Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

I’m looking for arguments against Hadith Rejectors or Quran Only beliefs. I believe in only the Hadiths that match the Quran. I do not believe in Hadith that permit what the Quran forbids or forbid what the Quran permits. Now, this is just a statement, I haven’t actually read most of the Hadith to say one way or the other.
I’m not really interested in counter arguments, just arguments against hadith rejectors. I’ve read the combat kit at answering-christianty.com so I would prefer some different arguments.

Lastly, I would prefer to keep this thread as a list of arguments so if anyone would like to discuss any of the arguments, creating a new thread is preferable.

2

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

^ why dont u bring forward a hadith which is against Quran and then we can see what to do with it....

3

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

The Koran doesn’t tell us the definition or method of Salaah (Contact-Prayer).

The Koran doesn’t tell us the amount of Zakaah (Purifying-Alms) and the threshold of wealth when it becomes obligatory.

The Koran doesn’t tell us the method of Hajj (Pilgrimage).

I can go on and on because there’s lots and lots of places in the Koran where we are told to do a certain things but the method and rulings are not found in the Koran… The Koran is complete and perfect and one of the ways it is complete and perfect is that it points us to the Prophet for further guidance.

Another thing that puts me off “Koran Only Islam” is a lot of them reject two verses of the Noble Koran saying they are false… and another thing which outs me off is (Rashid Khalifah) Richard Caliph claims to be a Rasool (Messenger of the Covenant).

They claim to follow the Koran but in an effort to be palatable to Western taste they give their own man-made intrepretations to Koranic verses which are sometimes wayyyy different from the traditional beliefs and practices, so infact they’re not even following but their own lusts…

They say they can’t accept the Ahadeeth of Rasool-Allaah :saw: which are preserved and transmitted by the best of the Muslimeen yet they have no problem believing that the methods of Salaah and Sawn were preserved at the hands of Pagans, Christians and Jews all the way from the times of Abraham :as:, we admit that Salaah was given to Abraham :as: but that doesn’t mean its method can’t be re-revealed for us after having been corrupted by the Jews, besides their rulings were different because they only had to pray three times a day whilst we five and they stopped doing Sajdah (prostration) and Ruku’ (bowing) in their Salaah a long time back.

I once thought it would have been quite grand if we can all unite on one source and there’d be no reason for Sunni Shia differences but it’s not practical.. If any Parvezi/Submitter can answer my doubts please go ahead.

4

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

There are no contradictions between Qur’aan and the Sunnah which is truly from Nabi Muhammad :saw:.

A layman like me or you is in no position to reject a Hadeeth just because we think it appears to contradict the Koran, we have to consult different Ullemah (scholars) to see if they explain and also gain knowledge for ourselves.

I’ll give you an example, the Ahadeeth say that keeping a dog in the house keeps the Angels from entering that house, it also says that keeping the dog without a valid reason (hunting, guarding farm etc.) results in the deduction of good deeds from you good-deed-account on a daily basis… However the Qur’aan says the “Ashab al-Kahf” (‘People of the Cave’; some past saints) had their dog with them whilt they were in the cave…

Now the Ahadeeth rejectors who are tired of the shackles of Shari’ah (Law) are quick to jump up and down and point this as a contradiction when in fact it’s not because if you look at the Ahadeeth carefully it allows keeping dogs for a valid reason such as guarding, hunting etc…

And another thing is, that particular Koarnic verse is talking about past people, and their Shari’ah (Law) was somewhat different from the Shari’ah (Law) given to us, Muhammad’s :saw: Ummah (Nation), e.g. the Bani-Israeel were only meant tp pray Salaah three times a day where as we have to pray five times a day, they weren’t allowed to eat certian part of a cow where as those parts are permissible for us, there Sabbath was on saturdays where as our holy day is Friday and the rulings concerning it are different, they were meant to face Masjid Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem/Bait-al-Muqadas when praying Salaah to Allaah whilst we have to face Masjid Al-Harem in Mecca…

Our Koran only brothers need to take a good look at themselves and think are they claiming to follow Koran only because they truly feel it’s what Allah wants of them or are they doing it to follow their own lusts?

5

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

Thanks for the reply Promiscuous Paki. To summarize your points:

1) The Quran does not give details for every command and the Hadith is necessary for learning those details.
2) The layman should not reject the hadith because of seeming contradictions, a scholar should be consulted to see if there really is a contradiction, which there probably isn't.

Are there any other points that you can think of? I would like to know if there are any arguments from the perspective of liabilty. Would a person become liable for not following the Hadith if the Quran did not say follow the prophet and take what the prophet gives you? I'm trying to see if there's some other argument that I'm missing that proves liablity for the quran only people besides the verses I mentioned.

Also, I agree with your Quran only brothers comment. It is necessary to check if one is following the Quran for themselves or for God.

6

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

1) Ahadith weak enough to be considered false have already been filtered out of the majority of collections available to us today. SOME of the reasons fo declaring them as such include:
a) Ahadith which contradict the Qur'an.
b) Ahadith which were evidently a product of pious fraud (religious people who thought they were offering good advice to the Muslims, but made it fraudulent by saying it was from the Prophet (s) when it was not.
c) Ahadith from those who wished Islam to become weak.
d) Ahadith wherein the Isnad (chain of narrators) had a significant flaw/s.

2) Ahadith offers SPECIFICATION and CLARIFICATION. IT can NOT contradict the Qur'an. Just because it mentions something 'new' that is not mentioned directly in the Qur'an, does not make it a contradiction. The example of instruction for prayer is quite self explanatory.

3) In narrating and recording Ahadith, there was such great ZEAL for accuracy and such a great FEAR for incorrect narrations amongst the Sahaba and Tabi'een etc. I will inshaAllah give exact references when I return to home to my books but for now, I can recall that one, when about to relate a hadith would begin to sweat all over and go pale with fear. I WILL give a reference for that inshaAllah. Refer to A'zami's books for much much much more on this topic.

NB: If someone has doubt about the authenticity of a particular hadith, as well as consulting someone who may know better, it may be a good idea to study the various hadith sciences as much as you can until you are 100% satisfied that you have come to a conclusion yourself.

Also, read the works of Schacht et al and the defense by A'zami to gain a proper understanding of this topic from both sides.

7

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

@abeeramahmood
I guess I'm not going to get any arguments in this thread. I didn't find anything related to the hadith when I did a search for "Schacht et al" and A'zami comes up with lots of people. If you have specific books or links I would like to know more.

@armughal
If you want to start a thread on that I would probably argue against killing apostates.

8

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

You’re probably not getting too many arguments in this thread because you sort of narrowed down your criteria in the very first post :slight_smile: Anyway, some useful titles of books on this subject, which I think you should read about and understand properly before trying to make another understand. Maybe you understsand perfectly already but just in case:

Siddiqi, Muhammad Zubayr., Hadīth Literature- Its Origin, Develop**ment & Special features, ITS (Islamic Texts Society)

M. A. Azami, Studies in Hadith Methodology and Literature, Islamic teaching Centre, Riyadh

Mohsen Haredy, Hadith Matn Criticism: A Reconsideration of Orientalists’ and Some Muslim Scholars’ Views, Leiden, 2001

As for Jospeh Schacht, he is an orientalist who usually represents the essence of the hadith rejectors, and is of the Goldziher clan :D! Much of Schachts work is based on the idea that, basically, all ahadith are forged. A’zami is famous for his works which step by step disprove his arguments. THAT you will find useful inshaAllah

Also check out:
http://www.islamonline.net/English/HadithAndItsSciences/HadithStudies/2005/05/01.shtml

9

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

@abeeramahmood

Thanks for the link and information I'll look into it.

10

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

@abeeramahmood

So do you know of any arguments that would say hadith rejectors will be held accountable for not following the Hadith? I do not consider a Prophet to be equivalent to a book so I'm disregarding arguments that say they are equivalent.

11

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

Laa ilaha illAllahu Muhammadur Rasool ullah.

Anybody who has studied the Qur'an will know that, at face value, the Qur'an is the nucleus, the framework, the core. Then comes the Sunnah, which builds up on the core/nucleus/framework. They are NOT equivelant because the ahadith ADDS to what the Qur'an says (also think about whether or not you see the sunnah as a divine source or not). Then comes Ijmaa' (Social Concensus) and then Qiyas (Analogy). THESE make up the four sources of ISLAMIC LAW! The Qur'an at the core, layered by the ahadith (the Sunnah) and then varying in ijmaa' and qiyas, neither being allowed to contradict the former (Q & H).

If you reject the hadith and sunnah, you reject the Qur'an which says explicitly to Obey Allah and His Messenger, and thus you reject the Prophet (s) and his claim to Prophethood ... What's the kalimah?
Why would Allah say in the INFALLIABLE Qur'an to 'Obey His Messenger', if Allah knew that ahadith would become corrupted to the extent that it would be difficult to differentiate between the authentic and forged hadith? Do you see what I mean?

12

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

by the way, it feels like you're not satisfied with this argument, which if you think about it, is enough to base a thousand arguments on... Am i wrong?

and are you writing and essay or planning to speak to someone about this topic? or just tryna gain a better understanding?

~~~ Missing someone ~~~
13

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

Yeah, I'm not satisfied with the argument. The argument assumes that following the prophet and following the hadith are the same, but they aren't to me. I was asking to see if there's something I missed. I've been to my local mosque and asked there, I've asked other friends, my brothers, and tried to find as many articles I could but none really address the issue of liability. Here's the problem:

For the Hadith, all liability due to inaccuracy falls with the follower. On the Day of Judgment, if a follower followed a hadees that was incorrect, even if it was well collaborated, any sin would be the follower's only. This is because the follower knew that the Hadeeth was not the word of God, he/she knew that any mistake would be due on part of the originator of the hadeeth and not on the Prophet or God, and he/she knew that books made by man would have mistakes. And thus there would be no liability for anyone except the originator and the follower.

For the Quran, all liability due to inaccuracy falls with the Prophet or God, provided it has been unchanged. This is because the follower can ascertain whether or not a verse is from the Quran or if it is fabricated just by reading the verse. So if a verse from the Quran is not discernable from a false verse but it is in the Quran because of the Prophet or God, then the follower is not liable. The follower knows the Quran is the word of God, if he is not able to tell the difference between a false verse and a true verse, he cannot be held liable. If the Prophet ever changed a verse while revealing it, then only the Prophet would be liable. This is because the followers had been convinced by God that indeed the Prophet was real. Of course, God makes sure this never happens because if a Prophet does this, he dies an immediate and violent death. There is no reprimand to the Prophet for this particular action.

On the Day of Judgment when the prophets are held as witnesses against their followers and our Prophet is asked if he said something that was incorrect in the Hadeeth, all he has to do is deny it and he will be right in doing so. The Prophet will say, “I only told them what you told me to say”, and any mistake in the Hadeeth would then be traced back to a misunderstanding on part of the originator. And then the followers would also be held accountable for following it over the Quran, even though the Quran was available.

14

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

I just wrote a really difficult reply and lost it due to a virus which changed my page automatically... plz b patient ... i have to write it all again...

15

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

Brother, though I don't have much knowledge related to the matter but I am sure there is one Ayat I read in the Quran with the translation approximately like this:

And whatever the Prophet (saw) tells you to do, accept it and whatever he asks you to refrain from, leave it...

I am sure of the above ayat as it was part of our course, but I applogise that I don't have the source where the exact location of this ayat in the Quran was mentioned.

The above ayat proves that following the Sunnah and Hadith is a part of following Quran. Anyone who denys hadith is denying this Ayat and denying one Ayat of Quran is denying the whole Quran.

16

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

Kantan is expressing that, in his view, following the Prophet (pbuh) and following Ahadith are not the same thing. He is talking more about the authenticity of Ahadith, as it travelled down the pipes to us, as opposed to following the Prophet (pbuh), which as far as I understand, he accepts, right Kantan? And whether someone who, on this basis, does not adhere to ahadith would be accountable for not doing so.

I was trying to explain that if you believe that the Qur'an is the word of God, then you will know that He is All-Knowing, All-Wise and would not tell us in the Qur'an to follow the Prophet (pbuh) if He knew that ahadith would later become corrupted to such an extent by the time it travelled through generations, it would be detrimental to us. He would have known that the Ahadith, despite being left to humans to collate and protect, would be the source we would have to gain knowledge about the Sunnah and would be substantial enough. If Allah knew it would be corrupted, surely His decree wouldnt have been the same.

Pimples on upper arms
17

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

either that OR.. "follow the Prophet" means something else and doesn't refer to ahadith.

18

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

^ u cant really follow the Prophet (saw) in any way other than hadith now that he has already passed away nearly 1500 years ago....

19

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

Isn't it a fact that hadith are *corrupted and no one knows for sure which are 100% words of prophet? Thousands were thrown out by mere mortals who could have no way of knowing the absolute truth. Evidently God's promise to protect the Quran didn't extend to the hadith. How could they *possibly be accurate when something was reported by someone who heard that someone heard the prophet reportedly say something?

The obvious answer to those who haven't been raised in Islamic culture is that 'follow the prophet' couldn't mean to literally imitate his evert habit. Even if here were a perfect human, it wouldn't be possible. Imitating the way someone brushes his teeth has nothing to do with religion and spirituality.

Junaid Jamshed
20

Re: Arguments against Quran Only/Hadith rejectors

What you are saying here is an assumption. We do not have anything in the Quran that says that the Hadith will be preserved or that we should follow the collected sayings of the Prophet in conjunction with the Quran. You are making an assumption that God will preserve the Hadith if He wants us to follow the prophet, but you do not have His word for this. In addition, I get the Hadith from the same people that bring me the Quran, and yet there isn't a single verse in the Quran that is questionable. We do not say that such and such verse has been well collaborated so it must be true, or that such and such verse is doubtful. We do have varying degrees of authenticity for the Hadith. For these two, and other reasons, I do not think that the Hadith is also protected. And consider, how could a man made book gain protection from God, when He Himself has said that it would contain errors.

I do believe in the Prophet and I do believe that many hadith are authentic. But since the Quran says that any man made book would have errors in it. My concern is that I will be liable for errors in the Hadith because it is a man made book. So what I'm asking is that if there is proof that I will become liable for not following the hadith. The argument of "how could you fulfill God's commandment to follow the Prophet without the Hadith" is invalid to me. The Prophet himself never followed the Hadith, he followed the Quran. I can claim that I'm following the Prophet by following the Quran. I can say that I believe in the Prophet because I believe in the Quran.

This is the way that the word of God is spread in Islam to me:

God > Angel > Prophet > People > Me

I am not liable for any mistake at, or before the "Prophet" level. In the Quran, it states that leaders, and the people that followed them, will go to hell. Liabilty starts at the "People" level. For the Quran, trust is not an issue. Anyone can give it to me and I can ascertain myself that it is from God. With the Quran, liablity starts at the "Prophet" level because I did not need to verify whether the person who gave it to me was honest. With the Hadith, I would have to trace it back through the chain of narrators, or I have to place trust in the Hadith Collectors, who were not prophets, and do make me liable for their mistakes. The Hadith starts at the "People" level and makes me liable for mistakes.