Abu Ahmad ibn Adi al-Jurjani: He has hadiths that are not corroborated, and he has good individual hadiths, and he is much better than Sulaiman ibn Arqam
Abu Bakr al-Bazzar: There is nothing wrong with him
Abu Hatim al-Razi: He is not trustworthy
Abu Hatim ibn Hibban al-Busti: An excessive Rafidi (Shia), and he distorts narrations
Abu Dawud al-Sijistani: He was a Shia
Abu Zur'a al-Razi: He is not that (reliable)
Abu Abd Allah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi: He was criticized for his extremism in Shi'ism and his poor memory
Ahmad ibn Hanbal: Trustworthy, and once: I do not see anything wrong with him, but he was excessive in his Shi'ism
Ahmad ibn Shu'ayb al-Nasa'i: Weak, and once: Poor memory, a Shia, and once: Not strong
Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani: Poor memory, a Shia
Ali ibn al-Madini: He was not strong, but he was righteous
Authors of Tahdhib al-Tahdhib: Weak, I do not know anyone who has a good opinion of him except Ahmad, despite their agreement on his extremism in Shi'ism
Yahya ibn Ma'in: From the narration of al-'Abbas who said: Weak, and once: He is nothing