I say: This is a weak chain of transmission. Its narrators are trustworthy and are among Muslim’s narrators, but it has two defects:

The first is the break between ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Sābiṭ and Jābir. Ibn Maʿīn was asked, “Did ʿAbd al-Raḥmān hear from Jābir?” He replied, “No; it is mursal.”

The second is that al-Rabīʿ ibn Saʿd al-Juʿfī’s status is unknown. Al-Dhahabī said:

“He is hardly known,”

and he cited this hadith for him through the route mentioned above.

As for Ibn Ḥibbān, he included him among the trustworthy narrators in al-Thiqāt, in accordance with his usual practice! This is the basis for al-Haythamī’s statement in his Majmaʿ (10/187):

“Abū Yaʿlā narrated it, and its narrators are narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ, apart from al-Rabīʿ ibn Saʿd—or, it was said, Ibn Saʿīd—and he is trustworthy!”

The hadith has been authentically reported concerning ʿAbd Allāh ibn Salām, in an account narrated by Muslim (7/161) and Ibn Mājah (2/454–455) on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Salām himself.

Then it became more likely to me that the hadith is established—and praise be to Allah—since the two aforementioned defects have been dispelled:

As for the first, I found evidence that ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Sābiṭ heard directly in another hadith, whose authentication has previously been cited under no. 2926. This is further supported by Ibn Abī Ḥātim’s testimony that his chain to Jābir was continuous, for he said in Ibn Sābiṭ’s biography:

“He narrated from ʿUmar by way of a mursal report, and from Jābir with a continuous chain.”

Al-Ḥāfiẓ likewise affirmed this in al-Iṣābah.

As for the other defect, Abū Ḥātim said of al-Rabīʿ ibn Saʿd:

“There is no harm in him.”