It was recorded by Ahmad (2/537–538), Abū Yaʿlā (302/1), and Ibn Hibbān (1888).

I say: Its chain of transmission is authentic according to Muslim’s criteria, as Ibn Kathīr (1/213) also stated.

It has a corroborating report with the same wording, narrated by Anas ibn Mālik and traced back to the Prophet. Al-Tirmidhī (2333) recorded it and deemed it singular. Another corroborating report was narrated by Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyab without a chain connecting him to the Prophet; al-Dānī (14/1) recorded it.

I say: This does not strengthen Shahr’s hadith, because it makes no mention of the Dajjāl, as is evident. It is therefore unrestricted in scope and cannot be restricted by that report—I mean Shahr’s hadith, given its weakness—especially since such a restriction would bring it into conflict with the other narrations. This is impermissible, as anyone of understanding will recognize.

As for the narrations explicitly stating that the Dajjāl’s forty refers to days, not years, they are transmitted by several Companions. All have already been cited, so I shall merely refer to their narrations:

First: Al-Nawwās ibn Samʿān, previously cited (pp. 56–58).

Second: Nufayr, the father of Jubayr, previously cited (p. 59).

Third: A man from among the Companions of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), previously cited (p. 71).

Fourth: Jābir ibn ʿAbd Allāh, previously cited (pp. 71–73 and 87).

Fifth: Abū Hurayrah, previously cited (p. 54).

I say: These authentic hadiths are not contradicted by the hadith of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr, who reported that the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: