al-Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿIrāqī said in "Takhrīj al-Iḥyāʾ" (1/50, Islamic Culture Edition): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī from the ḥadīth of Ibn Masʿūd with a good isnād." There is another route for it from Ibn Masʿūd, narrated by al-Lālakāʾī in "Sharḥ Uṣūl al-Sunnah" (239/1 from "al-Kawākib" 576) and by Ibn ʿAsākir (14/155/2) from al-Naḍr Abū Qaḥdham from Abū Qilābah from Ibn Masʿūd as marfūʿ. This isnād is weak and has two defects: the first is the disconnection between Abū Qilābah—whose name is ʿAbd Allāh ibn Zayd al-Jarmī—and Ibn Masʿūd, as there are about 75 years between their deaths. It is mentioned that he did not hear from a group of Companions, among them ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, who died eight years after Ibn Masʿūd. The second defect is al-Naḍr Abū Qaḥdham, who is Ibn Maʿbad, and he is very weak. Ibn Maʿīn said: "He is nothing," Abū Ḥātim said: "His ḥadīth is written," and al-Nasāʾī said: "He is not trustworthy." As for the ḥadīth of Thawbān, it was extracted by Abū Ṭāhir al-Ziyādī in "Three Sessions from al-Amālī" (191/2) and by al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Kabīr" (1/71/2) from Yazīd ibn Rabīʿah, who said: I heard Abū al-Ashʿath al-Ṣanʿānī narrating from Thawbān as marfūʿ. I say, this isnād is very weak. Yazīd ibn Rabīʿah is al-Raḥbī al-Dimashqī and he is abandoned, as stated by al-Nasāʾī and al-ʿUqaylī