This source-tracing and critical examination makes clear to you the error in al-Mundhirī’s statement in al-Targhīb (3/200):

“Abū Yaʿlā narrated it with a good chain of transmission.”

And al-Haythamī’s statement in al-Majmaʿ (4/298–299):

“Abū Yaʿlā, al-Ṭabarānī in al-Kabīr, and al-Bazzār narrated it. The narrators in Abū Yaʿlā’s chain are narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ, apart from ʿUthmān (1) ibn al-Yamān, who is trustworthy.”

That is what he said. Yet I have not found it in al-Ṭabarānī’s al-Kabīr, neither in the Musnad of ʿUmar nor in the Musnad of Khuzaymah ibn Thābit.

Moreover, despite his weakness, Zumʿah ibn Ṣāliḥ was not relied upon in the Ṣaḥīḥ—neither in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī nor in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Muslim only narrated from him alongside another narrator. Nevertheless, the hadith is authentic by virtue of its corroborating reports.

Among them is the report of Jābir ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Anṣārī, attributed to the Prophet, with similar wording.

It was narrated by al-Ṭaḥāwī (2/26) and al-Dāraquṭnī in his Sunan (3/288/160), through the route of al-Ḥasan ibn ʿArafah: Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh narrated to us, from Suhayl ibn Abī Ṣāliḥ, from Muḥammad ibn al-Munkadir, from him.

I say: The narrators of this chain are trustworthy, so it is authentic, were it not for the fact that Ibn ʿAyyāsh is weak when narrating from non-Syrians—and this is one such case.

Al-Ḍaḥḥāk ibn ʿUthmān also corroborated him, from Muḥammad ibn al-Munkadir, in an abbreviated form, with the wording:

(1) The original reads: “Yaʿlā”! This is a typographical error.