that his report is to be rejected outright. A second opinion maintains that he may be cited so long as he is not one of those who deem it permissible to lie in order to champion his doctrine or its adherents. It is also transmitted from al-Shāfiʿī—and another opinion states—that his narration is accepted provided he is not an active propagandist for his innovation; if he is a propagandist, it is rejected. This is the clearest and most equitable view, and it is the position of many—indeed, most—scholars. The first opinion is weakened by the fact that the two authors of the Ṣaḥīḥs and others relied upon numerous innovators who were not propagandists.

Eighth: The report of one who has repented from manifest sin is accepted—except in the case of a man who has lied about the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him. Such a person is never to be accepted, even if the formal pathway of his transmission appears sound. So stated Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, al-Ḥumaydī (the teacher of al-Bukhārī), and al-Ṣayrafī the Shāfiʿī. Al-Ṣayrafī said: “Anyone whose report we discarded because of lying we shall never restore on the basis of his repentance, and whomever we declared weak we shall not later strengthen—unlike the case of legal testimony.” Al-Samʿānī added: “If a man lies in a single report, we must discard all his previous narrations.” I say: all of this runs counter to the established principle of our school and others, and the distinction they draw between hadith transmission and courtroom testimony cannot be sustained.

Ninth: When a narrator transmits a hadith and the original source then denies having related it, the preferred view is that if the source is categorical—saying, for example, “I never narrated this”—the report must be rejected, yet this does not impugn the remainder of that transmitter’s narrations from him. If, however, he merely says, “I do not recognize it,” or “I do not recall it,” his statement does not harm the report. Likewise, if a narrator relates a hadith and subsequently forgets it, acting upon that hadith is permissible according to the sound position—the view of the majority across the legal schools, contrary to some Hanafis. This is not inconsistent with al-Shāfiʿī and others discouraging narration from those who are still alive. Allah knows best.

Tenth: According to Aḥmad, Isḥāq, and Abū Ḥātim, the narration of a person who receives payment for teaching hadith is not accepted, whereas Abū Naʿīm al-Faḍl, ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, and others deemed it acceptable. The legal verdict of