I say: Al-Haythamī likewise unequivocally declared him trustworthy, as will follow. This is part of his leniency, even though others had preceded him in that judgment. Yet the detailed criticism found in the statements of Ibn Ḥibbān and others should not be overlooked. Thus, one should avoid those of his reports in which he may be feared to have erred, or select those that are free of his errors—as is the case here. For he was corroborated in it: Zayd ibn Abī Anīsah narrated it at length as well, from al-Minhal ibn ʿAmr, with the wording cited in al-Dālānī’s narration.

It was recorded by ʿAbd Allāh ibn Aḥmad in al-Sunnah (2/520–524, Dār Ibn al-Qayyim), and also by al-Ṭabarānī through him and two other hadith masters—all three of them—as well as by al-Bayhaqī in al-Baʿth (239/479), all from Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUbayd ibn Abī Karīmah al-Ḥarrānī, who said: Muḥammad ibn Salamah al-Ḥarrānī narrated to us, from Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥīm, from Zayd ibn Abī Anīsah, with it.

I say: This is an authentic chain of transmission. All its narrators are trustworthy and are among Muslim’s narrators, except Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUbayd al-Ḥarrānī. He is trustworthy, as al-Dhahabī stated in al-Kāshif and al-Ḥāfiẓ in al-Taqrīb; the latter added: “He sometimes relates odd reports.”

Al-Mundhirī said in al-Targhīb (4/198 and 248):

“ Ibn Abī al-Dunyā and al-Ṭabarānī narrated it through several chains, one of which is authentic. Al-Ḥākim said: ‘Its chain of transmission is authentic.’”

Ibn al-Qayyim said in Ḥādī al-Arwāḥ ilā Bilād al-Afrāḥ (2/94, al-Kurdī edition):

“This is an important, good hadith ...”

As for al-Haythamī, he said (10/343):

“Al-Ṭabarānī narrated it in its entirety through several chains; the narrators of one of them are narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ, apart from Abū Khālid al-Dālānī, who is trustworthy!”