…va rivoyat qilayotgan narsasida aniq (dābit) bo‘lishi. Odil (‘ādil) esa musulmon, balog‘atga yetgan, aqli joyida bo‘lgan, fisq (gunoh-fosiqlik) sabablaridan va diniy taqvosiga shubha tug‘diradigan narsalardan xoli kishidir. Dābit esa ogoh va unutuvchan bo‘lmagan kishidir; agar xotiradan rivoyat qilsa, rivoyatini yodda saqlovchi; agar kitobdan rivoyat qilsa, nusxa ko‘chirishda aniq bo‘lgan; agar ma’no orqali rivoyat qilsa, nimani rivoyat qilayotganining ma’nosini va qaysi narsa maqsadlangan ma’noni o‘zgartirishini biluvchi kishidir.

and dābit (accurate) in that which he narrates. As for the ‘adil, it is the Muslim, mature, sane person who is free from the causes of fisq (transgression) and doubt in his piety. As for the dābit, he is the one who is aware and not forgetful; a memoriser of his narration if he narrates from memory, and accurate in his transcription if he narrates from a book, and knowledgeable of the meaning of what he transmits and of what will change the intended meaning if he narrates by meaning.

Ravizning odilligi (adolati) yaxshilik bilan tanilishi va unga aytilgan maqtov orqali isbotlanadi. Shunday ekan, kimki hadis naqli ahli va ularga o‘xshash ilm ahli orasida o‘zining ishonchliligi bilan mashhur bo‘lsa, uning ishonchliligi va ishonchliligi uchun maqtov keng tarqalgan bo‘lsa, bu uning odilligini tasdiqlovchi har qanday guvohlik dalilidan ehtiyojni yo‘qqa chiqaradi. Agar uning ishonchliligi va ilmiy tasdig‘i keng ma’lum bo‘lmasa, ravining odilligi xuddi shunday imomlarning ta’dili (tasdiqlovchi bahosi) bilan, yoki ularning bittasining bahosi bilan isbotlanadi.

The adālah (trustworthiness) of a narrator is established by his becoming known with good and the praise given to him; so whoever becomes well known for his trustworthiness amongst the people of transmission and their like from the people of knowledge and praise for his reliability and trustworthiness become widely known, this suffices him from needing any testimonial proof of his adālah (trustworthiness). The adālah of a transmitter is established likewise by the attestation (ta’dīl) of the imams or by one of them if his trustworthiness and scholarly approval of him is not well known.

Ravíyning aniqligi (dabt) ishonchli (thiqāt) ravílarning rivoyatlari bilan solishtirish orqali bilinadi, ular aniqligi va to‘g‘riligi bilan tanilgan kishilardir. Agar uning rivoyatlari ularning rivoyatlariga mos kelsa, hatto faqat ma’no jihatidan bo‘lsa ham, yoki ko‘p hollarda mos kelib, farqlar kam uchrasa, uning aniqligi tasdiqlanadi.

A transmitter’s accuracy (dabt) is known by comparing his narrations with that of the reliable (thiqāt) narrators who are known for their accuracy and precision. If his narrations are found to be in accord with their narration even if (only) in meaning or they are in accordance in the majority of cases and divergences are rare then his accuracy is established.

Rostgo'ylikni ta'dil qilish (ta'dil) sabab zikr etilgan-etilmaganidan qat'i nazar qabul qilinadi; bu tajrih (jarh) ga qarama-qarshidir. Insonlarning mafsaqa (fosiqlik) sabablari haqidagi qarashlari turlicha bo'lgani uchun, tajrih sababi bayon etilib, aniqlanmagan hollardan tashqari, u qabul qilinmaydi. Ravini tajrih qiluvchi (jorih) biror narsani fisq deb hisoblashi mumkin va shu sababli ravini zaif deb hukm qiladi, lekin aslida bu haqiqatda shunday bo'lmasligi yoki boshqalar nazdida shunday bo'lmasligi mumkin; ya'ni kishi o'zi tajrih deb hisoblagan narsaga asoslanib, aslida haqiqiy (to'g'ri) tajrih bo'lmagan narsani tajrih sifatida ko'rishi mumkin. Shu sababli, tajrih sababini bayon etishni shart qilib qo'yilgan, toki kishi uning haqiqiy tajrih ekanligini yoki emasligini tekshirib ko'ra olsin. Tajrihni bitta kishi ham isbotlashi mumkin; bu borada miqdor belgilanmagan. Ravining adolatliligini ta'dil qilishda ham, tajrih qilishda ham bitta kishining o'zi yetarli, chunki bu xabar berish masalasi bo'lib, unda bitta kishi kifoya qiladi. Xuddi shuningdek, xabarni qabul qilishda ham — balki bitta kishi yetarli bo'lgani kabi — ravining adolatliligini tajrih yoki ta'dil qilishda miqdor shart qilinmagan. Agar bitta kishida sababi aniq bayon etilgan tajrih va ta'dil birga mavjud bo'lsa, u holda tajrih ustun qilinadi, garchi ravining adolatliligini tasdiqlovchi kishilar ko'p bo'lsa ham. Chunki ravini ta'dil qiluvchi (mu'addil) uning ko'rinib turgan holatini xabar qiladi, tajrih qiluvchi (jorih) esa ta'dil qiluvchidan yashirin va berkitilgan narsani xabar qiladi. Ta'dil qiluvchilar sonining ko'pligi esa hech qanday ahamiyatga ega emas, chunki xabarni qabul qilishning sababi bu emas. Balki sabab — ravining holatidan xabardorlik (it'lo') yoki xabardor emaslikdir. Fuqaho bu qoidani faqat muaddil "jarih zikr qilgan sababni bilaman, lekin u tavba qildi va holati tuzaldi" deb aytmagan hollar bilan cheklagan. Jarih rad etish uchun aniq sabab zikr qilgan bo'lsa, muaddil agar bu sabab bekor bo'lganini aniq ko'rsatadigan biror narsani bilsa, uni bekor qilishi mumkin.

Attestation (ta’dīl) of a transmitter's reliability is accepted, whether the reasoning is mentioned or not; contrary to the invalidation (jarh). Due to the divergent views of people as to the causes of mafsaqah (transgression), it (jarh) is not accepted except when the reason has been explained and clarified. The one who invalidates (jārih) a transmitter may believe something to be a transgression so he judges the transmitter as weak but in reality it may not be so, or it might not be so according to others; that is, one may consider something as an invalidation based on what he believes to be an invalidation which in reality is not a (legitimate) invalidation. That is why explanation of the reason for invalidation has been made a condition so that one can look into whether it is a (legitimate) invalidation or not. The invalidation can be established by one person; there is no stipulation on the number. One person is sufficient in attesting (ta’dīl) and invalidating (tajrīh) a transmitter's adalāh because it constitutes the informing of a report for which one person is sufficient. Similarly, in the accepting of a report – rather one person is sufficient - the number is not stipulated in invalidating or attesting a transmitter’s adalāh. When there combines in one person an invalidation (jarh), the reason for which is clarified, and an attestation, then the invalidation (jarh) is given precedence, even if there are many people attesting to (the transmitter’s) adalāh because the one who attests (mu'addil) a transmitter’s reliability informs of what is apparent of the transmitter’s condition but the one who invalidates (jārih) informs of what is hidden and concealed from the one who validates. As for the number of those validating being greater that is of no value for that is not the reason (‘illah) for accepting the report. Rather, the reason is familiarity (itlā’) (with a transmitter’s condition) or the lack of familiarity. The fuqahā restricted this to when the attestator (mu’addil) does not say: ‘I know the reason mentioned by the jārih but he has since repented and his condition has improved’. When the jārih mentions a specific reason for invalidation, the mu'addil can nullify it if he knows anything that indicates definitely that the reason has been nullified.

Jarh (ravining) ro‘yobga chiqishi mumkin bo‘lgan narsalar o‘nta. Ulardan beshtasi ‘adolat bilan bog‘liq, beshtasi esa aniqlik (dabt) bilan bog‘liq. ‘Adolatga oid besh narsa quyidagilar: yolg‘on gapirish (kidhb), biror nomaqbul ish bilan ayblanish, fisqning namoyon bo‘lishi, johillik (jahalah) va bid‘at. Aniqlikka (dabt) oid besh narsa esa quyidagilar: jiddiy xatolar, katta beparvolik, vahm (adashish), ishonchli ravilarning xabarlariga zid kelish va xotirasining yomonligi.

Disparagement (of a transmitter) can take place due to ten things. Five of them relate to 'adālah and five relate to accuracy (dabt). As for the five that relate to the 'adālah they are: mendacity (kidhb), accusation (of any impropriety), manifestation of fisq, ignorance (jahālah) and innovation (bid'ah). As for the five which relate to accuracy (dabt) they are: serious errors, flagrant negligence, delusion (wahm), contradicting reports of reliable transmitters, and bad retentive ability.

Holi noma'lum bo'lgan roviy (majhūl al-hāl) haqida gap ketganda, ularning bir necha turlari bor:

As for the transmitter whose condition is not known (majhūl al-hāl), there are categories:

1. Majhūl al-‘adālata dhāhiran wa bātinan: zohiriy va botiniy adolati noma’lum bo‘lgan rivoyatchi; uning rivoyati qabul qilinmaydi.

1. Majhūl al-‘adālata dhāhiran wa bātinā: a transmitter whose apparent and hidden adālah is not known; his narration is not accepted.

2. Mastūr: rivoyat qiluvchi, uning yashirin holi noma'lum, lekin zohiriy jihatdan adolatli bo'lgan kishi. U aybsiz tarixga ega rivoyatchidir (mastūr). Bunday rivoyat qiluvchining rivoyati qabul qilinadi.

2. Mastūr: a transmitter whose hidden condition is not known but he is upright on the apparent; He is a narrator with a blameless record (mastur). This transmitter's narration is used.

3. Majhūl al-‘ayn: ulamolar tomonidan tanilmagan va hadisi faqat bitta roviy orqali ma’lum bo‘lgan roviy.

3. Majhūl al-‘ayn: a transmitter who is not known to the ulamā’, and whose hadīth is known only through one narrator.

Ravining shaxsning noma’lumligi ulamolardan biri uni tanishi yoki tanqidchilarning (mu’addalīn) u haqidagi rivoyati orqali yo‘qotiladi. Bitta rivoyat yoki bitta ta’dil yetarli. Al-Bukhoriy al-Walīd ibn Abd al-Rahmān al-Jārūdīdan rivoyat qilgan, holbuki undan faqat uning o‘g‘li al-Mundhir ibn al-Walīd rivoyat qilgan. Xuddi shunday, Muslim Jābir ibn Ismā’īl al-Hadramīdan rivoyat qilgan, holbuki undan faqat Abdulloh ibn Vahb rivoyat qilgan. Shunday qilib, ikkalasining noma’lumligi bitta rivoyat bilan yo‘qotilgan.

Anonymity of the transmitter is removed by his acquaintance of the ulamā’ or by the narration of the attestators (mu’addalīn) about him. One narration or one attestation (tadeel) is enough. Al Bukhāri narrated from al-Walīd ibn Abd al-Rahmān al-Jārūdī while none except his son al Mundhir ibn al-Walīd narrated from him. Similarly, Muslim narrated from Jābir ibn Ismā’īl al Hadramī while only Abdullah ibn Wahb narrated from him. Thus the anonymity of both was lifted by a lone narration.