Al-Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿIrāqī states in Takhrīj al-Iḥyāʾ (1/50, Islāmiyyah ed.):
“Al-Ṭabarānī transmitted it from Ibn Masʿūd with a ḥasan isnād.”
He also has another route from Ibn Masʿūd, reported by al-Lālakāʾī in Sharḥ Uṣūl al-Sunnah (239/1 of al-Kawākib 576) and by Ibn ʿAsākir (14/155/2), through al-Naḍr Abū Qaḥdham, from Abū Qilābah, from Ibn Masʿūd, as a Prophetic narration.
This chain is weak and suffers from two defects:
-
The link between Abū Qilābah—whose name is ʿAbd Allāh ibn Zayd al-Jarmī—and Ibn Masʿūd is broken. Roughly 75 years separate their deaths, and the scholars note that he never heard from several Companions, among them ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, who passed away eight years after Ibn Masʿūd.
-
Al-Naḍr Abū Qaḥdham, whose name is Ibn Maʿbad, is extremely weak. Ibn Maʿīn said, “He is nothing”; Abū Ḥātim said, “One may write down his ḥadith”; and al-Nasāʾī said, “He is not reliable.”
As for the ḥadith of Thawbān, it was produced by Abū Ṭāhir al-Ziyādī in Thalāthah Majālis min al-Amālī (191/2) and by al-Ṭabarānī in al-Kabīr (1/71/2) through Yazīd ibn Rabīʿah, who said, “I heard Abū al-Ashʿath al-Ṣanʿānī relate it from Thawbān,” as a Prophetic report.
I say: this chain is exceedingly weak. Yazīd ibn Rabīʿah, the Raḥabī of Damascus, is abandoned, as declared by al-Nasāʾī and al-ʿUqaylī.