I say: Most of these are narrators whose hadiths the scholars ordinarily deem good. The same, then, should apply to one of whom it is said, “He is a shaykh.” This is supported by the fact that al-Hafiz al-Mundhiri deemed the chain of this shaykh’s hadith to be good, stating immediately afterward in al-Targhib (3/239): “Al-Bazzar and Abu Ya‘la transmitted it with a good chain.”

Al-Haythami also declared him trustworthy, saying in al-Majma‘ (8/173): “Al-Bazzar and Abu Ya‘la transmitted it. The narrators in Abu Ya‘la’s chain are narrators of the Sahih, apart from Maymun ibn Ajlan, and he is trustworthy.” Perhaps his explicit declaration of Maymun’s trustworthiness was based on Ibn Hibban’s accreditation of him, for Ibn Hibban included him in al-Thiqat, as may be inferred from al-Ta‘jil—although I did not find him in the Zahiri manuscript of al-Thiqat, which has a lacuna. Al-Thiqat was later printed, and he was included in it (7/473), with Mahbub ibn al-Hasan and the people of Basra reported as narrating from him. Both men are included in al-Mizan and al-Lisan, so consult them.

Isma‘il ibn ‘Abd al-Malik al-Zaybaqi also narrated from this shaykh in al-Diya’, as did Muhammad ibn Bakr, though he called him Maymun al-Mar’i. Yet al-Tahdhib mentions, among narrators of this generation: “Maymun ibn Siyah al-Mar’i al-Basri; and it is said that he was the son of Maymun ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Safwan ibn Qudamah.” This Ibn Siyah is one of Maymun ibn Ajlan’s shaykhs, as is stated in both of their biographies in al-Tarikh and al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil; and, as you can see, he is his shaykh in this chain of transmission. They distinguished between the two, so Maymun ibn Ajlan is not al-Mar’i. It is possible, however, that he shared this nisbah with him. And Allah knows best.