Jami' at-Tirmidhi

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2132

Arabic hadith text

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ أَبِي عَدِيٍّ، عَنْ حُسَيْنٍ الْمُعَلِّمِ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ شُعَيْبٍ، حَدَّثَنِي طَاوُسٌ، عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، وَابْنِ، عَبَّاسٍ يَرْفَعَانِ الْحَدِيثَ قَالَ ‏ "‏ لاَ يَحِلُّ لِلرَّجُلِ أَنْ يُعْطِيَ عَطِيَّةً ثُمَّ يَرْجِعَ فِيهَا إِلاَّ الْوَالِدَ فِيمَا يُعْطِي وَلَدَهُ وَمَثَلُ الَّذِي يُعْطِي الْعَطِيَّةَ ثُمَّ يَرْجِعُ فِيهَا كَمَثَلِ الْكَلْبِ أَكَلَ حَتَّى إِذَا شَبِعَ قَاءَ ثُمَّ عَادَ فِي قَيْئِهِ ‏" ‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ ‏.‏ قَالَ الشَّافِعِيُّ لاَ يَحِلُّ لِمَنْ وَهَبَ هِبَةً أَنْ يَرْجِعَ فِيهَا إِلاَّ الْوَالِدَ فَلَهُ أَنْ يَرْجِعَ فِيمَا أَعْطَى وَلَدَهُ ‏.‏ وَاحْتَجَّ بِهَذَا الْحَدِيثِ ‏.

Translation

Unreviewed translation. All hadiths in this collection are available in five languages. Titles and introductions may remain in Arabic.

Muhammad ibn Bashshar narrated to us: Ibn Abi ‘Adi narrated to us, from Husayn al-Mu‘allim, from ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb, who said: Tawus related to me, from Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn ‘Abbas, who attributed the hadith to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): ‘It is not lawful for a man to give a gift and then take it back, except a father regarding what he has given his child. The likeness of one who gives a gift and then takes it back is that of a dog that eats until it is full, vomits, and then returns to its vomit.’ Abu ‘Isa said: This is a hasan sahih hadith. Al-Shafi‘i said, ‘It is not lawful for someone who gives a gift to take it back, except a father; he may take back what he gave his child.’ He cited this hadith as evidence.

Notes and open questions — unreviewed
  • The report attributes the ruling and its use as evidence to al-Shafi‘i; the exception specified is a father taking back what he gave his child.

  • ‏ قَالَ الشَّافِعِيُّ لاَ يَحِلُّ لِمَنْ وَهَبَ هِبَةً أَنْ يَرْجِعَ فِيهَا إِلاَّ الْوَالِدَ فَلَهُ أَنْ يَرْجِعَ فِيمَا أَعْطَى وَلَدَهُ ‏.

    The English witness preserves the substance, but the Arabic explicitly attributes the legal statement to al-Shafi‘i and then separately says he cited the hadith as evidence.

    Preserve both the attribution to al-Shafi‘i and the explicit evidentiary attribution.