So, Hadid scientists are very accurate. People don't realize the hard work to scholars and Hadid have put in grading and classifying Hadid. Hadid are not just judged with Sahih and the Ayaif, there's a lot more to it. I don't know if I'm getting in depth but I'll give you guys a playlist on the Hujderi Qawad channel called the Science and Hadid. Today's reading Hadid may need though. But one thing I'll just explain is that for Hadid to be considered Sahih, which is authentic, there are five conditions. So for Hadid to be considered Sahih, it has to meet at minimum five conditions. One of them, the chain has to be connected. It's called it the Salah of Sunnah. So that means from the prophets, Allah salam, till when it's written, there can be no breaks in the chain. For example, look at the Bible, there is no chain connecting Jesus to where the manuscript is written. Not in our office. But that would never be acceptable in Hadid. We need each narrator who was it that heard from each one, we have to know who they are. The chain has to have no breaks. It has a break. Even if we don't know who the narrator is, we have a neighbor. We don't know this one much who? That's a weak narrator. Then each narrator has to have solid or good memory. So this is something that makes Hadid times as unique because in history, we don't check that. Like we talk about like Dander or Julius Caesar. Even if we look at the first time reporters, we don't check their memory. Then you have to have good moral character. Right? Which is going to out. So again, Western historians, even if you look in the scientific industry, when you do a clinical trial, the people that are involved, we don't check their moral character. We don't care if they're drunk or liars or gamblers. We don't check if they're liable. If they lie regular, but if we check, anybody that was even accused of lying, that would be a fabricator. Don't let them... rather even accusation would now make it mature. If it's established, if they ever lied, they would become more dull. So the Hadid is judging is so accurate, but that's not it. Chain is connected, good memory, good moral character. Then we have to make sure there's no contradictions. If there is something stronger that contradicts it, it's called shab. Then we don't accept it as a feat. So there is a Hadid that mentions something or a ayah and a Quran, and then a Hadid comes something contradictory to it. It would never be something. This is again, this is a very deep research to go and to make sure that we have a full, what's protected. On top of that, on top of that, there can be no textual effects, meaning that if there's a grammatical error, if there is a word that's been flipped, that could never be something. So Imam Bukhari must have had even more, right? To reach Mutawati, that's even more. But even the base had been, it has to go to these five conditions that minimum. So if there is ever a chain or the break, it could not be something. Most history we have today doesn't have a connected chain. So that means even if you took more of the history you believe in, it would not reach the level of such things. Everybody has to have a good memory. Even they're very good people, but they made mistakes, they've flipped words, maybe they had some dementia at the time in the age, we cannot accept it hadiness. Everybody has a good moral character, moral character for them, not just lying, even if we didn't make Salah in the Muslim, even if you ate with your left hand, they would take you out of being not reliable and happy for you. Cannot be contradicted, people just can't be contradicted for not being here. It's one of the preconditions. And if there is any grammatical, even if a word is flipped, a word is flipped, then it would be considered to be weak. Now, if this criterion is met, whether that supports your political views or not, whether that supports your mudhead, your views or not, you have to accept it. And if these are not met, you have to reject it, even if it supports your point. And that's why, we were discussing earlier, people's biases cannot affect Haneem because the science is neutral. So if you look at the scholars of Haneem, it doesn't matter what mudhead, Mambukhari, for example Abu Dawud, the somebody who has an ager of the happy being chef, Aid, the howie being Hanefee, the bar being maliki, never affected their Hadith. Their focus is this, why? Because an Hadith can have a science that does not allow biases to get a place for it. You would have Hadith that are pro-Amelia and pro-Ampassia in the same book. The rough one that they will take was their life. But not that, you have a criterion that goes through this brief introduction in Shal'a to a science that I love, in Shal'a you can follow for more about Haneem.