The second is ‘Isa ibn Fa’id, who is likewise unknown, as Ibn al-Madini and others stated. The third is Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad, the Hashimite and their freedman. Al-Hafiz said: “He is weak; he grew old and changed, becoming susceptible to prompting.”

From this, one may recognize al-Mundhiri’s leniency in his statement (3/139)—which al-Haythami (5/65) followed him in making—: “Ahmad and al-Bazzar narrated it, and Ahmad’s narrators are those of the Sahih, except for the unnamed man!” The explanation is that none of the three aforementioned narrators is among the narrators of the Sahih—except Ibn Abi Ziyad, who is among Muslim’s narrators, though Muslim only narrated from him in conjunction with another narrator. Take note.

A third corroborating report is narrated by ‘Atiyyah al-‘Awfi, from Ibn Buraydah, from his father, attributed to the Prophet, with the addition: “If he was righteous, his justice will release him; but if he was wicked, another shackle will be added to his shackle.” Al-Tabarani narrated it in al-Awsat (1/200/1) through two routes from ‘Atiyyah. This is one of them; in the other, it is reported from him: “Buraydah narrated it to me.” ‘Atiyyah is weak.

A point of benefit: When al-Bazzar narrated the aforementioned route of Sa‘id ibn Yasar, he narrated it through Hammad ibn Salamah, from Yahya ibn Sa‘id, from him; and through ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Amr al-Qaysi: Yahya ibn Sa‘id narrated to us, from Sa‘id, from Abu Hurayrah. Al-Bazzar then said: “This is how ‘Ubayd narrated it, whereas the reliable narrators relate it from Yahya ibn Sa‘id, from Sa‘id ibn Yasar, from Abu Hurayrah. That is correct.” I say: There is no error in ‘Ubayd’s narration for it to be deemed erroneous; all that is the case is that he did not