Tirmidhi

Commentary: 1؎ :
From this, the Hanafis and Malikis have deduced that ‘umrah is not obligatory,
but this hadith is weak and not suitable for use as evidence.
Note:

(In the chain, Hajjaj ibn Arta’ah is known for excessive irsal (omission) and tadlis (concealment of the transmitter)).

581 Lexical Explanation:
«وَالرَّاجِحُ وَقْفُهُ» The preferred opinion is that this narration is mawquf and it is the statement of Jabir radi Allahu anhu. A Bedouin asked him this question and he gave this answer. And this is an issue in which there is room for ijtihad (independent juristic reasoning). [سبل السلام]
Attributing it to the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam is a mistake of the narrator, and along with this, its chain of transmission is also weak and not suitable as evidence. The details of this can be seen in Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi (vol. 2, p. 113).
«مِنْ وَجْهٍ آخَرَ ضِعِفٍ» It is also narrated through another weak chain, because it is narrated from Abdullah ibn Lahi‘ah from Ata from Jabir, and Ibn Lahi‘ah is weak in this. Imam Ibn ‘Adi rahimahullah has said that this is not preserved from Ata. Imam Daraqutni rahimahullah has narrated this same narration from Zayd ibn Thabit radi Allahu anhu as marfu‘, but in it Isma‘il ibn Muslim al-Makki is weak, and Ibn Sirin did not hear from Zayd radi Allahu anhu. And Imam Bayhaqi rahimahullah has narrated it from Ibn Sirin as mawquf through another chain, and its chain is more authentic than the previous one. [سبل السلام]
Due to the difference in evidences regarding ‘umrah, there is a difference of opinion about its obligation or non-obligation. The preferred opinion is that it is obligatory. ‘Umar, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbas radi Allahu anhum, Imam Shafi‘i, Imam Ahmad, and Imam Bukhari rahimahumullah and others hold this view.