The Precedence of Jarh over Ta’dīl

The question of whether jarḥ (criticism) or taʿdīl (praise) should be given priority when they conflict is an issue explained by Dr. al-Murtada al-Mahatwary (d. 1436 AH) in his PhD dissertation, later published under the title ʿAdālat al-Ruwāt wa al-Shuhūd.

In this work, al-Mahatwary states that the majority of scholars, and this is also the adopted position of the Zaydī madhhab, hold that jarḥ takes precedence over taʿdīl, whether the number of critics is greater than or fewer than those who offer praise.

He explains that this preference is rooted in the nature of the information being conveyed. Jarḥ reports a hidden matter — a concealed defect that undermines reliability and would not be known through outward observation alone. Taʿdīl, by contrast, affirms only what is externally apparent, such as visible uprightness or the absence of obvious faults.

On this basis, al-Mahatwary emphasises the established principle that the one who possesses knowledge has precedence over the one who does not. Awareness of a concealed flaw outweighs praise based solely on outward assessment. This methodological rule serves to preserve the rigor and reliability of transmitted knowledge in both legal testimony and narrator criticism.

Source

Dr. al-Murtada al-Mahatwary, ʿAdālat al-Ruwāt wa al-Shuhūd, p. 314.