and criticized them on account of narrators in their chains whose reports appear in one or both of the two Sahīh collections. This contradicts the principle he laid down for himself when he said: “Do not say that such criticisms might also apply to narrators in the two Sahīh collections.” If this demonstrates anything, it is the truth of what Shaykh Ahmad Shākir said about him: “As for Ibn Khaldūn, he pursued matters of which he had no knowledge and plunged into daunting questions he was not qualified to address.” Among the hadiths he cited and criticized because of narrators whose reports appear in one or both of the two Sahīh collections is the following:

“Al-Hākim recorded in al-Mustadrak a report from ‘Alī, may Allah be pleased with him, through Abū al-Tufayl from Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, who said: ‘We were with ‘Alī, may Allah be pleased with him, when a man asked him about the Mahdi. He replied, “That is far off!” Then he indicated seven with his hand and said, “He will emerge at the end of time, when a man who says ‘Allah, Allah’ will be killed”’—to the end of the hadith. Al-Hākim said: ‘This is an authentic hadith meeting the criteria of al-Bukhārī and Muslim.’” End of quotation.

Ibn Khaldūn then said:

“It meets only Muslim’s criteria, for its chain includes ‘Ammār al-Duhnī and Yūnus ibn Abī Ishāq, neither of whom al-Bukhārī included among his narrators. It also includes ‘Amr ibn Muhammad al-‘Anqarī, whose reports al-Bukhārī included not as proof but for corroboration. Added to this are ‘Ammār al-Duhnī’s Shi‘i leanings. Although Ahmad, Ibn Ma‘īn, Abū Hātim, al-Nasā’ī and others declared him trustworthy, ‘Alī ibn al-Madīnī reported from Sufyān that Bishr ibn Marwān had severed his Achilles tendons: ‘I asked, “For what reason?” He replied, “For his Shi‘i leanings.”’” End of quotation.

These three narrators, on whose account he criticized the hadith, are all among Muslim’s narrators. This clearly contradicts the approach he laid down at the outset.

Fifth: Ibn Khaldūn himself acknowledged that some hadiths concerning the Mahdi are free from criticism. After presenting the hadiths about the Mahdi, he said:

“These, then, are the hadiths recorded by the leading scholars concerning the Mahdi and his emergence at the end of time. As you have seen, only a few—very few indeed—have escaped criticism.” End of quotation.

I say: The few that are free from criticism suffice as proof, while the many that are not serve to support and strengthen them. In fact, a great many have escaped criticism, as already noted in the quotation from Qadi Muhammad ibn ‘Alī al-Shawkānī, who affirmed that they were mass-transmitted and stated that there were fifty hadiths, including authentic and good reports, and weak reports strengthened by corroboration. Moreover, at the end of his discussion, Ibn Khaldūn made statements indicating his hesitation regarding the Mahdi. This shows that he had reached no settled view, having spoken on a matter outside his field of expertise.

These are some observations on Ibn Khaldūn’s discussion of the Mahdi. I shall address them fully, along with further observations on his remarks, in the treatise I am preparing on this subject, if Allah Most High wills.

I have also read a treatise by Abū al-A‘lā al-Mawdūdī entitled al-Bayānāt, in which he discusses the Mahdi’s appearance. I noted several points which time does not permit me to address fully, but I shall mention three of them.

First: Regarding his statement: “And the hadiths on this issue are of two kinds: hadiths that contain