and he identified him by name in it, saying: “Isḥāq ibn Abī Isrāʾīl narrated to us: he narrated to me ...” Thus, when he subsequently says, “Isḥāq narrated to us ...,” without further identifying him, he is certainly the one mentioned immediately before. I do not know how al-Haythamī failed to notice this, for someone of his standing should not overlook such a matter. My certainty of this increased when I saw that Abū Nuʿaym identified him in his narration, as noted above; and Ibn Abī al-Dunyā named him Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm. He is the same person; his kunyah was Abū Yaʿqūb al-Marwazī, and he was trustworthy.

As for his statement, “Its narrators are the narrators of the authentic collections,” this too is an error, in view of what has been established in the biographical notice of Muḥammad ibn Shabīb: he is not among the narrators covered in al-Tahdhīb. Perhaps he mistook him for Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn, for this is how it appears in al-Bazzār’s Musnad (p. 315, its supplementary reports), through ʿAbd al-Raḥīm ibn Hārūn al-Ghassānī, from Hishām ibn Ḥassān, from Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn, from Jaʿfar ibn Abī Waḥshiyyah, with a similar version.

This ʿAbd al-Raḥīm is weak; al-Dāraquṭnī declared him a liar, as stated in al-Taqrīb. The occurrence there of “Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn” may belong to the report itself, in which case it indicates its weakness because it contradicts the trustworthy Abū ʿUbaydah al-Ḥaddād; or it may have come from a copyist. The former possibility is supported by al-Haythamī’s statement: “Al-Bazzār narrated it, and it contains ʿAbd al-Raḥīm ibn Hārūn, who is weak. Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in al-Thiqāt and said: ‘His hadith may be considered when he narrates from his book, for his memory-based narrations contain some objectionable reports.’ The rest of its narrators are among those of the authentic collections.” His words, “the rest of its narrators are among those of the authentic collections,” suggest that his copy likewise read: “Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn.” Yet it is possible that he erred in this as well, just as he erred regarding Abū Yaʿlā’s chain of transmission. And Allah, exalted is He, knows best.

Even so, I have not been able to determine the basis for the objectionability mentioned by al-Mundhirī and related by Ibn al-Jawzī from Imam Aḥmad. We uphold its authenticity, as required by the authenticity of its chain of transmission, and do not depart from that except