, al-Naqawī (1), Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr al-ʿUqaylī, Abū al-Qāsim al-Ṭabarānī, and a great many scholars from the Maghrib and the travelling traditionists.

Ibn ʿAdī said: “He was still a youngster in the company of ʿAbd al-Razzāq; his father had brought him to the sessions while he was very small indeed (2). For that reason he would say: ‘We recited to ʿAbd al-Razzāq,’ meaning that someone else did the reading while he listened.”

He added: “He reported some objectionable ḥadiths from him (3).”

I say: Ibn ʿAdī produced only a single report for this, through Ibn Anʿam al-Ifrīqī (4), and a report of that calibre is tolerable. So where, then, are the supposed anomalies? The man merely heard the books and transmitted them exactly as he had heard them, and the fault may well lie with his shaykh, whose reliability declined in his latter days—Allah knows best.

Al-Ḥākim said: “I asked al-Dāraquṭnī about Isḥāq al-Dabarī: ‘Does he merit inclusion in the Ṣaḥīḥ?’ He replied, ‘Yes, by Allah! He is trustworthy; I have seen no disagreement regarding him.’”

I say: He died in Ṣanʿāʾ in 285 AH (5), at the age of ninety.

Judge Abū ʿAbd Allah ibn Mufarrij (6) compiled a treatise on the letters in which al-Dabarī slipped, documenting the places where he misread words in the Jāmiʿ of ʿAbd al-Razzāq.