and he answered, “He is unobjectionable with respect to the people of Syria, but the Iraqis dislike his ḥadith.”

Someone said to Yaḥyā, “Which of the two is more firmly grounded, he or Baqiyyah?” He replied, “Both are sound.”

ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd transmitted from Ibn Maʿīn: “I hope there is nothing wrong with him.”

Muḥammad ibn ʿUthmān ibn Abī Shaybah said: “I heard Yaḥyā say, ‘He is trustworthy in what he transmits from the Syrians; as for his narrations from the people of the Ḥijaz, his notebook was lost, and so he became confused in what he remembered from them.’ ”

Muḍar ibn Muḥammad reported from Yaḥyā: “When he relates from the Syrians and cites the specific report, his ḥadith is straight; but when he narrates from the Ḥijāzis and the Iraqis, he mixes things up as much as you like.”

Abū Bakr al-Marrūdhī said: “I asked Aḥmad about Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh, and he deemed his narrations from the Syrians good, saying, ‘His standing with regard to them is better than in what he reports from the people of Medina and others.’ ”

Abū Dāwūd said: “I asked Aḥmad about him, and he replied, ‘What he narrates from his own shaykhs is acceptable; but in what he transmits from others he has aberrant reports traced back to trustworthy authorities.’ ”

Aḥmad ibn al-Ḥasan al-Tirmidhī (1) said: “Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal declared, ‘He is sounder than Baqiyyah, for Baqiyyah has aberrations.’ ”