and the second isnād would be authentic if not for the hesitation of Maʿmar or someone else between Ibn Abī Mulaykah and another, for if it is from Ibn Abī Mulaykah—whose name is ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUbayd Allāh—it is authentic, but if it is from another, it is unknown. The ḥadīth was attributed by al-Suyūṭī in "al-Jāmiʿ" to al-Bayhaqī in "Shuʿab al-Īmān" from ʿĀʾishah in a concise elevated form with the wording: "The most detested of creation to him was lying." al-Munāwī critiqued it by saying: "The author indicated its ḥasan status, implying that the author's work suggests al-Bayhaqī included it and remained silent on it, which is false. He included it from the narration of Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm al-Dabarī from ʿAbd al-Razzāq from Maʿmar from Ayyūb from Ibn Abī Mulaykah from ʿĀʾishah and from Muḥammad ibn Abī Bakr from Ayyūb from Ibrāhīm ibn Maysarah from ʿĀʾishah. Then he followed it with the statement: al-Bukhārī said: it is mursal, meaning between Ibrāhīm ibn Maysarah and ʿĀʾishah, and the ḥadīth of Ibn Abī Mulaykah is not authentic. al-Bukhārī said: How strange is the ḥadīth of Maʿmar from other than al-Zuhrī, for it is rare to find an authentic ḥadīth among them. End quote. This indicates that there is weakness or disconnection, so the author's extraction of that from his words and its omission is poor conduct, and Isḥāq al-Dabarī's meeting with ʿAbd al-Razzāq is unlikely as Ibn ʿAdī indicated, and al-Dhahabī mentioned him in "al-Ḍuʿafāʾ." End of al-Munāwī's words. I say: However, he was followed by Aḥmad as previously mentioned, and also followed by Yaḥyá ibn Mūsá who narrated to us from ʿAbd al-Razzāq with it similar to the narration of al-Dabarī from Ibn Abī Mulaykah from her, without hesitation. It was recorded by al-Tirmidhī (1/357) who said: "A ḥasan ḥadīth." So he said! And Yaḥyá ibn Mūsá—who is al-Balkhī—is a trustworthy narrator from the teachers of al-Bukhārī, and those above him