Second hypothesis 2
The material interpretation of some elements of civilization:
It becomes clear from the discussion of the first hypothesis that the economic factors, as addressed in the introduction, significantly influenced Ibn Khaldun’s arguments. In this second methodological hypothesis, we will demonstrate how these arguments and interpretations were also influenced by other elements of civilization, such as religion, reason, science, and ethics, and we will illustrate his approach to these elements.
1- Although many cases can be cited that show the great influence of religion on Ibn Khaldun’s arguments, and the way he dealt with religious issues, we will discuss only three examples.
The first example illustrates how the powerful influence of religion on him led him to develop a completely new and comprehensive theory reinterpreting the events of the Great Fitna between the fourth Caliph, Ali ibn Abi Talib, and Mu’awiya ibn Abi Sufyan, based on a chronological framework distinct from the interpretations of all previous Islamic scholars and thinkers. This example also demonstrates the rational approach he adopted in explaining the transfer of power in the early stages of Islamic rule from the legitimate Caliph, chosen through consultation (shura), to the authority of tribal solidarity (asabiyya). We will suffice with this brief mention without further elaboration.
The second example: It deals with his position on the conflict concerning the return of Christ or the Mahdi.
On the one hand, Ibn Khaldun acknowledged the religious concept of the return of Christ. On the other hand, he rejected the myths associated with this subject, refuting them scientifically using the results of his research. He devoted a lengthy chapter in his Muqaddimah to discussing the conflicting opinions on the matter.
The possibility of the return of Christ. Contrary to philosophical beliefs that limit the conditions necessary for his return to his lineage to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) or link it to the cycles of the stars, Ibn Khaldun reaffirmed his fundamental position that no political or religious movement can succeed except through the strength of its tribal solidarity. This is evident in his statement: “No call for religion or kingship can succeed except with the presence of a tribal force that brings it to fruition and defends it against those who support it .” He also clarified that Christ will not appear according to the cyclical theory embraced by the Shiites, who interpret the course of history as a perpetual three-stage cycle: beginning with prophethood, then the caliphate, and finally a monarchy characterized by injustice. In his view, the appearance of Christ depends on the availability of favorable conditions in the environment in which he will appear, provided that he is supported and sustained by the tribal solidarity and strength of his people, which will lead to the establishment of a powerful state.
The third example can be found in his approach to the relationship between the human mind and God Almighty. Ibn Khaldun trusts the human mind, and although he acknowledges that divine perception inherently grasps much that humans cannot comprehend, he does not consider this a deficiency in the mind’s capacity and intellectual contemplation. If we exclude the mind from judging the validity of sacred beliefs such as the oneness of God, the afterlife, and the reality of prophethood—matters beyond its capacity—we can still use it to measure other temporal phenomena. This is because, in Ibn Khaldun’s view, the mind is a sound scale, and its judgments are certain and reliable.
“This does not detract from the intellect and its perceptions; rather, the intellect is a sound scale, and its judgments are certain and free from falsehood. However, you should not expect to use it to weigh matters of monotheism and the afterlife.
The reality of prophecy and the realities of divine attributes, and everything beyond its scope, is a greed for the impossible.
What is striking about this matter is that Ibn Khaldun’s zeal for religion did not prevent him from acknowledging the conclusions reached by his intellect and scientific observations, even if they were of a material nature. An example of this is what we quoted earlier from his words at the end of our discussion of the first hypothesis, where he says: “Everything comes from God, so human actions are necessary in every acquisition and possession.”
2- The influence of rationalism in his writings can be observed in his recourse to realistic, rather than Platonic, intellectual inquiry to verify historical information. The introduction includes several studies on this topic, four of which we will mention:
In one of his studies, Ibn Khaldun used a demographic criterion to refute the account of the Islamic historian al-Mas’udi, who transmitted the story of the Israelite army without verification. Al-Mas’udi stated that Moses (peace be upon him) counted his army in the desert and found it to consist of six hundred thousand soldiers, excluding children and the elderly. Ibn Khaldun expressed great astonishment, for if all historical and religious accounts estimate the number of Jews who entered Egypt at seventy thousand, how could their number have multiplied so implausibly during their stay in Egypt, a period not exceeding two hundred and twenty years?
In a second study, Ibn Khaldun resorted to his previous knowledge of military campaigns to declare his doubt about the possibility of a large, strong army like the army of the Tubba’ kings of Yemen crossing the vast areas that extend from Yemen to northwest Africa without encountering, or at least clashing with, hostile forces on its way to obtain the necessary supplies.
In a third study, Ibn Khaldun used the method of geographical research to refute the common myths about the existence of what is called the Valley of Sand in Morocco, which humans are unable to penetrate.
Another legend tells of a paradise-like city in the desert of Aden called Iram. Narratives claim it was built in three hundred years, a magnificent city with palaces of gold, pillars of emerald and ruby, and numerous varieties of trees and rivers. After investigating its history and location, Ibn Khaldun refutes these legends by citing the accounts of some of the narrators themselves, who stated that Iram is lost and can only be found by those skilled in magic. Therefore, he dismisses all these legends as mere fables.
In a fourth study, Ibn Khaldun relied on the historical method of research, particularly in explaining the downfall of the Barmakids, the Abbasid loyalists. He refuted the historians who claimed that Harun al-Rashid orchestrated their downfall because of his sister al-Abbasa’s conduct with his freed slave Ja’far ibn Yahya ibn Khalid and the discovery of an illicit relationship between them. He commented that this was a sensational and implausible account, and that the more logical reasons for the Barmakids’ downfall lay in Harun al-Rashid’s fear of their growing power, which manifested in their attempts to control the Abbasid state, their monopolization of high-ranking positions after excluding Arabs from them, and their appropriation of tax revenues and ownership of estates throughout the kingdoms. This provoked their rivals, who then informed al-Rashid against them. Perhaps the best summary of Ibn Khaldun’s views in these four studies is his statement: Do not trust what is presented to you of this matter. Examine the reports and compare them to sound legal principles so that you may scrutinize them in the best possible way.
These four studies illustrate the extent of the influence of the rational element in his writings, and this is confirmed by the conclusion he reached that the human mind can distinguish between the nature of what is possible and what is impossible, and thus accepts things or events that fall within the realm of the possible and reasonable, and rejects all others.
