To deny for Allāh everything which He has denied for Himself in His Book, or which His Messenger denied for Him, along with believing that its fully perfect opposite is confirmed for Allāh – the Most High.
Here is a brief reply:
Shaykh al-Albānī has indicated that this ḥadīth is authentic in a number of works. For example, he declared it ‘ṣaḥīḥ’ in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Jāmiʿ (no. 499). He has also authenticated the ḥadīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Sunan Abū Dāwūd (no.4249) and Ṣaḥīḥ Sunanut-Tirmidthī (no.2724).
Furthermore, al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Mundhirī said in al-Targhīb (no.2389): “It is reported by at-Tirmidthī who graded it as ḥasan.”
Shaykh ʿAbd al Qādir and Shuʿayb al-Arnaʿūt said in their checking to Ibn al-Qayyim’s Zād al-Maʿād (2/p.335-336): “At-Tirmidthī said it is a ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth and it is as he said, and it was authenticated by ibn Hibbān (2375).”
In actuality, the principal chains of transmission recorded by Abū Dāwūd, al-Tirmidhī and Ibn Hibbān do contain a defect. However, this is of course not sufficient to declare the ḥadīth weak because there are in fact other isnāds by which the ḥadīth is established. Obviously, the ḥadīth scholars mentioned above took these supporting isnāds into account when giving their judgement on the ḥadīth. These supporting isnāds can be found as follows:
Ibn Mājah (no.3886) from Abū Hurayrah
Ibn Mājah (no.3885) also from Abū Hurayrah
Al-Bukhārī in al-Adab al-Mufrad (no.1197)
Al-Ḥākim in al-Mustadrak (1/119)
This explains the ruling on this ḥadīth given in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Musnad min Fadaa`ilil-’Amaal (no.1100) where it states: “It is ḥasan due to supporting narrations.”
And al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar said in Natāʾij al-Afkār (1/163): “I have found a witness for the ḥadīth of Anas (i.e the one mentioned by Abū Dāwūd etc.) that strengthens the isnād; however it is mursal.”