Light On the Muhammadan Sunnah Or Defence of the Hadith
Political Stratagem
To complete our discussion in demonstrating the extent of Jewish stratagem against Islam and Muslims — though it being a protraction that may divert me from my intended purpose — I disclose another aspect of the conduct of the Jewish sages, that is the political aspect. The Jews' deception in fighting Islam aimed at attacking Islam on two aspects: one is religious and the other one being political. Their vilification in the religious aspect, it was exposed to you before. Herewith a few examples of their political stratagem.
Abd Allah ibn Saba:
Rafiq al-Adum about the most renowned men of Islam said:
“The seeds of sedition have been planted all over the Islamic Kingdom and its grand capitals, like Egypt, Basrah, and Kufah, through a secret da’wah (propagation) launched by Abd Allah ibn Saba’, who was known with the nickname of Ibn al-Sawda'. He was a Jew from the tribe of Himyar. He embraced Islam during the caliphate of Uthman instigated by a secret assembly seeking through this to achieve one of these two goals: Sowing discord among Muslims either in respect of religion or in respect of politics.
On embracing Islam, he stopped at Basrah, staying near Hakim ibn
Jibillah al-`Abdi, where a number of people gathered. Thereat he embarked on seducing them toward the da’wah he launched, which was accepted by them. This news reached Ibn ‘Amir, who exiled him from Basrah, after which he went to Kufah, from which he was exiled too. Then he betook himself toward Egypt, where he settled down and a number of the Egyptians gathered round him, among whom being Kinanah ibn Bishr, Sawdan ibn Humran and Khalid ibn Muljam and their likes, whom he addressed saying. It is to wonder at whoever believing that Jesus will come back (from the heaven), and denying that Muhammad will come back (on Doomsday). So he laid down for them the principle of Raj`ah (return), which was accepted by them.
Among the statements uttered by Ibn Saba’: For every prophet there is an executor (wasi) and Ali is the wasi of Muhammad, and the Raj`ah after Muhammad shall be for Ali — which is one of the beliefs held by the Shi`ah — and that `Uthman seized the right of Ali.
In his book Fajr al-Islam, 329 Dr. Ahmad Amin says: It was him (Abd Allah ibn Saba’) who enticed Abu Dharr al-Ghifari to propagate for socialism, 330 and instigated the towns against Uthman, making of `Ali as a deity. From his biography it is learnt that it was him who laid down teachings for demolishing Islam, founding an underground society for spreading his teachings, taking Islam as a shield to cover up his intentions. The most notable of his teachings were the wisayah (executorship) and Raj`ah, initiating his utterance by saying that Muhammad will return (to the earth). His statement was thus: "It is to wonder at whoever believing Jesus will come back (from the heaven) and denying that Muhammad will come back (on Doomsday)." Then he turned to say that Ali will come back (to the earth).
Ibn Hazm said: When Ali was killed, he (Ibn Saba’) said: "If you bring us his brain a thousand times, I will never believe his being dead. He
will never die till he fills the earth with justice as was filled will oppression."
This idea of Raj`ah Ibn Saba' learnt from the Jewish Madhhab as it believes that the Prophet Khidr al-Yas has ascended to the heaven and will verily come back when he will restore the religion and law. The idea was also held by the Christian Madhhab during its early ages.
The abstract of speech in regard of these Jews — as said by some researchers — being that their weapon was slander, falsity, cunning, foisting perversion of speech, raising skepticism and suspicions and creating malevolence among Muslims.
It became clear that murder of Umar was engineered by an underground society, that was joined by the Jew Ka'b al-Ahbar, while assassination of Uthman was partially executed through intrigues of the Jew Abd Allah ibn Saba'. Besides, all the political seditions and fabrications of narration in the first era of Islam belong to the society of Saba'ites and associations of the Persians.
I recorded this in the first edition of my book relying on what was written by eminent historians and their successors quoting it from Ibn Saba'. A valuable book under the title Abd Allah ibn Saba’. authored by the great Iraqi scholar al-Ustadh Murtada al-Askari was published, in which he proved through convincing strong evidences that such name had no existence in truth. That is due to the fact that the first source upon which depended all the historians beginning with Tabari till the present time to prove his existence, was Sayf ibn Umar al-Tamimi (died in 170H.). And his narrations were refuted by all the Sunnah Imams, with al-Hakim saying in his regard: He was accused with atheism (zandaqah), and he was corrupt in narration.
We, to be fair toward knowledge and truth, say: Dr. Taha Husayn was doubtful, before, regarding the existence of this Abd Allah ibn Saba'.
Following is some excerption of what he stated in his precious book al-Fitnah al-kubra, the 2nd volume, under the chapter "Ali wa banuh" (Ali and his sons), when discussing the Battle of Siffin.
The least thing indicated by the historians' shunning the Saba'ites and Ibn al-Sawda' in the Battle of Siffin, being that their affair was only superficially imposed and lean, with being lately innovated when controversy heated between the Shi`ah and other Islamic sects. That was when the Shi'ah opponents intended to foist a Jewish element into this (Shi'i) madhhab, vigorously in teasing and defaming them. Had the claim of Ibn al Sawda' been based on even one foundation of truth and reliable history it would have been natural to see its impact when Ali's companions differed regarding the issue of government, and also in particular in forming this new party, which was averse to reconciliation, charging with impiety anyone inclining to it or taking part in it.
But no reference was made to Ibn al-Sawda' when mentioning the Khawarij. How can this negligence be explained? Or what reason we can give for ignorance of Ibn Saba' to the Battle of Siffin and establishment of the Court Party? On my part, I explain both the cases with one reason, being that Ibn al-Sawda' was nothing but an imaginary character... and had he actually existed, he was not of that danger portrayed by the historians, who illustrated his activities too during the reign of Uthman and first year of Ali's caliphate! In fact he was a person reserved by the Shi'ah alone not for the Khawarij... etc.
Following is a sample of this craft in regard of a critical matter through which the Islamic history changed its course:
See p. 763.
See pp. 330, 331.
When Ibn al-Sawda' met Abu Dharr in Syria (Sham) he said to him: O Abu Dharr! aren't you amazed at the saying of Mu'awiyah: "All wealth is for Allah, and everything belongs to Allah"? It seems as if he intends to curb Muslims from reaching it (Ashhar mashahir al-Islam, p. 734).
See pp. 98, 99.