(1/145), al-Ḥākim (1/167), and from him al-Bayhaqī (1/90), and Aḥmad (5/80) from Qatādah, from al-Ḥasan, from Ḥuḍayn ibn al-Mundhir Abū Sāsān, from al-Muhājir ibn Qunfudh. "that he came to the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) while he was urinating, and greeted him, but he did not respond until he performed ablution, then he apologized to him and said..." and he mentioned it. This text is not found in al-Nasāʾī and al-Dārimī. Al-Ḥākim said: "Authentic according to the criteria of the two Shaykhs," and al-Dhahabī agreed with him. He said this, even though he stated in "al-Mīzān": "Al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī was known for much tadlīs. If he narrated a ḥadīth saying: 'from so-and-so,' his argument was weakened, especially from those it was said he did not hear from, like Abū Hurayrah and the like, so they considered what he narrated from Abū Hurayrah as part of the disconnected." However, it appears that the intended tadlīs is only from his narrations from the Companions and not others, because the ḥāfiẓ in "al-Tahdhīb" frequently mentioned the reports from scholars about his narrations from those he did not meet, and all of them were Companions. They did not mention a single follower whom al-Ḥasan narrated from without meeting him, and this is supported by the consensus of all scholars on accepting al-Ḥasan's narrations from other followers, to the extent that I do not recall anyone criticizing a ḥadīth from his narrations from a follower without explicitly stating he heard it from him. This is what appears to me in this context. And Allāh, the Exalted, knows best. Moreover, this ḥadīth has a corroborating narration from Ibn ʿUmar with Abū Dāwūd (1/54-55) and al-Ṭayālisī (no. 1851) from Muḥammad Thābit al-ʿAbdī, from Nāfiʿ, from Ibn ʿUmar with a similar meaning. And this isnād is good for supporting evidence, except that it contains something objectionable that was criticized regarding wiping