The benefit of mastering this point is that it exonerates a narrator from any charge of error (1) when he cites the transmitter through his father and says, “Ibn Isḥāq informed us,” whereupon he is accused (2) of having misread the name, the supposed correct form being “Abū Isḥāq informed us.”

—or the situation may be reversed, as with Isḥāq ibn Abī Isḥāq al-Sabīʿī.

—or (3) his kunya happens to be the same as his wife’s kunya (4), such as Abū Ayyūb al-Anṣārī and Umm Ayyūb, two well-known Companions.

—or his teacher’s name is identical with his father’s name, as in the reports that read: “al-Rabīʿ ibn Anas, from Anas” (5). Encountering this, one might imagine that he is narrating from his own father—just as the Ṣaḥīḥ (6) records: “from ʿĀmir ibn Saʿd (7), from Saʿd,” and Saʿd is indeed his father. In our case, however, Anas, the shaykh (8) of al-Rabīʿ, is not his father: al-Rabīʿ’s father was a man of the Banū Bakr, whereas his teacher was an Anṣārī—Anas ibn Mālik (9), the famous Companion—and al-Rabīʿ just mentioned was not one of his sons.

[Transmitters ascribed to someone other than their father]

A further useful category is the knowledge (10) of those who are attributed to someone other than their biological father, such as al-Miqdād