Jaʿfar ibn Muḥammad al-Rasʿanī (1) narrates from ʿUthmān ibn Ṣāliḥ: “The Egyptians used to belittle ʿUthmān, until al-Layth ibn Saʿd grew up among them and began relating the virtues of ʿUthmān; only then did they cease.

Likewise, the people of Ḥimṣ would disparage ʿAlī, until Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh arose in their midst, recounted ʿAlī’s virtues, and they gave it up.

ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal said: My father asked Dāwūd ibn ʿAmr while I was listening, “Abū Sulaymān, would Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh relate these aḥādīth to you from memory?”

He replied, “Yes; I never once saw a book in his hand.”

My father said, “Then he must have had an excellent memory. How much did he know by heart?”

He answered, “An immense amount.”

My father asked, “Would he have memorised ten thousand?”

He said, “Ten thousand, and another ten thousand, and yet another ten thousand.”

My father remarked, “That makes him comparable to Wakīʿ.”

Aḥmad ibn Saʿd ibn Abī Maryam reports from ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī: “There are two men who are the principal ḥadīth authorities of their respective regions: Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh and Ibn Luhayʿah.”

Al-Faḍl ibn Ziyād transmits from Aḥmad [ibn Ḥanbal]: “No one narrates more of the Syrian scholars’ ḥadīth than Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh and al-Walīd ibn Muslim.”

Yaʿqūb al-Fasawī said: “I used to hear our colleagues say, ‘The knowledge of Syria is with Ismāʿīl and al-Walīd.’ I then heard Abū al-Yamān remark: ‘Our companions were eager for knowledge and strove hard in Syria, Medina, and Mecca. They would say, “We exert ourselves in the search, tire our bodies, and spend long periods away, yet when we return we find everything we have written already with Ismāʿīl.”’

Al-Fasawī then added: ‘Some people have spoken critically of Ismāʿīl, yet Ismāʿīl is trustworthy, upright, and the most knowledgeable of all in the ḥadīth of the Syrians; no one can deny this. Most of what they said was…’