I said: This is a weak isnād, its men are reliable according to Muslim, but it has two defects: the first is the disconnection between ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Sābiṭ and Jābir; Ibn Maʿīn was asked: Did ʿAbd al-Raḥmān hear from Jābir? He said: "No, it is mursal." The second is the unknown status of al-Rabīʿ ibn Saʿd al-Juʿfī, al-Dhahabī said: "He is hardly known," and he cited this ḥadīth from the mentioned path. As for Ibn Ḥibbān, he mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt" according to his principle! This is the basis of al-Haythamī's statement in "Majmaʿ" (10/187): "It was narrated by Abū Yaʿlá, and its men are the men of 'al-Ṣaḥīḥ', except for al-Rabīʿ ibn Saʿd; it was said: Ibn Saʿīd, and he is trustworthy!" The ḥadīth has been authenticated concerning ʿAbd Allāh ibn Salām in a story narrated by Muslim (7/161) and Ibn Mājah (2/454-455) from the ḥadīth of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Salām himself. Then it became more likely to me that the ḥadīth is established—and all praise is due to Allāh—by the resolution of the two mentioned defects: As for the first, I found the hearing of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Sābiṭ in another ḥadīth, its takhrīj has preceded under number (2926), and it was further supported by the testimony of Ibn Abī Ḥātim regarding its connection by saying in the biography of Ibn Sābiṭ: "He narrated from ʿUmar as mursal, and from Jābir as connected." Likewise, it was affirmed by al-Ḥāfiẓ in "al-Iṣābah." As for the other, it is by the statement of Abū Ḥātim regarding al-Rabīʿ ibn Saʿd: "There is no harm in him."