especially since it has been strengthened by those previously mentioned, and here are their names: 1 - Imām Aḥmad 2 - al-Tirmidhī 3 - Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī 4 - Ibn Abī ʿĀṣim 5 - Ibn Ḥibbān 6 - al-Ḥākim 7 - Ibn Taymiyyah 8 - al-Dhahabī 9 - al-ʿAsqalānī. I say: I have elaborated on the authenticity of this ḥadīth according to the correct scholarly method and mentioned those who authenticated it from among the knowledgeable scholars, because I noticed that some of the later scholars, who do not have a firm grounding in it, have deemed it weak. Among them is the famous historian Ibn Khaldūn, who said in his "Tārīkh" (2/458, Fes edition with commentary by Shakīb Arslān): "It would have been appropriate to include the state of Muʿāwiyah and his accounts with the states of the caliphs and their accounts, for he follows them in virtue, justice, and companionship, and the ḥadīth (the caliphate is thirty years) should not be considered, as it is not authentic, and the truth is that Muʿāwiyah is among the caliphs..." The scholar Abū Bakr ibn al-ʿArabī followed him in this, saying in "al-ʿAwāṣim min al-Qawāṣim" (p. 201): "This is a ḥadīth that is not authentic!" He thus made a general statement in weakening it without mentioning its defect, and this is not in accordance with the scholarly method, especially since it was authenticated by those scholars you have known before him. Our friend, Ustādh Muḥibb al-Dīn al-Khaṭīb, attempted to address the matter by explaining the defect, and he brought forth something that, if it were as he mentioned, we would agree with him on the aforementioned weakening. He said in his commentary on it: "because its narrator from Safīnah is Saʿīd ibn Jumhān (original: Jahmān). And there is disagreement about him,