..he said to his companion “Do not worry, Allah is with us”… So Allah sent down his serenity on him and strengthened him with forces the like of which you have never seen… (Qur’an 9:40)
A thousand, four hundred and forty-seven years ago, history stood witness to the emigration of seventy men and women from Makkah to Madinah. In the morning of 24 September, 622 CE, Prophet Muhammad (Upon him be peace and blessing), accompanied by his bosom friend, confidant and follower, Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, having slipped away under the cover of the night, having taken untrodden paths and having escaped the inhumanity of the aristocratic powers of Makkah (his homeland) eventually arrived the safe and secure earth-land of Madinah. This event is usually celebrated all over the Muslim world the same way it was celebrated by the second Caliph in Islamic history, Umar b. Khatab. It was the latter who began to date the undated in Muslim reality; it was B. Khattab who first started the usage of the date of emigration of the Muslims from Makkah to Madinah in the affairs of the Islamic state.
The successful arrival of the Prophet of Islam from Makkah to Madinah after thirteen years of persecution in the hands of the Makkan unbelievers known as Hijrah has since then been commemorated on a yearly basis by the Muslim world.
A question however becomes pertinent: since the Hijrah was an event in history, a door which was opened by the migration of the Prophet from Makkah and “closed” by his arrival in Madinah, of what value is its commemoration by the Muslims? Why do we have to talk about and reengage the Hijrah?
The Muslim world usually “celebrates” the Hijrah partly in its attempt to ensure the dated becomes undated in Islamic history. We mark the Hijrah in order to prevent the hijrah from being conclusive or teleological. We reread the Hijrah as a community and we endeavour to derive meaning and meaning of meaning ( (معني المعني) of the event based on our conviction that such an important event should not be viewed in the past perfect but in the past-present. We do this based on the realisation that we are destined and confined into that space in a world history where if we fail to read and reread the event, we might actually have failed in reading our lives through the prism of the Qur’an. An unexamined life, our teachers would counsel, is not worth living.
Where and how then do we begin our inquiry into the Hijrah of the Prophetic era? How do we begin to read for the meaning of the meaning of the Hijrah in contemporary Muslim existential reality? The starting point for this kind of exercise should probably be through the exploration of the Qur’an; in the pre-hijrah era of the Hijrah. We have to grapple with history as it unfolded in space, in the rigid geographical terrain of Makkah in order to make sense of and derive the meaning of meaning of Hijrah in our world today. We might also have to put the Hijrah in an historical-theological perspective. Let us endeavour to begin with the latter.
In world’s written and unwritten histories, there have been emigrations and emigrations. For example, the touchstone of Prophet Musa’s experience (upon him be peace) was in emigration with the Jewish nation for forty days in the geography of the unknown and one in which divine anger orbited over the horizon of the Jews like a gravity. Prophet Isa’s prophetic enterprise, (upon him be peace), was his constant emigration from the recalcitrance and obduracy of the Jewish race to which he had been sent as a national prophet. Prophet Ibrahim (upon him be peace) was suigeneris in this trajectory. He was an emigrant (muhajir) without a companion; he was an emigrant without an helper (nasir). He believed in Allah at a time humanity had reached a consensus to apostacize and impugn the divine.
At the onset of the modern period, the French warrior, Napoleon Bonaparte, could equally be cited as an “emigrant”. In company of his soldiers, he, in 1798, emigrated from Paris and eventually landed in Cairo. His arrival to Cairo marked the beginning of an era in which Africans were forced to discard the robe of the enslaved so that they might be colonized. The ‘hijrah’ of the modern period in which Europeans left the metropolis for the continents of Asia and Africa was that of individuals and corporate agencies that believed in the primordial supremacy of the “White” race over the “inferior”, the “black” and coloured races of the world.
The Hijrah of Prophet Muhammad (upon him be peace) from Makkah to Madinah in 622 CE, however, has none of the above-mentioned trajectories. It was based neither on racial superiority nor the realization of pecuniary gains. But in order for us to plumb its inner portals, our entré-point should be the Qur’an.
The tutored in Islamic history is aware of the fact that for events in Muslim realities in the past to enjoy credence, in order for events which the persona, the charisma and the vocation of the Prophet catalyzed to be valid, it must be told by the Qur’an itself; such events must enjoy Qur’anic certification. But in reading the Qur’an for the Hijrah, we run into a brickwall. This is because the Hijrah is not effusively celebrated by the Qur’an. No chapter is named after it; no complete narration in the Qur’an is dedicated to it. This is despite the fact that the event of the Hijrah was full of highly enchanting scenarios the like of which Ibn Hisham and other biographers of the Prophet would tell with relish.
To do that would probably have run contrary to the Qur’anic style: a style which gives precedence to brevity where detailed narration is expected; a style which employs stories not as an end in itself but as a means toward a glorious end; a style which concerns itself with the Prophet but might even treat the Prophet in the second person.
Thus, the story of the Hijrah is told only in two verses of the Qur’an. The first reads, partly, thus: “And we have put a barrier before them and a barrier behind them and we have covered them up such that they cannot see” (Q36:8). The second verse goes thus: “when the unbelievers drove him out with his closest associate and he and his second were in the cave, he assured him (his second): grief not because Allah is with us and Allah caused his peace to descend into his heart and aided him with warriors unseen, thus did he utterly humble the scheming of the unbelievers…” (Q9:40).
But we must pause here in order to ponder a chapter in the Quran titled The Cave (Qur’an 18). This chapter does not, however, celebrate the cavernous as it appertains to the odyssey of the Prophet of Islam and his companion inside the cave on the way to Madinah. Again, there is another chapter named after the Spider, but alas! not the Spider which hung its web at the entrance of the cave in which the Prophet and Abu Bakr Siddiq hid such that the unbelievers who were hitherto in their pursuit felt discouraged from exploring its hidden “treasures”. As far as the Qur’an is concerned it is not the events that make up the story of life that matter but what the story implies for humanity.
In the realm of the spiritual, the Hijrah was all about duty and sacrifice; in the realm of the material and the human it was an adventure. The first precedes the second both in importance and sequence. The Hijrah was also all about forsaking and repossessing. This is evidenced in the individual and communal realities of those who left what made them humans behind in Makkah in order for them to become greater humans in Madinah. It was a template for the emergence of new figures in history through whose actions the world today now counts the existence of over 1.9 billion Muslims all around the world. The Hijrah, while referencing motifs of forsaking and repossessing, amplifies the secret codes for the attainment of excellence in life. It means to be deprived of the world is not like the same thing as forsaking the world.
Both occurred with reference to the 70 individuals who made that journey during the first Hijrah, the second was relevant to those who willingly left Makkah in order to populate Madinah. The Hijra as a motif therefore essays the world as operating on a scale: it is either you are deprived of the world or you are made to forsake the world. In both instances, the world is meant to be forsaken not coveted. But the irony lies in the fact that those who forsake the world usually have the world come to them pleading that it be possessed; those who covet the world might or might never gain it; those who excessively covet the world are more likely going to lose it and lose their souls.
Furthermore, the Hijrah had to do with the departure from a space: the departure from Makkah. The Prophet and his companions not only left Makkah in person, but also left Makkah behind. To leave Makkah behind meant leaving the city with its insuperable odour of greed, covetousness, self-conceitedness, oppression of the poor, and sexploitation of women. By leaving Makkah, the Prophet was indirectly calling attention to the existence of the “Makkahs” of today: the “Makkah” in the North and South of Nigeria; the “Makkahs” in Africa and Asia; the “Makkahs” which are awaiting the emigration of humanity; the “Makkahs” of corruption in the various houses of Assembly and the corporate world; the “Makkah” in the Stock Exchange Markets where sharp practices are the order of the day; the Makkah in the banking sector where directors feast on the meagre deposits of pauperized Nigerians; the “Makkah” in local government houses where council allocations are “cancelled” on a monthly basis.
But the Hijrah of the Prophet from Makkah to Madinah did not and could not even have taken place the way it did without the resolution of matters which directly hinged on the personality of the Other Muhammad.
In other words, two types of Muhammad were known to the Makkans before the Hijrah: the Muhammad who claimed to be a Prophet and the Muhammad who was an embodiment of virtue and trustworthiness. The “first” Muhammad was hated for his declaration that there is no god but Allah; the second was loved for being virtuous, kind and a peace-maker; the first Muhammad was the one the Makkans believed had to be fought; the second was the one in whom the Makkans would entrust their loftiest treasures. But in reality, there was no separation between Muhammad, the Prophet of Allah, and the Muhammad who was an epitome of highest moral character. In other words, contrary to the wish of the Makkans, it was not possible for the Muhammad, son of Abdullah to be a Prophet ab initio if he could not measure up to the minimum standard of probity, honesty, and trustworthiness.
Thus, on the night of his departure from Makkah, he asked his cousin to help him return the treasures which the Makkans had kept with him while they were relating to him as Muhammad son of Abdullah, not as Muhammad the Prophet of Allah. To emigrate for the sake of Allah, therefore, meant to be free of all of obligations which are capable of rendering the Hijrah a nugatory; that even in a state of oppression, the religion of Islam demands equity from the oppressed to the oppressor even if the latter does not and would not come to equity with open hands.
By ensuring that Ali b. Abi Talib stayed behind in order to assist him return the trusts to their owners, the Prophet was leaving behind a patrimony: that even in a state of attrition, the Islamic timeless values of honesty and trustworthiness cannot be sacrificed on the altar of spiritual vocation. In essence, to take what belongs to the unbelievers or the masses in an unjust manner is the very antithesis of the spirit of emigration.
Thus, the journey to Madinah became an open track with unknowable and inestimable possibilities. The Prophet began the journey in the full knowledge that he was leading humanity from service to humanity to the service of Allah. The Hijrah essays the importance of the emergence of a global leader who would emigrate with humanity from the heinous theatre of ethnicity and profanity to the Eldorado of religiosity and equality. The distance between Makkah and Madinah was strewn with fear and uncertainty; but the Madinah, the destination, was a paradise awaiting those who were ready to overcome the temporary and empty ministrations of shaytan.
Put differently, the distance between Makkah and Madinah was like an open space and one in which the enemy was ready to appropriate; but it was also a closed space for those who had an unshakeable faith in Allah. Face to face with the enemies, the Prophet told his friend and companion, ‘don’t grief! Allah is with us”.
Face to face with the challenges of life, and in between the Makkah of our lives and the Madinah awaiting us, are we also ready to tell our companions: ‘don’t grief! Allah is with us?’. Face to face with the challenges of life and in-between our ‘Makkah’ of today – the ‘Makkah’ that is represented in yet to be fulfilled earthly desires- are we ready to look our spouses, friends, kith and kin in the eyes and say: ‘don’t grief! Allah is with us”?
Eventually he arrived his Madinah. The Prophet of Allah arrived Madinah after a tortuous journey across the arid desert of Arabia. But his arrival to Madinah only meant the beginning and the consolidation of what Islam can mean and what it could mean since every vocation is beset with the temptation of its purposes. His arrival to Madinah also meant the emergence of new identities within the nation of Islam. His arrival to Madinah equally meant the preparation for his return to Makkah. Now let us try to unpack the semiotics of these readings.
In the first instance, we mean to say that the Hijrah is not a geographical space of question but one seemingly dedicated to the search for an answer. This is because the Hijrah embarked upon by the Prophet and his companions is nothing but a geographical symbol of an obligation from which there can be no departing.
In our world today, as was the case during the Prophetic era, there can be no Hijrah from the observance of the five daily prayers; from the observance of fasting in the month of Ramadan; from pilgrimage to Makkah for those who can afford to do so; from perpetual testimony that Allah, in His essence, cannot be dualized let alone trinitized. It is settled in this religion that a Muslim would not wake up one day and say he is tired of being a man and as such he should be assisted to migrate from being male to female or vice versa as is now common in “advanced” societies today where transgender practices is now the order of the day. We embark on migration from ourselves unto Allah; a Muslim does not and would not embark on migration from God to Satan.
Now in talking about “beginning” and “consolidation” of Islam after Hijrah, it is with reference to those who would become Muslims by choice or chance; it is with reference to those who would find in Islam their lost treasures; it is with reference to those who would find in this religion answers to life-long questions that had hitherto agitated their minds. Those who migrated from Makkah would experience the ‘consolidation’ of faith in their hearts upon their arrival to Madinah. Ironically, the arrival of emigrants to Madinah also called attention to those who still remained in Makkah the same way it called attention to the new ‘Makkahs’ in our world today.
In other words, there are Muslims who still remain marooned in their own “makkah” awaiting their emigration to their own “madinah”. Equally, there are groups of Muslim youth today who have given an erroneous reading to their circumstances and have concluded that Islam in their community is already in its Madinite phase whereas, in reality, they are still under the jackboot of the oppression of new ‘Abi Sufyans’ and ‘Abi Lahab’ of today.
In other words, every age and clime produces and nurtures its own oppressors. There cannot be an Abu Lahab unless a Muhammad is appointed against him. As soon as a Fir’awn emerges anywhere in the world, it is certain that a “Musa” would be commissioned by Allah to lead him either to the grace of our Creator or to His damnation. But the Musa that led Fir’awn to his perdition had to spend some years under the oppressive suzerainty of the latter. The point at issue here is that it is important for us all to recognise exactly what stage our ‘Islam’ is presently. To do this would mean we would be in a position to address ourselves to what constitute our opportunities, threats and challenges. Not to do this would mean we would engage in what I would call misreading of reality: we would take our threat as an opportunity; we would take ignorance for knowledge and poverty for wealth. Is the event of the Boko Haram not an erroneous reading of the Makkah-Madinah construct in Muslim weltanchauung in Nigeria of today? Is Islam in Pakistan today in its Makkan or Madinite phase?
Let us side step the above and recall the fact that the arrival of the Prophet to Madinah (upon him be peace) meant the establishment of an Islamic State; it meant that to practice Islam in its apolitical or non-political tenor is both incomplete and invalid; that it is a transaction in intellectual sophistry to say that Islam and politics are strange bed fellows. The arrival of the Prophet to Madinah also means that in all times and climes, Muslims would occupy either of the two realities: that of the governor or that of the governed. The arrival of the Prophet to Madinah also meant the establishment of Islam as a social system where brotherhood and sisterhood, (is it brosterhood?) became nodus of religious practice. Or how else can we explain a trend in which women would be willing to share the most prized of all their “possession” with their fellow sisters. Without being sexist, I am wondering whether this world is not in dire need of that social system in which women would, working with the Islamic script, invite their unmarried fellow sisters to legal wedlock with their husbands; where men would invite their brethren to share from their wealth. In the society in which Islam established pursuant to the Hijrah, no space could be yielded for greed and selfishness; in the society in which Islam established sequel to the Hijrah, faith in blood relationship became inferior to faith in Allah and His prophet.
But the Hijra also led to the emergence of new identities within the Islamic polity. Here we are calling attention to the fifth columnist within: those who claim Islam in the open and side with un-Islam in the hidden; the friend of the Muslim community in the day and the confidant of the enemy outside in the night. In other words, whereas the Hijrah provided incentive for the establishment of a community of faith, it equally, and paradoxically too, led to the ‘birth’ of hypocrites within the Ummah.
Thus, no human society could be free of the challenges of the human in its polity. While the Hijrah produced “angels” among men: men like Abu Bakr Siddiq, Umar b. Khatab, Uthman b Affan and ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, it also produced the other men too: men like Ubayy b. K’ab b. Salul. The Hijra also produced women of excellence like ‘Aisha; it equally produced women like Hind. The Hijrah was a history of men and women of excellence; it was about men and women of history.
Thus, The Hijrah which took place a thousand four hundred and forty-seven years ago is as relevant to today as it was yesterday. But it remains to be seen whether and when Muslims of today shall embark on their own Hijrah. It remains to be seen when we shall all emigrate from unbelief to belief, from greed to contentment, from indecency to chastity. It remains to be seen when we shall emigrate from this “Makkah”, from this city and from this space, to a “Madinah” where faith would no more be commoditized, where chastity would no longer be monetized, where authority would always be held in trust for Allah, where women would no longer get tired of being women and men would no more desire to be women.
These are some of the conditions that make the Hijrah a categorical imperative for humanity today. The Hijrah should be the destiny and destination of all conscious Muslims who consider this world not as a paradise but a means to that paradise where the beatitude of the Almighty Allah would be contemplated by believers the same way we behold the sun each time it rises every morning in the horizon.
