“It was reported by Abu Ya'la, and its narrators are those of the Sahih, apart from Abd al-Rahman ibn Mas'ud (!), who is trustworthy.”

I say: It also has another chain, from Abu Hurayrah alone.

Al-Tabarani reported it in al-Mu'jam al-Saghir (p. 117), and al-Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad, through Dawud ibn Sulayman al-Khurasani: Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak related to us, from Sa'id ibn Abi Arubah, from Qatadah, from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, from him.

Al-Tabarani said:

“Dawud ibn Sulayman is alone in reporting it, and he is an acceptable shaykh.”

I say: This is a valuable point, for al-Tabarani’s declaration of the reliability of this Khurasani is not mentioned in works on narrator evaluation such as al-Mizan, al-Lisan, and others. Rather, the only statement found in the first two is that al-Azdi said: “Very weak.”

I say: The remaining narrators in the chain are trustworthy narrators of the Six canonical collections. Thus, in my view, it is an acceptable corroborating report. And Allah knows best.