alongside Ibrāhīm ibn Tahmān. He was Abū al-Ḥajjāj al-Ḍubāʿī, the Sarakhsī.

He travelled in search of knowledge and sat with ʿAmr ibn Dīnār, Zayd ibn Aslam, Bukayr ibn al-Ashajj, ʿAbd al-Malik ibn ʿUmayr, Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī, Sharīk ibn Abī Namir, ʿAmr ibn Yaḥyā al-Māzinī, Yūnus ibn ʿUbayd, and their peers.

Among those who reported from him were ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Mahdī, ʿĪsā ibn Mūsā Ghunjar, Wakīʿ, Ḥafṣ ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Naysābūrī, Yaḥyā ibn Yaḥyā, Yazīd ibn Ṣāliḥ al-Farrāʾ, Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād, and others.

Muslim transmitted—through Yaḥyā ibn Yaḥyā—who said: “In our view his narrations are straight-forward; we rejected nothing from him except when he practiced tadlīs (concealing the intermediary) from Ghiyāth, for we could easily recognise those reports.”

Al-Ḥākim said: “In himself he is trustworthy”—that is, he is not suspected.

Abū Ḥātim said: “His ḥadith may be written.”

Ibn ʿAdī said: “He errs, but not deliberately.”

ʿAbbās related from Yaḥyā: “He is not reliable.”

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Aḥmad said: “My father forbade me to record his narrations.”

Muḥammad ibn Saʿd said: “People abandoned his ḥadith and were cautious of him.”

Al-Nasāʾī said: “His ḥadith is abandoned.”

Al-Jūzajānī said: “He is accused of irjāʾ (the Murjiʾ doctrine).”