Scholarly Views Concerning Ibn Sayyad:

Abū Abd Allah al-Qurtubī said, “The correct view is that Ibn Sayyad is the Dajjāl, as indicated by what has already been presented. There is nothing implausible about his being on the island at that time and then being among the Companions at another time” (1).

Al-Nawawī said, “The scholars said: His story is problematic, and his true identity is uncertain: is he the well-known False Messiah, or someone else? There is no doubt, however, that he is one of the many impostors.

“The scholars said: The apparent meaning of the hadiths is that it was not revealed to the Prophet ﷺ whether he was the False Messiah or someone else. He was only given revelation describing the Dajjāl’s characteristics, while Ibn Sayyad displayed indications that could be interpreted either way. The Prophet ﷺ therefore did not state categorically that he was or was not the Dajjāl. Hence, he said to Umar—may Allah be pleased with him—‘If he is indeed the one, you will not be able to kill him.’

“As for Ibn Sayyad’s argument that he was a Muslim whereas the Dajjāl is an unbeliever; that the Dajjāl would have no children whereas he himself had children; and that the Dajjāl would not enter Mecca or Medina whereas Ibn Sayyad had entered Medina and was on his way to Mecca—none of this proves anything, for the Prophet ﷺ only described the Dajjāl’s characteristics at the time of his tribulation and his emergence upon the earth.