The Prophet ﷺ did not take ill omens from anything. Whenever he sent out an official, he would ask about his name. If the name pleased him, he would be glad and the joy of it would show on his face. If he disliked the name, the displeasure of it would show on his face. And whenever he entered a town, he would ask about its name. If its name pleased him, he would be glad and the joy of it would show on his face. If he disliked its name, the displeasure of it would show on his face.
أن النبي ﷺ كان لا يتطير من شيء، وكان إذا بعث عاملا سأل عن اسمه، فإذا أعجبه اسمه فرح به ورئي بشر ذلك في وجهه، وإن كره اسمه رئي كراهية ذلك في وجهه، وإذا دخل قرية سأل عن اسمها فإن أعجبه اسمها فرح ورثي بشر ذلك وجهه، وإن كره اسمها رئي كراهية ذلك في وجهه.
Reported by Abu Dawud (3920), Nasai in Kubra (8771), Ahmad (22946), and Ibn Hibban (5827), all of them via Hisham (that is, Dastawai), from Qatada, from Abdullah bin Burayda, from his father, who related it. The wording given is Abu Dawud's.Bazzar reported it in Kashf Astar (1985) with this same chain, and in it he said, "When you send me a messenger, send one of good appearance and good name." Its chain of transmission is sahih, and Ibn Hajar also graded it sahih in Mukhtasar Zawaid Bazzar (1700).In the chain is Qatada, and although he has been described as practicing tadlis, the scholars tolerated his tadlis because of its rarity. This is why Ibn Hajar graded his hadith sahih, and in Taqrib he was content to describe him simply as "trustworthy and firmly reliable," without mentioning the description of tadlis regarding him. There are examples of his narrations in the Sahihayn.However, Bukhari said in Tarikh al-Kabir (4/12), "It is not known that Qatada heard directly from Ibn Burayda." And Tirmidhi said in his Sunan (982), regarding the hadith "The believer dies with sweat on his brow," he said, this is a hasan hadith, and some scholars of hadith said, we do not know of Qatada having heard directly from Abdullah bin Burayda.What appears evident from Tirmidhi's statement is that he was not satisfied with this claim. As for Bukhari's statement, it should be understood in light of his own position requiring proof of an actual meeting, whereas the majority hold that mere contemporaneity suffices for this purpose, so long as the narrator is not one who practices tadlis.