Abu Ahmad ibn Adi al-Jurjani: He narrated many hadiths, and I rarely found anything objectionable in his hadith that went beyond the limit if a trustworthy narrator narrated from him. They have agreed upon his weakness, but nevertheless, his hadith is written down.
Abu al-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi: He weakened him
Abu Hatim ibn Hibban al-Busti: He was extreme in his Shi'ism and a liar in hadith, and he said: Weak
Ahmad ibn Hanbal: He considered him trustworthy
Ahmad ibn Shu'ayb al-Nasa'i: He is not strong
Ahmad ibn Salih al-Jili: Trustworthy
Ibrahim ibn Ya'qub al-Jawzajani: Not trustworthy
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani: Truthful, but he has errors, and he was extreme in his Shi'ism
Al-Daraqutni: Weak
Al-Dhahabi: He weakened him
Salih ibn Muhammad al-Jazara: Shaykh, he was a Shi'a, average
Abd al-Rahman ibn Yusuf ibn Kharash: He is nothing
Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari: Bad methodology is mentioned about him
Muhammad ibn Sa'd Katb al-Waqidi: He considers him weak
Authors of Tahrir Taqrib al-Tahdhib: Weak, no one considered him trustworthy except al-'Ijli, and he often considers weak and unknown narrators from the people of Kufa trustworthy, so where does his truthfulness come from?
Yahya ibn Ma'in: His hadith is not to be written down, and once: His hadith is nothing, and once: He is worth nothing, and once: He is not trustworthy
Ya'qub ibn Sufyan al-Faswi: His hadith is nothing, he was almost a Rafidi