Tijaniyya in Kano

The history of ‘Yan haƙiƙa is intermeshed with and embedded in the historical trajectory of Tijaniyya in Nigeria, since ‘Yan haƙiƙa is an offshoot of the Sufi brotherhood. Tijaniyya was founded in the late eighteenth century by Sidi Abul Abbas Ahmad al-Tijani, popularly known as Shaykh Ahmad Tijani. He was born in the south-west Algerian oasis town of Ain Madi in 1737 (Wright Reference Wright2005). The doctrines and beliefs of Tijaniyya are contained in its major book of reference, Jawahirul Ma’ani, which was written by one of the leading protégés of Shaykh Ahmad Tijani, Shaykh Aliyu Harazimi (Anwar Reference Anwar1990). Tijaniyya spread to different parts of North and West Africa; the first part of West Africa to come into contact with the order was Mauritania, through Muhammad al-Hafiz Ibn Mukhtar Ibn Habib al-Baddi, who, before the death of the founder, affiliated the Idaw Ali ethnic group with Tijaniyya.

According to Quadri, it is historically difficult to establish precisely when Tijaniyya was introduced into present-day Nigeria, but it has been claimed that the tariqa had reached some places as early as during the lifetime of its founder (Quadri Reference Quadri1981). Kano is one of the places that had early contact with Tijaniyya, and it is believed that some Islamic scholars at the famous centre of learning in Madabo in the heart of Kano were initiated into the tariqa long before the visit of Shaykh Umar al-Futi (1794–1864).Footnote ² One of the residents of Madabo, Abd-al-Rahman al-Suyuti, was believed to have been initiated by one Malam Sharih.Footnote ³ It is claimed that the scholars of Madabo renewed their initiation and silsila (initiation chain) from Umar Futi when he came to Kano in about 1832 (ibid.). He also initiated people outside Madabo, including prominent individuals such as Ahmad Tijani Takobi, Sabo of Kofar Wambai and Shamsu of Kabara Quarters. The Adhama family of Koki also received initiation from him (Paden Reference Paden1973; Adam Reference Adam2014). From the nineteenth century and into the first two decades of the twentieth century, the Tijaniyya were widely regarded as egalitarian, populist and radical in comparison to other Sufi brotherhoods, especially Qadiriyya,Footnote ⁴ which was generally perceived as old fashioned but more serious (Anwar Reference Anwar1990). It is important to note that the old-style Qadiriyya is now regarded as conservative because it is more personal and private – that is, it is not practised in loud gatherings and does not use bandari (large drum tambourines) or any other musical accompaniment. (The reformed Qadiriyya, however, led by Nasiru Kabara, is performed collectively in public with bandari.Footnote ⁵) Further, initiation into the old Qadiriyya required at least a week, and sometimes forty days, in isolation (kwalwa) for meditation and prayer.

The social contours of Tijaniyya changed in Kano and other parts of northern Nigeria in the early decades of the twentieth century, largely as a result of external influences, especially the visits of various Sufi itinerant scholars such as Shaykh Abd al-Wahab, popularly known as Sharif Ujdud (Quadri Reference Quadri1981). Sharif Ujdud was a Berber from Mauritania who settled at Bakin Ruwa (Kano City) at about the time of the First World War to disseminate knowledge. During his stay in Kano, Ujdud converted Emir Abbas (1903–19) to Tijaniyya (before Abbas, the emirs of Kano were all adherents of Qadiriyya), renewed the certificate and silsila of Muhammad Salga,Footnote ⁶ a polymath Tijani scholar, and re-initiated Wali Suleiman. Later, Abdullahi Bayero, who became emir of Kano in 1926, was initiated into the order by Wali Suleiman. From the time of Ujdud’s sojourn in Kano onwards, Tijaniyya became associated not only with the masses but with the ruling and merchant classes.

Other Tijani figures who came and influenced Islam in Kano included Shaykh Alfa Hashim al-Futi b. Ahmad b. Sa’id al-Futi, a nephew of Umar Futi, and Sharif Muhammad b. al-Shaykh, who came from Fez and settled in an area known as Unguwar Dandalin Turawa. It was said that Sharif Muhammad was the first muqaddam to have initiated Muhammad Salga into Tijaniyya (Adam Reference Adam2015–16). Another influential visitor was Sharif Muhammad Alami, who came to Kano from Morocco in 1923. Before his arrival, most Tijanis and their muqaddams engaged more in individual worship and activity than in large-scale organizations; Alami, however, emphasized the importance of group worship, unity and spiritual collectivity and spearheaded the establishment of the first Tijani zawiya (centre) in the Kwarin Mabuga area of Koki in 1925 (Paden Reference Paden1973). Muhammad Salga renewed his silsila with Alami, and so, when the latter left Kano, he appointed the former as imam of the newly built zawiya. Muhammad Salga earned respect within scholarly circles because of his unrivalled scholarship and that of his students; these included Shaykhs Abubakar Atiku, Abubakar Mijinyawa, Tijani Usman Zangon Barebari, Shehu Maihula and Sani Kafinga, who later came to be known as Salgawa. Salgawa later accepted the spiritual authority of a Senegalese reviver of the Tijaniyya, Shaykh Ibrahim Niasse (d. 1975), and became his main representative in Kano (Adam Reference Adam2015–16).

Niasse was a prolific scholar, as well as a saint, who contributed to the production of Islamic literature. He authored many books, among them Kashif al-Ilbas ‘an Faydati Qutb Abul Abbas (The Removal of Confusion Concerning the Flood of the Saintly Seal Ahmad al-Tijani) (Wright et al. Reference Wright2010; Wright Reference Wright2010). Niasse performed hajj in 1937 and established his first contact with the Kano people in Mecca – namely, the emir of Kano Alhaji Abdullahi Bayero (1926–53) and Wali Suleiman. Niasse first visited Nigeria in 1945 and brought with him four copies of the Kashf, which he left with the ulama of Kano (Wright Reference Wright2010). He was accepted in Kano and most of the Tijani scholarly families, especially Salgawa, submitted to his authority. According to Paden (Reference Paden1973), outside Senegal, northern Nigeria – and Kano in particular – has been his main area of support. The majority of Kano’s Tijanis identify themselves with Tijaniyya-Ibrahimiyya,Footnote ⁷ and a section of them, known as ‘Yan haƙiƙa, exhibit tendencies and ideologies that constitute a unique identity and distinguish them from mainstream Tijanis.

Historicizing ‘Yan haƙiƙa

‘Yan haƙiƙa Footnote ⁸ derive their name from one of the doctrines of Tijaniyya known as haqiqa, divine reality, due to their affiliation with the Tijaniyya-Ibrahimiyya. The group’s ideology is deeply influenced by Ibn Arabi’s idea of Wahdah al-Wujub (unity of being), which teaches that ‘nothing has essential substance except God. Therefore, all things that exist in the universe, including the diversity of religions and the pluralistic paths of faith, are rooted in God’ (Sumbulah Reference Sumbulah2016). The idea of the unity of existence alludes to the fact that there is no distinction between the existence of God and the world; this is why ‘Yan haƙiƙa tend to say that everything and everybody is a manifestation of God. Thurston argues that the epithet ‘Yan haƙiƙa (people of the truth – i.e. people who aspire to reach a mystical state) is used by opponents to refer to the group (Thurston Reference Thurston2015). The spiritual leader of the order, Niasse, combined in his person the sacred law (sharia) and the divine essence (haqiqa), and therefore he became the guide to the Sufi way (Wright et al. Reference Wright2010). The Tijaniyya teaches that there are two types of knowledge: haqiqa or batin (esoterism) and sharia or zahir (exoterism). Sharia is any knowledge acquired by a murid (spiritual seeker) through the medium of a teacher in order to discharge religious obligations (Quadri Reference Quadri1981), whereas haqiqa is about disciplining the soul and its spiritual transformation. It aims at purifying one’s soul, training oneself spiritually, and protecting oneself from blameworthy deeds, such as those relating to hypocrisy, pride and over-ambition. It enables one to acquire and possess good character traits, such as sincerity, gratefulness, patience, piety, perseverance, asceticism and contentment (ibid.). If one looks critically at the Sufi/Tijani conception of haqiqa, one can easily conclude that it is a spiritual tool for disciplining one’s soul and acquiring unblemished virtues and qualities that will bring one close to the divine essence. Conversely, the activities, conduct and utterances of ‘Yan haƙiƙa in Kano are assumed by other Muslims, especially Salafis,Footnote ⁹ QadirisFootnote ¹⁰ and even mainstream Tijanis,Footnote ¹¹ to reflect the opposite of anything spiritual.

As mentioned above, ‘Yan haƙiƙa believe that they are bona fide followers of Tijaniyya-Ibrahimiyya and they observe some of the rituals of the order. They were initiated into the order by different muqaddams who oversee their spiritual journey. A number of ‘Yan haƙiƙa underwent tarbiya, spiritual training, which is both a doctrine and a practice found in all Sufi groups. But the practice became more prominent and accessible in the twentieth century as a result of its simplification and democratizationFootnote ¹² by Ibrahim Niasse, who both brought fayda and was a master of tarbiya. According to Brigaglia:

The doctrine of tarbiya in Tijaniyya is a method whereby a murid toils to achieve the spiritual goal of experiencing the divine essence and knowing God properly. According to Seesemann:

The liberalization, simplification and easy access to the mystical experience through spiritual training by a pool of ‘unqualified’ Tijanis engendered profanation, desecration and defilement of the sacred by the predominantly overzealous young spiritual novices who later came to be known as ‘Yan haƙiƙa in Kano. Niasse believed and insisted that tarbiya should not be restricted to a literate elite but should also be made available to the illiterate (Hiskett Reference Hiskett1980). The main tendency of ‘Yan haƙiƙa is the deification of Ibrahim Niasse, who is ranked above the Prophet, and the divinization of the group’s members and every object. ‘Yan haƙiƙa often abstain from observing obligatory ibadat – for example, the five daily prayers and fasting in the month of Ramadan. Hiskett opined that it was the teachings of Tijaniyya that led to its followers neglecting some of the fundamental and obligatory Islamic rituals. He said:

They indulge in alcoholism and promiscuity according to a perspective of an interviewee,Footnote ¹³ they have affairs with married women and promote the indiscriminate mixing of the sexes at public events such as mawlid (birthday celebrations) of the key Tijani figures, especially Niasse.Footnote ¹⁴

The activities and beliefs of ‘Yan haƙiƙa appeared in Kano in the early 1960s when Malam Abdallahi Ja’afaru, Malam Jibrilu and their murids engaged in ‘un-Islamic’ practices in the name of tariqa. The murids of Ja’afaru were reported to have stopped observing Islamic rites such as prayers after undergoing tarbiya. Ja’afaru prescribed dhikr (remembrance) for them, which supplanted obligatory prayers. He argued that he carefully chose the dhikr in conformity with Qur’an 29.46, which says that ‘remembrance of God indeed is the greatest’ (Quadri Reference Quadri1981). The concerns raised and the constant complaints about the attitudes of Ja’afaru and his followers meant that Tijani figures had to devise means of handling the delicate and religiously sensitive issue. The Salgawa scholars, who were representatives of Niasse in Kano, tried to caution them about the spiritual implications of their actions but without much success. Ja’afaru’s activities were reported to Niasse and he responded through a letter addressed to his companions (the Salgawa scholars) dated 24 February 1961. It read as follows:

The action taken by the Salgawa scholars and Niasse’s letter show that Tijani scholars frowned on the early activities of ‘Yan haƙiƙa. The letter also shows that Niasse monitored and closely observed the activities of his disciples in Kano. In the letter, he reveals that he tried several times to keep Abdallahi Ja’afaru within the confines of sharia and the teachings of Islam. The defiance of Ja’afaru and his reluctance to take heed of the admonition of his master made him lose his spiritual authority to initiate people into the order; Niasse stripped him of his licence and banned him from guiding aspirants to ‘transcend their ego-selves and taste the directly-experienced knowledge, or gnosis (ma’rifa) of God’ (Wright et al. Reference Wright2010).

Despite the resentment and ostracism that Ja’afaru and his followers faced in Kano, his ideology and religious understanding remained appealing to others. People continued to associate with him and he initiated new converts. Quadri observes that the ideology of Ja’afaru contradicted not only Islam but also the exclusive doctrines of Tijaniyya, yet some people – about a hundred in number – submitted to his authority and recognized him as their spiritual guide.Footnote ¹⁶

The revocation of ijaza (licence) by Niasse, coupled with public hostility, forced Ja’afaru and some of his followers to migrate from Kano to Ghana in 1962. They settled at the zango communityFootnote ¹⁷ in Kumasi. There, he continued to cling to his ideology and initiated more people into Tijaniyya. He attracted a significant following, both Nigerians and Ghanaians, and established a zawiya where they conducted their activities. The members he had converted also stopped observing all the obligatory rituals; they addressed some of their members as ‘Allah’ and ‘Angel Gabriel’ (mala’ika Jibrilu) and the news of their activities circulated among the Muslim community in Kumasi. The Sarkin (chief of) Zango requested the authority to arrest them. They were brought to his court and later locked up in his old palace for several days without food. When they complained of starvation, the Sarkin Zango responded sarcastically that they claimed divinity and therefore they did not require food to survive. Consequently, he expelled them from his community.Footnote ¹⁸ The available information does not indicate that ‘Yan haƙiƙa returned after their expulsion from Ghana, possibly because of the hostility and rejection that initially evicted them from Kano City. Therefore, they went into ideological oblivion.

One can understand that Ja’afaru had a strong conviction in his ideology and was not in any way ready to renounce it. Hence, he and his followers faced challenges akin to his experience in Kano. While the migration of Ja’afaru in 1961 allowed his ideology to spread beyond northern Nigeria, it disappeared from the religious public sphere in Kano until the second decade of the twenty-first century, when some young Tijani singers started to make what the Muslim public regarded as blasphemous claims in their songs.

Occurrences, utterances and controversies of ‘Yan haƙiƙa

There were many incidents that happened in connection to ‘Yan haƙiƙa, not only in Kano but throughout northern Nigeria. Incidents in Kano City attracted attention because of the people’s religious sensitivity, the sectarian rivalry and politics, the complexity of society and ideological convergences and divergences. Kano has been the epicentre of religious groups and tendencies in northern Nigeria and has long hosted ulama, both indigenous and itinerant. Kano has been prone to fissiparous tendencies since the end of colonial rule, perhaps because its clerics pursue followers as vigorously as its traders pursue customers.Footnote ¹⁹ Each religious group strives to create a space for itself and attract a reasonable following in Kano due to the prominence of the state in Nigeria. It has been historically established that most of the revisionist religious groups, such as Kala Kato, Qur’aniyyun, Maitatsine and ‘Yan haƙiƙa, found their way in Kano and had a noticeable presence there. The convergence, competition and identities of these groups keep changing and remapping the religious contours of Kano. They make the religious landscape fluid, amorphous and tense, and that is why intra-Muslim politics and relationships are dramatic, never ending and unique.

The complexity of the religious geography and the resentment shown to ‘Yan haƙiƙa from the 1960s onwards made those who subscribed to the ideology hide their identity, although some, in difficult years, announced their ideology through Sufi songs (Adamu Reference Adamu and Isa2017). Other Muslims (including Tijanis) considered the themes, verses and musical accompaniments of these songs to be blasphemous, heretical and sacrilegious. The most prominent among these singers were Ismail and Rabiu Takalafiya, who composed songs in praise of the ‘divine attributes’ of Niasse. The introduction to one of Ismail’s songs goes as follows:

This song instantly went viral on social media, especially WhatsApp, Facebook and YouTube, and is one of the things that notified Kano Muslims about the resurfacing of the ‘Yan haƙiƙa group. The song portrays Niasse as God and attaches the major divine attributes to him by claiming that he was not biologically born like other human beings. Takalafiya composed many other controversial songs in 2013, such as ‘Barhama nake bautawa, dan shi ya halicce ni’ (I worship Barhama, because he created me) and ‘Baba uban Allah Inyassi’ (Niasse, the father of God) (Adamu Reference Adamu and Isa2017). These songs, especially the second one, caused spectacular public shock, which led to the arrest of the singer by the Kano State Censorship Board on 31 May 2013. Despite the public outrage, ‘Yan haƙiƙa continued to play and listen to the song – at least privately – in order to achieve an ecstatic state.

The songs of ‘Yan haƙiƙa opened up a new vista into its history in Kano, for they laid a foundation and served as ‘cultural infrastructure’ to transport the group’s ideology into the public arena. The songs were used as instruments for the creation of a permanent identity and space for the group on the religious map of Kano and northern Nigeria. They also prepared the ground for the subsequent events that would generate friction. For example, in 2015, during the mawlid of Ibrahim Niasse in Kano, one of the speakers insulted the Prophet Muhammad. The mawlid was organized by Sayyada Maryam IbrahimFootnote ²¹ and her sons.Footnote ²² The organizers invited many people, mostly ‘Yan haƙiƙa, who lectured on different topics. During the event, one of the invitees talked about the importance of education in the life of Muslims. In response, Abdulazeez Dauda, popularly known as Abdul Nyass,Footnote ²³ a muqaddam who came from Abuja, went up to the podium and downplayed the issue of education and instead enjoined attendees to adore Niasse only. He emphasized that whatever education or knowledge one desires would be found within the fold of Niasse (Adamu Reference Adamu and Isa2017). He made disparaging comments: ‘[E]ven if Muhammad would rise from his grave in Madina to come to the venue of the mawlud, if he did not love the Shehu [Shaykh Ibrahim Niasse], we [Abdul Nyass and others] would trample upon him.’Footnote ²⁴ He was cheered and asked to continue by a number of ‘Yan haƙiƙa present, a situation that enraged the residents of the neighbourhood.

The utterances of Abdul Nyass, coupled with the endorsement he received from ‘Yan haƙiƙa, made youth in the area attack and disperse the crowd. It is important to note that Muslims in Kano often react to religious controversies not only in Africa but in other parts of the world. The charge of blasphemy against the songs spurred tension and incited young men to take the law into their own hands. A number of ‘Yan haƙiƙa were maimed and their vehicles destroyed by the mob. Security agents arrested five members of ‘Yan haƙiƙa: Sayyada Maryam, Shaykh Jibrin Hassan Danjummai, Aminu Muhammad Sakwaya,Footnote ²⁵ Shaykh Abubakar Garkuwan FaydaFootnote ²⁶ and Alkassim Abubakar.Footnote ²⁷ Abdul Nyass, who escaped and fled to Abuja, was later arrested and taken back to Kano to face trial. When the state government announced that he would appear before the upper sharia court at Rijiyar Lemo Quarters to answer charges of blasphemy, thousands of young people led demonstrations demanding his death and burned down the court building (Thurston Reference Thurston2015). The youth have always been at the forefront of policing ‘proper Islam’ and protecting it from desecration due to their conviction that they are duty-bound to do so. Some of them, especially ‘Yandaba’ (dropouts living as organized gangs, who can be used for violence or threats of violence),Footnote ²⁸ engage in religious policing and rioting largely to vandalize and steal public and private property. Other demonstrators demolished the house of Garkuwan Fayda at Gaida Quarter, on the outskirts of Kano, perhaps due to his open affiliation and promotion of ‘Yan haƙiƙa’s ideology as well as his close association with Abdul Nyass. An informant opined that Garkuwan Fayda was targeted due to rivalry with his neighbour, Usman Mai Dubun Isa, a Tijani muqaddam allegedly jealous of Garkuwan Fayda because of his following, especially among Fulani Tijanis throughout northern Nigeria.Footnote ²⁹ It is worth noting that the rioters were not followers of any particular Islamic group; rather, they had different affiliations and inclinations, and a number of them did not identify with any of the competing religious groups.

On 22 June 2015,Footnote ³⁰ the upper sharia court at Rijiyar Lemo Quarters convicted and sentenced Abdul Nyass, Sayyada Maryam, Shaykh Danjummai, Garkuwan Fayda and Aminu Muhammad to death by hanging for blasphemy based on sections 110 and 382B of the sharia penal code of Kano State, which states:

The convicts exercised their right of appeal as guaranteed by the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria of 1999 (as amended). However, the first lawyer the defendants hired from Kano withdrew his legal services because of social pressure, personal safety and the interference of his parents. Therefore, they engaged the services of another lawyer, Barrister A. A. Muhammad, who is based in Abuja but originally from Niger State and a Tijani himself.Footnote ³¹ Initially, the accusers were detained at Goron Dutse correctional centre and later transferred to Kurmawa correctional centre, both in Kano City. But because of the sensitivity of the case and previous violence, the state government transferred the appellants to Kirikiri maximum security prison in Lagos, where they spent twelve months before the Kano State high court cleared four of the appellantsFootnote ³² by allowing their appeal. Abdul Nyass’s appeal, however, was dismissed; he has further appealed to the court of appeal, Kano Division, and this appeal was yet to be decided at the time of writing. One of Abdul Nyass’s contentions before the appellate court was that his comment was not targeted at the Prophet but was addressed to Shaykh Nasiru Kabara.Footnote ³³ He claimed that what he meant was that, ‘even if Nasiru Kabara would rise from his grave in Madina to come to the venue of the mawlud, if he did not love the Shehu [Shaykh Ibrahim Niasse], we [Abdul Nyass and others] would trample upon him’. However, if one looks at his original statement and subsequent claim, he did not mention Nasiru Kabara in his talk and the grave of Kabara is not located in Madina but in Kano.

The hearing of cases in public by the sharia court is mandatory because it is set out in the constitution, which is superior to any law; the laws of the sharia courts must not contradict any provision of the constitution. In consideration of the safety and public order in Kano, the hearing of the ‘Yan haƙiƙa case continued in a more secluded place.

Despite the court sentencing Abdul Nyass to death, perhaps as a deterrence to ‘Yan haƙiƙa and other groups with revisionist ideologies, another blasphemy incident happened in March 2020 in a WhatsApp group of young Tijanis called Gidan Umma Abiha. A member of the group, Sharif Yahaya Aminu, who engaged in a heated exchange with a friend over who to rely on – the Prophet Muhammad or Niasse – to intercede with God on their behalf, said:

The voice note was leaked and shared with other people, which led to his arrest and subsequent prosecution before the upper sharia court in Hausawa, Kano. On 10 August, Alkali Aliyu Muhammad Kani sentenced him to death by hanging.Footnote ³⁵ This incident created tension among Muslims and irate youth attempted to set the house of Aminu’s family ablaze in Kano City. The police dispersed the protesters to protect innocent members of the family. This incident provided an opportunity for the governor of Kano, Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, who became increasingly unpopular because of his alleged involvement in corrupt practices, to score cheap political points and win the sympathy of the Muslim public. He promised that as soon as the case reached his office, he would not hesitate to endorse the death sentence.

Responses and reactions of the Muslim community to ‘Yan haƙiƙa

Religion is the most sensitive aspect of people’s life in Kano; it constitutes, arguably, the most important identity marker for Muslims. It is historically evident that a majority of Muslims in Kano feel obligated to protect Islam against both external threats and internal abuse. Muslims in Kano often react to perceived threats and insults with anger, street protests, and even attacks on accused individuals or institutions. The ulama responds to the profanation of Islam, Muslims, saintly figures, companions and prophets by pontification, sermons, fatwa (legal verdicts), condemnation and, of course, by labelling the offending party as a heretic. The ideology, activities and unusual utterances of ‘Yan haƙiƙa incited tensions, criticism and harsh responses from ulama of different persuasions. In the 1960s, when the ideology of ‘Yan haƙiƙa started to appear in Kano, the ulama expressed concern and disapproval through writing. From the late twentieth century onwards, the internet and social media have aided the rapid dissemination and circulation of information and have expanded the frontiers of theological debate by providing a platform where previously silent followers can take a position.

The incident concerning Abdul Nyass generated an uproar and a litany of sermons and public discourses in Kano and throughout northern Nigeria. The first set of ulama to come out publicly and condemn the organizers of the mawlid and the attendant desecration of the Prophet were Shaykh Dahiru Usman Bauchi and the Khalifa of the Tijaniyya in Nigeria, Shaykh Isyaka Rabi’u (d. 2018). These were respected Tijani figures in Nigeria and they distanced the order from the incident. They also issued a statement distancing Abdul Nyass from the teachings of the order (Adamu Reference Adamu and Isa2017). In spite of the repudiation of ‘Yan haƙiƙa by the leadership of the order, its members still feel that they are ‘pure’ Tijanis and that anyone who does not believe in their ideology or share their love of Niasse is a superficial Tijani.

The Salafis and Qadiris used their pulpits and mosques, especially on Fridays in May 2015, to sermonize and set out their positions on the blasphemous comments. Dr Abdallah Usman Umar,Footnote ³⁶ a Salafi, opined that the Tijanis who claimed to love the Prophet Muhammad more than any other group attacked his personality just because of their shaykh. He said that the problem was rooted in the spiritual training the Tijanis undergo and their elevation of saints over the Prophet. He said that, in the past, Salafis overlooked certain aberrations but now their patience had been exhausted, and therefore he would use any kaulasan (an Arabic letter that sounds like ‘k’ and is the first letter of the Arabic word kafir, or unbeliever) to label the sinners heretics. He said that if these things were allowed to continue unchecked, Muslims would never experience peace again and Allah would remove his blessings from them. These people claimed to be Muslims but rained abuses on the Prophet in the name of Tariqa. He maintained a position that those people were zindiqai, candidates for hellfire, haters of the Prophet. He said that those who criticized even the hair of the Prophet committed apostasy. Even those who tried to excuse them were heretics. He said that Muslims should stop cursing France, the USA and Denmark for Islamophobia; instead, they should redirect their anger at those in Kano who slandered the Prophet.Footnote ³⁷

In his Friday sermon, Dr Abdullahi Muhammad,Footnote ³⁸ a Salafi, said that the utterance of a single word can lead to a Muslim leaving the path of Islam, and the words uttered by ‘Yan haƙiƙa were emotionally sensitive and blasphemous. He admonished Muslims to invest their time in learning more about tawhid, the oneness of Allah, and the dos and don’ts of Islam. He recommended the text of Muhammad b. Abdulwahab, Nawaqid-ul-Islam (nullifiers of Islam), to his audience in order to know the boundaries of Islam. He said that ‘Yan haƙiƙa had turned Ibrahim Niasse into a symbol of worship, insulted the Prophet, and above all committed shirk (associating God with other deities), and hence they were heretics. Dr Bashir Aliyu Umar, one of the leading Salafi scholars in Kano, said that sharia is the most fundamental pillar in Islam and any follower of any Islamic credo who abandons sharia and sticks to haƙiƙa is an evil agent of Satan and a heretic.

Dr Ahmad Muhammad Ibrahim, a Salafi scholar and the imam of Darul Hadith Juma’at mosque, also condemned the blasphemers and turuq for promoting rituals and practices that gave rise to heretical elements such as the ‘Yan haƙiƙa group. He said that the rhetoric of ‘Yan haƙiƙa was prevalent in Sufi literature and that the adherents of turuq respected their muqaddams more than the Prophet. The leadership of Tijaniyya responded to Dr Ahmad’s derogatory remarks by having the Tijaniyya Lawyers Association report him to the police, charging him with defamation of character and an unfair attack on Tijaniyya. On 3 June 2015, the police summoned Dr Ahmad and played the audio clip in which he criticized ‘Yan haƙiƙa and turuq. Dr Ahmad admitted that it was his voice and stood by what he said; he further argued that he mentioned neither Tijaniyya nor their shaykhs, that he mentioned only turuq. But he also mentioned Shaykh Ibrahim Niasse and accused him of promoting misguided teachings of Islam through the concept of fayda. Dr Ahmad insisted that the fact that the Tijanis did not report ‘Yan haƙiƙa to the authorities when they insulted the Prophet proved his point. The Tijaniyya lawyers made their position clear that they did not want him to disparage their group and their shaykhs for the sake of peace.Footnote ³⁹

The case took a new dimension and involved other parties. The ulama and lawyers who identified themselves with Salafis sided with Dr Ahmad, while those who are affiliates of Tijaniyya came to the defence of their tariqa. This made the emir of Kano, Muhammad Sanusi II (2014–20), who is one of the leading figures of Tijaniyya in Nigeria, to invite the two parties to his palace. He mediated and brokered peace. The intervention of the emir doused down the tension and looming legal battle.Footnote ⁴⁰

Shaykh Abduljabar Nasiru Kabara, the leader of a radical faction of Qadiriyya, As’habul Kahfi waraqeem, also criticized ‘Yan haƙiƙa in his weekly educational session. He said that Islam is complete even without the existence of Sufi shaykhs from the first saint to the last, but it could not be what it is without the delivery of the message brought by the Prophet.Footnote ⁴¹ Shaykh Kasiyuni, another outspoken Qadiri scholar, also organized a lecture in defence of the Prophet, to which he invited scholars from other Islamic groups, such as Shaykh Ibrahim Khaleel, who serves as a bridge between Sufi and Salafi groups, and Muhammad Tahir Adam, who is an ardent defender of Tijaniyya. He condemned the blasphemous utterances made against the Prophet by ‘Yan haƙiƙa.Footnote ⁴²

The case of ‘Yan haƙiƙa reinvents an old debate about who is a ‘pure’ Muslim and who is not. The group has a strong belief in its ‘Muslimness’, which is why it recruits new members and instructs them to attach divine attributes to Niasse. On the one hand, the mainstream Tijanis disown the group, dissociate its members from Niasse, and insist that they do not represent the true teachings of the order. On the other hand, the Salafis and Qadiris conflate mainstream Tijanis and ‘Yan haƙiƙa. This situation creates a scenario in which ‘Yan haƙiƙa always strive to justify their place in the larger Muslim community and at the same time mainstream Tijanis try to prove otherwise. It is interesting to note that there is a ‘prayer economy’ (Soares Reference Soares2005) that flourished as a result of the activities of ‘Yan haƙiƙa. According to an informant who is a key figure among ‘Yan haƙiƙa in Kano, the group is patronized by a myriad of commercial and political elites. He said that he renders spiritual services to traders who want their businesses to prosper and politicians who want to win elections. He claimed that when he was arrested and incarcerated, his influential clients who were within the corridors of power played a major role in his acquittal. He further said that even during his jail term in Lagos, he rendered services to inmates who were former top security personnel and public office holders.Footnote ⁴³ This explains the source of the flamboyant lifestyles of prominent group members such as Garkuwan Fayda, who drove an expensive car, married many wives and took care of both his children and his spiritual servants.