Tarihi süreç içinde ortaya çıkan ilimlerin konusunu, amacını ve sınırlarını belirlemek için çeşitli tasnifler yapılmıştır. Bu tasnifler ilimlerin birbiri ile irtibatını göstermesi bakımından önem arz etmektedir. Kur’ân ve sünnet etrafında şekillenen İslâmî ilimler için ilk zamanlarda belli bir tasnif yapılmamakla birlikte, tercüme faaliyetlerinden sonra başta Müslüman filozoflar olmak üzere çeşitli sınıflandırmalar yapılmıştır. Daha ziyade din-felsefe arasındaki ilişkiyi açıklama amacı da bulunan bu çalışmalardaki tasniflerde ilimler genel olarak dinî ve aklî olarak ikiye ayrılmıştır. Bu araştırmada bunlardan iki tanesi olan Âmirî (ö. 381/992) ve Hârizmî (ö. 387/997) tarafından yapılan tasnifler hakkında bilgi verilip, bu tasniflerde hadis ilminin yerine işaret edilmiştir. Âmirî’nin kendisinden önce de bazı tasnifler yapılmakla birlikte, ilimleri ilk defa net bir şekilde dinî ve hikemî olarak ayıran filozof olarak dikkat çekmektedir. O, hikemî ilimlerden üstün gördüğü dinî ilimlerin en başında hadis ilmine yer vermiş ve bu ilmi dinî ilimlerin temeli olarak görmüştür. Aynı dönemde yaşayan Hârizmî ise ilimler tasnifinde hadis ilmine yer vermemekle birlikte, ehl-i hadisi ayrı bir mezheb olarak tanıtmış ve fıkıh ilminin üzerinde tartışma olmayan kaynakları arasına ikinci sırada sünneti almış ve bu anlayışla ilgili bilgi vermiştir.   

Studies on the description and classification of sciences go back to very old periods in the history. Science has come to the fore as an important concept in Islamic civilization, and by this word, it is meant to preserve, understand and transfer the Qur’an and the Sunnah to daily life. Towards the end of the first century, studies in this field intensified and science branches of different names began to emerge. Works related to the classification of sciences began to be seen with the beginning of the translation of philosophical works into Arabic. In these works, the connection between the sciences was shown, and the order to be applied in learning and teaching them was revealed. On the other hand, these classifications were important in terms of pointing to the understanding of science of the period in which the scholars who made the classification lived. In this study, firstly, information was given about ʿĀmirī (d. 381/992) and Khārizmī (d. 387/997), who had studies on the classification of sciences. Then, the place of the hadith science was pointed out in their classifications. The subject of the classification of sciences was initially dealt with rather by philosophers, and the binary division, generally religious and worldly, was adopted. ʿĀmirī lived in a period between such two important philosophers as Farabī (d. 339/950) and Ibn Sīnā (d. 428/1037). ʿĀmirī primarily divided the sciences into two as religious and philosophical. Especially in the section he explained about philosophical sciences, he emphasized their benefits and gave information about their subjects. After explaining each science, he emphasized that these sciences did not contradict religion. What he wanted to express is to re-spell the understanding that the truth is one. It should also be pointed out that the religious and philosophical distinction of sciences and the triple classification of each of them was clearly made by ʿĀmirī for the first time. ʿĀmirī placed hadith on the basis of religious sciences, which he considered superior to philosophical sciences. According to him, as the basis of philosophical sciences is the science of physics, the science of hadith provides resources for all religious sciences. Therefore, it is not possible to talk about religious sciences without hadith. Without the efforts of the hadith scholars, it is impossible to distinguish between the authenticated and the false. They should be contacted in case of dispute on these issues. ʿĀmirī has pointed out the importance of hadith science in this regard from a different perspective. Khārizmī, who lived in the same period and environment with ʿĀmirī, wrote a separate work on the classification of sciences. He divided the sciences into two as sharʿī/Arabī and ʿAjamī (of foreign nations). While the sciences were classified, the basic reforms of these sciences were explained. In the section of ʿajamī sciences, attention was drawn to the issues needed in the regular execution of state affairs. He pointed out that philosophical sciences entered the Islamic civilization later and, in a way, he classified them under the title of ʿajamī sciences. An important feature of his classification is that he pointed to fiqh and kalām in the first place in the sharʿī sciences, and did not mention the sciences of tafsir and hadith. In his classification, he primarily considered the current situation, gave information to those who wanted to focus on these sciences, and aimed to meet a practical need. Khārizmī covers issues related to hadith under the science of fiqh. It points out that understanding the hadiths should primarily be within the framework of the science of fiqh. While distinguishing sciences as sharʿī and ʿajamī, Khārizmī did not adopt the sciences of other nations in an exclusionary manner. One of the most important aspects of the book is that it is one of the first encyclopedic copyrighted works in the century that the author lived in. Thanks to this feature of the work, it is possible to determine the understanding of science of the relevant period and the interest of the author in different branches of science. One of the primary issues to be done today is to clearly demonstrate the place of each science branch in the classification of sciences. Otherwise, it will possibly become more difficult to eliminate the hesitations especially on the subjects of Islamic sciences and today’s purpose and function. Especially considering the hadith science, this situation is more important. The precise determination of the place of hadith science in the classification of sciences in general is more important than ever. As a result, it can be said that it is possible to determine the importance of the science of hadith precisely by determining its place in the classification of sciences.