It was recorded by Ibn Abi Hatim (2/23/2), Ibn ‘Adi (2/234), al-Tabarani in al-Mu‘jam al-Awsat (2/8; 1/6700, according to my numbering), and Ibn ‘Asakir (18/93–94), through two routes from al-Hajjaj. Ibn Abi Hatim said: “My father said: No one besides al-Hajjaj possessed this hadith, and it was not found in al-Layth’s book. This Hajjaj was a known shaykh.” He said the same in al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil, and Ibn Hibban mentioned him in al-Thiqat (8/202), saying: “His hadith may be considered when he narrates from trustworthy narrators.” Ibn ‘Adi said something similar at the end of his biography: “When he narrates from someone other than Ibn Lahi‘ah, his reports are sound, if Allah Most High wills.”

In al-Mizan and al-Lisan it states: “Ibn Yunus said: ‘His hadith contains rejected narrations.’ Abu Zur‘ah said: ‘His hadith is rejected.’ Ibn ‘Adi considered him acceptable.”

4 – Al-Hasan al-Basri reported, as a hadith of the Prophet, something similar to Ibn Mahran’s hadith from Ibn ‘Abbas. Hammad ibn Salamah also narrated it from Habib ibn al-Shahid, Yunus ibn ‘Ubayd, and Humayd, from him. It was also recorded by al-Hakim, as well as al-Bayhaqi and Ibn ‘Asakir; all three recorded it together with Yusuf ibn Mahran’s hadith from Ibn ‘Abbas. Al-Hakim left it without comment, while al-Dhahabi said in al-Talkhis: “I say: Its chain of transmission is good.”

That is what he said, but scholarly criticism—to the best of my knowledge—does not support it. As for Ibn ‘Abbas’s hadith, this is due to what has already been mentioned concerning the condition of Ibn Mahran and Ibn Jud‘an; and as for al-Hasan’s hadith, it is because it is mursal. Perhaps he meant that it is good in view of the two chains taken together. And Allah knows best.