al-Dāraqutnī said: "It is narrated both as marfūʿ and mawqūf, and the mawqūf is more authentic." I said: In Ibn al-Qaṭṭān's unqualified labeling of Ibn Sābiq as weak, there is an evident oversight, as he has no precedent for this except Ibn Maʿīn, while al-ʿAjlī deemed him trustworthy, and Yaʿqūb ibn Shaybah said: He was a truthful, trustworthy shaykh, but not known for precision in ḥadīth. Al-Nasāʾī said: There is no harm in him, and Abū Ḥātim said: His ḥadīth is written but not used as evidence. I say: Thus, his ḥadīth is ḥasan at the very least, because his criticism is unexplained. Moreover, the two shaykhs have used him as evidence. Al-Dhahabī said about him: "He is trustworthy in my view." al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Taqrīb": "Truthful." al-Khaṭīb mentioned from Ibn Abī Shaybah that he mentioned this ḥadīth of Muḥammad ibn Sābiq and said: "If he remembered it, it is a strange ḥadīth." And from ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī, he said: "This is a rejected ḥadīth from Ibrāhīm from ʿAlqamah, and it is only from Abū Wāʾil, not from al-Aʿmash." al-Khaṭīb said: "I said: It was narrated by Layth ibn Abī Sulaym from Zubayd al-Yāmī from Abū Wāʾil from ʿAbd Allāh, except that he stopped it and did not raise it, and it was narrated by Isḥāq ibn Ziyād al-ʿAṭṭār al-Kūfī—who was truthful—about Isrāʾīl."