The History (6/199, 12/47), through Ḥammād ibn Salamah from him.

I say: This chain is acceptable as supporting corroboration. Its narrators are trustworthy and are narrators of Muslim, apart from Ibn Judʿān, who is weak due to his poor retention; though some grade his hadith as good.

The third route is through Sulaymān al-Taymī from him.

Abū Nuʿaym recorded it (8/172–173): “Ṭalḥah ibn Aḥmad ibn al-Ḥasan al-ʿAwfī narrated to us: Muḥammad ibn ʿUlwayh al-Miṣṣīṣī narrated to us: Yūsuf ibn Saʿīd ibn Muslim narrated to us: ʿAbd Allāh ibn Mūsā narrated to us: Ibn al-Mubārak narrated to us from Sulaymān al-Taymī.”

He said: “It is well-known among the narrations of Anas; several narrated it from him, while Sulaymān’s narration is transmitted by at least two chains.”

I say: Its narrators are trustworthy and are narrators of both Shaykhs, apart from Yūsuf ibn Saʿīd ibn Muslim. He was a trustworthy memorizer and one of al-Nasāʾī’s teachers, but I was unable to identify the two narrators below him.

The fourth route is through Khālid ibn Salamah from him. Al-Wāḥidī recorded it in The Intermediate Exegesis (1/15/1), through Ṣāliḥ ibn Aḥmad al-Harawī: Abū Bujayr Muḥammad ibn Jābir narrated to us: ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Muḥammad al-Muḥāribī narrated to us: Sufyān narrated to us from him.

I say: The narrators of this chain are trustworthy and well known, apart from this al-Harawī, concerning whom Abū Aḥmad al-Ḥākim said: “There is cause for concern about him.”

I say: In sum, the hadith is, beyond doubt, authentic through the entirety of these routes. All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds.