Abd Allah ibn Sa'd ibn Abi al-Sarh (Arabic: عبد الله ابن سعد ابن أبي السرح, ʿAbd Allāh ibn Saʿd ibn Abī al-Sarḥ) was an Arab administrator and commander.
During his time as governor of Egypt (646 CE to 656 CE), Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه built a strong Arab navy. Under Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله leadership, the Muslim navy won a number of victories including its first major naval battle against the Byzantine emperor Constans II at the Battle of the Masts in 654 CE.
Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه came from the Banu Amir ibn Lu'ayy clan of the Quraish tribe and was an adopted brother of the Caliph Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه.When Rasulullahﷺ had gathered enough troops to besiege Makkah, Rasulullahﷺ issued an order to his followers that Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه would be one of those who had to be killed even though he was hiding beneath the curtain of the Kaaba.
But Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عن then went to his adopted brother, Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه asking for help. Then together they went to Rasulullahﷺ to beg for forgiveness. When he met the two of them, Rasulullahﷺ, who was accompanied by some of his companions, was silent for a long time until he said yes. But after the two of them left, Rasulullahﷺ said to his followers, "I kept silent so that one of you might get up and strike off his head!" One of the Ansar said, "Then why didn’t you give me a sign, O apostle of God?" Rasulullahﷺ answered that a prophet does not kill by pointing.
A hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud similarly records Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله's tense encounter with Rasulullahﷺ in Makkah after his defection and fleeing from Rasulullahﷺ after the capture of Makkah by the Muslims. In his History, Al-Tabari briefly records Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله and Rasulullahﷺ that " Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله used to write for him. Apostatized from Islam and later returned to Islam on the day of the conquest of Makkah".
Saiyidina Umar Al Khattab رضي الله عنه appointed Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه as second-in-command (lieutenant) to Amr ibn al-As رضي الله عنه for the campaign of conquest of Egypt. He played a major role as a military commander in the conquest of Egypt. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله was commander of the right flank of Amr ibn al-As رضي الله عنه's and participated in all the battles fought during the conquest of Egypt under Amr ibn al-As رضي الله عنه’s command
When Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه became caliph in 644 CE, he appointed Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه governor of Egypt replacing 'Amr ibn al-'Asرضي الله عنه, with Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa as his aide. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه brought over a large foreign entourage and established the diwan, "and commanded that all the taxes of the country should be regulated there".
The protests against Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه appear to have been instigated by his aide, Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه. Muhammad's father (Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه ) was an early convert to Islam who died in the Battle of Yamamah. Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه.was raised by Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه. When he reached maturity Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه participated in foreign military campaigns and accompanied Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه to Egypt as an aide.
Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه. admonished Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, recommending changes in the government but Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, did not respond. After continuous efforts to persuade
Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه to make changes in the government, and eventually, Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه. lost patience and turned from a sympathetic admonisher to a disillusioned opponent; first of Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, and later of Uthman for appointing him. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, wrote to Saiyiduna Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه. claiming that Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه. was spreading sedition and that if nothing was done to stop him, the situation would escalate. Saiyiduna Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه attempted to silence, Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه.'s protests with 30,000 dirhams and expensive presents. Uthman's gifts were perceived as a bribe and backfired with Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه.'s bringing the money and presents into the Great Mosque saying;
Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه sent numerous placatory letters to Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه. but continued building community opposition against Abd Allah. In 656 Egyptian community leaders decided to send a delegation to Madinah to demand Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله's dismissal. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله also left for Madinah to defend himself at the court of the caliph. In his absence, Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa assumed charge of the government.
When Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله reached Ayla, he was told that Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه's house was under siege (Siege of Uthman) and decided to return to Egypt. At the border, he was informed that Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfa رضي الله عنه had given orders to prevent him from entering Egypt. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله then went to Palestine awaiting the outcome of events in Madinah. In the meantime, Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه' was killed in Madinah, and when Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله heard the news, he left Palestine and went to Damascus to live under the protection of Muawiyah I.
Differentiating between ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه and someone else who apostatized and claimed that he had distorted the revelations, Praise be to Allah.
Many people mix up two people who apostatized at the time of Rasulullahﷺ. One of the reasons for that is that they both wrote down the revelation and they both apostatized. But in fact, they are two different people. The first one is ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, and the second is a Christian man whose name is not known. The former apostatized and then came back to Islam during the conquest of Makkah; the latter remained an apostate and died, and the earth rejected his body and thus became a sign for the people. The latter is the one who claimed that he used to change words when he wrote down the revelation; that was not the noble Sahaabi ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه,.
With regard to the former, his name was ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله, Abu Yahya al-Qurashi al-‘Aamiri, the brother through breastfeeding of ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan. Rasulullahﷺ had issued a death warrant against him, but Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه' asked for protection for him, and Rasulullahﷺ granted him protection. Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه' became Muslim again and was a good Muslim.
It was narrated that Sa‘d ibn Abi Waqqaas رضي الله عنه said: On the day of the conquest of Makkah, Rasulullahﷺ granted safety to the people except four people, two women whom he named, and Ibn Abi Sarh. As for Ibn Abi Sarh, he hid with Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه', and when Rasulullahﷺ called the people to swear allegiance, Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه brought him and made him stand before Rasulullahﷺ and said: O Prophet of Allah, accept the allegiance of ‘Abdullah.
Rasulullahﷺ raised his head and looked at him three times, each time refusing, then Rasulullahﷺ accepted his oath of allegiance after the third time. Then Rasulullahﷺ turned to his Companions and said: “Was there not among you any intelligent man who, when he saw me not accepting his pledge, would get up and kill him?” They said: O Rasulullahﷺ, we do not know what is in your mind; why did you not hint to us with (a movement of) your eyes? Rasulullahﷺ said: “It is not appropriate for a Prophet to have treacherous eyes.”
Narrated by an-Nasaa’i (4067) and Abu Dawood (2683). Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh an-Nasaa’i.
‘Saiyidina Uthman ibn Affan رضي الله عنه', appointed him as governor of Egypt, and he is the one who led the battle of Dhaat as-Sawaari. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, went on a campaign in North Africa and conquered many of its cities. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, refrained from getting involved in the turmoil between ‘Ali and Mu‘aawiyah (may Allah be pleased with them both), then he went to ar-Ramlah in Palestine. One morning he said: O Allah, let my last deed be Fajr prayer. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, did wudu, then he prayed; he said the salaam to his right, then when he was going to say the salaam to his left, Allah took his soul.
That was in 59 AH.
Imam adh-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said concerning him:
Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, never harmed anybody, and he did not do anything that he could be blamed for after the conquest of Makkah. Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, was one of the wisest and most generous of men.
End quote from Siyar A‘laam an-Nubala’, 3/34
See also al-Isti‘aab fi Ma‘rifat al-Ashaab by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, 3/52; al-Isaabah fi Tamyeez as-Sahaabah, 4/110
We have not come across any report with a Saheeh (sound) isnaad that says that ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, used to distort the revelation; rather in his story it says that the Shaytaan caused him to slip.
It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: ‘Abd Allah ibn Sa'd رضي الله عنه, used to write for Rasulullahﷺ. Then the shaytaan caused him to slip and he joined the kuffaar. Rasulullahﷺ ordered that he be killed on the day of the Conquest [of Makkah], but Saiyidina Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan رضي الله عنه, sought protection for him and Rasulullahﷺ granted him protection.
Narrated by an-Nasaa’i (4069) and Abu Dawood (4358); classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh an-Nasaa’i.
Thirdly:
With regard to the other man, he was a Christian, then he became Muslim, then he apostatized. He used to say that he changed the words that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) dictated to him. Then Allah, may He be exalted, destroyed him in a manner that served as a lesson to others who reviled the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and cast aspersions upon his religion.
It was narrated that Anas رضي الله عنه, said: There was a Christian man who became Muslim and read al-Baqarah and Aal ‘Imraan, and he used to write for the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). He went back to being a Christian, and he used to say: Muhammad does not know anything but what I wrote for him. Allah caused him to die, and they buried him, then the next morning the earth had thrown him out. They said: This is the doing of Muhammad and his companions, because he ran away from them; they dug up our companion and threw him (on the ground). So they dug a grave for him and made it deep, but the next morning the earth had thrown him out. They said: This is the doing of Muhammad and his companions because he ran away from them; they dug up our companion and threw him (on the ground). They dug another hole for him and they made it as deep as they could in the ground, but the next morning the earth had thrown him out. Thus they realised that this was not something that people had done, so they left him unburied.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
This accursed one who fabricated lies against the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and said that he did not know anything but what he wrote for him was subject to vengeance and shame from Allah, as He caused him to be thrown out of the grave after he had been buried, several times. This is something extraordinary which shows to everyone that this was a punishment because of what he had said and that he was a liar, because such things do not happen to most of the dead.
It also shows that this crime was more grievous than merely apostatising because such things do not happen to most apostates who die; Allah wrought vengeance for His Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) because of his slander and insults against him, to support His religion to prevail and expose the lie of the liar, because the people could not carry out the hadd punishment on him.
End quote from as-Saarim al-Maslool, 1/122
Thus it becomes clear that ‘Abdullah ibn Sa‘d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه, was innocent of that of which he was accused; he never made such a claim and never said such words. Moreover, he repented after that, and he became Muslim and was a good Muslim.
Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه, - And the allegations against him
The critics have levelled a number of accusations against Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu on account of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه, . For example, he removed an experienced and mature Sahabi (Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه, ) from Egypt without any reason and appointed his foster brother (‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d), a youngster, as governor.
Ibn Mutahhar al Hilli al Shia writes:
ولى عبد الله بن سعد بن أبي سرح مصر حتى تظلم منه أهلها إلخ
He appointed ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه, over Egypt and due to him their residents were put under oppression.
A few aspects of the life of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه, will be briefly presented to the esteemed readers which will highlight his worthiness and value and his Islamic services. In the end, a few misconceptions will be addressed, Allah willing. By virtue of the above, the misconceptions will be removed.
Lineage and Fosterage
His name is ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh ibn al Harith. He is from the ‘Amiri tribe. He is not an individual from the Banu Umayyah clan.
He is the foster brother of Sayyidina ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan رضي الله عنه, drank ‘Abdullah’s mother’s milk.
This is mentioned in Tabaqat ibn Sa’d and Usd al Ghabah:
عبد الله بن سعد بن أبي سرح بن الحارث … بن عامر إلخ هو أخو عثمان من الرضاعة أرضعت أمه عثمان إلخ
‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh ibn al Harith … ibn ‘Amir. He is the foster brother of ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه,. His mother suckled ‘Uthman.رضي الله عنه,
Apostasy after Islam followed by Islam, Bay’ah, and Steadfastness
و استأمن له عثمان يوم فتح مكة من رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فآمنه و قد كان أمر بقتله إلخ
On the Day of the Conquest of Makkah, ‘Uthman sought security for him from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam who awarded it to him. He had, aforetime, ordered his assassination.
و كان قد أسلم قديما … ثم افتتن و خرج من المدينة إلى مكة مرتدا فأهدر رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم دمه يوم الفتح فجاء عثمان بن عفان إلى النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فاستأمن له فآمنه … و قال يا رسول الله تبايعه فبايعه رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يومئذ على الإسلام و قال الإسلام يجب ما كان قبله
He had accepted Islam early on. Thereafter, he fell into fitnah and left Madinah to Makkah as an apostate. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam thus declared his blood permissible on the Day of the Conquest. So ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan came to the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and sought protection for him, and the request was granted. He said, “O Messenger of Allah, take bay’ah from him.” thus Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam accepted his pledge of allegiance on that day upon Islam and declared, “Islam destroys everything before it.
و أسلم عبد الله بن سعد بن أبي سرح أيام الفتح فحسن إسلامه فلم يظهر منه شيء ينكر عليه بعد ذلك هو أحد النجباء العقلاء الكرماء من قريش
‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarhرضي الله عنه, embraced Islam during the days of the Conquest. His Islam was firm. Thus, no issue thereafter was exhibited by him for which he was criticized. He is one of elite, intellectuals, and kind-hearted individuals of the Quraysh.
ثم إنه حسن إسلامه و لم يؤثر عنه بعدها إلا الخير
Thereafter, his Islam was sincere. Nothing was displayed by him after that besides goodness.
Governor and Official
Allah blessed Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه, with excellent talent. He was a ready pillar in administration affairs. That is why Sayyidina ‘Umar al Faruq رضي الله عنه, appointed him governor over the district Sa’id during his caliphate. Thereafter, Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه, appointed him governor of Egypt. Hafiz Ibn Hajar and Ibn al Barquni have spoken of the above in the following words:
ثنا أبو صالح من الليث قال كان ابن أبي سرح على الصعيد في زمن عمر ثم ضم إليه عثمان مصر كلها إلخ
Abu salih narrated to us―from al Laythi who said:
Ibn Abi Sarh was governor over Sa’id during the reign of ‘Umar. Thereafter, ‘Uthman put the entire Egypt under his authority.
Accomplishments in Islamic Conquests
When Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه, appointed Sayyidina ‘Abdullah رضي الله عنه, as governor over Egypt due to the present circumstances, he fought many battles for the expansion of Islam. The Conquest of Africa is the most memorable achievement of his which took place in 27 A.H. With this, the Battle of Asawid (In the Nubian land in 31 A.H.) and the Battle of al Sawari (in the Roman Sea) was won by him. All these vast lands were conquered under his supervision. These are his high religious services which the seniors of the ummah view with much appreciation.
ثم ولاه عثمان بعد ذلك مصر … و فتح على يديه أفريقية سنة سبع و عشرين إلخ
Then ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه, made him governor over Egypt. Africa was conquered at his hands in the year 27 A.H.
و له مواقف محمودة في الفتوح … و كان محمودا في ولايته و غزا ثلاث غزوات أفريقية و ذات الصواري و الأساود إلخ
He has many praiseworthy accomplishments on the battlefield to his name. He was praiseworthy during his term of governorship. He fought three battles, Africa, Dhat al Sawari, and al Asawid.
‘Abdullah’s Demise upon Goodness
After fulfilling religious tasks for a lengthy period, Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه, adopted solitude and detachment after the martyrdom of Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه, and the arising fitnah thereupon and avoided the disputes therefrom. Some have mentioned that he settled in ‘Asqalan while others mention Ramlah.
قيل بل أقام بالرملة حتى مات فارا من الفتنة و دعا ربه فقال اللهم اجعل خاتمة عملي صلوة الصبح فتوضأ ثم صلى الصبح … ثم سلم عن يمينه و ذهب يسلم عن يساره فقبض الله روحه
It is said that he stayed in Ramlah until he passed on, escaping the fitnah. He implored his Rabb saying, “O Allah, make the last action of mine the Fajr prayer.” He thus performed wudu’ and then performed Salat al Fajr. He made salam to his right and as he went to make salam to his left, Allah took away his soul.
Removal of a few misconceptions
The critics have listed a number of criticisms against Amir al Mu’minin Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه,, among which many pertain to Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه,. Since Ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه, is the foster brother of Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه, (although he is not from the Banu Umayyah tribe), and Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه, appointed him governor over Egypt, these objections are jointly targeted at Sayyidina ‘Uthman and Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه, . Answering them is our concern.
- The first accusation they level is that Sayyidina ‘Abdullahرضي الله عنه, accepted Islam and then apostatised after some time, due to which Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam ordered his assassination and execution. To shed some light on this issue (as we mentioned above), his acceptance of Islam and subsequent apostasy happened prior to the Conquest of Makkah. On the occasion of the Conquest of Makkah, Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه, brought him in the noble presence of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, after which he reverted to Islam and pledged allegiance. At this, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam announced, as appeared above
إن الإسلام يجب ما كان قبله
Indeed, Islam wipes out every sin and shortcoming before it.
This prophetic affirmation has cleared the air. All sins, whether big or small, are pardoned and his Islam is accepted.
Another famous Sahabi is Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه, . His incident is recorded in the books of hadith. It is reported therein that he came into the presence of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to give bay’ah. After extending his hand, he withdrew it and said, “O Messenger of Allah, on condition that my previous mistakes are forgiven.” On this occasion, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam announced:
يا عمرو أما علمت أن الإسلام يهدم ما كان قبله
O ‘Amr, do you not know that Islam wipes out everything before it.
In a similar way, many persons apostatized in that era and subsequently reverted to Islam and became upright. This is the same case with Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه, . Now, to recall the previous sins, continue taking him to task, and label him a murtad (apostate) and Tarid al-Rasul (Rasul’s outcast) is against the Islamic style. In the glorious Qur’an, the divine declaration has been sounded as a warning:
وَلَا تَنَابَزُوْا بِالْأَلْقَابِ بِئْسَ الِاسْمُ الْفُسُوْقُ بَعْدَ الْإِيْمَانِ وَمَنْ لَّمْ يَتُبْ فَأُولٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُوْنَ
Do not call each other by [offensive] nicknames. Wretched is the name of disobedience after
faith. And whoever does not repent – then it is those who are the wrongdoers. They also object that Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh radiya Llahu ‘anhu and other people of his kind were the Tulaqa’,e. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam forgave them on the occasion of the Conquest of Makkah. These Tulaqa’ were given the reigns of the ummah by Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu. It is due to this that people looked at them with scorn. Sufficient with regards to this issue is that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam stood at the door of the Kaaba on the occasion of the Makkan conquest and announced inter alia:O gathering of Quraysh! Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala has removed the pride and arrogance over your forefathers of ignorance. All people are from Adam and he was from dust.”
He then recited the following verse:
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثىٰ وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوْبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوْا إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيْمٌ خَبِيْرٌ
O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted. Allahﷻ
Allahﷻ
Rasulullahﷺ
Rasulullahﷺ
رضي الله عنه
After which he proclaimed:
O gathering of Quraysh, what is your view? How will I treat you?
The people replied, “You will treat us cordially. You are noble and kind and the son of a noble and kind man.”
Hearing this, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “Go, you are free, i.e. you all have been awarded pardon.”
During this address, all the tribes of Quraysh were present. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam addressed the entire audience. The individuals of a particular tribe were not the only addressees, nor were these words directed at a handful of selected persons. Various tribes of the Quraysh were present before his noble personality. The Banu Taym, Banu ‘Adi, Banu Makhzum, Banu Khuzaimah, Banu Asad, Banu Nawfal, Banu Zuhrah, Banu Hashim, Banu ‘Abd Shams (Banu Umayyah), etc., all those present were addressed with the words:
اذهبوا فأنتم الطلقاء
Go for you are free.
This ruling was not specific to any clan. The words O gathering of Quraysh is an open contextual evidence for generality. Now to label a few individuals of the Banu Umayyah (Sayyidina Walid ibn ‘Uqbah, Sayyidina Muawiyah رضي الله عنه, Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه) as Tulaqa’ and to create dislike for them in the masses is no noble deed. First of all, this was not a derogative word that Rasulullahﷺ uttered. It only implied forgiveness. Moreover, due to this word, there existed no mutual disgust or aversion in the time of the esteemed Sahabah رضي الله عنه, nor would they use it to insult one another, nor were the noble Sahabah رضي الله عنه perturbed by any of them assuming a position of authority. In fact, the reality is the opposite. Sayyidina ‘Umar al Faruq رضي الله عنه gave amazing offices to these Tulaqa’ during his caliphate, as we mentioned previously. Specifically, Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه was appointed governor over the Sa’id district by Sayyidina ‘Umar rرضي الله عنه. In other words, he handed the reigns of the ummah to the Tulaqa’. (The reference to this has been provided in the previous pages.)
It is ironic that these Tulaqa’ are awarded positions of authority in the eras of Sayyidina Siddiq Akbar and Sayyidina Faruq A’zam رضي الله عنه, and everything runs smoothly. The public is neither disturbed, nor is Sayyidina ‘Umar رضي الله عنه criticised. On the other hand, when they assume posts in the ‘Uthmani era, these very Tulaqa’ are despised and disparaged, the entire populace is disgusted with them, and the propaganda of giving the reigns of the ummah to Tulaqa’ activates. Oh, how paradoxical!
Another objection raised is that Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه dismissed Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه, an experienced Sahabi, from Egypt and gave this honorable position to his foster brother. This was a prejudiced deed done for family distinctions. To top it all, Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarhرضي الله عنه wrought havoc.
To remove this doubt, a few points are penned hereunder to ponder over. No other answer will be needed.
Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه was not from the tribe of Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه (the Banu Umayyah). Rather, he was from the Banu ‘Amir. Nonetheless, the critics have regarded his foster brotherhood as his crime.
The year in which Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه was relieved from Egypt and Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه was instated, this very same year (27 A.H.) saw the Battle of Africa. Under the leadership of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه was this momentous operation handled. Among the warriors was the biological son of Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه, Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه. Sayyidina ‘Abdullah is a Sahabi himself and participated enthusiastically in the Battle of Africa along with other Sahabah, the likes of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, ‘Abdullah ibn al Zubair, Ma’bad ibn al ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah ibn al ‘Abbas, Ibn Jafar, Hassan, Hussain, and others رضي الله عنه. The Muslims were victorious and obtained booty. All this was accomplished under the leadership of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله who was the army general.
Khalifah Ibn Khayyat has written in volume one of his history compilation:
و فيها (سنة 27 ه) عزل عثمان بن عفان عمرو بن العاص عن مصر و ولاها عبد الله بن سعد بن أبي سرح فغزا ابن أبي سرح أفريقية و معه العبادلة عبد الله بن عمر و عبد الله بن عمرو (بن العاص) و عبد الله بن الزبير
In this year (27 A.H.) ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan relieved ‘Amr ibn al ‘As from Egypt and instated ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh. Ibn Abi Sarh waged war on Africa alongside the ‘Ubadalah, viz. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr (ibn al ‘As) and ‘Abdullah ibn al Zubair.
The following historians have also recorded this fact that in the Battle of Africa, Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As’s son, ‘Abdullah رضي الله عنه, joined while the army general was Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه.
- Al Baladhuri: Futuh al Buldan, pg. 234, the Conquest of Africa.
- Ibn Khaldun: Tarikh Ibn Khaldun, vol. 2 pg. 1003, the governorship of ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh over Egypt and the Conquest of Africa, new Beirut print.
The idea of relating this is that had Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه removed Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنهr in an impermissible way, and had this dismissal been the product of prejudice, then on that occasion why did the senior Sahabah رضي الله عنه raise no objection? Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As’s رضي الله عنه own son Sayyidina ‘Abdullah رضي الله عنه did not object nor deemed the dismissal erroneous. On the contrary, after a short while (when the Battle of Africa presented itself) he participated under the leadership of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه, displaying his total support. As if his action has removed the doubt that Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه removed Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه for no reason and out of discrimination. Furthermore, Shah ‘Abdul ‘Aziz speaks of this by mentioning:
در لشکر او بسیارے از صحابہ و اولاد صحابہ بودند ہر ہمہ از سیرت او خوش ماندند و بہیچ وجہ بر اوضاع او انکار نہ کردند از جملہ آنہا عقبہ بن عامر جہنی و عبد الرحمن بن ابی بکر و عبد اللہ بن عمرو بن العاص
In the army of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه in the Conquest of Africa, many illustrious Sahabah رضي الله عنه and children of Sahabah رضي الله عنه were present. Everyone was pleased with Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d’s رضي الله عنه behavior and mannerism. They did not in any way criticize the behavior of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah رضي الله عنه. Among those who participated were Sayyidina ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Amir al Juhani, Sayyidina ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Abi Bakr, and Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه
Worthy of note is that Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه was a staunch supporter and backer of the Banu Umayyah. History bears testimony to this fact. If for argument’s sake, we accept that Sayyidah ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه dismissed him out of prejudice and took this post away from him in an impermissible manner, then Sayyidina ‘Amr ibn al ‘As رضي الله عنه would have been saddened and grieved at heart. Due to this, not only would he be opposed to the Banu Umayyah, he would have supported their opposition. However, the reality is the opposite. This teaches us that his dismissal from Egypt was not out of discrimination, nor was he grieved by it. Instead, the change of post was due to present circumstances.
Note:
In those days, the objection of the entire khums (fifth of the booty) of Africa been given to Sayyidina Ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه is quite well-known. The answer to it will, Allah willing, be presented in the discussion on favoritism of relatives with regard to wealth. This discussion is regarding favoritism of relatives with regard to posts and offices. In the fourth discussion, the aspect of wealth will be tackled and this issue will be resolved there, with Allah’s subhanahu wa ta ‘ala help.
Benefit:
At this juncture, the report of Tarikh al Tabari, vol. 5 pg. 71, under the year 31 A.H. is presented by the critics which disparages and derides Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه in a nasty manner and mentions that his execution is permissible. Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه is taken to task on few accounts. All these faults have been listed from the side of Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfah.
This narration is very lengthy. Quoting the text of the report and then translating it will be a lengthy issue. The above signs of the narration are sufficient to locate the narration.
Briefly, both the chain and text will be analyzed which will prove sufficient for the just-natured people and the unreliability of this report will be realized.
Analysis of the chain
Ibn Jarir al Tabari narrates from Muhammad ibn ‘Umar (al Waqidi) who in turn narrates from Ma’mar ibn Rashid who reports on the strength of Zuhri.
- Muhammad ibn Jarir al Tabari has gathered all types of historical reports; authentic and inauthentic, weak and strong, fabricated and baseless; the entire lot. Generally, he mentions a chain. However, at times he does not and mentions some things from his own side. This is evident and nothing obscure to the scholars. He mentioned the above chain for this report.
- Al Tabari took this information from Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al Waqidi. Al Waqidi is a famous liar, matruk (accused of hadith forgery), and a fabricator of ahadith.
Until his report is not strengthened from another avenue, it is unacceptable. His mutafarrid reports are discarded. Whatever appears in this report is not backed by a sahih narration.
- Al Waqidi reports from Ma’mar ibn Rashid. Ma’mar is a reliable person and the scholars have praised him duly and declared him reliable. Notwithstanding this, it is proven that one of Ma’mar’s nephews was a Rafidi. He got hold of Ma’mar’s compilation of ahadith and altered them. Have a look at the following texts as evidence. The words of Ibn Hajar are:
قال أبو حامد ابن الشرقي هو حديث باطل و السبب فيه أن معمرا كان له ابن أخ رافضي و كان معمر يمكنه من كتبه فأدخل عليه هذا الحديث
Abu Hamid ibn al-Sharqi says: It is a false hadith. The reason for this is that Ma’mar had a nephew who was a Rafidi. Ma’mar would grant him access to his books. He included this hadith in the books and attributed it to Ma’mar.
It is compulsory to clarify here so that no deviate from the truth writes a rule that all the reports of Ma’mar are doubtful. No, this is incorrect. Instead, the incident has been written by the scholars under those reports of Ma’mar which contradict accepted fundamentals. They are munkar or shadh reports. They appear contradictory to accepted fundamentals of the Shari’ah and no proper interpretation can be given to them. Regarding such reports of Ma’mar, the research scholars have certainly clarified that doubts and alterations are found in them. The report of al Tabari under our discussion is also of this type. Hence, it is also not worthy of acceptance.
- Ma’mar has related the entire incident from al Zuhri. And the entire thing is his personal statement. It is not the statement of a renowned individual of that era. Al Zuhri is reliable, however, noteworthy is that Ibn Shihab al Zuhri was not present at the time. In fact, scholars have written that he was born in 58 A.H. and this incident (the Battle of Africa) took place in 27 A.H. (as in the report of Ibn Khayyat.) al Tabari on the other hand mentions it under the year 31 A.H, but the research of Khalifah ibn Khayyat seems correct. So, al Zuhri is born approximately 31 years after.
- Then, his age of maturity is taken at least 15 years. This adds to 46 years. Where did this report remain for such a lengthy period? Who reported it? Who related it to Ibn Shihab al Zuhri? All of this is worthy of consideration. To the contrary, the reports which have authentic and uninterrupted isnads, which do not contain these criticisms against Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu will be accepted and this report will be discarded.
Analysis of the Content of the Report
Worthy of noting is that if the content of this report is hypothetically deemed correct (that Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه has these defects due to which his execution is correct) then in this significant Battle of Africa, why did a large group of senior Sahabah from Madinah Munawwarah and youngsters of the Banu Hashim and Quraysh the likes of Sayyidina Ibn ‘Umar رضي الله عنه, Ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘Asرضي الله عنه, Ibn ‘Abbasرضي الله عنه, ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Abi Bakrرضي الله عنه, ‘Abdullah ibn al Zubair ibn al ‘Awwamرضي الله عنه, Miswar ibn Makhramahرضي الله عنه, Basr ibn Artatرضي الله عنه, Hassanرضي الله عنه, and Hussaiرضي الله عنهn (according to Ibn Khaldun), etc. participate? These luminaries ought to raise these objections against Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه and Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه before. Why did they not? Why did they join the military expedition of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh رضي الله عنه with silence?
Secondly, worthy consideration is that Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr رضي الله عنه and Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfahرضي الله عنه are of a low rank. Senior nobles and Quraysh leaders do not consider these criticisms and do not spread these defects while low-ranking persons broadcast the same? As if only they observed these faults while the seniors were totally blind to them.
According to al Baladhuri, Sayyidina Abu Bakr’s son, Sayyidina ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Abi Bakr رضي الله عنه, was part of the Battle of Africa under the leadership of Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d رضي الله عنه while his brother, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakrرضي الله عنه, on this occasion vehemently insults and criticizes Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’dرضي الله عنه and Sayyidina ‘Uthman رضي الله عنه. This is the practical and verbal polarity between the true brothers. In this case, the practical support of Sayyidina ‘Abdur Rahman ibn Abi Bakr رضي الله عنه will be given preference and Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr’s رضي الله عنه disagreement will be put behind, since the former’s rank is far superior to the latter’s in every aspect.
Another point worth pondering over, in the light of this report, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr رضي الله عنهand Muhammad ibn Abi Hudhayfahرضي الله عنه raised these objections on the occasion of the battle. Why did they not raise the issue in Madinah? If these issues were correct, it was binding upon them to present them to the people in the capital of Islam, Madinah. After crossing Egypt and at the battlefield was not the occasion. The gist of this is that this report makes no logical sense just as it is unacceptable from the perspective of its chain.
Did Abdullah Abi Sarh author and edit several Quran revelations?
Those narratives only indicate that Satan made ibn Abī Sarḣ turn his back on Islam, then later return to Islam and became a devout Muslim so much so that he was in all the gazwas that took place.
Narratives that indicate that ibn Abī Sarḣ altered the Qur'an or that he was inspired by the final part of the 14th verses of Al-Mu'minun are fabricated because these are found in commentaries only and that too with no isnad(chain of transmission)given.
Let the seeker of knowledge know that Sîrah collects every account whether true or false. But the intention is to mention all that is conveyed in the books of Sîrah regardless of the isnaad. (i.e., the authenticity of the chains of narration).
According to the critics, the revelation of verse 23:12 and the amazed anticipation of Abdullâh Ibn Sâd Ibn Abî Sarh at the end of verse 23:14 triggered his apostasy.
Let us bust this lie all in one
Many books about the Ulûm al-Qur'ân have made an accurate classification of the Chapters and verses that were revealed in Makkah (those are called Makkan verses or Chapters), and the ones revealed in Madinah (those are called Madinite). According to Al-Itqân, one can find that the full Chapter 23 (i.e., Sûrat al-Mu'minûn) is Makkan. Refer to pages 17-21 of As Suyuti where many reports confirm the revelation of Chapter 23 is Makkah with no exception of any single verse. Obviously, this report quoted from al-Baidawi is a gross fabrication since Abdullâh Ibn Sâd Ibn Abî Sarh embraced Islam after the revelation of Chapter 23. ie only after the prophet Migrated to Madinah.
Probable origin of the story:
John of Damascus, if you know, was keen on heresy and he tried his best to spread malicious lies to stop people from accepting the faith.
Conclusion
The claims that the Holy Qur'ân has been tainted by Ibn Abî Sarh do not hold water is therefore clear like a diamond. One thing is sure. We do not know a lot about the beginning of the faith of Ibn Abî Sarh.It was apparently unstable. However, later, he converted back to Islam and his faith grew beyond reproach.
And Allah knows best.
NEXT⇒ Marwan ibn al Hakam And the allegations against him
references
Imam adh-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said concerning him:
Narrated by an-Nasaa’i (4067) and Abu Dawood (2683). Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh an-Nasaa’i.
End quote from Siyar A‘laam an-Nubala’, 3/34
See also al-Isti‘aab fi Ma‘rifat al-Ashaab by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, 3/52; al-Isaabah fi Tamyeez as-Sahaabah, 4/110
[1] Minhaj al Karamah, vol. 4 pg. 66, discussion on criticism against ‘Uthman, Lahore print, at the end of Minhaj al Sunnah.
[2] Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 7 pg. 190 – 191, section 2, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh, Leiden print; Usd al Ghabah, vol. 3 pg. 173 biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d, Tehran print.
[3] Nasab Quraysh, pg. 433, the progeny of Abu Sarh.
[4] Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 7 pg. 190 – 191, section 2, ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh.
[5] Al Isti’ab with al Isabah, vol. 2 pg. 368, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d; Usd al Ghabah, vol. 3 pg. 173, biography of ‘Abdullah.
[6] Al Muntaqa, pg. 403, Egypt print; Jawami’ al Sirah, pg. 232, the conquest of Makkah.
[7] Al Isabah with al Isti’ab, vol. 2 pg. 309, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d.
[8] Al Isti’ab with al Isabah, vol. 2 pg. 368, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d; Usd al Ghabah, vol. 3 pg. 173, biography of ‘Abdullah.
[9] Al Isabah with al Isti’ab, vol. 2 pg. 309, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d.
[10] Al Isti’ab with al Isabah, vol. 2 pg. 366, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d; Usd al Ghabah, vol. 3 pg. 174, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh; al Isabah, vol. 2 pg. 309, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Sarh; Sirat al Halabiyyah, vol. 3 pg. 264, chapter on the list of his salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam famous scribes.
[11] Sahih Muslim, vol. 1 pg. 76, book on faith, chapter on Islam erasing everything before it, Nur Muhammadi print.
[12] Surah al Hujurat: 11.
[13] Surah al Hujurat: 13.
[14] Sirat Ibn Hisham, vol. 2 pg. 412, Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam tawaf of the House and his speech therein, Egypt print.
[15] Tarikh Khalifah ibn Khayyat, vol. 1 pg. 134, the year 27 A.H., Iraq print.
[16] Tuhfat Ithna ‘Ashariyyah, pg. 315, criticisms against ‘Uthman, the end of fourth criticism, new Lahore print.
[17] Taqrib al Tahdhib wa Tahdhib al Tahdhib, vol. 9 pg. 364, 366, 367, under Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al Waqidi.
[18] Mizan al I’tidal, vol. 1 pg. 38, Ahmed ibn al Azhar ibn Mani’ al Naysapuri; Tahdhib al Tahdhib, vol. 1 pg. 12, Ahmed ibn al Azhar ibn Mani’; Dhayl al La’ali al Masnu’ah, pg. 61, book on virtues, ‘Alawi Lucknowi publishers, old edition, under the merits of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.
[19] Al Bidayah, vol. 8 pg. 11 – 12.
And Allah knows best.
