حُكْم التَّدليس في "الصَّحِيْحَيْن" في ضوء أقوال أئمَّة الحديث ونُقَّاده دراسة استقرائيّة نقديّة

As per the nomenclature of Ḥadīth scholars, tadlīs (literally: misrepresentation) refers to a case when the narrator hides a defect in sanad (line of narrators) in order to improve its apparent view. Hence, it is one of the important topics in Ḥadīth which results in giving the conclusion whether sanad is muttaṣil (connected) or mursal, and eventually it helps to conclude whether Ḥadīth is Ṣaḥīḥ or Ḍaīf. Imām al-Bukhārī and Imām Muslim have quoted in their Ṣaḥīḥ collections from narrators who were known for committing tadlīs. Such a matter had made some contemporary people suspect the authenticity of these collections and even impugning upon them on the grounds that Ḥadīth of these collections are reported from narrators who are not thiqa and could be ḍaīf narrators who were attributed with tadlīs. Hence, these people created allegations and suspicions about these collections. This research conducts a study of this topic from its most important aspects and explains the stand of tadlīs in both of the Ṣaḥīḥ based on the views of stalwarts and critics of Ḥadīth and then refutes upon the allegations created by the opponents. In this study, the researcher has arrived upon some important conclusions like: all the instances in both of the Ṣaḥīḥs related to anana (i.e., narrating by stating an (from)) by narrators known for tadlīs are reflective of connected and authentic Ḥadīths, and all the Muanan Ḥadīths narrated in both the collections are explicitly stated with taḥdīth (i.e., earlier narrator narrating to the receiver) and samā (audition) in other sands which are mentioned in other authentic and reliable collections of masnad and sunan.