President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s demonstrably unconstitutional suspension of the elected leaders of Rivers State and his illegal imposition of a retired military lickspittle as sole administrator in the exercise of his otherwise constitutional privilege to declare a state of emergency in any part of the country is the latest addition in a long list of instances of his embrace of the very things he once resented and fought against when he was outside the reins of federal power.

For example, he was brutally censorious of Goodluck Jonathan’s withdrawal of fuel subsidies in 2012. He expressed sentiments in writing and in speeches that resonated with the angst of the masses. He even helped finance a nationwide mass protest that so convulsed the country that Jonathan was compelled to back off his plans.

Yet, one of the first acts Tinubu did as a president in May 2023 was to announce an economically and socially disruptive withdrawal of fuel subsidies that has deepened poverty, annihilated the middle class, and ruptured the very fabric of Nigerian society.

Again, when Olusegun Obasanjo unconstitutionally suspended Plateau State’s Governor Joshua Dariye—along with state legislators— in May 2004 and appointed General Chris Ali as the state’s sole administrator, then Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu of Lagos rightly called the act “illegal.”

“It is unfortunate and illegal,” he said. “This has to be discouraged. It is a bad precedent. What the president of the country has done, I pray it doesn’t stand.”

In fact, when Goodluck Jonathan declared states of emergency in the three northeastern states of Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa without suspending the elected leaders of the states, which I commended in a May 25, 2013, column titled “The Malcolm Xian Logic in Jonathan’s Praiseworthy Boko Haram Offensive,” Tinubu condemned it as unacceptable federal overreach.

“No governor of a state in Nigeria is the chief security officer,” he said. “Putting the blame on the governors, who have been effectively emasculated, for the abysmal performance of the government at the centre which controls all these security agencies, smacks of ignorance and mischief.”

He contended that Jonathan’s action “seeks to abridge or has the potential of totally scuttling the constitutional functions of governors and other elected representatives of the people” and that it would be “counterproductive in the long run.”

Given an opportunity to give materiality to the principles he espoused when he had no access to federal power, he has become indistinguishable from, and in many cases worse than, the objects of his erstwhile censure.

Tinubu now implements the same policies he once condemned and has become the same personality he once reviled. He exemplifies the aphoristic wisdom (often attributed to historian Ariel Durant or her husband Will Durant) that says, “Today’s rebel is tomorrow’s tyrant.” In Tinubu’s case, he was yesterday’s rebel and today’s tyrant.

Why do most people who initially invested symbolic and political capital in fighting against authority or oppression eventually become the very oppressors they once resisted? Why do firebrands and idealists often morph into the very thing they once denounced after assuming power?

 The evidence of history shows us that resistance to tyranny can, and often does, end in new tyrannies. Critics of war or corruption frequently adopt those same practices when they find themselves in the circles of power.

So, this is beyond Tinubu as a person, who probably never really had any principles to begin with, whose resistance to past oppressive policies was probably mere calculative opportunism.

But why do previously genuinely adversarial people become the very things they once opposed with such regularity? Observers from psychology, philosophy, and political theory have long studied this phenomenon.

A previous column I wrote (and republished twice) on the psychology of power pointed out that “people under the influence of power are neurologically similar to people who suffer traumatic brain injury” and posited that situational, power-induced brain damage may be responsible for this.

Philosophers have also grappled with the paradox of noble ideals curdling into oppression. Friedrich Nietzsche, for example, famously warned of the moral danger that comes with fighting evil too intensely. “He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster,” Nietzsche wrote, adding, “if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”

Nietzsche’s metaphor speaks to how the struggle for power or justice can warp people’s souls. Revolutionaries and reformers, in attempting to vanquish a “monster” (e.g. a tyrant or an unjust system), may take on the very methods and mindset of that monster.

His concept of the “will to power” also suggests that the drive to attain power can override other moral constraints, so that once the will to power is unleashed, individuals rationalize actions that serve dominance.

French theorist Michel Foucault provides another lens through which we can make sense of the phenomenon of people taking on the very methods and mindset of the beasts of power they once fought.

He said, “Power is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere.” By that, he means no one is ever truly outside power relations; even the most vicious critics of the most monstrous regimes operate within a field of power. Once the critics take control, he said, they often reproduce the very power dynamics they once criticized, even if their rhetoric changes.

The line between oppressor and liberator can blur: the roles may switch, but the play remains the same. Foucault’s insight is that systems of power tend to self-perpetuate, regardless of who is at the helm, unless conscious effort is made to dismantle those underlying structures.

 In other words, a change in leadership without a change in what Foucault calls the “microphysics of power” is likely to yield similar repressive outcomes. The new boss becomes “same as the old boss,” because the circuitry of power channels them into that role.

That’s why the sadly familiar pattern of “condemning in opposition, then doing in government” is so widespread that it almost seems like a political law of gravity. It’s good to bear this in mind as we read and listen to the pronouncements of current “opposition” politicians who seem like they identify with popular causes and sentiments.

Like Tinubu, today’s opponents of executive overreach may extend their own executive powers once they have the opportunity.

Like Tinubu, they will have a story to tell themselves and the public to justify their U-turn: the situation is different, their actions are for the greater good, their previous stance was based on incomplete information, etc. And indeed, sometimes circumstances do legitimately change.

But when the dust settles, the outcome looks awfully familiar. Pro-democracy activists become a congress of tyrants and justifiers of tyranny; the fierce social critic and human rights activist who once decried abuses now defends them; the liberator who once raged against oppressors now only liberates his stomach. As the Roman philosopher-politician Cicero once wrote, “It is easier to criticize than to do better.”

Fortunately, this cycle is not inevitable. Many thinkers advocate checks and balances, institutional limits, and personal integrity as antidotes, although even those seem to be insufficient.

Nigeria’s National Assembly, as we have seen in the last few years, particularly in the last few days, can neither check nor balance the excesses of the executive. It’s a slavish extension of Aso Rock. The voices of the few honest, conscientious ones among them are drowned out by the cacophony that the rapacious, unprincipled, mercenary self-seekers among them, who constitute the majority, emit. The judiciary is even worse.

It is easy to be disillusioned and to surrender amid this reality. To be frank, I have found myself in that state many times. But power must be continually guarded and checked. Philosopher Hannah Arendt observed that only constant vigilance and a commitment to plurality and law prevent rebels from calcifying into tyrants. 

We must all do our part to hold people in power to account, even if we’re not sure we would do better ourselves. At this point, the only check and balance against creeping tyranny is the democratic rebellion of the people. 

There is an African proverb that says, “When you give someone a goat, you must also release the rope.” This wise saying warns against the tendency of benefactors to maintain control over what they claim to have relinquished. The ongoing political crisis in Rivers State is a clear reflection of this truth. Former Governor Nyesom Wike, minister of the FCT, anointed and supported Siminalayi Fubara as his successor, yet he has found it difficult to step aside and allow his protégé to govern independently. Instead, Rivers State has been plunged into political chaos, with a battle for supremacy between a former leader who refuses to let go and a sitting governor struggling to assert his authority.  Alas! The squabble has compelled President Bola Tinubu to recently declare a state of emergency in Rivers State, citing the prolonged political crisis and governance paralysis. Against the foregoing backdrop, it is not illogical to reason that had Wike truly released the “rope” after gifting the “goat,” Rivers State would have been enjoying political stability today.

Without a doubt, the Wike-Fubara crisis is not an isolated case; it is a symptom of a much deeper problem that has plagued Nigerian politics for decades. Across the country, the godfather-godson syndrome continues to wreak havoc on governance and development. In many instances, outgoing political leaders handpick successors, not necessarily based on competence, but on perceived loyalty and the ability to continue serving the interests of their political benefactors. However, once these successors assume office and begin to understand the weight of governance, they often seek to establish their own authority, leading to bitter power struggles.

We have seen this scenario play out in multiple states. In Lagos, President Bola Tinubu’s political dominance has ensured that successive governors remain firmly under his influence. Although Tinubu has successfully maintained control, not every godfather is as lucky. The conflict between former Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode and Tinubu led to Ambode’s political downfall when he sought to exercise independence. In Kano, a similar battle for supremacy occurred between former Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso and his successor, Abdullahi Ganduje. Their fallout created deep political divisions in the state. In Edo, Adams Oshiomhole and Godwin Obaseki went from allies to fierce political rivals, leading to an intense struggle that reshaped the political landscape of the state.

In fact, the godfather syndrome has proven to be one of the biggest threats to Nigeria’s democracy. Instead of allowing the electorate to choose their leaders, political heavyweights impose candidates who they believe will serve their interests. The result is that many governors come into office shackled by expectations that they must remain loyal to their predecessors rather than serve the people. This breeds mediocrity in governance, as the focus shifts from development to appeasing political benefactors.

Moreover, the battle for control often leads to instability, which in turn affects governance and service delivery. When a godfather and his successor fall out, the entire state apparatus is often thrown into turmoil. Political loyalists are divided, state assemblies become battlegrounds, and critical governance issues take a backseat to power struggles. The people, who should be the primary beneficiaries of governance, end up suffering the most.

Without a doubt, the crisis in Rivers State is particularly troubling because it highlights how political godfatherism can derail a state’s progress. Wike was a dominant force during his tenure as governor. He built a strong political structure and was instrumental in Fubara’s emergence as governor. However, instead of stepping back and allowing his successor to lead, Wike has continued to exert influence over the state’s affairs. Fubara, on the other hand, has gradually begun to assert his independence, leading to a bitter fallout between the two.

The Rivers State House of Assembly has been a key battleground in this crisis. Lawmakers loyal to Wike have clashed with those siding with Fubara, leading to legislative paralysis. The in-fighting has also affected governance, as key decisions and policies have been stalled due to the political crisis. Instead of focusing on development and governance, Rivers State has been consumed by political maneuvering and factional battles.

Had Wike truly allowed Fubara to govern without interference, Rivers State would have remained peaceful. The lesson here is clear: political godfathers must learn to let go. Once a leader has handed over power, they should step aside and allow their successor to govern independently. Anything short of this leads to unnecessary strife and instability.

In fact, political godfatherism is deeply entrenched in Nigeria’s political system. Many politicians see public office as an extension of their personal estates, and they are unwilling to relinquish control even after leaving office. This has led to a situation where many state governors operate under the influence of political heavyweights who dictate key decisions behind the scenes.

The only way to break this cycle is to strengthen Nigeria’s democratic institutions. Political parties must move away from the culture of imposition and allow internal democracy to thrive. The electorate must also demand accountability from their leaders and resist attempts to impose candidates who are merely stooges of powerful politicians. Until these changes occur, the problem of political godfatherism will continue to plague Nigeria’s democracy.

For Nigeria to move forward, political leaders must learn to embrace true leadership. True leadership is about service, not control. It is about mentoring the next generation of leaders and allowing them the freedom to govern independently. A good leader should not seek to manipulate or dictate to their successor but should instead offer guidance when sought and step aside when necessary.

The crisis in Rivers State serves as a cautionary tale. It is a reminder that power is transient and that no leader, no matter how influential, can hold onto it forever. Those who fail to understand this end up being consumed by the very system they seek to control.

The problem of political godfatherism is not just a state-level issue, it is a challenge that must be addressed before it escalates to the national level. If not checked, a similar crisis could rear its ugly head at the presidential level, throwing the entire country into chaos. Imagine a scenario where a former president installs a successor and then refuses to step aside, using political influence to control national affairs from behind the scenes. The consequences would be disastrous for Nigeria’s democracy, leading to instability at the highest levels of government.

To prevent this, decisive action must be taken to discourage the culture of political godfatherism. Institutions must be strengthened to ensure that power truly resides with the people and not with a select few individuals who manipulate the system to their advantage. Political leaders must be made to understand that governance is about service to the people, not about maintaining personal control over public office.

If Wike had left the rope after gifting the goat to Fubara, Rivers State would have been peaceful today. But the political crisis in Rivers is just one of many examples of how political godfatherism continues to undermine Nigeria’s democracy. From Lagos to Kano, from Edo to Anambra, the same story repeats itself: political benefactors refusing to let go, leading to instability and setbacks in governance.

Until Nigerian politicians learn that leadership is about service rather than control, the cycle of godfatherism and political conflict will continue. The people deserve better. Governance should not be a personal empire; it should be about delivering progress and development to those who elected leaders into office. If Nigerian leaders can embrace this simple truth, the country’s democracy will be the better for it.

There is no denying the fact that the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State is an ill-advised and disproportionate measure that threatens to escalate an already tense situation in the state. It is akin to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, a classic case of applying a bigger problem to solve a smaller one. The crisis in Rivers, while serious, does not warrant the draconian measure of a state of emergency, which has historically been reserved for situations where a state has become completely ungovernable due to insurgency, war, or natural disaster.

Against the backdrop of the foregoing, it is germane to recall that Rivers State is a crucial economic hub in Nigeria that has been embroiled in a political crisis stemming from the power tussle between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor, Nyesom Wike, who now serves as the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory. Thus, the friction between the two political gladiators has spilled over into the state’s legislature, judiciary, and even the security apparatus, leading to a breakdown in governance.

However, while the situation is concerning, it has not degenerated into total lawlessness. The courts are still functioning, the security agencies are still in operation, and economic activities have not ground to a halt. The political instability is largely an elite struggle for control, and while it has trickled down to affect governance, it has not created the kind of anarchic conditions that justify a state of emergency.

Declaring a state of emergency in Rivers would mean suspending democratic institutions, imposing military rule, and giving the federal government sweeping powers over the state. Historically, states of emergency in Nigeria have led to further crises rather than solving them. For instance, the declaration of a state of emergency in Plateau and Ekiti states in the early 2000s did not yield lasting peace but rather deepened political tensions.

The implications of such a declaration are dire. First, it would disenfranchise the people of Rivers by sidelining their elected government. Second, it would set a dangerous precedent where political conflicts are met with authoritarian responses rather than dialogue and democratic solutions. Third, it could have economic repercussions, as investors would see Rivers as an unstable environment, leading to capital flight and further economic downturn.

Without a doubt, the crisis in Rivers is a political problem that requires a political solution. In fact, the crisis in Rivers is fundamentally political, and political problems require political solutions. This is as the issues at play include loyalty struggles, governance style differences, and conflicting interests within the ruling party. These are challenges that should be resolved through dialogue, negotiation, and institutional mechanisms, not military intervention.

Rather than imposing a state of emergency, the federal government should facilitate a roundtable discussion involving all stakeholders, including Governor Fubara, Minister Wike, lawmakers, traditional rulers, and civil society leaders. Mediation efforts should be aimed at ensuring that the democratic institutions in the state function optimally and that governance is not held hostage by personal ambitions.

Additionally, the judiciary must play its role in resolving the legal disputes arising from the crisis. The courts should be allowed to function without political interference so that legal interpretations of the unfolding events can provide clarity and direction.

Irrespective of the fact that Nigeria’s democracy is not new to incidents of declaration of state of emergency, the latest declaration in Rivers, no doubt, highlights the dangerousness of its pronouncement for Nigerian Democracy. 

In fact, the recently declared state of emergency in Rivers, will no doubt further set a precedent that could be exploited in other states facing political crises. This is as Nigerian politics is replete with conflicts between governors and their predecessors, rival factions within parties, and power struggles at different levels of government. Therefore, if the federal government responds to such conflicts with emergency declarations, it could mark the beginning of an era of arbitrary interventions, weakening Nigeria’s democratic structure.

Moreover, the security forces, which are already overstretched with issues of insurgency in the North-East, banditry in the North-West, and separatist agitations in the South-East, should not be dragged into what is essentially a political conflict. Deploying federal forces to Rivers in an emergency scenario would further militarize governance and increase the risk of human rights abuses.

Against the backdrop of the foregoing view, it is not a misnomer to opine that Nigeria’s democracy is still evolving, and that part of that evolution is learning to handle political crises within the framework of democratic institutions. The situation in Rivers, while challenging, is not unmanageable within the bounds of democracy. The federal government must resist the temptation to employ excessive force where political engagement is needed. Declaring a state of emergency in Rivers would be a classic case of using a bigger problem to solve a smaller one, and history has shown that such approaches often create more chaos than they resolve. Instead of exacerbating the crisis, the focus should be on dialogue, institutional reforms, and upholding the rule of law. That is the only sustainable path to peace and stability in Rivers State.

Beware the Ides of March has been an unceasing admonition to politicians since the brutal assassination of Julius Caesar on 15 March, 44BC when events move in a certain troubling trajectory. In the case of Caesar, he was warned by a soothsayer and the wife Calpurnia as is usual with women, was ill at ease. What with their intuition which is superior to any debate. Didn’t Chief Awolowo say to the world that his wife was a jewel of inestimable value who was usually Divinely guided? And didn’t the wife of Pontius Pilate say to her husband that she was troubled in her dream all night and her husband should “have thou nothing to do with the death of that man because He is innocent?” The innocent Man was no other than the Lord Christ. This is because women have an abundance of richer spiritual content in their make-up that enables them to easily tell right from wrong than men. And so exultantly and confidently the wife of Charles de Gaulle one-time President of France, said: “Charles, you govern France, but I rule this house including you!”

Feeling confident, Caesar headed for the Senate meeting ignoring the warnings.
“I could be well moved. If I were you.
If I could pray to move, prayers would move me.
But I am constant as the Northern Star.
Of whose true fixed and resting quality
There is no fellow in the firmament.
The skies are painted with unnumbered sparks;
They are all fire, and everyone doth shine.
But there’s but one in all doth hold his place.”
Julius Caesar was felled, stabbed by his traducers.

The struggle in Rivers State has been long coming. It began as soon as Siminalayi Fubara took up the mantle of office as Governor, but he did not have enough experience to deal with people who are adept in the power game and watch his back. As I said last week, the crisis in the oil-blessed Rivers State is unremitted power struggle for political and economic control. Nyesom Wike is undoubtedly driving at enthronement of godfatherism worship to replicate the Lagos doctrine. Governor Fubara had wondered that since Wike governed Rivers State permitting no interference from any quarters, why should he not be allowed to serve with the same free hands and latitude.

The relationship between Wike and Fubara was chummy in the early stages of the latter’s Administration. It was such that when Wike was appointed Minister of the Federal Capital Territory. Governor Fubara led some members of his cabinet, elders and stakeholders of the state to Abuja on a congratulatory celebration. There was hardly any visit to Port Harcourt by Wike that Fubara did not lead his officials to receive him at the airport. Many of Wike’s commissioners when he was governor were inherited by Fubara. Unknown to Fubara there were undertows charging in the mass of waters that is Rivers State and abutting Government House. A secret plan had reached an advanced stage to impeach him because of his stand-off against interference in his administration from Abuja. This was in October, 2023, when he was barely six months in office.

That was when things began to fall apart. Reports said he had to move fast to avert the harm to his rulership and political career so early. But some occurrence came to his rescue. A wing of the State Assembly building caught fire. The coincidence was too much not to insinuate that it was the handiwork of arsonists known to people in the executive. The Assembly members read into the incident a deliberate effort to stall the impeachment process. They removed the Majority Leader of the House, Edison Ehie. The legislators were determined to still forge ahead with their impeachment resolve to a logical conclusion. However, they were disbanded by security operatives who drove them away when they reconvened to pursue their objective to remove the governor. The Governor himself came out. He addressed them describing the attempt to impeach him a nullity.

The House was broken with four going on the side of Governor Fubara and 27 for FCT Minister Nyesom Wike. The Governor moved the Assembly to Government House ostensibly to rebuild or renovate the building damaged by fire. The governor said later that the building had suffered from integrity deficiency and had largely to be pulled down. The larger faction led by Speaker Martin Amaewhule refused to move the Assembly to Government House. On 11 December, 2023, at a reception held in honour of Tony Okocha, chairman of APC chapter in River State, they announced their defection to APC. They were shown on video standing with Okocha raising hands and brandishing broom the symbol of APC.

Edison Ehie who had become the Speaker on the side of Fubara headed for the state High Court to obtain order recognising the four members as constituting the authentic Rivers State House of Assembly. He made efforts to declare the seat of the 27 group vacant since they had changed party and gone away with the APC. Based on that recognition the 2024 budget was presented to the four-man legislators. They passed it and Governor Fubara signed it into an appropriation law on the same day. Lawyers say that there had been a similar case of thin legislature strength in Plateau State before which they could cite. The budget in Port Harcourt, anyway, covered the renovation of the Assembly building damaged.

On 18 December, President Bola Tinubu waded into the crisis, asking the parties in the rift to sheathe their swords and embrace peace. Fubara was asked to re- absorb the pro- Wike commissioners who had left the administration of their own free will. He was asked to re-present the 2024 budget as well. He re-absorbed the commissioners but he declined to re-present the appropriation bill which those close to him said had been overtaken. This led to renewed stand-off. Nyesom Wike said the only path to peace in the state is in Fubara re-presenting the 2025 budget and tabling his list of commissioners before the expanded legislative house.

As the crisis situation was deteriorating, President Tinubu came in with a big stick! He declared a state of emergency on Tuesday, 18 March, exactly two years Fubara had his electoral victory at the polls. It is not the state of emergency that is so much of a problem as the exercise of that power is discretionary and based on what intelligence reports he has, but the attendant sacking of the governor, his deputy, Professor (Mrs.) Ngozi Odu; their Executive Council; and Members of the State Assembly. Lawyers argue that by so doing the President has exceeded his brief spelt out in the constitution.

It is reassuring that lawyers have been churning out quite some literature on this such that everything, the hastiness of action by the Federal Authority has sounded more like working to the answer. Many analysts say the gaze is on 2027 and Rivers State is crucial in the electoral calculation. What with Nyesom Wike conducting himself with his accustomed lack of refinement and with a certain sense of entitlement to Rivers State beyond a call to serve for which we all must bow our spirit in humility for the Grace. What with the pro-Wike State House of Assembly members not making themselves available for Governor Fubara to present his budget and list of commissioners in line with the ruling of the Supreme Court! To frustrate him, the Assembly adjourned indefinitely without any thought about his finding the resources to run and meet the obligations of the state.

Bola Tinubu and Nyesom Wike are two of a kind sharing the same political philosophy which is that struggle for power is not a child’s play. You fight for it “at all costs, snatch it and run with it.” Both will not let go on their super-rich empires.

Unfortunately, the dominant wish among our people is to line up behind the man with the deep pocket. They drop their principles.

See the spate of defections!!

The Governor said while addressing the people of River State before vacating Government House on Wednesday: “Even in the face of the political impasse, we have remained committed to constitutional order and the rule of law, putting the interest of our people above all else. This was why immediately after Mr. President’s intervention to broker peace, we did not hesitate to implement the agreed terms in good faith, including welcoming back commissioners who had previously resigned on their own volition. Furthermore, we moved swiftly to comply with the Supreme Court’s judgment immediately we received the certified true copy of the judgment to return the state to normalcy…. Unfortunately, at every turn, members of the Rivers State House of Assembly frustrated our efforts, thus making genuine peace and progress difficult.”

The craving for power and influence by man is an age-long intoxication. It was for fear of losing power and influence as well as hold on their fellowmen that the political and priestly establishments in Israel conspired and instigated hate among the people to get rid of the Lord Jesus Christ. And they executed Him Who brought the Holy Word of Salvation. The end to the intoxication is not in sight and will not be until mankind have the knowledge of the consequences of the burden in every wrongdoing which are awaiting them in life hereafter! They are severe; they are relentless. The entire Creation is governed by immutable, living and self-acting Laws.

Governor Fubara and his government should be immediately recalled. State of Emergency may be retained to curb lawlessness such as emerging oil pipeline vandalization which President Tinubu accused Fubara of not censoring. Options to return the state to normalcy can be exhausted in the arbitration of the courts. States are coordinate entities with the Centre; that is why we are a federation.

UNIQUE SEASON OF FASTING
For millions of Christians and Moslems world-wide this is a special season. The mosques are overfilling every evening. And from pulpits on Sundays an outpouring of exhortations for the good life thunders across the globe. It is yet another season of the great yearly fast, ladies and gentlemen. This year’s fasting period is unique. The last time the period for both faiths coincided was 32 years ago. Those who have pre-occupied themselves with this ecclesiastical purification of body and soul say the coincidence is indeed every 33 years. Their prediction borne out of cosmic calculation is that indeed the fasting by adherents of both Christianity and Islam Ramadan and Lent will fall on the same day, 18 February, next year. The Moslems turned their gaze upwards on 28 February with the sighting of the moon and should be away in spirit until the appearance of another crescent, about 30 days altogether. The Christians went on their knees on 05 March to begin their own 40-day retreat from worldliness.

In 1993 when this overlapping occurred, I said given the fact that a substantial majority of Nigerians subscribe to both religions, it may not be quite out of place to assume that, under normal circumstances a wave of purifying flames or currents would sweep through the country at least for the period of the fast. A great many unbelievers, too, might be wondering, shaking their heads in pity, at what sounded to them as transcendental penitentiality that demands abstinence from food, drinks and pleasure was really all about and what has befallen the world!

I do fast. And I enjoy doing so on two grounds. First it affords me the opportunity to give the body a break from its enormous workload. Withdrawal from food for some time is like bringing the city of millions of trillions of cells to a standstill on a sanitation last Saturday of the month. All the wastes that heavy work schedule locked in the closets are brought out and emptied as all energy is diverted to detoxification of the household. Thereafter, the body gets lighter, livelier, more radiant and youthful.

But by far more important is the benevolent effect of true fasting on the inner man. Man himself. True, a revitalised cloak or vessel as a refurbished motor car is to a motorist, is an invaluable asset for spiritual mobility and outreach, it is in the capacity of a fast to loosen spirit from body awhile and connect man to his Maker that its greatest benefit resides.

Man on earth is a union of body and soul, the soul itself a union of the spirit, that is of man, and his non-physical, finer coverings. The unions are held together by a mesh of radiations to which each party makes a contribution. Full consciousness is a state in which each party generates its required share of heat for the union. When the current is low from any side, the uniting mesh weakens and the union loosens. This happens often, as when the body is in a state of shock or illness, during sleep when the body goes to rest or when at the other end, the inner man loses the will to live and loses hold on the body, its cloak.

This is clearly evident when a tired body falls asleep, its contribution to the rays diminishes and the soul is freed through a weakening of the union hold, soars away, in what the brain, memory brain also called cerebellum, is later to remember faintly as a dream, having not fully and consciously participated in the experiences of the soul. It is the same principle that is enunciated by such alternative forms of medicine as acupuncture, acupressure, reflex zone therapy and iridology. Those channels of energy they speak about are nothing other than paths of energy flow.

Fasting may indeed have a spiritually composing effect if it turns man away from earthly trivialities and assists him to seek connection with his Maker. This will depend, however, on the inner state. For once the deprivation of nourishment to the body compels it to weaken; the union with the soul loosens somewhat, and the soul thus freed may easily gain the necessary connection with finer, that is immaterial currents. Gratitude arises to flow to the Throne of Grace. With finer currents come blessings, clarity, guidance, protection etc.

It needs be pointed out, however, that not all fasting brings blessings. There cannot be blessing where fasting does not engender an awakening inwardly. In fact, many who fast in this expectation are inwardly dead and do fast only out of habit or society expectation. For those who cannot fast for whatever reason or do not believe in it, that awakening is by no means unattainable through other agencies. Many souls are known, for example, to open up in the woods, seashore or in music halls. It is important for each person to find the key for unlocking the treasures of his own inner life. Above all, however, there is no better way to the unfolding than what The Grail Message by Abd-ru-shin points out: “He who bears within himself the firm volition for what is good, and strives to give purity to his thoughts has already found the way to the Highest! All else will then be added unto him.” Elsewhere, The Grail Message states: “If you deal exclusively and earnestly with what is good all else follows of its own accord. Thus it is not at all so difficult! But in your volition you constantly reach far beyond this, thus from the outset making the most simple things not only very hard for yourselves but quite often even impossible.”