ibn Abī Masʿūd, and noted that his kunyah was Abū Isḥāq, al-Wāqidī’s secretary. He said:

“He narrated from ʿAbbād ibn al-ʿAwwām, ʿAbd Allāh ibn Idrīs, and Khalaf ibn Khalīfah al-Ashjaʿī. Ibrāhīm ibn ʿAbd al-Razzāq, ʿAbbās al-Dūrī, and ʿAbd al-Karīm ibn al-Haytham al-ʿĀqūlī narrated from him.”

This ʿAbd al-Karīm was trustworthy and firmly reliable, as stated in al-Tārīkh (6/78).

He then related, through his chain from Ibn al-Sakan: “Ismāʿīl ibn Abī Masʿūd was a trustworthy Baghdadi.”

I say: This is a useful addition to al-Lisān, for it mentioned his accreditation only from Ibn Ḥibbān. Ibn Ḥibbān included him in the fourth generation of al-Thiqāt (8/95), saying:

“Abū Shaybah ibn Abī Bakr ibn Abī Shaybah and ʿUthmān ibn Khurrazādh al-Anṭākī narrated from him. He narrated uncommon reports.”

I say: Four others also narrated from him, three of whom were trustworthy. Al-Khaṭīb mentioned two of them, and the third was Ibn Saʿd, as you can see. Thus, he is trustworthy, Allah willing, as Ibn Ḥibbān and Ibn al-Sakan said.

Moreover, he was corroborated by ʿAmr ibn Muḥammad al-ʿAnqazī in Sunan al-Nasāʾī; al-Ṭabarānī also transmitted it from him in al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr (12/11), as did Abū Nuʿaym in Maʿrifat al-Ṣaḥābah (1/270/1). Dāwūd ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān likewise transmitted it with al-Bazzār (no. 2699). Al-Haythamī did not cite its wording, but mentioned it after the hadith under discussion, then said:

“I say: He then mentioned something similar to it.”

I say: Its chain of transmission is authentic according to the criteria of al-Bukhārī and Muslim.

Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr cited its wording in his history, al-Bidāyah (4/128), adding at its end: