THE MYTH

'ABDULLAH IBN SABA'

May the curses of Allah, His Angels, His Messengers, His Prophets and all the people be upon him

Many Sunni scholars have denied the existence of Abdullah Ibn Saba and/or the forged stories attributed to him. Among them are:

Dr. Taha Husayn, a well-known Egyptian Sunni scholar.
In his book al-Fitnat al-Kubra, Vol. II, p.90
He wrote that:

"The fact that the historians make no mention of Ibn al-Sawda' i.e., 'Abdullah ibn Saba' being present at the battle of Siffin together with his followers proves at the very least that the whole notion of a group of people led by him is a baseless fabrication. It is one of those inventions that acquired currency when the conflict between the Shi'is and other Islamic groups intensified. In order to underline their hostility, the enemies of the Shi'ah tried to insert a Jewish element into the origins of their sect. If the story of 'Abdullah ibn Saba' had any basis in historical fact, his cunning and guile could not have failed to show itself at the battle of Siffin.

"I can think of only one reason for his name not occurring in connection with that battle: that he was an entirely fictitious person, dreamed up by the enemies of the Shi'ah in order to vilify them."

Dr. Taha Husain, who has analyzed these stories and rejected them.
In his book "al-Fitnah al-Kubra"
He wrote that:

In my opinion, those who have tried to emphasize on the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba, have committed a crime in the history and hurt themselves too. The first thing that is observed is that in the important collections the name of Ibn Saba does not appear when they discuss the agitation against Uthman. Ibn Sa'd does not mention the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba when he discusses the Caliphate of Uthman and the revolt against him. Also the book by al-Baladhuri, "Ansab al- Ashraf", which I think the most important and the most detailed book about the revolt against Uthman, the name of Abdullah Ibn Saba has never been mentioned. It appears that al-Tabari was the first who reported the story of Ibn Saba from Sayf, and then other historians quoted al-Tabari in this regard.

Dr. Taha Husain
In his book "Ali wa Banuh" (Ali and His Sons)
He mentioned:

The story of Ibn Saba is nothing but myth, and is the invention of some historians, since it contradicts other historical documents. The fact is that the friction between Shia and Sunni have had many shapes, and each group was advocating itself and denouncing the other by any means possible. This requires a historian to be much more cautious when analyzing the controversial reports related to seditions and revolts.

Dr. Ali al-Wardi, professor of history at Baghdad University, Sunni scholar
Cited in Dr. Haykal, Hayat Muhammad, p. 136
He wrote:

"Did Ibn Saba' actually exist or was he an imaginary personality? For those who wish to study the social history of Islam and draw the appropriate conclusions, this is an extremely important question. It is claimed that Ibn Saba' incited unrest, but no such person ever existed. The whole story is reminiscent of the claim made by the Quraysh at the beginning of the Prophet's mission, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, that he received his teachings from a Christian slave by the name of Jabr and based his preaching on the instruction he received from him."

Muhammad Kurd Ali, Sunni scholar
In his book Khitat al-Sham, Vol. VI, p. 246
He wrote:

"Some of the well-known Companions who at the dawn of Islam followed Ali, peace be upon him, became known as the Shi'ah. What can be deduced from the written sources is that certain shortsighted people regarded Shi'ism as a collection of innovations and fabrications stitched together by a person known Abdullah ibn Saba' or Ibn al-Sawda'. However, there can be no doubt that this view of things is pure superstition and fantasy, for this Abdullah ibn Saba' the Jew exists only in the world of the imagination. Any attempt to link the origins of Shi'ism to him must be regarded as a sign of pure ignorance."

The research of Allamah al-Askari [Ibn Saba and Other Myths] which was released in 1955. Before that time, no analytical research had been done on the character of Abdullah Ibn Saba to investigate if he really existed in physical world and/or if the stories around this man had any single truth in it. Although Sayf's heresy was well-known for a number of centuries, no research had been done about the origin of the tale of Abdullah Ibn Saba. In his research, al-Askari proved that Sayf's narration attributed to Abdullah Ibn Saba and many other things are sheer lie since they contradict ALL other Sunni documents in content, timing of the events, names of cities and companions, imaginary chain of narrators, and miraculous records by Sayf (like talking cows with humans and so on). If there was any Abdullah Ibn Saba at that time, his story was much different than what Sayf manipulated.

Here is the response of a Sunni scholar Dr. Hamid Dawud, the professor of Cairo University, after reading al-Askari's book [Ibn Saba and Other Myths] (Here is only a part of his letter):

The 1300th birthday of Islam has been celebrated. During this time, some of our learned writers have accused Shia of having un-Islamic views. Those writers influenced public opinion against Shia and created big gaps between Muslims. In spite of wisdom and learning, the enemies of Shia followed their own chosen beliefs and partiality, covering the truth, and accusing the Shia of being superstitious etc. Hence Islamic science suffered much, as Shia views were suppressed.

As a result of these accusations, the loss to Islamic science was greater than the loss suffered by Shia themselves, because the source of this jurisprudence, though rich and fruitful, was neglected, resulting in limited knowledge. Also, in the past, our learned men were prejudiced, otherwise we would have benefited from many Shia views. Anyone who wishes to do research in Islamic Jurisprudence must consider Shia sources as well as those of Sunni.

Was not the Shia leader, Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (d. 148 AH), the teacher of two Sunni Imams? i.e., Abu Hanifa al-Nu'man (d. 150 AH), and Malik Ibn Anas (d. 179 AH). Imam Abu Hanifa said: "Except for the two years Nu'man would have starved," referring to the two years he had benefited from the knowledge of Imam Jafar al-Sadiq. Imam Malik also confessed straightforwardly that he had not met anyone learned in Islamic Jurisprudence better than Imam Jafar al-Sadiq.

Yet, some of our so-called learned men, unfortunately disregard the rules for research to suit their own ends. Hence knowledge is not fully disclosed to them and thus they create a wider gap between Muslims. Ahmed Amin is one of those deprived of the light of knowledge, remaining in darkness. History has recorded this stain on the robe of Ahmed Amin and his friends, who blindly followed one special Madhab. Of many mistakes made by him, the biggest is told in the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba. This is one of the tales told in order to accuse Shia of heresy and foregoing events.

The great contemporary researcher, al-Askari, in his book, has proved with substantial evidence, that Abdullah Ibn Saba was fictitious, and it is therefore a greater lie to say that he was the founder of Shi'ism.

God has decreed that some learned men disclose the truth regardless of blame they may get. The pioneer in this subject is this man who has made the Sunni learned men of research revise the history book of Tabari (History of Nations and Kings), and to sift out the authentic stories from the false. The stories which have been preserved as God's revelations.

The honorable writer, with much evidence, has stripped the veil or ambiguity from those historical events, and disclosed the truth, to some extent that some facts seem frightful. But we have to obey the truth no matter how difficult they appear. The truth is the best to be followed.

Dr. Hamid Hafni Dawud
Oct. 12, 1961
Cairo, Egypt.