The Yazid of today must be repelled the same way. Now, this chain of transmission does not need an analysis except for the biography of Malik al-Juhani, for the biographies of Muhammad bin Isma’il and Salih bin ‘Uqba have already been presented. This is the first Ziarat of Ashura and the better known ziarat which is recited.
However, the two other reports both state the text of the salutation. Thus what Muhaqqiq al-Tustari assumed is incorrect. The reward of each major and minor pilgrimage and military expedition will be akin to having undertaken them with the Prophet of Allah and the Rightly Guided Imams.” The narrator said: “May I be ransomed for you, but what about him who lives in far and distant lands and is unable to travel there (i.e. Just this does not establish his trustworthiness, you can also ask a trustworthy person about something and say to him: Your words are against the words of Zayd from the people, and Zayd is unknown to you, there is no evidence to his weakness nor his trustworthiness, and he answers you that he heard it from the Imam, so what evidence is there in this to establish trustworthiness [of Zayd]? The scholars of the science of Rijal such as Seyyid Bahr al-‘Ulum al-Tabatabai (d 1212 A.H. / 1797 A.D.) have relied on this general rule. Shaykh Saduq narrates from him with appreciation and satisfaction, and the teachers do not need further verification.

Shaykh Tusi did not elucidate his reliability; rather other evidences prove his trustworthiness. Whilst those who narrate from him include: Muhammad bin al-Husayn bin Abi al-Khattab and his son (i.e.
Therefore whether we invoke curse on them, or not they will always be distanced from the mercy of Allah (SwT), due to the seeds of mischief that they had sown in this world. These include: 1) ‘Ali bin al-Hasan bin al-Fadhdhal 2) Sa’d bin ‘Abdillah al-Qummi 3) Hamid bin Ziyad: Shaykh Tusi says in his Fihrist that: Hamid transmits many Usul from Muhammad bin Khalid al-Tayalisi (who is) also known by the epithet of Abu ‘Abdillah. But the possibility of there being a ziyara for the 10th day, is already of very high probability even without this consensus, because it is unlikely that the Imams did not visit him on this sacred day.But if this [usage of the consensus] is intended to infer this specific narration of the Ziyara, then it is on the premise that they acted on this narration, and establishing that [they acted on it] is difficult, and if someone accepts [this assumption], it will be a consensus based on observation, in which they relied on the existence of narrations [as proving that the scholars acted on it], so it has no hujjiyah [probative force], and some comments related to this point will come in our final words, God willing. As for Muhammad bin Khalid al-Tayalisi, Shaykh Tusi has considered him in his Rijal to be one of the companions of al-Kadhim (a.s.). Except for someone who is on the methodology we mentioned earlier [Akhbari], which the great scholar has practiced here… and our comments on this have been provided earlier.

Worshippers through Awareness (al-’Ubbad), Chapter 8: Upon you all I invoke the peace of Allah forever, as long as I ‌live and the night and day subsist,], You will need to follow the instructions in that message in order to gain full access to the site.

Nor is this accepted by Sayed al-Khoei, who considered hundreds of narrators to be unknown, regardless of them being mentioned in the books of Shaykh al-Najashi and Shaykh al-Tusi [without explicit authentication], even though al-Tusi and al-Najashi weakened dozens of people in these two books.Yes, the inference that the narrator is an Imami Shi’a is perhaps conceivable, but establishing his trustworthiness because of merely mentioning his name among the names of the Shiite authors is no argument at all, especially since the books of al-Tusi and al-Najashi were authored to show the names of the authors and their works, they did not attempt to always show the conditions of a narrator.Unless by general commendation it is meant that he is an Imami, and this does not benefit us here, as our purpose is to prove the reliability of his narrating.In addition, being among those narrated from by some great narrators, such as Ibn Bazee’, is not evidence of his trustworthiness according to most of the scholars, including Sayed al-Khoei and others, because the narrators sometimes narrate for the sake of the collection of the hadith legacy/herritage and not [selectively narrating] depending on their beliefs, and it was alluded to by Ibn Idris Al-Hilli in the book al-Sarair while commenting on the book al-Nihaya by al-Tusi in multiple places.But in any case, Salih bin ‘Uqba is considered trustworthy according to Sayed al-Khoei because of his presence in the chains of Tafsir al-Qummi.