Is the testimony of one whose integrity has been lost due to lying, even once, or fabrication, accepted after he repents? And is his narration selected?

The questioner : It is known that if a person lies in a hadith, even in a single hadith, or fabricates, his integrity is lost. However, al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi, in the biography of 'Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Abi al-Hasan al-Nu'aymi, the Hafiz and poet, mentioned that he fabricated once, then repented, and they accepted him. This is found in al-Nubala, in al-Mizan, and in Tarikh Baghdad. Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar said something similar in the biography of Isma'il ibn 'Abd Allah ibn Abi in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib. Perhaps that was in his youth, when he was young, as al-Nasa'i said in his words, "He is not trustworthy," and he said, "I used to fabricate hadiths for the people of Madinah." So perhaps that was in his youth, then he repented and his condition improved.

The Shaykh : Okay.

The questioner : Ahmad mentioned in al-'Ilal that al-Hanash, who is Husayn ibn Qays al-Rahbi, in the category of those whose narrations are abandoned, has one good hadith. The point of this, or the question I want to ask, is: if a person's integrity is lost due to fabrication or lying, is it possible to accept him afterwards? Or is it possible to select from his narration, even though he is a liar in some hadiths, as Imam Ahmad said about al-Hanash, Husayn ibn Qays al-Rahbi? This is the apparent meaning of my question, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : No, it is apparent. The answer is: which is worse, the Muslim whose integrity has been lost, or the disbeliever whose integrity is lost?

The questioner : The disbeliever is undoubtedly in a worse state.

The Shaykh : Yes, if he becomes a Muslim, his narration is accepted.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Or perhaps I should withdraw the word "becomes a Muslim." If he repents, his repentance is accepted. This is a variation in expression, because we do not want them to say...

The questioner : ...in the question.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : This is in the question. Yes, indeed.

The Shaykh : If the disbeliever repents, his narration is accepted. So if one who was not described as righteous repents, why is his narration not accepted? Rather, accepting his narration is more appropriate than accepting the repentance of the lying disbeliever.

The questioner : This is contrary to what some usuliyyun (scholars of legal theory) say, such as Imam al-Haramayn, who means that if he repents and his repentance is good.

The Shaykh : This is like what was said to the one who was stoned for a false accusation; he was flogged for the slander. Yes, for the slander as well. It was said that his narration is also not accepted. And the correct view is that if he repents and he actually did commit slander, his repentance is accepted and his narration is accepted. Consequently, the point is that in my view, there is no distinction between the two matters, and Allah knows best.

The questioner : May Allah preserve you. Good, praise be to Allah. Here is a phrase, O Shaykh.