Shaikh Muqbil bin Haadee al-Waadi’ee was asked, “When both Jarh and Ta’deel are combined in a person, then which of them is given precedence?”
He replied, “When the Jarh is Mufassar, it is given precedence. However, it is desireable to look at the criticiser (Jaarih), is he one of those that can be relied upon, such as Yahyaa bin Ma’een, Bukhaaree, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Yahyaa al-Qattaan, Abdur-Rahmaan bin Mahdee, Abu Zur’ah and Abu Haatim, so if he is of this type, then it is accepted and it is a Jarh Mufassar. And al-Jarh al-Mufassar is like when someone says, “He errs”, “he has errors”, “munkar ul-hadeeth”, “kadhdhaab”, “matrook” All of this is Jarh Mufassar. Similarly, “Da’eef Jiddan”. So the likes of this Jarh Mufassar is given precedence over ta’deel.” (Ijaabat us-Saa’il Alaa Ahammil-Masaail p.497, Dar ul-Hadeeth, Dammaaj)
And he was also asked, “When it is said, al-Jarh al-Mufassar”, then what is this al-Jarh al-Mufassar”?
The Shaikh replied, “Examples of this has preceded, such as saying “Matrook Da’eef Jiddan (Abandoned and very weak), Munkar al-Hadeeth (His Hadeeth are rejected), Kadhdhaab (Liar), Akdhabun-Naas (the greatest of liars), ilaihil-muntahaa fil-kadhib (all lies end with him)” And as for the Jarh which is not Mufassar, then it is like saying, “Da’eef” (weak). However, overwhelmingly, the rest of their expressions are actually Jarh Mufassar such as the saying of Bukhaaree, “Feehi nadhar” (there is something about him), and likewise “Sakatoo anhu” (they remain silent about him), even though they never remained silent about him, but Bukhaaree is very gentle and soft in his words.” (Ijaabat us-Saa’il Alaa Ahammil-Masaail p.498, Dar ul-Hadeeth, Dammaaj)
And Shaikh Muqbil was also asked, “When a narrator is declared reliable by one person and disparaged by four, or disparaged by one and declared trustworthy by four, then whose saying is taken? Explain to me with a single example of the books of hadeeth and rijaal concerning Jarh Mufassar, because I have given precedence to the general appraisal (ta’deel) of the many [rather than the single person’s jarh]?”
The Shaikh replied, “As for given precedence to the ta’deel of the many, then it is not correct. Because the criticiser has observed what the appraiser (mu’addil) has not observed. So for example, when you find a man always in the first row (in prayer), so you declare him thiqah, but your friend knows that he is not a haafidh (strong memoriser), rather he is weak in memory (da’eef ul-hifdh). So you know that the man is always in the first row, but your friend knows he works in a usurious bank, or that pictures (photos) are made of him (or by him) or he works as one who shaves beards (i.e. a barber), so the Jaarih (criticiser) has observed or come across what the Mu’addil has not come across. If ten people were to declare him thiqah, and then a single person has made criticism of him with a “Jarh Mufassar”, then the Jarh Mufassar is accepted…” (Ibid, p.499).
Source: Ijaabat us-Saa’il Alaa Ahammil-Masaail pp.497-499