He presented kufr (disbelief) to them, and they distanced themselves from it.

He presented kufr (disbelief) to them, and they distanced themselves from it. He then suggested sedition to them and they gave him hope. Then he began and slandered ‘Amr b. al-As, saying, “Why is his pension and salary the largest among you?” Will a man from Quraysh not be put forward to settle the matter between us?” They were pleased with that from him, and said, “How can we achieve this with ‘Amr when he is the man of the Arabs?” He said, “Seek his dismissal!

Then we will play our role and begin to publicly command the good and to defame. At that time, no one will hold us back.”[^2] In this chain again is Sayf b. ‘Umar. We will only remind ourselves of the words of ‘Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420 H) concerning him: قلت: وفي هذا نظر، فإن أكثر الطرق المشار إليها مدارها على سيف بن عمر والواقدي وهما كذابان I say: There is an error in this, for most of the indicated chains, their pivot is Sayf b.

‘Umar and al-Waqidi, and they both were LIARS .[^3] As such, the sanad is mawdu’ and the riwayah is thereby a fabrication. Ibn Asakir apparently assumes that the “Ibn al-Sawda” in the report was ‘Abd Allah b. Saba – which is why he has placed the riwayah under his biography of the latter. However, there is no valid proof that ‘Abd Allah b. Saba had a black mother, to begin with! Even Ibn Asakir makes no attempt to provide any, either!

Meanwhile, decency and common sense dictate that whosoever seeks to rely upon the above report to prove the existence of ‘Abd Allah b. Saba – as Ibn Asakir did - must first do the following: Bring convincing, solid proof that there was a man - at that period in time - named ‘Abd Allah b. Saba who had a black mother. Supply reliable evidence that the black mother of this man was well-known among the people, and was widely recognized as “ the black woman”.

Provide an authentically transmitted eye-witness testimony which establishes that the man - ‘Abd Allah b. Saba - was also known as Ibn al-Sawda . We are absolutely certain that no creature can fulfil any of the above conditions till the Hour! As such, we believe that anyone who claims that Ibn al-Sawda in the fabricated riwayah was ‘Abd Allah b. Saba (whoever that was) – apparently with no valid evidence at all – is a bigot who only plays dirty games with the truth.

Undoubtedly, there is zero evidence to establish that ‘Abd Allah b. Saba was ever referred to or known as Ibn al-Sawda by any of his contemporaries. Therefore, it is clearly impossible to connect the above tale of Sayf to him.