In this research, we have dealt with the method of a scholar, muhaddith, hafiz, methodologist, jurist Qutb al-Din al-Khaidiri (d. 894/1489) in his criticism and selection of hadiths and judgment on them through extrapolation of his book al-Gharām bi adillah al-ahkām which he composed according to the method of jurists, and judged on it’s hadiths according to the method of muhaddiths, and he often relied on the sayings of critics’ leaders in their ruling on hadiths and agree with them on this, sometimes he discusses their rulings and criticizes their opinions after they are mentioned, he does not imitate, and contradicts them, and redresses them, he says: “It is not as he said”, “He found him flawed based on something unacceptable / uninjurious” “What he said is refused”, “He is delusional”, “What he said is not something that would harm the soundness of the hadith!”. There are hadiths that stop ruling on them and transfer the rulings of the imams and their different opinions without giving preference, if their condition is not clear to him, and there is no reliable imam’s saying in them.

By following the rulings of al-Khaidiri in his book and the criticism, correction and weakening of hadiths that he followed, we have come to grips with some of the subtleties and issues that he commented on with his opinion in the folds ofthe chapters, in agreement with the opinions of the hadith critics and the muhaddiths, which are these: al-Tabi’i’s saying: “From the Sunnah as such” and the justice of the all of Companions, the narration of a companion whose name is not mentioned should not harm that narration; although an hadith refers to the Sahih of Bukhari, the fact that only a part of that hadith is found in the Sahih is a sign of leniency, and adopting the opinion of whom corrected the hearing of al-Hasan al-Basri from Samurah b. Jundub, and accepting the chain of narrators of Amr b. Shu’aib such as acceptance of his narrations he made from his father and his father from his grandfather.

We believe that it is necessary for every person engaged in the sciences of Hadith and specially its jurisprudence to benefit from the approach and proceeding of Qutb al-Din al-Khaidiri, who took into account in his judgment on hadiths according to the rules of jarh and ta’deel, and adopted the opinions of scholars of hadith criticism, except for what was likely to stop and not imitate them in judgment as it was not clear to him the condition of the chain of transmission. In this context, we are pleased that our study made a modest contribution to the relevant scientific community.