ʿAbd Allāh ibn Idrīs said, “No one is more reliable in transmitting from Ibn Isḥāq than Ziyād al-Bakkāʾī, for Ibn Isḥāq dictated to him twice.”
Ibn Maʿīn stated, “He is trustworthy with respect to Ibn Isḥāq’s material.”
ʿAbbās narrated from Yaḥyā who said, “He is of no account (1), though I did record from him the reports on the Prophet’s campaigns.”
Ibn al-Madīnī remarked, “I do not relate anything from him.”
Ṣāliḥ Jazara said, “In himself he is weak in hadith, but he is among the most reliable people in al-Maghāzī; he even sold his house and travelled about with Ibn Isḥāq.”
Al-Nasāʾī said, “He is not strong.”
Abū Zurʿa declared, “He is truthful.”
Abū Ḥātim said, “He is not to be taken as proof.”
Al-Tirmidhī commented, “He reports many singularities (2).”
Ibn Ḥibbān said, “Al-Ḥasan ibn Sufyān informed us; Zakhamawayh informed us; …”
(1) Al-Laknawi notes in al-Rafʿ wa-l-Takmil, p. 99: “You will often find in Mizan al-Iʿtidal and similar works, quoting Yahya ibn Maʿin, the judgment ‘he is nothing.’ Do not be deceived into thinking that the narrator in question is seriously discredited. Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar states, in the introduction to Fath al-Bari, under the entry for ʿAbd al-ʿAziz ibn al-Mukhtar al-Basri (p. 419), that Ibn al-Qattan al-Fasi explained Ibn Maʿin’s phrase ‘he is nothing’ as meaning simply that the narrator has transmitted very few hadiths. Al-Sakhawi confirms this in Fath al-Mughith, citing Ibn al-Qattan: when Ibn Maʿin says of a narrator ‘not worth anything,’ he merely intends that the person has narrated only a small number of reports.
(2) Ibn Hajar adds in the introduction to Fath al-Bari, p. 401: “Ibn Hibban went to extremes and maintained that one may not rely on his report if he is the sole transmitter.”