IBN
KHALDUN VIS-A-VIS TRADITIONS ABOUT IMAM MAHDI (A.S.)

Personality
and prominence often establish or nullify an idea in the minds of the people.
Their opinion, often, is of prime importance in understanding a concept.
Their opinion creates an impact as compared to that of a common individual.
Ibne Khaldun is an eminent scholar of reputation in the Islamic world. His
views rule the hearts of a section of Muslims, thus making him popular with
titles like 'Allama'.

Ibne Khaldun's views have not left the present day scholars unaffected.
And so we delve to study his consideration towards the traditions concerning
Imam Mahdi (as). Some scholars have subscribed to his viewpoint and consequently
the common masses have been affected with it. Here, before bringing the
traditions collected by Ibne Khaldun regarding Imam Mahdi (as) and his standpoint
with regards to them, we present the Muqaddamah where he has mentioned those
traditions.

Muqaddamah of Ibne Khaldun

Ibne Khaldun has authored a six-volumed
book of history entitled "Kitabul Abar wa
Deevanal Mubtada wal Khabar fi Ayyamal Arabe wal Ajam wal Barbar".
This book of Ibne Khaldun did not become as popular as the Muqaddamah written
on it. The popularity of Ibne Khaldun is more associated with this book.
This Muqaddamah is also very popular in Europe, as well. The original Arabic
book has been translated into many languages; the English and Urdu translations
are easily obtainable in India. Moreover, in some universities this Muqaddamah
is a part of the final examination of the Arabic course (Faazil).

It can be said that this Muqaddamah is the seventh part of Ibne Khaldun's
book of history. The book was written in a short period of eight to nine
months, detailing the principles of history and varied other aspects. It
is the collection of all logical and narrative (from traditions) sciences.
With all
this is also an independent analysis by Ibne Khaldun.

Some people consider the history book of Ibne Khaldun to be the body and
the Muqaddamah, the spirit. As, it is this Muqaddamah which has brought
him the actual fame.

We have taken this very Muqaddamah to be our subject and review the analysis
of Ibne Khaldun. For this treatise we have referred to the Urdu translation
of the Muqaddamah by Maulana Raaghib Rehmani Dehlavi
and published by Aeteqaad Publishing House, Delhi. It is in 2 volumes.
The 52nd part of the second volume is concerning Imam Mahdi (as) and comprises
of 18 topics.

Traditions
about Imam Mahdi (a.s.)

Ibne Khaldun has quoted twenty one traditions from the companions, and brings
them on pages 158 to 173 in the second volume. The narrators include Hazrat
Ali (a.s.), Jabir (a.r.), Ibne Masud, Umme Salma, Abu Saeed-e-Khudri, Abdullah
ibne Masud, Mohammed ibne Haatiyah, Ibne Abbas, Thaubaan, Abdullah ibne
Harith ibne Harr, Abu Hurairah, Qurah ibne Ayaas, Ibne Umar, Talha ibne
Abdullah, Mujahid, Umme Habibah, amongst others. The narrations are from
disparate chains of narrators. Ibne Khaldun himself acknowledges that Tirmizi,
Abu Dawood, Baraaz, Ibne Majah, Hakim, Tabrani and Abu Yaala Masuli have
brought these traditions in their books. And then he writes, "The rejectors
of Mahdi doubt the chain of narrators of these traditions, as we shall see.
It is an acclaimed rule that "doubt precedes justification". On
that account if a narrator is doubted - for instance if he is negligent,
or he has a poor memory, or if some weakness is found in him, or his opinion
is not good then this will affect the correctness of the tradition. The
tradition will now no longer fit the criteria of authenticity. (Muqaddamah,
2/158)

Reminder

From the above it becomes clear that the respected Allamah rejects all traditions
wherein the narrator is doubted (Muqaddamah, 2/158)
directed by the principle 'doubt precedes justification'.

The
doubted traditions

Ibne Khaldun brings twenty one traditions regarding Imam Mahdi (as) after
the above explanation, and casts doubt on the narrators and chains of each
one of them with these words, 'Because the scholars of traditions have doubted
these traditions (concerning Imam Mahdi (as)). Suhaili Abu Bakr Khaithamah
has collected all the traditions about Mahdi (as). We present them here.'
(Of the twenty one traditions we consider only two of them).

Tradition One :

Jabir (ar) says: "The Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon
him (and his progeny) said, The denier of Mahdi is an infidel; and the rejector
of Dajjal, a liar; and about the denier of the sun rising from the West,
I think he said something similar." The narrators of this tradition
are Malik ibne Anas from Mohammed ibne Munkadar from Jabir. This series
is mentioned by Abu Bakr Asqaaf in his
Tavaaedul Akhbaar'.

Doubt: There is a lot of disorder in the chain of narrators reaching
Malik ibne Anas. And even Abu Bakr Asqaaf himself is accused by the Ahle
Hadith of fabricating traditions.

Tradition
Two :

Ibne Masud narrates from Holy Prophet, blessings and peace be upon him (and
his progeny), that even if one day remains for the end of this world, the
Almighty will prolong that day such that He will send a person from me or
my family, whose name will be my name and his father's name will be my father's
name (Tirmizi, Abu Dawood - these are the words
of the narrator of Abu Dawood). The chain of narrators is Aasim
ibne Abi Najoor from the famous reciter Zareen
Habeesh from Abdullah ibne Masood.

Note: Tirmizi and Abu Dawood bring this tradition with their own
chain of narrators. Abu Dawood has maintained silence over this tradition.
In his famous treatise Abu Dawood writes for whichever tradition I maintain
silence, is self-explanatory. (Capable of acceptance as a proof).

Doubt : Imam Ahmad says that he (Aasim) is a pious man, reciter of
the Holy Quran, a good and honest person. However, A'amash has a better
memory. (Here he is suggesting Aasim has a poor memory). In Ajali's words,
opinions about Aasim differ, that is he was considered weak (narrator).

Mohammed ibne Saeed says Aasim was honest, yet he often made mistakes. Abdur
Rehman ibne Abi Khatim says, "I told my father, Aasim is called to
be reliable. My father commented, 'He (Asim) is not of that calibre (of
being reliable).'" Ibne Haaliyah has discredited him and has stated,
Aasim is of weak memory. Abu Hatim remarks, "According to me he is
on the level of truthfulness (i.e. he is truthful), and is a good traditionalist
(i.e. his traditions are acceptable), but is not a memoriser of traditions.
Nesai has another opinion about him. Abu Jafar Aquili avers: Only he had
poor memory. Darqutni opines, "His (Asim's) memory was weak".
Yahya Al Qataan declares, "I have observed the person (the narrators)
called Aasim who has poor memory. I have heard Sheba say, that Asim b. Abi
Bakhud narrated a tradition for us, although people did not have a good
opinion about him." (Muqaddamah, 2/159-160)

Note: After these doubts, Ibne Khaldun makes an attempt to answer
an objection, "If someone contends that Bukhari and Muslim too have
quoted from Asim, and hence Asim is reliable. The reply is, Bukhari and
Muslim have not only brought his traditions, but they have brought them
along with other narrators. Thus the actual narrator is someone else and
this (quoting by Bukhari and Muslim) is only for further substantiation."

(Muqaddamah 2/160)

Fearing, doubts
will be casted on other narrators of Bukhari and Muslim, Ibne Khaldun writes
(in their defence). The scholars without exception adjudge the traditions
of Bukhari and Muslim to be correct. This unanimity of the scholars is ie
most potent proof and the best evidence for the defence and support of the
traditions.

(Muqaddamah, 2/158)

We make the
following conclusions om the writings of Ibne Khaldun and the doubts he
raises.

1) Those traditions from doubted narrators are not authentic.

2) Doubts
have been casted on the traditions of Mahdaviyat and consequently they are
unacceptable.

3) If the narrator on whom doubt is casted is a narrator of Bukhari and
Muslim, the validity of the tradition will not be affected, since the scholars
are uanimous about the correctness of Bukhari and Muslim.

It should be noted that after bringing twenty one traditions about Imam
Mahdi (a.s.) and after discarding them, Ibne haldun writes: "These
are all the traditions which the scholars bring about Mahdi and his re-appearance
at the end of time. You have noticed that all these are doubted, and it
is improbable that any has been spared." (Muqaddamah
2/173)

By calling these traditions rare Ibne haldun has not only misled the Muslims,
it has actually deviated some.

Now let us make it clear that neither the traditions about Mahdi are rare
nor by doubting the narrators the authenticity of the traditions can be
shrivelled. Because the truth is:

(1) The chains of reliable traditions are not in need of scrutiny. Thus
by terming the traditions of Mahdaviyat unauthentic by doubting the narrators
is against the principles of 'science of traditions'.

(2) Ibne Khaldun contradicts himself as on the one hand he brings the traditions
from twenty one different narrators and on the other hand declares them
rare.

(3) Ibne Khaldun has cited the traditions of Mahdaviyat from a section of
prominent scholars like Tirmizi, Abu Dawood, al Baraaz, Ibne Majah, Tabarani
and so on. Does this not establish that the doctrine of Mahdaviyat is a
fundamental belief and Muslims are unanimous about it. Is it not for this
reason that the recent scholars have quoted them?

(4) The rule, 'doubt precedes justification' is framed by the scholars of
traditions, and is not based on Quran and traditions. Besides many of the
traditionalists have rejected it. So why has the respected scholar Ibne
Khaldun employed only this rule to declare the traditions of Mahdaviyat
weak?

(5) It is incorrect to label the tradition as weak on account of a narrator
with weak memory or negligence, as the traditions of Mahdaviyat are authentic
on the basis of narrative language, concept and all other aspects.

(6) Ibne Khaldun has himself confessed, "It is pronounced and famous
amongst the Muslims that during the end of time, a person will appear from
the Ahle Bait who will consolidate the religion and spread justice..."
This determines the unity of the Muslims on the doctrine of Mahdaviyat,
and this itself is the best proof for the support of this belief.

The article can continue with the flow of such arguments. However, we have
demonstrated the validity of this doctrine from varied aspects in the previous
issues. Therefore, the claim of Ibne Khaldun of calling the traditions of
Mahdaviyat weak is baseless.

Furthermore, it should be noted that Ibne Khaldun was not a traditionalist
but was a historian. Thus seeking his opinion to determine the authenticity
of traditions is unfitting. And a traditionalist is always preferred instead.

The famous scholar of the Ahle Sunnah, Ahmad ibne
Sadeeq Shafeei, rejecting this opinion of Ibne Khaldun, wrote
a book, 'Abraaz al Wahm al Maknoon min Kalaam-e-Ibne
Khaldoon' . This educative book comprising of 150 pages was written
in Arabic and printed in Damascus in 1437 A.H. The author very proficiently
proves the traditions concerning Mahdi authentic and exposes Ibne Khaldun.

O
Almighty ! Protect all Muslims from deviation.