1740), Ahmad (4/312–313), al-Ruyani likewise (165/2), Abu Ya‘la (3/95/1526), al-Tabarani likewise (2/169/1654–1661), in al-Awsat (1/135/2/2611), and al-Bayhaqi likewise, through several routes from him. Al-Tirmidhi said, “A good, authentic hadith.”

I say: It would indeed be so, if al-Hasan—meaning al-Hasan al-Basri—had explicitly stated that he heard it directly, for he was known for concealment in transmission. Indeed, Abu Hatim said: “His hearing it from him has not been established.” However, al-Hafiz al-Mizzi indicated in his Tahdhib that this is rebutted by al-Hasan’s explicit statement that he heard it from him in an authentic chain which he cited. He was referring thereby to a hadith recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim, whose documentation will come under no. 3013. Thus, the hidden defect is al-Hasan’s use of an ambiguous transmission formula in the hadith under discussion, in every route cited by those whom we have mentioned who recorded it. Perhaps for this reason Muslim recorded it after the hadith of Anas ibn Sirin, as though citing it as a supporting report. And Allah knows best.

Some narrators added to the text in their transmission from al-Hasan: “Take heed, O son of Adam: lest Allah call you to account ...” This addition is found in Abu Awanah, Ibn Hibban, al-Bayhaqi, Ahmad, and al-Tabarani, but not in Muslim. Perhaps Muslim deliberately omitted it, thereby indicating the defect I mentioned above. Moreover, it does not occur in the first, authentic route; it is therefore anomalous, if not rejected. For the hadith has been reported from a number of Companions without this addition, including Abu Hurayrah, as recorded by al-Tirmidhi (2165) and al-Darimi (1/332), and Samurah ibn Jundab, as recorded by Ibn Majah (3946) and Ahmad (5/10).