Mālik called Ṣāliḥ mawlā al-Tawʾamah “not trustworthy.” As al-Nawawī records, Yaḥyā b. Maʿīn described him as “trustworthy, an authority” but explained that Mālik and Sufyān al-Thawrī encountered him after his faculties deteriorated; Ibn Abī Dhiʾb heard him earlier. Sound early transmission and disputed reports from a period of confusion must not automatically receive the same grade.
Ibn ʿAdī made room for the earlier routes of Ibn Abī Dhiʾb, Ibn Jurayj and Ziyād b. Saʿd. Abū Zurʿah called Ṣāliḥ weak, and Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī said he was not strong. Ibn Ḥibbān expressed the more cautious view that late and early material had become mixed. These are specific, distinct evaluations, not a single unanimous verdict.
For example, a route through Ibn Abī Dhiʾb’s early hearing cannot automatically be equated with a pupil’s later hearing merely because both contain “from Ṣāliḥ.” Establish the pupil, time of hearing and supporting routes before grading either report.