Jami' at-Tirmidhi
Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1973
حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ مُوسَى، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، عَنْ مَعْمَرٍ، عَنْ أَيُّوبَ، عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي مُلَيْكَةَ، عَنْ عَائِشَةَ، قَالَتْ مَا كَانَ خُلُقٌ أَبْغَضَ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مِنَ الْكَذِبِ وَلَقَدْ كَانَ الرَّجُلُ يُحَدِّثُ عِنْدَ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِالْكِذْبَةِ فَمَا يَزَالُ فِي نَفْسِهِ حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ أَنَّهُ قَدْ أَحْدَثَ مِنْهَا تَوْبَةً . قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ .
Unreviewed translation. All hadiths in this collection are available in five languages. Titles and introductions may remain in Arabic.
Yahya ibn Musa narrated to us: ‘Abd al-Razzaq narrated to us, from Ma‘mar, from Ayyub, from Ibn Abi Mulaykah, from ‘A’ishah, who said: “No trait was more hateful to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ than lying. A man would tell a lie in the Prophet’s presence, and it would remain with him until he knew that the man had repented of it.”
Abu ‘Isa said: This hadith is hasan.
Notes and open questions — unreviewed
The Arabic says the lie remained ‘in his own mind’ until he knew that repentance had occurred; the referent is contextually understood as the Prophet ﷺ, while the repentant person is the man who lied.
قَالَتْ مَا كَانَ خُلُقٌ أَبْغَضَ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مِنَ الْكَذِبِ وَلَقَدْ كَانَ الرَّجُلُ يُحَدِّثُ عِنْدَ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِالْكِذْبَةِ فَمَا يَزَالُ فِي نَفْسِهِ حَتَّى يَعْلَمَ أَنَّهُ قَدْ أَحْدَثَ مِنْهَا تَوْبَةً .
The phrase فما يزال في نفسه can be rendered as the lie remaining in the Prophet’s mind until he knew the speaker had repented; the witness interprets it as him not being content.
Should the phrase remain as ‘the lie would remain with him’ rather than ‘he would not be content’?
حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ مُوسَى،
The English witness omits the chain from Yahya ibn Musa through ‘A’ishah.
Should the complete isnad be retained?
قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ .
The Arabic gives a hasan grade absent from the English witness.
Should Abu ‘Isa’s grade be included?