Methodology and Terms of Diwan
We present here the approved terms in judging hadiths and our scientific methodology in verification and clarification.
Diwan's Terms in Judging Hadiths
Some scholars may explicitly state the ruling on a hadith, while others adopt a specific methodology. We have adopted their methodologies as follows:
Authenticated by al-Bukhari or Muslim
Indicates the authenticity of the hadith. What has been discussed, we have clarified.
Corrected by Abu Dawud
We mean what Abu Dawud remained silent about, which is suitable for argumentation or consideration, including weak hadiths that can be strengthened.
Mentioned by Ibn Khuzaymah / Ibn Hibban in his Sahih
Means it is an authentic or good hadith.
Mentioned by al-Diya' in al-Mukhtarah
We mean its authenticity according to him, as he committed to mentioning the defect if found.
Mentioned by Abd al-Haqq al-Ishbili in al-Ahkam al-Sughra
Evidence of its authenticity as he selected only authentic chains.
Silenced by Abd al-Haqq al-Ishbili in al-Ahkam al-Wusta
Evidence of its authenticity according to his statement: If there is no defect in it, my silence about it is evidence of its authenticity.
Mentioned by Ibn al-Mulaqqin in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj
His condition is to mention only authentic or good hadiths, and if he mentions a weak one, he alerts to it.
Mentioned by al-Mundhiri with decisive wording
If he starts with (from) it is authentic or good, and if he starts with (narrated) it is weak.
Silenced by Ibn Hajar in Takhrij al-Mishkat
He said: What I remain silent about its clarification is good.
Mentioned by Ibn Adi or al-Uqayli in al-Manahir
We mean that the hadith is among what is rejected from the narrator, indicating its inauthenticity.
Attributed by al-Suyuti to these alone
What he attributed alone to al-Uqayli, Ibn Adi, al-Khatib, Ibn Asakir, al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi, al-Hakim in al-Tarikh, Ibn al-Najjar, or al-Daylami is weak.
Our Methodology in Diwan
We follow a precise and simplified scientific methodology for all Muslims:
Accepted and Rejected
We divided hadiths into accepted (green) which are authentic and good, and rejected (red) which are weak and fabricated, to facilitate for non-specialists.
Clarity of Ruling
We mentioned the hadith ruling clearly, with alerting if it is weak in one context and authentic in another.
Presentation of Opinions
We started with those who argued with the hadith, then followed with those who rejected it, separating the two groups with (but).
Verification
We verified the hadith scientifically in a way that fulfills the purpose and suffices the researcher and student.
Clarifying the Problematic
We clarified the problematic aspects of the hadith and responded to doubts in case of apparent contradiction.
Companions' Narrations
We may go beyond the elevated to rule on the stopped (narrations of companions and followers) for a good reason, and we indicate this with (the report).