another narration, Surah al-Nūr—and explained it so eloquently that, had the Byzantines, the Turks, and the Daylamites heard his explanation, they would have embraced Islam.

For this reason, most of what Ismā‘īl ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmān al-Suddī al-Kabīr relates in his commentary comes from these two men: Ibn Mas‘ūd and Ibn ‘Abbās. Sometimes, however, he transmits from them accounts they relate from the People of the Book, which the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, permitted when he said:

“Convey from me, even if only a single verse. Relate accounts from the Children of Israel; there is no harm in doing so. Whoever deliberately attributes a lie to me, let him take his seat in the Fire.”

Al-Bukhārī narrated this from ‘Abd Allāh ibn ‘Amr.

Thus, ‘Abd Allāh ibn ‘Amr acquired two camel-loads of books belonging to the People of the Book on the day of the Battle of al-Yarmūk. He would relate accounts from them, understanding this hadith to permit that. These Israelite reports, however, are cited for corroboration, not to be accepted as established truths. They fall into three categories:

The first consists of reports whose truth we know because the evidence we possess confirms them. These are true.

The second consists of reports whose falsehood we know because they contradict the evidence we possess.

The third consists of reports concerning which nothing has been stated, belonging to neither of the preceding categories. We neither believe nor reject them, and relating them is permissible for the reason already mentioned.