عنوان مقاله [English]
The masters of major biographical sources and other great scholars have not had the same viewpoint about many cases indiscrediting and accrediting some scholars of hadith rather, they have had serious disagreements.To solve these discrepancies, we need to set criteria for preferring the dignitaries’ speeches upon their disagreements. This article discusses these criteria and analyzes them.
Somecriteria of the great authorities regarding this issue include referring to the dignitary`s character, the quality of the discredit’s and accreditor`s speeches, the way the discredit and accreditor have accessed to the narrator`s states, preference of the discredit’s speech, collection of the accreditor`s and discredit’s speech (believing in details) and preferring the accreditor`s speech.Studying the history and bases of these criteria and examining some of them regarding some scholars of the hadith, the writers try to prove that the main base for assigning the criteria is “knowledge surplus”.Thereby, none of these criteria can be known applicable in all discrediting and accrediting the discrepancies. As a result, in some cases, the base of “knowledge surplus and higher information” makes these rules to be applied reversely.