I say: Its narrators are trustworthy and are among Muslim’s narrators, except that Ibn Jawwāb has been subject to criticism. Ibn Maʿīn said, “Trustworthy,” though on another occasion he said, “He is not particularly strong.”

His shaykh, ʿAmmār, is stronger than he is. Al-Nasāʾī and al-Bazzār said of him, “There is nothing objectionable about him.”

He was contradicted in its chain of transmission by three trustworthy transmitters among the students of Abū Isḥāq—namely, al-Sabīʿī:

First: Sufyān al-Thawrī. ʿAbd al-Razzāq said in al-Muṣannaf (3/59/4790): “Al-Thawrī informed us, from Abū Isḥāq, from Mujāhid, with it,” but without the additional wording—like al-Nasāʾī’s narration, likewise without the additional wording.

Through ʿAbd al-Razzāq’s route, it was recorded by Aḥmad (2/35) and al-Ṭabarānī in al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr (12/414/13527).

Then Aḥmad said (2/94): “Abū Aḥmad al-Zubayrī narrated to us: Sufyān narrated to us with it.”

Al-Tirmidhī (2/84/417) and Ibn Mājah (1149) also recorded it through other routes from Abū Aḥmad al-Zubayrī. Al-Tirmidhī said:

“A good hadith. We know it from the hadith of al-Thawrī, from Abū Isḥāq, only through the hadith of Abū Aḥmad. What is well known among the people is the hadith of Isrāʾīl, from Abū Isḥāq. This hadith has also been narrated from Abū Aḥmad, from Isrāʾīl.”