Alhamdulillah Was-Salatu Was-Salamu ‘Ala Rasoolillah, Amma Ba’d:
The Full Narration:
It was transmitted to me in writing by As-Sari from Shu’ayb from Sayf from ‘Atiyyah from Yazid Al-Faq’asi (that): ‘Abdullah bin Saba was a Jew from the people of San’a, and his mother was a black woman. He converted to Islam in the era of ‘Uthman (Caliphate of Uthman bin Affab), then roamed about the lands of the Muslims, attempting to lead them into error. He began in the Hijaz, and then (worked) successively in Basrah, Kufah, and Shaam. He was unable to work his will (his evil plans) upon a single one of the people of Shaam; they drove him out and he came to Egypt .
He (‘Abdullah bin Saba) settled among the Egyptians, saying to them, among other things, “How strange it is that some people claim that Jesus will return [to the earth], while denying that Muhammad will return. And Almighty God has said (in The Quran), ‘Surely the One who has enjoined the Qur’ān upon you will surely bring you back to a place of return.’ [Quran 28:85] Now Muhammad is more worthy than Jesus to return.”
(Yazid Al-Faq’asi) says: This gained the approval [of his listeners], and so he fabricated for them [the notion of] the Return (Ar-Raj’ah, initially it meant the doctrine of the second coming of Muhammad ﷺ, it later evolved to mean the return of the 12th Imam of the Shia), and they discussed it among themselves. Later on, (Ibn Saba) said to them, “Verily there have been a thousand prophets; every prophet has an executor (executor of his will, Wasi) and ‘Ali was the executor of Muhammad.” He continued, “Muhammad is the seal of the prophets, and ‘Ali is the seal of the executors (Khatam-ul-Awsia).”
Then after that he said, “Who commits a greater wrong than a man who has not carried out the testament of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, who has attacked the executor of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, and who has usurped power over the Ummah?” Then he told them, “Verily, ‘Uthman has taken it without right, while this one [that is, ‘Ali] is the executor of the Messenger of Allah. Therefore, champion this cause and set it going (work towards it).
(‘Abdullah bin Saba said:) Begin by censuring your Umaraa (leaders, governors). Proclaim publicly the commanding of good and the forbidding of evil, and you will (then) win over the people. Summon them to this cause.
Then he dispersed his agents (callers to his cause, Du’aat) and wrote to those whom he had corrupted in the garrison towns. They returned his correspondence and secretly preached their notions [to others].
In public they proclaimed the commanding of good and the forbidding of evil. They began sending letters to the garrison towns, filling them with censure (mentioning the faults) of their rulers, while their brethren would write back to them in similar terms. Among (these dissidents) the inhabitants of each garrison town would write about their activities to another garrison town. Those involved would read this aloud in their various garrison towns, until finally they extended this [agitation] to Madinah and spread his message throughout the land. Their real aim was different from the one that they proclaimed in public, and what they kept secret was different from that which they presented openly. Thus, the inhabitants of every garrison town were saying, “We are secure from the trials facing everyone except the Madinans (people of Madinah).” As the latter became aware of (the agitation) in all the garrison towns, they said, “We are secure from the situation facing the people.”
At this point (the narrator) is joined by Muhammad and Talhah: (The Madinans) came to ‘Uthman and said, “O Commander of the Faithful, have you heard what we hear concerning the people?” He answered, “No, by Allah. I have only heard about order and security.” They continued, “(Certain things) have come to our attention,” and they told him what had been communicated to them. Then (‘Uthman) said, “You are my associates (Shuraka) and the men of probity (Shuhood, witnesses) among the believers, so advise me.” They responded, “We advise you to send men whom you trust to the garrison towns so that they may bring back their reports to you.”
Then he summoned Muhammad bin Maslamah and dispatched him to Kufah; he also sent Usamah bin Zayd to Basrah, ‘Ammar bin Yasir to Egypt, and ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar to Shaam. In addition to these, he sent men to various other places. They all returned before ‘Ammar and said, “O people, we did not disapprove of anything [which we found during our tours of inspection], nor did the notables (A’lam) or commoners (‘Awaam) among the Muslims.” They said also, “The affairs of the Muslims are in good order if only their governors (Umaraa) act equitably (i.e. with justice) among them and keep watch over them.”
The people waited so long for ‘Ammar that they thought that he had been assassinated. Then unexpectedly they got a letter from ‘Abdallah bin Sa’d bin Abi Sarh, informing them that a band of men (Qawm) in Egypt had focused all their efforts on ‘Ammar (bin Yasir) and won him to their cause. Among these were ‘Abdallah bin As-Sawda’ [that is, ‘Abdullah Ibn Saba], Khalid bin Muljam, Sudan bin Humran, and Kinanah bin Bishr.
[Tareekh At-Tabari, translated into English by R. Stephen Humphreys, University of Wisconsin, Madison, State University of New York Press as, ‘The History Of Al-Tabari’, Volume 15, pages 145-148. In the original Arabic book, Vol.4, page 340-341. See ‘Events of 35 Hijri’. I have slightly adapted and corrected the English translation without changing anything from the main text.]
Some reasons why this narration is not reliable and very weak:
1. Regarding this narration, the Muhaqqiqoon (the ones who researched the chains of narration of Tareekh At-Tabari), who compiled after a thorough research Saheeh wa Da’eef Tareekh At-Tabari (Muhammad Subhi bin Hassan Hallaq and Muhammad Taher Al-Barzanji) stated:
The chain of this narration is weak and contains Nakarah Shadeedah (things that are to be severely criticised). The mentioned narration by Saif stated that when Uthman ibn ‘Affan sent ‘Ammar ibn Yasir (may Allah be pleased with him) to Egypt, he (‘Ammar) delayed his return. It became apparent to the Muslims that the reason for his delay was his being influenced by the opinions of the Jew- ‘Abdullah ibn Saba (Ibn As-Sauda). The truth that should be said is that, there is no authentic, well-established narration demonstrating that any of the companions were (ever) influenced by the words of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba. In fact, weak narrations sometimes assert that the companions only considered him a Jew, as seen in the weak narration by Saif about the disagreement between Mu’awiyah and Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with them) and Abu Dharr’s departure to Madinah and then to Rabadha after consulting with Sayyiduna ‘Uthman ibn Affan, the Commander of the Faithful (may Allah be pleased with him) – refer to (4/330/787). (End quote.)
[After writing this, the researchers mention in this same footnote the reality of the existence of ‘Abdullah bin Saba and how he was involved in the murder of ‘Uthman bin ‘Affan, from various Sunni and Shia sources, but we will not add it here as it is not necessary for our discussion.]
2. Let us mention the condition of two narrators from the chain of the narration above:
Sayf bin Umar (Al-Usayyidi At-Tamimi):
Imam Yahya ibn Ma’een said, “Weak in hadith. When asked about him, Abu Ja’far Al-Hadrami said, ‘There is no goodness in him’.” Imam Abu Hatim Ar-Razi said, “His Hadith are considered unreliable, and his narration resembles the narrations of Al-Waqidi.” [See: hadith.islam-db.com/]
Shuaib bin Ibrahim (Al-Kufi):
Imam Abu Ahmad ibn ‘Adi Al-Jurjani, “He has narrations and reports, but he is not well-known in this regard. The quantity of what he narrates in terms of hadith and reports is not much, and some of his reports and narrations are questionable due to their containing criticism of the early generations.” Imam Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, “Feehi Ba’dh Nakarah (There is some criticism regarding his narrrations).” Imam Adh-Dhahabi: There is ignorance about his condition.” [See: hadith.islam-db.com/]
3. The text of the narration is also problematic as it says that ‘Ammar bin Yasir, the noble Sahabi, was influenced by the deceptive words of ‘Abdullah bin Saba and his companions. May Allah keep us safe from thinking as such about the Sahaba (the Prophet’s ﷺ companions).
4. The narration of ‘Abdullah bin Saba is being shared these days to imply that it is not allowed to speak ill of an oppressive ruler even if it is with an intention of ordering good and forbidding evil, and not to cause a rebellion. Rather this contradicts narrations from the pious predecessors and scholars about ‘backbiting an evil ruler’. Some of them are below:
a. The following are some quotes from ‘Kitab-us-Sunnah Min Masail Harb bin Ismail Al-Hanzali Al-Kirmani’ (translation from al-aqeedah.com):
(Point:) 117 / 656 – ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Abdil-Wahhāb narrated to us and said: Ziyād ibn Ar-Rabī’ narrated to us, from ‘Abdur-Rahmān ibn Udhaynah who said: Our ashyākh (pl.shaykh) said: “Three (types of people) have no backbiting: The unjust oppressing ruler, the sinner who exposes his sins and an innovator.” Narrated by Harb in his ‘Masāil’ (1412).
(Point:) 121 / 660 – I asked Ishāq: about the backbiting of the oppressive ruler? He said: “It is not (backbiting when) regarding them. Except that it is disliked that a person makes his tongue used to (speaking bad about people).” [Narrated by Harb in his ‘Masāil’ (1415)]
(Point:) 122/661- Al-Akhdar narrated to us and said: ‘Ārim narrated to us and said: Wuhayb ibn Khālid narrated to us and said: I heard ‘Ubayd-Allāh saying regarding the backbiting of the Khawārij and the ruler who has publicly shown (his mistakes): that he did not see any backbiting of them. But as for them one about whom it is known that he is a sinner and he likes to screen himself, then he considered that (i.e., speaking about him) backbiting from them. [Narrated by Harb in his “Masāil” (1416).]
[Note: Even if someone says that some of or all of the above quotes are weak, it should be noted that, the presence of these quotes shows that it was from the belief of Imam Harb Al-Kirmani, that there is no prohibition of backbiting with regards to an oppressive ruler.]
b. Ali ibn Salama Al-Lubqi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “I heard Imam Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah saying, ‘There are three for whom there is no (prohibition from) backbiting: the oppressive ruler, the sinful one who sins publicly, and the innovator who calls people to his innovation.'” [Shu’ayb Al-Iman of Imam Al-Bayhaqi (127/9).]
c. Imam Muqbil (Rahimahullah) said: Those who say that advising [rulers] should only be done in secret, they do not have any evidence, and the hadith (about advising privately) is weak. Advising should be done secretly when one knows that it will be accepted, or when it is known that public advice from the pulpits may stir up discord. However, if it is known that the wrongdoing can be removed, because governments have informants in large societies, and the information might reach them (about their public criticism being done), and they fear people criticizing them and so this will lead to them removing this wrongdoing. When we read the biographies of our scholars, we find among them those who openly criticized the rulers, and among them, those who refrained from doing so to avoid causing discord. As for abandoning clarification (of these sins), then when will these rulers reform?!”
(From the Fiqh of Imam Al-Wadi’i, 3/403.) [Taken from X.com: @M_ALWadiee]
- by Mohammed Manna, dated 30th November 2023.
Saheehus-Seerah 