Refuting the claim that Abdullah Ibn Saba founded Shi'ism
[Thread]

The thread will be divided into three parts:
1- The main source of this myth
2- The actual beliefs of Abdullah ibn Saba
3- Sunni scholars who admitted that Shias follow the Ahlulbayt (as)

1- Source of this myth
The main source that the critics of Shi’ism relied on is the mentioning of ibn Saba by the Shia theologian Sheikh Abū Muḥammad al-Ḥasan b Mūsā an-Nawbakhtī (d. 3rd century AH) in his book titled Shia Sects فرق الشيعة

Critics of Shia Islam claim that Sheikh an-Nawbakhtī acknowledged of a sect called Al-Saba’īyyah who had the following views:
1-Their founder ibn Saba was the first to insult the two caliphs
2-Ibn Saba was also the first to ascribe Imamah for Ali (as) following Jewish traditions

However, when examining the words of an-Nawbakhtī we find those accusations to be invalid.
First off, the Sheikh said that Al-Saba’īyyah believed that Imam Ali(as) didn’t die nor he will until he fills Earth with justice & inequity
As its known Shias don't hold such views

Secondly, an-Nawbakhtī never said that Ibn Saba was the first to have insulted Abu Bakr & Umar but rather he said he was from among those who did it publicly and claimed that Imam Ali (as) ordered him to do so
This is evident with the word أظهر which translates to reveal

Likewise, Sheikh an-Nawbakhtī never said that Ibn Saba was the first to ascribe Imamah to Ali(as).
But rather he said he was the first to state it publicly شهر القول
and he attributed this narration to unknown companions of Imam Ali (as), which makes it a Mursal report

What further confirms this is that Sheikh an-Nawbakhtī himself in the same book said that the first people who believed in the Imamah of Ali(as) were Al-Miqdad, Salman the Persian, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari and Ammar bin Yasser (May Allah be pleased with them)

This shows that there is a big DIFFERENCE between saying the first who believed/insulted & the first who broadcasted these views to the general public.
Imams (as) emphasized in many narrations on the importance of keeping true beliefs as secrets at times of taqiyya

2- The actual beliefs of Abdullah ibn Saba
Shias narrated from their Imams(as) the beliefs of Ibn Saba which includes claiming prophethood for himself & divinity for Imam Ali (as). Therefore, he was cursed in multiple narrations.
Ikhtīyār maʿrifat al-rijāl by Sheikh Al-Tusi

It’s also worth noting that extremists ghulat who believe in the divinity of the Imams(as) are considered to be out of the fold of Islam by major Shia giants
Shaykh al-Saduq reported this judgment in his book (A Shi’ite Creed)

3- Sunni scholars who admitted that Shias follow the Ahlulbayt (as)
What further validates that Shia Twelvers have nothing to do with Ibn Saba is that their major opponents have recognized that they follow the path of Ahlulbayt (as)

Surprisingly, Ibn Taymiyyah himself said that NOT most of what the Rafida report from their Imams(as) in jurisprudence is a lie rather the MAJORITY is truthful
The response to Al-Sobky in the issue of suspending the divorce

Ibn Al Qayyim followed his teacher and said that the Shia scholars from their beginning to their end narrate from the Ahlulbayt on an issue of divorce & we cannot believe that all their narrations are a lie since there are scholars and people of knowledge from among them.

The last nail in the coffin goes to Ibn Khaldun, he says that the Ahlulbayt were the ones who attacked some companions of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله) and attributed infallibility to the Imams.
Note: The word Ahlulbayt was replaced with Alids in the English translation

In conclusion, the Shias have no book from Ibn Saba, no narrated sayings from him(not even weak), don’t share his beliefs and he is cursed in their narratives.
But somehow, magically, the nawasibs believe he had so much influence on Shi’ism
wla hawl wala quat 'iilaa biallah