Rather, the enactment of protest signifies democracy in its most essential form, one that is founded on action and enactment: ‘Democracy is, properly speaking, the symbolic institution of the political in the form of the power of those who are not entitled to exercise power – a rupture in the order of legitimacy and domination. Democracy is the paradoxical power of those who do not count’ (Rancière and Panagia 2000: 124).

Protest is not only concerned with seeking recognition; protest seeks to disrupt the existing political order, transcend, or abandon its ideological trappings, and create new possibilities.

Protests invoke images of mass demonstrations, riots, and sit-ins, all of which are common tactics used by civic activists, often to advocate for a cause or protest a government policy. At the heart of protest culture is a firm belief in the value of free speech, and the power of the collective in making demands on the state. Protest culture thus has its roots in the democratic ideals that enable them to take place: justice, equality, and fraternity, to name some of them.

Protest culture, however, need not lead to a slippery slope of divisive identity politics, if it is rooted in a thoughtful, engaged citizenship. This cuts to the heart of the state’s distrust of protests – a fundamental lack of respect for, or trust in, the citizenry by the state due to paternalism. Such paternalism views protestors as petulant children who make demands without considering the complex challenges that policymakers face and inevitable trade-offs they have to make. Protests are seen as outlets for populism and xenophobia, rather than a meaningful intervention into existing debates.

In other climes they protest and riot over increase in the price of bread or rice, fuel and other issues that impinge on the welfare of the people. Here we are content to accept all that they throw at us with equanimity. What have we done about the fantabulous take home pay of our legislators? Nothing! We do not protest the potholes on our streets or the delay in refuse disposal. We make little or no demands on our leaders and do not hold them responsible for our degradation, impoverishment and accelerating poverty.

Political apathy can be categorized as the indifference of an individual and a lack of interest in participating in political activities. Political apathy can lead to low voter turnout and stagnation in government.

It has been argued that religion; in particular Islam, is a contributing factor to the situation of political docility and lethargy of its adherents. Obedience is a divine command from al-Qur’an and Hadith likewise. Islamic history records many instances as far as obedience is concerned.

On the authority of Ibn ‘Umar, The Holy Prophet (SAW) said: It is obligatory upon a Muslim that he should listen (to the ruler appointed over him) and obey him whether he likes it or not, except that he is ordered to do a sinful thing. If he is ordered to do a sinful act, a Muslim should neither listen to him nor should he obey his orders (Sahih Muslim, Book 20, Hadith 4533).

This perhaps accounts for the proverbial acceptance of some of our brothers in the faith for the misrule of their leaders and why they have remained apolitical.

This thesis is however faulted in the light of the ‘Arab Spring’ and other uprisings and protests in patently Islamic climes. It is therefore not Islam or Christianity that makes a citizen apathetic, irresponsible to his political duties and obligations; rather it is the political culture of lethargy and political de-participation.

Despite the suffering and challenges we face, we lack the culture of protest and rejection of bad governance. People are not prepared to make sacrifices on the barricades and as such resign their lives to fate. Yet, in this same country, we had, Aba Women Protest, Enugu Coal Miners Strike, Egba Women Protest, NADECO, Civil Society Groups, Occupy Nigeria and the recent ENDSARS Protest. But no nationwide protest over ASU/Government closure of universities for nearly a year, no pim on the excesses and political paganism of our legislators, nothing on the state of hunger and starvation in the country despite humongous expenditure on SUVs, Hajj and other scandalous spendings.

Yet, protests and counter-protests are all products of a healthy democracy, and thus help engage a wider public in important discourse that is often overlooked because it involves only a small minority of people.

In an age of increased complexity and in which the population has grown to demand more of a say, protest allows all people to make their voices heard, helping to surface opinions that might change Nigeria for the better, but might otherwise never be heard or taken seriously by the state.

Even in Islamic history, there are instances of the importance of followers asking questions and making demands on their leaders. A person cannot be a functioning member of his community if he or she lacks knowledge and wisdom. Equally a follower is expected to be courageous.

According to Mohammed Al-Işfahani: “courage is a quality of the soul, its heart’s strength against shock and composure when experiencing fear.” The Path to Virtue: The Ethical Philosophy of AlRaghib Al-Işfahani: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization, p 275)

The earliest followers in Islam were credible, honest and courageous. Therefore, they established themselves as independent, critical thinkers whose knowledge and wisdom are dependable. Bashir bin Sa‘ad (r.a) was a courageous follower during Omar’s (r.a) regime. He was bold enough to tell Caliph ‘Omar that they will straighten him as they do with their arrows if he fails to properly perform his duties as a leader.

Caliph Omar said, “It is the duty of the leader and followers to listen to each other and to voice out their concern.” He added, “When followers do not participate and provide input, they are not contributing something useful. And we are not useful if we do not consent to their contributions.” (Ali, A.J. (2005), Islamic Perspectives on Management and Organization. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. P 135)

Of Tragedy and Hope: The fatherless child is snatched from the breast; the infant of the poor is seized for a debt. Lacking clothes, they go about naked; they carry the sheaves but still go hungry. They crush the olives among the terraces; they tread the winepresses yet suffer thirst. The groans of the dying rise from the city, the souls of the wounded cry out for help. But God charges no one with wrongdoing (Job 24:8-12)

Barka Juma’at and a happy weekend

Islam

Friday Sermon: Terrorism: The Curse of Islam 1

Published

2 days ago

June 5, 2026

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

A lot has happened recently on the ‘terrorism’ front that brings to the front burner the issue of Islam and terrorism, more especially with some erstwhile Moslems and ‘friends’ of Islam beginning to ask the question: Why Islam? Misperception and confusion are starting to set in and many have begun to ruminate over the possibilities of a real connection between the tenets of the religion and terrorism.

Here in Nigeria, it has become increasingly clear that terrorism is no more the exclusive preserve of the Fulani herdsmen, Boko Haram and their derivatives, rather it has become a full-blown lucrative proposition for all comers. Kidnapping, terrorism and their variants have assumed industrial scale pursuits; and is no more limited to regions or provinces.

Recent provocative messages from Mike Arnold, a former US mayor and missionary and spokesman on the perceived Christian persecution, radical Islam and humanitarian crises in Nigeria, has made this sermon very germane. He is also the US ally of Nnamdi Kanu, the misguided Biafra irredentist: And most of all a self-styled modern-day crusader for the liberation of Nigeria from the clutches of remnants of Dan Fodio’s Jihad and the emergence of the ‘Promised Messiah’.

From the onset, let us disabuse our minds of any connection, encouragement, aiding or abetting of terror by mainstream Islam. There is no point repeating the assertion that Islam is a religion of peace.

It must also be said that the media is today enamoured with incidents of terrorism as it gives them good copy and the now proverbial’ Breaking News’ syndrome. The result of these odious presses, the activities of fringe terrorists is causing the faith what many now perceive that: “Violence is inherent in Islam. It’s a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. It legitimizes murder.”

We can say with certainty that the violence and conflict racking much of the Muslim world does not happen because its inhabitants are Muslims. Because in recent decades alone we have seen every one of these types of violence replicated in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Rwanda, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Cambodia, in conflicts where next to no Muslims were involved.

Contrary to the oft-stated view that religion causes much of the world’s violence, the past century has shown the immense potential for violence of the centralizing nation-state. Some people will be quick to say that none of the countries have generated global terrorism; which is correct. The fact is that they do not make sensational headlines as religion would.

A better explanation is that none of these post-colonial nations was deemed of crucial strategic importance to the West, and so none found itself garrisoned by Western troops; whereas the countries where large numbers of Muslims live happen to lie across the Suez Canal, the Strait of Hormuz and a vast reservoir of fossil fuels, as well as the birthplace of the West’s major religion. All those things made the West a participant in the Muslim world’s conflicts and then – eventually, after many decades – a target for them.

But that is geopolitics and cannot explain the recent emergence of home-based terrorists in England, France, Germany, Belgium and the United States. However, we might ponder, why the same type of terrorism is absent in South America, even Mexico.

The reason is not far-fetched. These nations have never had exploitative relationships with the so-called axis of Islamic militarism. That is, simply the Oil kingdoms of the East.

If anything, Europe is suffering from the collateral damage of years of its injustice to the people of the ‘Fertile Crescent’. The situation is however, not being helped by the intemperate language of ‘Islam haters’ in the West. A commentator on CBS 60 Minutes did not stop at the violent acts of militant Muslims: No, he declared on the program that ‘Muhammad (SAW) is a “terrorist” who set an example opposite to that of Jesus and Moses’.

The most detestable of them all is the book by J.K Sheindlin: THE PEOPLE VS MUHAMMAD: A PSYCHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS, dubbed; ‘The trial which challenges the founder of Islam’s authority over all mankind’. In this book (worse than Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses), the author called the Prophet (SAW) all sorts of unprintable epithets, most unbecoming of a sane human being. No wonder the book was eventually censored and banned on the Internet.

We have written about this before, namely, that the sins of Muslims should not be confused with the tenets or doctrines of Islam. We absolutely agree that some Muslims use Quranic verses (out of context) to justify their murder of innocent people. But the Bible has also been used to justify murder (http://www.evilbible.com/evil-bible-home-page/murder-in-the-bible/), the enslavement of Africans, or racial discrimination in the United States. You can also reference ‘The Slave Bible’.

Scores of Orthodox Christian Serb soldiers systematically raped tens of thousands of Bosnian Muslim women in the aftermath of the breakup of Yugoslavia. The members of the Klu Klux Klan are Christians. Can one justifiably conclude that Christianity is a racist and “evil” religion? Islam is not accorded this same treatment, and it is wrong.

On the one hand some Christian fundamentalists say how barbaric Islam is when it decrees cutting off the hand of the thief; however, when we read the Old Testament, much of the punishment prescribed there is the same as in the Qur’an. Even the evangelicals’ relentless assault on the dress of the Muslim women is contentious. Ask them about the dress of Mary, the mother of Jesus and the pious women during the time of Jesus: In the New Testament the verses read, ‘it is a shame for a woman to pray with her head uncovered. (1 Cor. 11:2-16); also, in the book of Ephesians, there are verses that read, wives obey your husbands and be silent in the church, if you have a question, wait until you get home and ask your husband. Women are to learn in silence and subjection (Ephesians 5:21-32). The Evangelical are silent on these and countless other verses that support racism against people of colour; the verse reads “Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.” (Colossians 3:22).

Allah says in the holy book: O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you, make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do (Quran 5:8)

It is very easy to forget that the evangelicals and the neo-conservatives use the Bible to justify Israeli occupation of Palestine. They fund and support illegal settlement activity. They are also against peace and all “road maps” to peace. They support directly or indirectly the violence and terrorism against Palestinians fighting for their just cause against occupation. They also supported the illegal war against Iran for the “security” of Israel.

The US, Israel, India, Russia, etc. have all the WMDs and other powerful weapons which they use frequently – these nations have terrorized and killed so many and continue to do so in the name of self-defence or in the defence of their economic interest – even at the cost of so many innocent lives? It is therefore an insult upon injury when the legitimate struggle of the oppressed is termed terrorism.

We need to educate people in the fact that terrorism is not Islam; and that terrorists, regardless of religion or political ideology, are all demented fools who use their religion or ideology as a mechanism to justify their sick and twisted acts. No religion condones terrorism.

We need to educate the people that being a Muslim, Christian, Jew, Atheist, a member of the political left or political right does not equate you to being a terrorist, but rather that those who are terrorist are trying to equate themselves with members of these faiths or ideologies and are causing catastrophic damage when they hijack these faiths and ideologies for their own sick and twisted actions.

Groups such as Al-Qaeda, the IRA, The Japanese Red Army, ISIS, Boko Haram and many other groups do not represent the whole of the community they claim to represent, instead they are the exact opposite of what they claim to represent.

It is rather unfortunate that the terrorists, kidnappers and extremists that operate in our country fall under the above nomenclature. Kidnapping, terrorism and extremism have become a growth industry and are in no way religious in nature. The Fulani herdsman is not fighting for Islam. His cows destroy the farmland of both Muslim and Christian farmers.

Does the Quran or Muhammad (SAW) promote violence? Some issues in peace and violence are what we will look at in our next discourse.

Barka Juma’at and a happy weekend

Islam

Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac: Familial Bonds, Divine Promise and Human Action

Published

1 week ago

May 29, 2026

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

Isaac and Ishmael were both sons of Abraham but had different mothers. Ishmael was born to Hagar, Sarah’s Egyptian maidservant, as a result of Sarah’s attempt to provide an heir due to her initial barrenness (Genesis 16:15). Isaac, however, was born to Sarah herself as the fulfillment of God’s covenant promise, making him the ‘child of promise’ (Genesis 21:3). This distinction created a natural divergence in their destinies, with Isaac designated as the heir of God’s covenant and Ishmael destined to become the progenitor of a separate nation (Genesis 21:12-13).

The story told in the Quran and Islamic exegesis naturally creates doubts about Judeo-Christian renditions, yet the Torah or Taurat predates the Quran by over 3,000 years. We should therefore be cautious in treating historical facts which we are not in a position to corroborate or dismiss. No doubt in the narrations of both Judaism and the Quran, supernatural claims were involved. One supernatural claim cannot be dismissed offhand by the other. There is no doubt God made a promised to both Abraham and his wife. He also came to the aid of Ishmael and his mother during their sojourn in the wilderness.

The story of Abraham and his two sons has a bearing on the just concluded Hajj which is an essential pillar of Islam.

Ishmael, as the firstborn son of Abraham, holds a significant position in the family. Yet, his birth is not the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham and Sarah. The narrative takes a pivotal turn in Genesis 17, when God reiterates His covenant with Abraham and promises that Sarah will bear a son, Isaac, through whom the covenant will be established. In Genesis 17:19, God explicitly states, “Your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.”

Theologically, the story of Ishmael and Isaac raises important questions about God’s promises and human agency. Moreover, the relationship between Ishmael and Isaac has been interpreted allegorically by later biblical writers. In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul uses the story of Hagar and Sarah to illustrate the difference between living under the law and living under the promise (Galatians 4:21-31).

In Islamic tradition, Ishmael is considered an important prophet and an ancestor of Muhammad (SAW), which further complicates the historical and theological relationship between Ishmael and Isaac’s descendants. This adds layers of significance to their story, as it touches on issues of identity, heritage, and faith across different religious traditions.

The relationship between Ishmael and Isaac as depicted in Genesis is a rich tapestry of familial bonds, divine promise, and human action. It challenges us to consider the dynamics of God’s covenantal relationships and the ways in which God works through and despite human frailty.

While Ishmael and Isaac’s paths diverge, both are integral to the unfolding story of God’s interaction with humanity, reminding us of the breadth and depth of God’s promises and the diverse ways in which they manifest in the world.

In retrospect, Isaac and Ishmael themselves were not depicted as lifelong enemies. Biblical accounts show moments of tension and divine prophecy that have been interpreted symbolically or historically as foreshadowing conflict among their descendants, but the narrative emphasizes God’s care and promises for both sons. The perception of enmity largely arises from later historical, religious, and cultural interpretations rather than direct biblical evidence. They were both alleged to have come together to bury their father, Abraham.

What do Isaac and Ishmael have to do with the conflict in the Middle East? The conflict in the Middle East has to do with eschatology, or end-time Bible prophecy?

In Islam, the story of Isaac and Ishmael emphasizes themes of faith, sacrifice, and divine mercy, with both figures revered as prophets and significant in the lineage of the Abrahamic faiths.

Ishmael (Isma’il) is considered the father of the Arabs and an ancestor of Prophet Muhammad (SAW), while Isaac (Ishaq) is recognized as a prophet and the father of Jacob (Yaqub), establishing a lineage of prophets in both traditions. Over time, some interpretations have linked this lineage to historical and modern conflicts between Jews and Arabs. However, these interpretations are retrospective and not explicitly stated in the biblical text.

Both sons are seen as continuing the spiritual legacy of their father, Abraham (Ibrahim), and are respected figures in Islam.

The story illustrates profound themes of faith and divine mercy. Ishmael’s survival and the miraculous provision of water (the Zamzam well) in the desert symbolize God’s mercy and care for those who trust in Him.

Isaac’s birth is viewed as a reward for Abraham’s unwavering faith, representing hope and the fulfillment of God’s promises.

The narratives surrounding Isaac and Ishmael are not just historical accounts but are imbued with moral and spiritual lessons that resonate with Muslims today. They emphasize the importance of faith, obedience, and the belief in God’s mercy and providence.

The differing interpretations of the sacrifice story reflect broader theological discussions within Islam regarding lineage, prophecy, and the nature of divine tests.

Both figures are integral to the Islamic understanding of the Abrahamic tradition, illustrating the deep connections between these foundational stories across different faiths.

A central story in Islamic tradition is Abraham’s test of faith, where God commanded him to offer one of his sons in sacrifice. The Quran does not explicitly name the son, but many Islamic traditions identify Ishmael as the intended sacrifice. In this account, Ishmael willingly submitted to God’s command, demonstrating profound faith and obedience. At the last moment, God provided a ram to be sacrificed instead, commemorated annually during Eid al-Adha.

Some early Islamic sources and scholars, however, mention Isaac as the son in this test, reflecting a diversity of interpretations.

Ishmael is associated with Mecca; he and Abraham are credited with constructing the Kaaba, the holiest site in Islam. His descendants became the Arab peoples, and he is honored as a prophet who exemplified patience and submission to God.

Isaac is recognized as a prophet and righteous man, whose lineage produced many Israelite prophets, including Jacob (Yaqub) and Joseph (Yusuf). He represents the continuation of divine guidance through his descendants. It needs to be borne in mind that all prophets in Islam are Judaic prophets except Prophet Muhammad (SAW).

The stories of Ishmael and Isaac emphasize faith, obedience, and divine wisdom. They illustrate the importance of submission to God’s will, the blessings of righteous offspring, and the interconnectedness of Abrahamic lineages. The narrative of the sacrifice teaches Muslims about trust in God and the spiritual value of obedience, forming a foundational element of Islamic belief and practice.

In summary, Ishmael and Isaac are both central figures in Islam, each with distinct roles: Ishmael as the forefather of the Arabs and participant in the Kaaba’s construction, and Isaac as the forefather of the Israelites and a prophet of righteousness. Their stories highlight the shared heritage and moral lessons of the Abrahamic faiths.

Islam’s conception of Ishmael is similar to that of Judaism and Christianity. Sources for this narrative include the Quran and tafsir (i.e., Quranic exegesis); Muhammad’s (SAW) Hadith; historiographic collections by al-Tabari and other Muslim scholars; and Israʼiliyyat, which collectively refers to information and religious literature sourced primarily from the Jews for details about early prophets and messengers.

There are many versions of the construction of the Ka’aba that differ in fairly significant ways, although all have Abraham build or cleanse the Ka’aba and then immediately after, or at an unknown time, God called Abraham to establish the Hajj, or pilgrimage. The starting of the Hajj has many versions, and some scholars believe this reflects the late association of Abraham with the Hajj after Islam had developed to help remove its connection to early pagan rituals.

In other verses, such as 21:85 and 38:48, Ishmael is praised for being patient, good, and righteous. A particular example which describes Ishmael individually is Quran 19:54-55 – “And call to mind, through this divine writ, Ishmael. Behold, he was always true to his promise, and was an apostle [of God], a prophet, who used to enjoin upon his people prayer and charity, and found favor in his Sustainer’s sight.” As a descendant of Ishmael, Muhammad (SAW) is the Prophet and continues the line of prophets from ancient times.

“All the best compliments, prayers, and good deeds are for Allah. Peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you, O Prophet! Peace be upon us and upon all the righteous servants of Allah. I testify that there is no god but Allah, and I testify that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger”. Attahiyat or Tashahhud.

Barka Juma’at and happy weekend

Islam

Friday Sermon: Facing Mount Arafat 3: A Prophet’s Final Admonition

Published

2 weeks ago

May 22, 2026

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

Khutbatul Wada’ or Prophet Muhammad’s (SAW) ‘last sermon’ was delivered on the 9th of Zulhijjah 10 A.H (632 C.E) on Mount ‘Arafat, Makkah.

Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is an example for all of humanity. He was always a remarkable man. He excelled in all walks of life by being a prophet, ruler, statesman, orator, soldier, husband, friend, father and a grandfather. He was a man of love, patience, courage, wisdom, generosity, intelligence and exemplary character who inspires over a billion lives throughout the world.

Allah says in the Quran that he was sent as a mercy for the people of the world: And We sent thee only as a mercy for all mankind. وَمَٓا اَرْسَلْنَاكَ اِلَّا رَحْمَةً لِلْعَالَم۪ينَ; Wama arsalnaka illa rahmatanlilAAalameen. (Surah Al Anbiya, Quran 21:107)

Shortly before his death, Prophet Muhammad (SAW) delivered a sermon during the Hajj, which came to be known as his “Final Sermon”. This sermon was not only a reminder to his followers, but also the ‘final admonition’; it also heralded the end of his Prophetic Mission. Historically, the Farewell Sermon of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) occupies an important place in Islam.

The sermon consisted of summarized exhortations reflecting some of the core teachings of the Quran and Sunnah. The sermon exemplifies the Quran’s assertion that the prophet was but a Warner: This was mentioned 57 times in the Quran.

Prophet Muhammad (SAW) undertook his farewell and only pilgrimage in the year 10 A.H. and it has since been the model for performing the fifth pillar of Islam, the Hajj.

The Final Sermon:

“O People, lend me an attentive ear, for I know not whether after this year, I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefore, listen to what I am saying to you very carefully and take these words to those who could not be present here today.

“O People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners.

“Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your Lord, and that He will indeed reckon your deeds. God has forbidden you to take usury (interest), therefore all interest obligation shall henceforth be waived. Your capital, however, is yours to keep. You will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity.

“God has Judged that there shall be no interest, and that all the interest due to Al-Abbas ibn Abd’el Muttalib shall henceforth be waived… Beware of Satan, for the safety of your religion. He has lost all hope that he will ever be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things.

“O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under a trust from God and with His permission. If they abide by your right, then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.

“O People, listen to me in earnest, worship God, perform your five daily prayers, fast during the month of Ramadan, and offer Zakat. Perform Hajj if you have the means. All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab; a white has no superiority over a black, nor does a black have any superiority over a white; [none have superiority over another] except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves. Remember, one day you will appear before God and answer for your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.

“O People, no prophet or apostle will come after me, and no new faith will be born. Reason well, therefore, O people, and understand words which I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the Quran and my example, the Sunnah, and if you follow these you will never go astray. All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and it may be that the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me directly. Be my witness, O God, that I have conveyed your message to your people.”

Thus the beloved Prophet (SAW) completed his Final Sermon, and upon it, near the summit of Arafat, the revelation came down: “…This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My Grace upon you, and have chosen Islam for you as your religion…” (Quran 5:3)

Perhaps it is more appropriate to present this ayat in proper context: “Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which hath been invoked the name of other than Allah; that which hath been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by being gored to death; that which hath been (partly) eaten by a wild animal; unless ye are able to slaughter it (in due form); that which is sacrificed on stone (altars); (forbidden) also is the division (of meat) by raffling with arrows: that is impiety. This day have those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: yet fear them not but fear Me. This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. But if any is forced by hunger, with no inclination to transgression, Allah is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.” (Quran Surah Al Ma’idah Verse 3)

Indeed the meanings found in this sermon are astounding and it could rightly be described as the Prophet’s last Admonition.

But how have we as his followers kept to his admonitions? We have kept to them in the breach: An incorrigible generation, hell bent on disobedience and trenchant iniquities, we kill our fellow men, we enslave our women in the name of Sunnah, we persecute people of other faiths and engage in terrorism and are unjust to peoples of other races and ethnic persuasions, we are intolerant and intemperate in our manners and speech and we are bigots and fanatical in our ways. We have gone against all the things in the admonitions. We are unjust, nepotic and consume usury; we even export hard drugs to the ‘House of God; child abuse, prostitution and other forms of iniquities that make Sodom and Gomorrah pale into insignificance.

What will we not do for money? We dispossess the orphans and maltreat the widows. Sexual inequality which the Prophet preached against is still the order of the day in most Islamic countries and Muslim communities; 1,387 years after the Prophet, the Arabs and their cohorts still treat women as chattels.

The Admonition talks about equality of men but the Arab Muslims did not remember that when they came to enslave Africans, especially from East Africa. A generation of vile men and human anacondas, we even attempt to bribe God, but He refused to be mocked. On the Day of Qiyamah they will reap their just recompense. Walahi! There will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth, but it will be too late.

Let us reflect on ourselves, take a step back, and revive the core teachings of our Prophet (SAW) in achieving an ethical and moral society, wherever we are, where no one inflicts harm or injustice upon others.

May Allah grant us the strength to become better Muslims and better human beings.

LA ILAHA ILLA ANTA SUBHANAKA INNI KUNTU MINAZ ZALIMEEN: “None has the right to be worshipped but You (O Allah)), Glorified (and Exalted) are You (above all that (evil) they associate with You). Truly, I have been of the wrong-doers.”(Quran 21:87)

Barka Juma’at, happy weekend and Eid Mubarak and Barka da Sallah.