Özet:

The purpose of this research is to explain the difference between the science of ḥadīth and the science of qirāʾāt about the al-jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl of the narrators. While determining whether the narrator is reliable (taʿdīl) two orders, ʿadāla and zabt, are taken as basis. These two basis differ from the science of qirāʾāt as a criterion for zabt from the science of ḥadīth. In this study, the conditions required for the realization of the zabt according to the muḥaddiths were examined, and the conditions that imams regard as the qirāʾāt and the conditions of the accepted qirāʾāt were revealed. The words of the scholars of ahl-i jarḥ about the imams of qirāʾāt and their narrators were mentioned and then their status was evaluated in terms of ḥadīth science with mentioning the thoughts of ahl-i jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl about them. In addition, the reason why the hadith narrations are weak is also revealed. The difference between the ḥadīth and the science of recitation in terms of evaluating the narrators has caused some confusion. For example, Imam ʿĀṣim and Imam Ḥafṣ, who are regarded as imams in the science of qirāʾāt were both criticized as narrators in the science of ḥadīth. The research talked about Imam ʿĀṣim and Imam Ḥafṣ in ḥadīth and mentioned the thoughts of ahl-i jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl' about them, In this direction, if the hadith critics state that the narrator (kāri has narration) is weak in terms of justice, this situation is equally valid for ḥadīth and recitation, but if only memorizing was criticized then it will be acted according to this rule: Every science acts according to its own method regarding around zabt. The terms of zabt of each science are unique. In other words, a scholar does not have to satisfy the requirements of every science. kāri cares about qirāʾāt, narrator cares about ḥadīth. Hence Imam Ḥafṣ was proved reliable in qirāʾāt and weak in ḥadīth. The research also concluded that the reality of the imams of recitation in terms of hadith: they are generally between Ṣadūq and Ṣīka, and some of them are less than that; Because the care they showed in qirāʾāt and the harmony with their shaykhs were not the same care and attention in the field of ḥadīth. For instance, Imam ʿĀṣim and Imam Ḥafṣ relegated from reliability status, and their weakness was because of memorizing not Justice. The research also concluded that a scientist's failure in other majors doesn't mean his thoughts are rejected in his own major, because every specialty has its own experts. So, there's no relation between a scientist's weakness in a major and strength in another. Ḥadīth scholars also mentioned the weaknesses of fuqahāʾ, qāḍīs, and righteous people in hifz.However, this is an evaluation made within the framework of the science of ḥadīth, not as a criticism of their justice or religion. When looking at readers' status, books which are concerned about mentioning their status should be reviewed. When looking at narrators' status on the other hand, we should review books devoted to the men of ḥadīth. The research also concluded ahl-i ḥadīth past and present care about al-jarḥ wa-l-taʿdīl science as they have followed narrators' status in detail and talked about those who agree with discrediting and weakening them as well. And that mentioning the status of narrators and highlighting their weak and strong spots are considered as a very honest, accurate and fair method in judging them. Which leads to trust their sayings and reassurance of their judgments.

Anahtar Kelimeler: