Aḥmad (4/312/313), al-Rūyānī also (165/2), Abū Yaʿlá (3/95/1526), and al-Ṭabarānī also (2/169/1654-1661) in "al-Awsaṭ" (1/135/2/2611), and al-Bayhaqī also through various chains from him, and al-Tirmidhī said: "A ḥadīth that is ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ." I said: it is so if al-Ḥasan—meaning al-Baṣrī—had explicitly stated the transmission, for he is known for tadlīs, and Abū Ḥātim even said: "It is not confirmed that he heard from him." However, al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Mizzī indicated in "Tahdhīb" to refute that by mentioning his explicit hearing from him in a sound isnād he cited, referring to a ḥadīth narrated by the two Shaykhs, and its extraction will come under number (3013), so the defect is then his ʿanʿanah in the ḥadīth of the translation according to all those we mentioned who extracted it. Perhaps for this reason, Muslim included it immediately after the ḥadīth of Anas ibn Sīrīn, as if he mentioned it as corroboration. And Allāh knows best. Some have added in its text from his narration from al-Ḥasan: "So look, O son of Adam! Do not let it seek you..." It is with Abū ʿAwānah, Ibn Ḥibbān, al-Bayhaqī, Aḥmad, and al-Ṭabarānī but not with Muslim, and perhaps he deliberately did not mention it as a hint to what I mentioned earlier about the defect, with its absence in the first sound path, so it is anomalous if not denounced, for the ḥadīth came from a group of Companions without this addition, among them: Abū Hurayrah with al-Tirmidhī (2165) and al-Dārimī (1/332). And Samurah ibn Jundub with Ibn Mājah (3946) and Aḥmad (5/10)