ABDULLAH IBN SABA - FOUNDER OF SHIISM There have been a growing tendency amongst modern Shi`ah scholars to dismiss the role of `Abdullah ibn Saba (sometimes called ibn Sauda) of Sana, a city of Yemen, in the origin of Shiism debate. After the Iranian revolution of 1979, the modern Shiah state now wishes to ground its origins on something more concrete, rather than upon the mischief of Jew, in order to gain official recognition as a legitimate Islamic state amongst Muslims. Upto the classical age of Shiism, all of the erudite Shiite scholars attributed the origin of Shiism to this same ibn Saba. `Allamah Majlisi said: Some scholars have asserted that ibn Saba was a Jew who accepted Islam and started voicing his opinion of the `wilayat (divine appointment) of `Ali. While a Jew, he propounded the exaggerative notion that Yusha ibn Nun was divinely appointed to succeed Prophet Musa, he thus adopted a similar stance with regard to `Ali in relation to the Holy Prophet. He was the first to subscribe to the belief of Imamate, and he openly vitriolated his enemies (i.e. the first three Caliphs) and branded them as infidels. The origin of Shiism is thus based on Judaism. (Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 25, p. 287). Other Shi`ah scholars who have affirmed this was `Allamah Kashi in his Rijal al-Kashi and `Allamah Mamaqani in his Tanqih al-Maqal. Amongst Sunni scholars, `Allamah ibn Taimiyyah had confirmed this in his Minhaj al-Sunnah. He wrote: More than one Shi`ah scholar have affirmed that that the first one to start disparaging the Sahabah and who introduced the doctrine of wilayah was a hypocrite and a zindiq who intended to corrode Islam from within. He wished to scheme as Baulus had schemed against Christianity. Prophet Jesus was raised to the heavens, and there were a precious few who followed his teachings. His teachings thus weakened the fabric of Christianity and many started adopting his exaggerated notions and many kings were won over to their side. When their scholars tried to oppose them, they were killed, some were exiled, while some were confined to life-long sentences in remote monasteries. On the other hand, this ummah will always have a group of staunch followers who will uphold the truth. No corrupt person will be able to destroy Islam, he will only gain some followers. (Minhaj al-Sunnah, vol. 3, p. 261). `Allamah Shahristani has confirmed this too, saying that when `Ali heard the claim of his divinity directly from the mouth of ibn Saba, he exiled him to Madain (Al-Milal wa al-Nihal, vol. 2, p. 11). Hafiz ibn Hajar threw more light on the dialogue between `Ali and ibn Saba on this occasion: Abul Ijlas says that I heard `Ali telling `Abdullah ibn Saba: By Allah, I have not hidden any secret from anyone which the Holy Prophet told me. I heard the Holy Prophet saying that there would appear thirty liars before the last day, and you are one of them. Once Suwaid ibn Ghafalah visited `Ali during his reign and told him that he had passed a few people amongst whom was ibn Saba speaking ill of Abu Bakr. They claimed that you also held the same opinion. `Ali retorted: I have nothing to do with this black filthy creature. I seek refuge from Allah that I hold any opinion other than the best for Abu Bakr and `Umar. He then exiled ibn Saba saying that he could not tolerate to live with him in one city. `Ali then ascended the pulpit, and after relating the story said: I will lash anyone who prefers me over Abu Bakr and `Umar, the lashing of a slanderer. (Lisan al-Mizan, vol. 3, p. 290). Beliefs of Ibn Saba in a nutshell `Ali was divinely appointed to be the Holy Prophets successor, and that `Ali had hid this knowledge from the people. He later called for the divinity of `Ali. Having said so, he proclaimed himself as `Alis Prophet. Even Shi`ah scholars have gawked at his audacity. He initially did not openly preach these beliefs, but he later abandoned his secret and started a vigorous campaign. (Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 25, p. 286) He preferred `Ali over Caliph Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman, saying that they usurped the Caliphate form `Ali. He declared open enmity towards all those who did not subscribe to such a belief and branded them as kuffar. His devious scheme Speaking of the devious scheme which ibn Saba gradually implemented to achieve his aims, Shah `Abd al-`Aziz has written: Ibn Saba first called the masses to show their love and devotion to the ahl al-Bait (Prophetic Household). He then started claiming that none could excel the ahl al-Bait in status. When he gained some popularity at this, he boldly claimed that `Ali was the most superior person after the Holy Prophet. When he saw that some of his followers had indeed believed him, he confided in them that `Ali was in reality the appointed successor of the Holy Prophet, but the Sahabah had usurped this right from him. He then unleashed a campaign of vilification against all the Sahabah, and the first three Caliphs in particular amongst the army of `Ali. What amazed ibn Saba was that people still believed him! He thus took the opportunity the corrupt the belief pattern of the Muslims. He thus told his staunch supporters that `Ali had powers above those of a normal human being, he was Allah, besides whom there was no other power. This `secret until it reached the ears of `Ali himself. `Ali threatened to burn all of them, asked them to repent and exiled them to Madain. As a result of this propaganda, the army of `Ali was split into four factions: First, The initial and sincere Shi`ahs who are in fact Sunnis. They followed the directives of `Ali, and paid due respect to all the Sahabah, including those who opposed `Ali like Sayyidah `Aishah and Mu`awiyah. `Ali singled out this group for praising on many occasions, and they did not fall prey to the propaganda machine of ibn Saba. Second, The Preferential (Tafdili) Shi`ahs. They preferred `Ali over the rest of the Sahabah. Third, the Sabai Shi`ahs or the Tabariyah. They went a step further and regarded all the Sahabah as hypocrites, usurpers, and kuffar. Fourth, the Exaggerationaists (Ghali) Shi`ahs who proclaimed `Ali as Lord. These were the special students of ibn Saba. Thus, the origin of Shiism was planted by ibn Saba and since then it continued to spread. (Tuhfah Ithna `Ashariyyah, pp. 3-5) All these accounts prove that ibn Saba was not a product of the figment of anyones imagination, he was rather a well-known personality who whose notoriety matched that of the devil too. The fact that he is not well known amongst the Traditionists (Muhaddithun) is not prove enough that he was a created and legendary figure. His absence in the books of Rijal (Biographies) is because he did not report any traditions (ahadith), and not because he did not exist. In the face of the above evidence, the call of modern Shi`ahs to disclaim their roots has a sinister ring to it. They wish to discredit the claims of sound historiography in doing so, and came up with new explanations which might have some early political legitimism, but has no scientific basis and is not supported by corroborative texts. At most it can be said that though Shiism is not entirely based on the teachings of ibn Saba, it has borrowed many Sabai characteristics which plays an integral in modern Twelver (Ithna `Ashari) Shiism. Al-Rasheed Volume3 No.10
Posted on: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 06:19:20 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015