A Shi'ite Encyclopedia (chapter 10)

Abdullah Ibn Saba (part Iii)

Agitation Against Uthman

Sayf alleged that the main reason behind the agitation against Uthman was Abdullah Ibn Saba. He provoked Muslims of different towns and provinces such as Basra, Kufa, Syria, and Egypt, to rush to Medina and to kill Uthman since he believed Uthman had occupied the seat of Ali. Sayf also alleged that the companions inside Medina such as Talha and Zubair did not oppose Uthman.

Similar to his other allegations, this allegation of Sayf Ibn Umar about Abdullah Ibn Saba has NOT been reported by any other reporters. No trace of Ibn Saba can be found on the issue of agitation against Uthman, except through Sayf. In fact, other authorities have a totally the opposite story.

Should a reader of Islamic history be liberated from his emotion toward or against the third Caliph, he can be assured that the call for a revolt against Uthman did not start in Basra, Kufa, Syria, or Egypt. The weakness of Uthman in handing the affairs of the State caused many companions to oppose him.

This naturally resulted in a power struggle among the influential companions in Medina. Sunni historians such as al-Tabari, Ibn Athir, and al-Baladhuri and many others provide traditions (reported by other than Sayf) which confirm that the agitation against the Caliph started right inside Medina by some influential individuals among the companions.

These companions were the first who asked the other companions, resided in other cities, to join them in revolt against Uthman. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari reported:

When the people saw what Uthman was doing, the companions of the Prophet in Medina wrote to other companions who were scattered throughout the frontier provinces: "You have gone forth but to struggle in the path of Almighty God, for the sake of Muhammad's religion. In your absence the religion of Muhammad has been corrupted and forsaken. So come back to reestablish Muhammad's religion." Thus, they came from every direction until they killed the Caliph (Uthman).

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p184

In fact al-Tabari quoted the above paragraph form Muhammad Ibn Is'haq Ibn Yasar al-Madani who is the most celebrated Sunni Historian and the author of "Sirah Rasool-Allah".

History (reported by other than Sayf) testifies that those influential people who were the key element in agitation against Uthman include Talha, Zubair, Aisha (the mother of believers), Abdurrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas.

a) Talha

Talha Ibn Ubaydillah was one of the biggest agitator against Uthman and was the one who plotted his murder. He then used that incident for revenge against Ali by starting the first civil war in the history of Islam (i.e., the battle of Camel). I just give few paragraphs from both of al-Tabari and Ibn Athir to prove my point. Here is the first one which is narrated by Ibn Abbas (in some manuscripts it is Ibn Ayyash):

I entered Uthman's presence (During the agitation against Uthman) and talked with him for an hour. He said: "Come Ibn Abbas/Ayyash," and he took me by the hand and had me listen to what the people were saying at his door. We heard some say, "what are you waiting for," while others were saying, "wait, perhaps he will repent."

While the two of us were standing there (behind the door and listening), Talha Ibn Ubaydillah passed by and said: "Where is Ibn Udays?" He was told, "He is over there." Ibn Udays came to (Talha) and whispered something with him, and then went back to his associates and said: "Do not let anyone go in (to the house of Uthman) to see this man or leave his house." Uthman said to me: "These are the orders of Talha."

He continued, "O God! Protect me from Talha for he has provoked all these people against me. By God, I hope nothing will come of it, and that his own blood will be shed. Talha has abused me unlawfully. I heard the Messenger of God said: 'The blood of a Muslim is lawful in three cases: apostasy, adultery, and the one who kills except in legitimate retaliation for another.' So why should I be killed?"

Ibn Abbas/Ayyash continued: I wanted to leave (the house), but they blocked my path until Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr who was passing by requested them to let me go, and they did so.

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 199-200

The Sayf's claim is shattered into pieces when its is compared with any other reports similar to above. The above report gives evidence to the fact that Uthman himself knew companions like Talha were doing all this to him, and not the personage of Abdullah Ibn Saba.

Do these mercenaries claim that they understand the situation better than the Caliph Uthman while they were born centuries after the incident? The following report also supports that the murder of Uthman was led by Talha, and the killers came out to inform their leader that they took care of Uthman:

Abzay said: I witnessed the day they went in against Uthman. They entered the house through an opening in the residence of Amr Ibn Hazm. There was a skirmishing and they got in. By God, I have not forgotten that Sudan Ibn Humran came out and I heard him say: "Where is Talha Ibn Ubaydillah? We have killed Ibn Affan!"

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p200

Uthman was besieged in Medina while Imam Ali (AS) was in Khaibar. The Imam (AS) came to Medina and found people gathering at the residence of Talha. Then Imam Ali (AS) went to met Uthman. Ibn Athir wrote:

Uthman said to Ali: "You owe me my Islamic right and the right of brotherhood and relationship. If I have non of these rights and if I were in pre-Islamic era, it would be still shame for a descendants of Abd Munaf (of whom both Ali and Uthman are descendants) to let a man of Tyme (Talha) rob us of our authority."

Ali said to Uthman: "You shall be informed of what I do." Then Ali went to Talha's house. There were a lot of people there. Ali spoke to Talha saying: "Talha, what is this condition in which you have fallen?" Talha replied: "O' Abul Hasan! it is to late!"

Sunni reference: al-Kamil, by Ibn Athir, v3, p84

Tabari also reports the following conversation between Imam Ali and Talha during the siege over Uthman:

Ali said to Talha: "I ask you by Allah to send people away from (attacking) Uthman." Talha replied: "No, by God, not until the Umayad voluntarily submit to what is right." (Uthman was the head of Umayad).

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p235

Talha even deprived Uthman of water:

Abdurrahman Ibn al-Aswad said: "I constantly saw Ali avoiding (Uthman) and not acting as he formerly had. However, I know that he spoke with Talha when Uthman was under siege, to the effect that water skins should be taken to him. Ali was extremely upset (from Talha) about that until finally water skins were allowed to reach Uthman."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 180-181

To know why Imam Ali (AS) deserted Uthman, see the traditions close to the end of this article.

Furthermore, the historians confirm that those who plotted his killing, did not let the body of Uthman be buried in a Muslim Cemetery, and that he was finally buried in a Jew Cemetery called "Hashsh Kawkab", without washing and without a shroud. (See History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 246-250).

If Jews were doing all that, they wouldn't permit to bury him in their own Cemetery!!! After Muawiyah came to power, he joint that Jew Cemetery to al-Baqi including the land between them. (See History of Tabari, English version, v15, pp 246-250).

b) Aisha

Talha was not the only collaborator against Uthman. Sunni history tells us that his cousin, Aisha (the mother of believers), was collaborating and campaigning against Uthman as well. The following paragraph also from the History of al-Tabari shows the cooperation of Aisha with Talha in overthrowing Uthman:

While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: "O' Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them.

I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr." Ibn Abbas said: "O' Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, Ali)." Aisha replied: "Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

Many Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (AS). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:

"Kill this old fool (Na'thal), for he is unbeliever."

Sunni references:

  • History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206

  • Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141

  • al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290

  • Sharh al-Nahj, by Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v16, pp 220-223

As we can see, the main figures in plotting against Uthman are some highly influential individuals, like Talha and Aisha. These Sunni reports are in clear contradiction with the reports related to Abdullah Ibn Saba, which were made up to cover up for those individuals centuries after the incident.

Another Sunni historian, al-Baladhuri, in his history (Ansab al-Ashraf) said that when the situation became extremely grave, Uthman ordered Marwan Ibn al-Hakam and Abdurrahman Ibn Attab Ibn Usayd to try to persuade Aisha to stop campaigning against him. They went to her while she was preparing to leave for pilgrimage, and they told her:

"We pray that you stay in Medina, and that Allah may save this man (Uthman) through you." Aisha said: "I have prepared my means of transportation and vowed to perform the pilgrimage. By God, I shall not honor your request... I wish he (Uthman) was in one of my sacks so that I could carry him. I would then through him into the sea."

Sunni reference: Ansab al-Ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, part 1, v4, p75

Certainly the revolution against Uthman * started * in Medina, and not in Basra, Kufa, and Egypt. The prominent people of Medina are the ones who first wrote to those outside Medina and instigated them against Uthman. To say that a Jew, named Ibn Saba, is the one who inspired people to revolt against the Caliph is not logical unless we accept that he was the one who also inspired Aisha, Talha, and Zubair to revolt. But those who speak of Ibn Saba and his role, do not include Aisha and people of her position as the followers of Ibn Saba.

The alleged role of Ibn Saba, in the revolt against Uthman, would also be credible if we were to say that Ibn Saba was the one who persuaded the Caliph to follow a path contrary to the first two Caliphs, and that he was the one who advised Uthman to give Islamic funds to his relatives and appoint them governors of Islamic provinces.

The manner in which Uthman conducted the affairs of the Islamic states gave Aisha, Talha, and Zubair and others, a reason to provoke Muslims against Uthman. However those who attribute the revolution against Uthman to Ibn Saba, do not accept that Ibn Saba was the one who advised Uthman to follow that wrong policy. They are right, because that alleged Jew with such achievements never existed except in the imagination of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi and those who quoted from him.

A few (less than 15) traditions (which are not even in any authentic Sunni books nor in any reliable Shia books) related to Abdullah Ibn Saba narrated by people other than Sayf give a totally different story in compare with Sayf's heavy documentation which is being distributed everywhere. These traditions do NOT mention the presence of Ibn Saba in the revolt against Uthman.

c) Amr Ibn al-Aas

It is amazing that such an important role in the revolution against Uthman is attributed to a Jew for whose existence neither Shia nor Sunni have any strong evidence. Yet historians forget the important role which was played by a person well known in Islamic history, namely Amr Ibn al-Aas. He was more intelligent and more clever than any Jew ever existed in that era. Amr had all the reasons to conspire against the Caliph, and he had all the abilities to instigate most of the people of Medina against him.

Amr Ibn al-Aas was one of the most dangerous agitators against Uthman. He was the governor of Egypt during the reign of the second Caliph. However, the third Caliph dismissed him and replaced him with his foster brother, Abdullah Ibn Sa'd Ibn Abu Sharh.

As a result of this, Amr became extremely hostile towards Uthman. He returned to Medina and started a malicious campaign against Uthman, accusing him of many wrong doings. Uthman blamed Amr and spoke to him harshly. This made Amr even more bitter.

He used to meet Zubair and Talha and conspire against Uthman. He used to meet pilgrims and inform them of the numerous deviations of Uthman. According to Tabari, when Uthman was besieged, Amr settled in the palace of al-Ajlan and used to ask from people about the situation of Uthman:

...Amr had not left his seat before a second rider passed by. Amr called him out: "How is Uthman doing?" The man replied: "He has been killed." Amr then said: "I am Abu Abdillah. When I scratch an ulcer, I cut it off. (i.e., when I desire an object, I attain it). I have been provoking (people) against him, even the shepherd on the top of mountains with his flock."

Then Salamah Ibn Rawh said to him: "You, the Quraishites, have broken a strong tie between yourselves and the Arabs. Why did you do that?" Amr replied: "We wanted to draw the truth out of the pit of falsehood, and to have people be on an equal footing as regards the truth."

Sunni reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 171-172

The divider of Muslims ignored what is well known in the history of Islam which was reported by important Sunni reporters. The revolt against Uthman was as a result of the efforts of prominent personalities in Medina, such as Aisha, Talha, Zubair, Aburrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas. Instead of attributing the revolution to real people who rebelled against Uthman, the dividers of Muslims refuse to accept the truth or to mention it.

They attribute the revolution to a fictitious Jew, relying on the reports of Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi, a man who was accused by prominent Sunni scholars to be a man of lies and innovations. They chose to accept Sayf's report in order to cover up for the Caliph, Aisha, Talha, and Zubair.

It is even more amazing that Aisha, Talha, and Zubair, and Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan fought Imam Ali in two wars, unprecedented in the history of Islam, yet non of them accused the followers of Imam Ali to be students of Ibn Saba. Sunni history books and Sunni collections of traditions clearly state that Muawiyah commanded all the Imams of the mosques throughout the Muslim world to CURSE Imam Ali in every Friday prayer.

If the fictitious Jew, Ibn Saba, had any small role in the revolt against Uthman, Muawiyah would have made it the main topic of his defamation campaign against the Imam and his supporters. He would have publicized throughout the world that those who killed Uthman were the student of Abdullah Ibn Saba, and that they were ones who brought Ali to power. However neither Muawiyah nor Aisha took this route, because such stories attributed to Ibn Saba was invented by Sayf Ibn Umar who lived in the second century after Hijrah, long after their death.

The murder of Uthman provided a nice scapegoat for those who were fighting over more power, while serving under the government of Uthman. They were mainly his relatives, the Umayads such as Muawiyah and Marwan, who thoroughly took advantage of Uthman's life as well as his death. The story of Ibn Saba in this regard has served to cover the face of those power- hungry individuals, and yet another way to attack Imam Ali and his true followers.