This chain of transmission consists of trustworthy narrators used by both al-Bukhārī and Muslim. Only two well-known matters mentioned in al-Sabīʿī’s biographical entry prevent me from definitively declaring it authentic:

The first is his confusion in his later years. However, we are safe from this issue here because al-Thawrī narrated from him; it is well known that he narrated from him before that confusion, and his narration from him is found in both Ṣaḥīḥ collections. Salām ibn Sulaym also corroborated him, as mentioned above, and both compilers likewise narrated reports from al-Sabīʿī through him in their Ṣaḥīḥ collections.

The other is his use of an ambiguous “from” transmission formula; he was accused of concealment in transmission. In my view, however, this objection does not apply here, for the following reasons:

First, they mentioned in al-Sabīʿī’s biography that he narrated from Ibn ʿUmar. Among those who mentioned this was Ibn Abī Ḥātim, reporting from his father. Had al-Sabīʿī intended concealment in transmission, he would have omitted Mujāhid from between them and narrated it directly from Ibn ʿUmar. Had he done so, the description of concealment in transmission would indeed apply to him here. Ibn Abī Ḥātim alluded to this in his narration from his father in al-Marāsīl (p. 94), who said:

“Abū Isḥāq did not hear from Ibn ʿUmar; he merely saw him.”

Second, he narrated in al-Jarḥ, with an authentic chain of transmission, from al-Ṭayālisī, who said:

“A man said to Shuʿbah, ‘Did Abū Isḥāq hear from Mujāhid?’ He replied, ‘What need did he have of Mujāhid?! He was stronger in hadith than Mujāhid, al-Ḥasan, and Ibn Sīrīn.’”

I say: Thus Shuʿbah considered Abū Isḥāq too eminent to narrate from Mujāhid, since in his view Abū Isḥāq was greater than him. Nevertheless, when he needed his hadith, he narrated it from him, explicitly affirmed it, and did not conceal it in transmission. This dispels the suspicion of concealment in transmission from him here.