Essay
Confusing Obedience to the Messenger with Obedience to Scattered Hadith and Reports; Creating Parallel Religions and Sects Beside the Way of the Qur’an
2026-07-06
In the name of The-God, The-Merciful, The-Compassionate
Introduction
One of the greatest logical confusions in the history of Muslim religiosity is that several Qur’anic truths were taken, and from them a conclusion was constructed which the Qur’an itself never stated. The Qur’an says to obey The God and the Messenger. The Qur’an also says that the Messenger, in the station of messengership, does not speak from desire, and what he brings in the station of revelation is revelation. But from these two truths a conclusion was produced that neither comes from the Qur’an nor from sound reason: that every statement attributed to the Prophet tens or hundreds of years later is automatically the certain speech of the Prophet, the same divine revelation, and the same binding source of religion.
This article is about that confusion. The issue is not that the Prophet of God has no legal or normative place. The issue is not that the Messenger should not be obeyed. The issue is not that every historical report about the Prophet is worthless. Rather, the issue is that there is a foundational difference between “the Messenger who carries revelation” and “a report attributed to the Messenger.” The Messenger was commissioned by God and, in the station of messengership, conveyed the revelation of God. But a report is a human report about the Messenger. A report passes through memory, hearing, transmission, understanding, politics, sect, bias, error, fabrication, forgetfulness, and late compilation. To treat these two as one is one of the main roots of the distortion of religion.
The revelation of the Qur’an is preserved; reports are not preserved. The God says the Qur’an is “no doubt in it.” Hadith, even when a Hadith system calls it “sound,” remains in the field of human evaluation, probability, conjecture, disagreement, authentication, weakening, criticism, accreditation, memory, and historical transmission. The Qur’an is the criterion; report must be measured by the Qur’an, not the Qur’an placed under the rule of report. The problem began when reports, instead of being measured under the criterion of the Qur’an, came to govern over the Qur’an: they restricted a verse, set aside a Qur’anic ruling, made forbidden what God had not made forbidden, made obligatory what God had not made obligatory, and at times even declared a clear ruling of the Qur’an abrogated by relying on a report. Examples include killing the apostate, stoning the adulterer and adulteress, marriage to children, forbidding music, compulsion in religion, taking away freedom of conscience and expression, intruding into people’s personal and faith matters, and hundreds of other cases.
This is no longer a simple academic disagreement. When human beings, through report, madhhab, fatwa, or historical narration, manufacture something as binding religion which God has not authorized in His Book, they have entered the domain of legislation. And legislation belongs to The God.
1. Two verses that must be understood correctly: “obedience to the Messenger” and “he does not speak from desire”
At the beginning, we must cite the two foundations that are usually used to sanctify Hadith. First are the verses about obedience to the Messenger. The Qur’an says:
مَّن يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللَّهَ ۖ وَمَن تَوَلَّىٰ فَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ عَلَيْهِمْ حَفِيظًا
Whoever obeys the Messenger has truly obeyed The God; and whoever turns away, We have not sent you over them as a guardian.
This verse is clear in its surface meaning: obedience to the Messenger is obedience to The God. But the end of the same verse contains a crucial boundary: if someone turns away, the Prophet is not a guardian forcibly imposed over their faith. This boundary must not be removed. The verse does not merely command obedience to the Messenger; it also says the Messenger is not a coercive keeper over people’s belief. How, then, can any religious institution threaten even a denier of Bukhari and Muslim with apostasy and takfir, while the verse itself does not give the Prophet the role of coercive guardian over faith?
قُلْ أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ ۖ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا فَإِنَّمَا عَلَيْهِ مَا حُمِّلَ وَعَلَيْكُم مَّا حُمِّلْتُمْ ۖ وَإِن تُطِيعُوهُ تَهْتَدُوا ۚ وَمَا عَلَى الرَّسُولِ إِلَّا الْبَلَاغُ الْمُبِينُ
Say: Obey The God and obey the Messenger. If they turn away, upon him is only what he was made to carry, and upon you is what you were made to carry. If you obey him, you will be guided; and upon the Messenger there is nothing except delivery of The Clarifier.
This verse also states obedience to the Messenger, but its closing is decisive: upon the Messenger there is nothing except clear delivery. The Qur’an itself calls itself Clarifier. Therefore obedience to the Messenger is bound to his delivery of the clear message, not to late conjectural reports attributed to him centuries later.
الر ۚ تِلْكَ آيَاتُ الْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ
Alif Lam Ra. These are the signs of the clear and The Clarifier Book.
Likewise, the Qur’an speaks of The Clarifier Book in Yusuf 12:1, al-Hijr 15:1, an-Naml 27:1, ash-Shu‘ara 26:2, al-Qasas 28:2, az-Zukhruf 43:2, ad-Dukhan 44:2, and al-Ma’idah 5:15. If the mission of the Messenger is delivery of The Clarifier, and the Qur’an itself is The Clarifier Book, then the root of the Messenger’s delivery is in this Book, not in scattered, late, disputed, conjectural reports.
وَأَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَاحْذَرُوا ۚ فَإِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّمَا عَلَىٰ رَسُولِنَا الْبَلَاغُ الْمُبِينُ
Obey The God and obey the Messenger and beware. If you turn away, know that upon Our Messenger there is only delivery of The Clarifying.
وَأَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ ۚ فَإِن تَوَلَّيْتُمْ فَإِنَّمَا عَلَىٰ رَسُولِنَا الْبَلَاغُ الْمُبِينُ
Obey The God and obey the Messenger. If you turn away, upon Our Messenger there is only delivery of The Clarifying.
These repetitions are not accidental. Wherever the Qur’an speaks of obeying the Messenger, it places him in the station of conveying the message, not in the station of coercive guardian over faith and not as a separate source from God for manufacturing a parallel religion beside the Qur’an. The Hadith system later turned even criticism of its books into grounds for threat; in doing so, it violated the closing boundaries of these very verses.
The second group of verses usually used to sanctify Hadith is the opening of Surah an-Najm:
وَالنَّجْمِ إِذَا هَوَىٰ
مَا ضَلَّ صَاحِبُكُمْ وَمَا غَوَىٰ
وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ
إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ
عَلَّمَهُ شَدِيدُ الْقُوَىٰ
ذُو مِرَّةٍ فَاسْتَوَىٰ
وَهُوَ بِالْأُفُقِ الْأَعْلَىٰ
ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ
فَكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَىٰ
فَأَوْحَىٰ إِلَىٰ عَبْدِهِ مَا أَوْحَىٰ
مَا كَذَبَ الْفُؤَادُ مَا رَأَىٰ
أَفَتُمَارُونَهُ عَلَىٰ مَا يَرَىٰ
وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً أُخْرَىٰ
عِندَ سِدْرَةِ الْمُنْتَهَىٰ
عِندَهَا جَنَّةُ الْمَأْوَىٰ
إِذْ يَغْشَى السِّدْرَةَ مَا يَغْشَىٰ
مَا زَاغَ الْبَصَرُ وَمَا طَغَىٰ
لَقَدْ رَأَىٰ مِنْ آيَاتِ رَبِّهِ الْكُبْرَىٰ
“By the star when it descends.
Your companion has neither gone astray nor erred.
And he does not speak from desire.
It is nothing except revelation that is revealed.
One mighty in power taught him.
Possessor of strength; then he rose and became steady.
And he was at the highest horizon.
Then he drew near and descended.
So he was at the distance of two bows, or nearer.
Then He revealed to His servant what He revealed.
The heart did not deny what it saw.
Do you then dispute with him about what he sees?
And certainly he saw him another time,
near the Lote Tree of the Utmost Boundary.
Near it is the Garden of Refuge.
When there covered the Lote Tree what covered it.
The sight did not swerve, nor did it transgress.
Certainly he saw of the greatest signs of his Lord.”
These verses describe a particular great revelatory event, not a general rule for every ordinary statement of the Prophet and not every report later attributed to him. The passage speaks of the Mighty One, the highest horizon, nearness, the distance of two bows or nearer, revelation to the servant, the heart not denying what it saw, another vision by Sidrat al-Muntaha, and the Garden of Refuge. This is not the language of every later report-chain; it is the language of a specific revelatory vision.
The context establishes the truthfulness of the Prophet in receiving and conveying revelation. In the station of messengership he did not speak from desire. What he received as revelation was not from his ego. But from this truth one cannot conclude that every later report attributed to him after passing through memory, transmitters, politics, sects, fabrication, oral transmission, late compilation, and human judgment is divine revelation. That is not Qur’anic reasoning; it is a Hadith-system leap.
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَلَا تَوَلَّوْا عَنْهُ وَأَنتُمْ تَسْمَعُونَ
O you who believe, obey The God and His Messenger, and do not turn away from him while you are hearing.
The phrase “while you are hearing” places obedience in the living encounter with the Messenger’s delivery. It does not say that centuries later every report forced upon the Messenger should be treated as the same direct hearing.
وَأَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَلَا تَنَازَعُوا فَتَفْشَلُوا وَتَذْهَبَ رِيحُكُمْ ۖ وَاصْبِرُوا ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَ الصَّابِرِينَ
Obey The God and His Messenger, and do not dispute, lest you fail and your strength depart; and be patient. Indeed The God is with the patient.
History shows that when the community moved from the single Qur’an into scattered reports and hostile schools, dispute, weakness, and the loss of force appeared. Sunni and Shia identities formed, then sub-branches multiplied: Salafi, Ash‘ari, Maturidi, Hanbali, Hanafi, Shafi‘i, Maliki, Imami, Isma‘ili, Zaydi, Rafidi, Nasibi, Khawarij, and many others. Each group built its own reports, fiqh, transmitters, authorities, and traditions, and many judged the other misguided, innovating, or unbelieving. If obedience to the Messenger in the Qur’an is tied to avoiding dispute and weakness, then the return must be to the Qur’an that unites, not to conflicting corpuses that became the raw material of sectarianism.
2. Clear verses, ambiguous verses, and the pillar of understanding the Qur’an
Before entering the history of Hadith and report, the pillar of understanding the Qur’an must be clarified. The Qur’an itself says that the Book contains clear verses and ambiguous verses. This prepares the human mind to know which parts are the criterion, which parts are fields of humility, and how those who seek fitnah use ambiguity for religious power.
هُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ مِنْهُ آيَاتٌ مُّحْكَمَاتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَابِهَاتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَابَهَ مِنْهُ ابْتِغَاءَ الْفِتْنَةِ وَابْتِغَاءَ تَأْوِيلِهِ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۗ وَالرَّاسِخُونَ فِي الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِهِ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّا أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ
He is the One who sent down to you the Book. From it are clear verses; they are the mother of the Book, and others are ambiguous. As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they follow what is ambiguous from it, seeking fitnah and seeking its interpretation. None knows its interpretation except The God. Those firmly rooted in knowledge say: We believe in it; all is from our Lord. None is reminded except possessors of understanding.
The clear verses are the mother of the Book: the foundation, pillar, and criterion of understanding. Ambiguous verses exist, but ambiguity is not a defect in the Qur’an. Ambiguity is a field of humility, patience, reflection, and faith; not a field for fitnah-making and interpretive domination. Those in whose hearts there is deviation use ambiguity to seek fitnah and interpretation; those firmly rooted in knowledge do not claim ownership of the final interpretation. They say all of it is from their Lord.
This verse challenges the claim that the Qur’an is incomplete without Hadith from its root. If the clear verses are the mother of the Book, then for guidance, responsibility, tawhid, ethics, divine lawful and unlawful, and the measurement of truth and falsehood, the Qur’an has its clear pillars. It does not need Bukhari, Muslim, or any later authority to rewrite God’s clear proofs. Ambiguous verses are not an excuse for scattered report-books to rule over the Qur’an or for historical memories to become the key of final interpretation. The Qur’an says that final interpretation belongs to The God. It never says that because ambiguous verses exist, conjectural reports must become the certain key.
At the same time, the existence of those firmly rooted in knowledge shows that knowledge can illuminate horizons of verses without claiming final interpretation. Scientific knowledge may make some signs about embryonic growth, creation, darknesses, the sky, cosmic movement, or universal horizons more visible. This does not make science or Hadith rulers over the Qur’an. Knowledge can serve Qur’anic understanding, but neither knowledge nor report has the right to dominate the clear verses.
Therefore the Qur’an is not a silent incomplete book awaiting report-based interpretation. It is a Book whose clear verses are the mother of the Book, whose ambiguous verses test humility, and before which the deeply rooted in knowledge stand with submission and caution.
3. How does the Qur’an introduce itself?
The Qur’an is the only Book that The God Himself declares free from doubt. If religion has one fixed point, that point is the Qur’an, not Hadith and fiqh collections.
ذَٰلِكَ الْكِتَابُ لَا رَيْبَ ۛ فِيهِ ۛ هُدًى لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ
That is the Book; no doubt is in it; guidance for the people of taqwa.
This verse is about the Qur’an, not Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, al-Kafi, Bihar al-Anwar, al-Muwatta, Sunan at-Tirmidhi, or any other collection. No verse says that any Hadith book is “no doubt in it.” The Qur’an gives this rank only to the Book of God.
إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ
Indeed We ourselves sent down the Reminder, and indeed We are its guardians.
The God guarantees the preservation of the Reminder. Whatever discussion one has about the exact referent of “Reminder,” Muslims have recognized the Qur’an as the preserved, public, criterial text of revelation. No such guarantee came for Hadith books, transmitters, compilers, or later religious authorities.
أَفَلَا يَتَدَبَّرُونَ الْقُرْآنَ ۚ وَلَوْ كَانَ مِنْ عِندِ غَيْرِ اللَّهِ لَوَجَدُوا فِيهِ اخْتِلَافًا كَثِيرًا
Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an? Had it been from other than The God, they would have found in it much contradiction.
The Qur’an introduces itself through the criterion of internal harmony. Hadith, by contrast, is full of contradiction: between reports, between madhhabs, between Hadith books, between fiqhs, and even between Hadith and the Qur’an. The many rules built to reconcile, prefer, abrogate, reinterpret, or subordinate verses to reports show that Hadith is not like the Qur’an.
وَإِن كُنتُمْ فِي رَيْبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلْنَا عَلَىٰ عَبْدِنَا فَأْتُوا بِسُورَةٍ مِّن مِّثْلِهِ وَادْعُوا شُهَدَاءَكُم مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ
فَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلُوا وَلَن تَفْعَلُوا فَاتَّقُوا النَّارَ الَّتِي وَقُودُهَا النَّاسُ وَالْحِجَارَةُ ۖ أُعِدَّتْ لِلْكَافِرِينَ
If you are in doubt about what We sent down upon Our servant, then bring a surah like it, and call your witnesses besides The God if you are truthful. But if you do not—and you will never do—then guard yourselves against the Fire whose fuel is people and stones, prepared for those who cover the truth.
This challenge belongs to the Qur’an. If Hadith were revelation like the Qur’an, it would show the same linguistic horizon, transcendence, coherence, structural power, and criterial authority. But Hadith, even Hadith Qudsi, carries another language: report, sermon, narration, human imagery, and historical culture.
Linguistic structure is one important tool for distinguishing pure from impure in religious texts. A text carries a linguistic fingerprint: word choice, sentence structure, metaphor, theological horizon, imagery, and even the things it avoids saying. This is why biblical studies can observe differences between layers of the Old Testament and New Testament, and why the language of the Gospel of John, with its Logos vocabulary, differs from the narrative style of the synoptic Gospels. Such differences show different linguistic horizons and historical environments.
The same method is useful in Hadith critique. The Qur’an speaks of God with tanzih and keeps the discourse in the horizon of tawhid. But many Hadiths, including Qudsi reports, move toward human imagery: hesitation, a foot in Hell, being hurt, clothing imagery, or body-like descriptions. Even when scholars interpret them metaphorically, the difference in language remains.
اللَّهُ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ الْحَيُّ الْقَيُّومُ ۚ لَا تَأْخُذُهُ سِنَةٌ وَلَا نَوْمٌ ۚ لَهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ ۗ مَن ذَا الَّذِي يَشْفَعُ عِندَهُ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِهِ ۚ يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ ۖ وَلَا يُحِيطُونَ بِشَيْءٍ مِّنْ عِلْمِهِ إِلَّا بِمَا شَاءَ ۚ وَسِعَ كُرْسِيُّهُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ ۖ وَلَا يَئُودُهُ حِفْظُهُمَا ۚ وَهُوَ الْعَلِيُّ الْعَظِيمُ
The God—there is no deity except Him, the Living, the Self-Subsisting. Neither drowsiness overtakes Him nor sleep. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and the earth. Who can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is before them and behind them, and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He wills. His Kursi extends over the heavens and the earth, and preserving them does not burden Him. He is the Most High, the Magnificent.
This verse is long, but it never leaves the axis of tawhid and tanzih. It negates any deity beside God, affirms life and self-subsistence, negates sleep and fatigue, returns ownership and intercession to Him, makes His knowledge encompassing, limits creaturely knowledge, and ends with majesty. Even when it mentions “Kursi,” the language remains in the horizon of authority, knowledge, greatness, and transcendence, not bodily depiction.
Now compare this with the famous Qudsi report in Sahih Bukhari 6502, in which God is reported as becoming the servant’s hearing, sight, hand, and foot, and as “hesitating” in taking the soul of the believer. Even if interpreted ethically or mystically, the language is narration and human image. Ayat al-Kursi does not place God in human states, limbs, or psychological hesitation.
لَيْسَ كَمِثْلِهِ شَيْءٌ ۖ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْبَصِيرُ
Nothing is like Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.
قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ
اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ
لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ
وَلَمْ يَكُن لَهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ
Say: He is The God, One. The God, the Self-Sufficient. He neither begot nor was begotten. None is equal to Him.
This is the language of tanzih. Many reports, however, depict God in bodily, psychological, kinetic, or story-like language. This difference is not merely literary. It indicates a difference in origin and route of transmission. The Qur’an is revelation; Hadith is historical report. The Qur’an carries the linguistic signature of revelation; Hadith carries the traces of narration, gathering, memory, and the culture of its time.
فَمَا كَانَ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَىٰ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلَٰكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ مِن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
This Qur’an could never have been fabricated from other than The God; rather, it confirms what is before it and is the detailing of the Book. There is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds.
This verse gives three foundations: the Qur’an is not made by other than God; it confirms earlier revelation and details the Book; and it is “no doubt in it.” If conflict appears between the Qur’an and any other text, this verse tells us which side is the criterion.
4. Surah Yunus: truth, conjecture, the Qur’an, and the practical test
Surah Yunus is one of the most important Qur’anic chains for this discussion. It first establishes the criterion of truth, then critiques following conjecture, then presents the Qur’an as no doubt in it, then exposes denial without encompassing knowledge, and finally gives the practical principle for dealing with disagreement.
فَذَٰلِكُمُ اللَّهُ رَبُّكُمُ الْحَقُّ ۖ فَمَاذَا بَعْدَ الْحَقِّ إِلَّا الضَّلَالُ ۖ فَأَنَّىٰ تُصْرَفُونَ
That is The God, your true Lord; so what is after truth except misguidance? How then are you turned away?
After truth there is nothing but misguidance. Religion cannot be built simultaneously on truth and conjecture. Whatever belongs to conjecture must be measured under truth, not placed in truth’s position.
قُلْ هَلْ مِن شُرَكَائِكُم مَّن يَهْدِي إِلَى الْحَقِّ ۚ قُلِ اللَّهُ يَهْدِي لِلْحَقِّ ۗ أَفَمَن يَهْدِي إِلَى الْحَقِّ أَحَقُّ أَن يُتَّبَعَ أَمَّن لَّا يَهِدِّي إِلَّا أَن يُهْدَىٰ ۖ فَمَا لَكُمْ كَيْفَ تَحْكُمُونَ
Say: Is there among your partners anyone who guides to the truth? Say: The God guides to the truth. Is the One who guides to the truth more worthy of being followed, or one who does not find guidance unless he is guided? What is wrong with you? How do you judge?
This is not only about stone idols. Anything placed beside God in final guidance, legislation, lawful and unlawful, faith and disbelief, salvation and destruction, and religious law must face this question. The transmitter needs guidance. The Hadith scholar needs guidance. The jurist needs guidance. The madhhab needs guidance. History and memory need guidance. How can what itself needs guidance sit above the Qur’an?
وَمَا يَتَّبِعُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ إِلَّا ظَنًّا ۚ إِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ بِمَا يَفْعَلُونَ
Most of them follow nothing but conjecture. Conjecture does not avail anything against truth. The God knows what they do.
This is heavy for report culture. Report is built on human transmission: one person heard from another, and later scholars graded these transmissions as sound, weak, fair, disconnected, anomalous, or defective. This very grading proves that the field is not the field of divine certainty. If it were like the Qur’an, it would not need these human mechanisms of authentication.
فَمَا كَانَ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ أَن يُفْتَرَىٰ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلَٰكِن تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ مِن رَّبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
This Qur’an could never have been fabricated from other than The God; rather, it confirms what is before it and is the detailing of the Book. There is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds.
The order is clear: God guides to truth; most people follow conjecture; the Qur’an is no doubt in it. Thus the Qur’an is the way out of conjecture. If religion is built on conjecture, the human being becomes trapped in hearings, memories, sectarian systems, political power, and scattered reports.
أَمْ يَقُولُونَ افْتَرَاهُ ۖ قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِسُورَةٍ مِّثْلِهِ وَادْعُوا مَنِ اسْتَطَعْتُم مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ
Or do they say he fabricated it? Say: bring a surah like it and call whomever you can besides The God, if you are truthful.
بَلْ كَذَّبُوا بِمَا لَمْ يُحِيطُوا بِعِلْمِهِ وَلَمَّا يَأْتِهِمْ تَأْوِيلُهُ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ كَذَّبَ الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ ۖ فَانظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الظَّالِمِينَ
Rather, they denied what they had not encompassed in knowledge, and whose interpretation had not yet come to them. Thus those before them denied; so see how was the end of the wrongdoers.
A human being sometimes rejects not because he has proof, but because he has not yet encompassed the matter in knowledge. He has not understood, but denies. He has not been patient, but rejects. He has not read the Qur’an with the Qur’an, but fills his lack of understanding with report, habit, imitation, guesswork, taste, society, and religious power.
وَمِنْهُم مَّن يُؤْمِنُ بِهِ وَمِنْهُم مَّن لَّا يُؤْمِنُ بِهِ ۚ وَرَبُّكَ أَعْلَمُ بِالْمُفْسِدِينَ
Among them is one who believes in it, and among them is one who does not believe in it; and your Lord knows best the corrupters.
وَإِن كَذَّبُوكَ فَقُل لِّي عَمَلِي وَلَكُمْ عَمَلُكُمْ ۖ أَنتُم بَرِيئُونَ مِمَّا أَعْمَلُ وَأَنَا بَرِيءٌ مِّمَا تَعْمَلُونَ
If they deny you, say: my action is mine and your action is yours; you are free from what I do, and I am free from what you do.
This is the practical test. God does not tell the Prophet to kill, imprison, punish, or force belief. He teaches separation of responsibility. Disagreement in belief is not a license for repression. Denial is not a license for killing. Critique is not a license for prison. Therefore any system that punishes critique of report, leaving a madhhab, changing belief, or returning to the Qur’an has departed from the practical logic of Surah Yunus.
5. Surah ash-Shu‘ara: preserved revelation against polluted hearings
Surah ash-Shu‘ara distinguishes between the path of preserved revelation and the path of hearings that circulate among liars and sinners.
وَإِنَّهُ لَتَنزِيلُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ
نَزَلَ بِهِ الرُّوحُ الْأَمِينُ
عَلَىٰ قَلْبِكَ لِتَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُنذِرِينَ
بِلِسَانٍ عَرَبِيٍّ مُّبِينٍ
وَإِنَّهُ لَفِي زُبُرِ الْأَوَّلِينَ
أَوَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُمْ آيَةً أَن يَعْلَمَهُ عُلَمَاءُ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ
This is a sending down from the Lord of the worlds. The Trustworthy Spirit brought it down upon your heart, so that you may be among the warners, in a clear Arabic tongue. It is in the scriptures of the former peoples. Was it not a sign for them that the scholars of the Children of Israel know it?
The path is clear: the Lord of the worlds, the Trustworthy Spirit, the heart of the Prophet, and clear Arabic language. This differs from scattered and polluted hearings.
وَمَا تَنَزَّلَتْ بِهِ الشَّيَاطِينُ
وَمَا يَنبَغِي لَهُمْ وَمَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ
إِنَّهُمْ عَنِ السَّمْعِ لَمَعْزُولُونَ
The devils did not descend with it. It is not fitting for them, nor are they able. They are removed from the hearing.
The revelation of the Qur’an is not from the genus of polluted hearing. Forces of deception, falsehood, distortion, and pollution do not have access to it.
هَلْ أُنَبِّئُكُمْ عَلَىٰ مَن تَنَزَّلُ الشَّيَاطِينُ
تَنَزَّلُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ أَفَّاكٍ أَثِيمٍ
يُلْقُونَ السَّمْعَ وَأَكْثَرُهُمْ كَاذِبُونَ
Shall I inform you upon whom the devils descend? They descend upon every sinful liar. They cast down hearing, and most of them are liars.
Here the Qur’an opens the field of hearing, casting hearing, transmitting hearing, and lying. It does not say every heard thing is false, but it warns that the field of hearings is dangerous. When religion moves from the preserved text of God to “so-and-so from so-and-so,” the danger begins. As long as such hearings remain history, admonition, or human report, they can be examined. When they become sources of lawful and unlawful, killing, punishment, faith, disbelief, salvation, destruction, and religious legislation, the issue becomes tawhidi.
The Qur’an is preserved; hearings are not. The Qur’an is separated from devils; hearings can be polluted. The Qur’an is revelation; report is human report. The Qur’an is the criterion; report must be governed by the Qur’an, not govern it.
6. The different historical paths of Qur’an and Hadith
One repeated confusion says that the transmitters of the Qur’an and Hadith were the same, so if Hadith is questioned the Qur’an is questioned. This is methodologically false. The Qur’an and Hadith did not reach us through one historical, social, and textual path.
From the beginning the Qur’an was recited, public, collective, preserved, written, the axis of worship, prayer, community, and religious identity. It lived in the public community of believers through prayer, recitation, teaching, memorization, writing, and life. It became a mushaf and was recognized as the Book of The God, with divine guarantee of preservation.
Hadith was not like this. It was not handed to the community in the Prophet’s lifetime as a public, preserved, Qur’an-like corpus with divine guarantee. What later became Hadith formed through memories, gatherings, transmitters, disagreements, travels, political power, legal needs, sectarian disputes, and late compilation. Even scattered notes never had the status of the Qur’an: not mushaf, not “no doubt in it,” not public mutawatir at the level of the Qur’an, and not preserved by divine guarantee.
If Hadith were truly binding revelation like the Qur’an, the natural expectation would be that the Prophet and the first generations would preserve, write, publicize, and make it criterial with the same sensitivity as the Qur’an. But that did not happen. Even the Hadith sources themselves contain a report in Sahih Muslim 3004 forbidding writing anything from the Prophet other than the Qur’an. This report is not used here as legislation, because it too comes through Hadith; but as an internal admission it is important. The apparatus that later made Hadith a source of law preserves a report that places a serious boundary between Qur’an and non-Qur’anic speech.
The proof does not stand on that report alone. Even without it, the historical action of the first generation shows that the Qur’an became the Book, while Hadith did not become a book equal to the Qur’an.
At the same time, living collective practice must be distinguished from Hadith as law-making text. Prayer, qiblah, Ramadan, Hajj, and public worship lived in the practical memory of the believing community. That is different from a single report or conflicting reports producing a ruling against the Qur’an. Living practice, when harmonious with the Qur’an, can continue as the practical memory of believers; but Hadith becomes dangerous when it sits in the place of the Qur’an and creates parallel legislation.
7. The confusion of making the Qur’an dependent on Hadith for prayer, zakat, Hajj, and other rulings
One repeated question of the people of Sunnah, Hadith, and report is: if Hadith is not binding, what happens to prayer, zakat, and Hajj? But the question is upside down. They first take their inherited sectarian form of practice as the criterion, then ask the Qur’an to confirm those inherited details. If the Qur’an does not repeat every inherited detail, they call the Qur’an incomplete.
The correct method is not to measure the Book of God by ancestral religious habits. It is to measure ancestors, habits, sects, reports, and historical forms by the Book of God. Otherwise the human being removes judgment from God and places himself as judge over the speech of God.
Prayer, zakat, and Hajj have clear Qur’anic roots. But the Qur’an is not obligated to confirm every sectarian detail, fiqh dispute, historical form, manufactured amount, or inherited etiquette. If something is not in the Qur’an, the first question is whether it is truly binding religion from God or a historical addition of human beings. One cannot first declare additions certain religion and then accuse the Qur’an of incompleteness for not mentioning them.
This is the same disease the Qur’an warns against: following what the fathers were found upon against following what God sent down. The sect does not usually admit, “We place the fathers above the Qur’an”; it says “this is Sunnah,” “this is consensus,” “this is madhhab,” or “this is the understanding of scholars.” But if this inheritance is not measured by the Qur’an and instead rules over it, its function is the same as following forefathers against revelation.
The right question is not: what happens to our religious habits without Hadith? The right question is: which parts of our practice stand on the Book of God, clear guidance, taqwa, justice, ihsan, and tawhid, and which parts are only sectarian inheritance? What agrees with the Qur’an may continue as faithful practice. What restricts, defects, diminishes, or subordinates the Qur’an must be questioned.
The Qur’an confirms the original Torah and Gospel as divine revelation, guidance, and light, yet the people of Hadith easily dismiss existing Biblical texts as altered when they conflict with their beliefs. They accept that historical distance, human transmission, copying, textual variation, and human hands can affect earlier texts, but do not apply the same criterion to Hadith. Sahih Bukhari was compiled in the third century AH, about 238 years after the Prophet’s death. If historical distance justifies caution about Gospel and Torah transmission, why is Hadith exempt from the same caution? If the criterion is the Qur’an, every religious inheritance must be measured under it.
8. The disconnected letters and the collapse of the claim that Hadith is necessary
One of the strongest tests of the claim that the Qur’an cannot be understood without Hadith is the disconnected letters. These letters appear at the beginning of twenty-nine surahs, are openly recited, are part of the Qur’anic text, have been preserved generation after generation, and their final meaning is not clear to human beings. If Hadith were the necessary key to understanding the Qur’an, the first place where a clear, sound, marfu‘, certain, and binding Hadith should exist would be these letters.
But in the respected books of the people of Hadith there is no sound, clear, binding, universally accepted prophetic report explaining the meaning of these letters. There is no certain prophetic explanation of “Alif Lam Mim,” “Kaf Ha Ya ‘Ayn Sad,” “Ta Ha,” or “Ya Sin” that obligates the community.
This silence matters. If Hadith were structurally necessary for understanding the Qur’an, why did it not provide certainty at the clearest apparent point of need? Why do we have reports about small details, but no certain explanation of one of the most visible elements of the Qur’anic text? The answer is that the Qur’an is not designed so that its guidance depends on Hadith-based decoding of every element. The disconnected letters show that the Qur’an can contain elements whose final meaning is with God, without damaging its guidance, clarity, criterionhood, or completeness. This is the logic of Aal ‘Imran 3:7. Ambiguities are not an excuse for fitnah. The firmly rooted in knowledge say: all is from our Lord.
Thus the claim that the Qur’an is incomplete without Hadith collapses from within. If Hadith were the necessary key, it should have held the key to the disconnected letters. But it does not.
9. The inheritance of forefathers against what The God sent down
One root of report-centeredness is following the inheritance of forefathers. People often receive religion through family, madhhab, tribe, mosque, fiqh school, clergy, social tradition, and great names, not through direct return to revelation. The Qur’an critiques this disease repeatedly.
وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ اتَّبِعُوا مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ قَالُوا بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَا وَجَدْنَا عَلَيْهِ آبَاءَنَا ۚ أَوَلَوْ كَانَ الشَّيْطَانُ يَدْعُوهُمْ إِلَىٰ عَذَابِ السَّعِيرِ
When it is said to them, Follow what The God sent down, they say: Rather, we follow what we found our fathers upon. Even if Satan were calling them to the punishment of the Blaze?
This verse is not only about ancient polytheists. Every religious society can suffer from it. If people are told to follow the Qur’an and answer with madhhab, fiqh, report, fathers, and great figures, it is the same logic. The Qur’an does not say every inheritance is false; the problem is when the past takes the place of revelation. If the fathers were right, their rightness came from following God, not from being fathers. If they erred, respect for them does not make error true.
وَمَن يُسْلِمْ وَجْهَهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَهُوَ مُحْسِنٌ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىٰ ۗ وَإِلَى اللَّهِ عَاقِبَةُ الْأُمُورِ
Whoever submits his face to The God while being a doer of good has grasped the firmest handhold; and to The God belongs the outcome of all matters.
Submitting the face to God means orienting life, judgment, religion, identity, and obedience toward God, not inherited structures. The verse adds ihsan: submission is not an empty claim. The firmest handhold is not a sect-name, a chain, a clerical title, or inherited fiqh; it is direct orientation to God through what He sent down.
10. The prohibition of following without knowledge and individual responsibility
The Qur’an forbids following of what one has no knowledge of. This principle is crucial in critiquing report-centeredness, because historical report, however famous, is not divine certainty.
وَلَا تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ ۚ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولَٰئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْئُولًا
Do not follow what you have no knowledge of. The hearing, the sight, and the heart—all of these will be questioned.
This verse does not allow a person to hand his religious responsibility to a transmitter, Hadith scholar, jurist, mullah, mufti, shaykh, imam, marja‘, or majority. On the Day of Account he cannot say: they told me this Hadith was sound, so I accepted it; they told me the Qur’an was not enough, so I believed; they said this report abrogated the verse, so I obeyed. The Qur’an says your hearing, sight, and heart will be questioned. Not only the scholar, transmitter, or ruler is responsible; you are responsible too.
وَمَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ ۖ إِن يَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا الظَّنَّ ۖ وَإِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا
They have no knowledge of it. They follow nothing but conjecture, and conjecture does not avail anything against truth.
The Qur’an also shows a scene of the Hereafter in which people blame their leaders and great ones for misleading them. This is the end of outsourcing responsibility. The Qur’an does not allow the human being to hide behind the crowd.
11. Making lawful and unlawful without God’s permission and legislative shirk
One of the most dangerous forms of report-centeredness is making things lawful and unlawful in God’s name.
وَلَا تَقُولُوا لِمَا تَصِفُ أَلْسِنَتُكُمُ الْكَذِبَ هَٰذَا حَلَالٌ وَهَٰذَا حَرَامٌ لِّتَفْتَرُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ ۚ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَفْتَرُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ لَا يُفْلِحُونَ
Do not say, concerning what your tongues falsely describe, “This is lawful and this is unlawful,” in order to fabricate lies against The God. Those who fabricate lies against The God do not succeed.
When God has not forbidden something in the Qur’an, no human being has the right to declare it forbidden by God through report, fatwa, madhhab, habit, or social fear. When God has not brought a ruling in the Qur’an, no human being has the right to make it binding religion. When God has opened repentance, report has no right to close mercy. When God has placed no compulsion in religion, Hadith has no right to produce killing of the apostate. When God gives the ruling of zina in Surah an-Nur, report has no right to impose stoning. When God connects zakat and spending to purification, growth, social responsibility, and giving from what He provides, no system may reduce it to religious taxation and clerical domination.
أَمْ لَهُمْ شُرَكَاءُ شَرَعُوا لَهُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا لَمْ يَأْذَن بِهِ اللَّهُ
Or do they have partners who legislated for them of the religion what The God did not permit?
This verse reaches the root. Legislation in religion without God’s permission is not a minor error; it has a shirk-like function. Whenever Hadith, fiqh, madhhab, or clergy create binding religion without permission from the Book of God, they enter the dangerous field of legislative shirk.
12. Dangerous examples of report-authority ruling over the Qur’an
When report sat in the place of the Qur’an, dangerous practical outcomes appeared. Many rulings later made famous in the name of Islam are either not in the Qur’an or conflict with its spirit and text.
The first example is killing the apostate and compulsion in religion.
لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ ۖ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ ۚ فَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِالطَّاغُوتِ وَيُؤْمِن بِاللَّهِ فَقَدِ اسْتَمْسَكَ بِالْعُرْوَةِ الْوُثْقَىٰ لَا انفِصَامَ لَهَا ۗ وَاللَّهُ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ
There is no compulsion in religion; right guidance has become clear from error. Whoever rejects Taghut and believes in The God has grasped the firmest handhold, with no break in it. The God is Hearing, Knowing.
Religion does not come by compulsion. Faith is not produced by the sword. Yet report manufactured a ruling of killing the apostate, placing many who leave a religion or critique report under threat of death in fiqh systems. This stands in tension with al-Baqarah 2:256, Yunus 10:41, an-Nisa 4:80, an-Nur 24:54, al-Ma’idah 5:92, and at-Taghabun 64:12.
The second example is stoning. The Qur’an says:
الزَّانِيَةُ وَالزَّانِي فَاجْلِدُوا كُلَّ وَاحِدٍ مِّنْهُمَا مِائَةَ جَلْدَةٍ ۖ وَلَا تَأْخُذْكُم بِهِمَا رَأْفَةٌ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ۖ وَلْيَشْهَدْ عَذَابَهُمَا طَائِفَةٌ مِّنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ
The female and male who commit zina: lash each one one hundred lashes; let no pity take you regarding them in the religion of The God if you believe in The God and the Last Day, and let a group of believers witness their punishment.
The Qur’an states the ruling. Report came and said that the married man and woman are to be stoned. Then some claimed that a verse of stoning existed, its recitation was abrogated but its ruling remained. This is extremely dangerous: it attributes a killing-ruling to God while no such verse exists in the Qur’an, and then sets aside the existing Qur’anic ruling by report.
فَإِذَا أُحْصِنَّ فَإِنْ أَتَيْنَ بِفَاحِشَةٍ فَعَلَيْهِنَّ نِصْفُ مَا عَلَى الْمُحْصَنَاتِ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ
When they are brought into the protection of marriage, then if they commit indecency, upon them is half of what is upon free married women of punishment.
This verse invalidates stoning from its root. If the punishment of the free married woman were death by stoning, what would half of death mean for the enslaved married woman? Death cannot be halved. Therefore the punishment must be measurable and divisible. Together with an-Nur 24:2, this shows that the Qur’anic ruling is of the kind that can be halved, not stoning.
The third example is child marriage. The Qur’an connects marriage with suitability, growth, responsibility, covenant, honorable companionship, tranquility, affection, and mercy.
وَأَنكِحُوا الْأَيَامَىٰ مِنكُمْ وَالصَّالِحِينَ مِنْ عِبَادِكُمْ وَإِمَائِكُمْ ۚ إِن يَكُونُوا فُقَرَاءَ يُغْنِهِمُ اللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ
Marry off the unmarried among you, and the suitable/righteous among your servants and maidservants. If they are poor, The God will enrich them from His bounty. The God is Vast, Knowing.
The word “suitable/righteous” in the context of marriage is decisive. A child may be innocent and pure, but suitability for marriage requires moral, intellectual, social, bodily, emotional, and responsibility-bearing capacity. Report-centered history often opened the way to justifying child marriage and placing it in religion’s name.
The fourth example is zakat and spending. The Qur’an ties spending to purification, growth, justice, and support for those in need; some systems turned it into religious taxation and clerical power.
الَّذِينَ يَلْمِزُونَ الْمُطَّوِّعِينَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ فِي الصَّدَقَاتِ وَالَّذِينَ لَا يَجِدُونَ إِلَّا جُهْدَهُمْ فَيَسْخَرُونَ مِنْهُمْ ۙ سَخِرَ اللَّهُ مِنْهُمْ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ
Those who criticize the voluntary givers among the believers in charities, and those who find nothing except their effort, so they mock them—The God mocks them, and for them is a painful punishment.
إِنَّمَا الصَّدَقَاتُ لِلْفُقَرَاءِ وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَالْعَامِلِينَ عَلَيْهَا وَالْمُؤَلَّفَةِ قُلُوبُهُمْ وَفِي الرِّقَابِ وَالْغَارِمِينَ وَفِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ ۖ فَرِيضَةً مِّنَ اللَّهِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ
Charities are only for the poor, the needy, those who work over them, those whose hearts are reconciled, freeing human beings from bondage, debtors, in the path of The God, and the traveler cut off; an obligation from The God. The God is Knowing, Wise.
Government is not listed as owner or recipient of charities. “Those who work over them” are administrators of distribution, not owners of zakat. A worker may receive due to service, but this is not the same as turning zakat into a state tax or clerical wealth-system.
وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا
Remain in your houses, do not display yourselves as in the former ignorance; establish salat, give zakat, and obey The God and His Messenger. The God only intends to remove impurity from you, people of the household, and purify you completely.
This shows that zakat is not only a state tax on official income. It is part of faith responsibility, purification, growth, giving, and social orientation. It can be from wealth, capacity, service, ability, and whatever blessing a person has. Its Qur’anic destination is supporting the vulnerable, debtors, travelers, freeing human beings, reconciling hearts, the path of God, and proper administration—not filling the treasury of power.
The fifth example is non-Qur’anic unseen beliefs. The Qur’an speaks of the Hereafter, account, resurrection, Paradise, and Hell. But many details of grave punishment, grave questioning, barzakh scenes, and frightening unseen stories entered through reports and sometimes became more central than the Qur’an. The problem is not reflection about the unseen; the problem is turning conjectural hearings into binding belief and frightening people with them as if they were Qur’anic certainty.
13. The Messenger’s complaint is about the abandonment of the Qur’an, not the abandonment of Hadith
The Qur’an presents a very heavy scene:
وَقَالَ الرَّسُولُ يَا رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِي اتَّخَذُوا هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنَ مَهْجُورًا
And the Messenger said: My Lord, my people have taken this Qur’an as abandoned.
This verse must be a criterion for religious conscience. The Messenger does not say: my people abandoned Hadith. He does not say: my people did not consider reports sufficient. He does not say: my people abandoned the books of the Hadith scholars or sectarian fiqhs. He says: they took this Qur’an as abandoned.
Abandoning the Qur’an is not only failing to recite it. The Qur’an may be recited, printed, memorized, and beautifully chanted, while being abandoned in judgment and criterion. When report governs over the verse, the Qur’an is abandoned. When fiqh restricts the verse, the Qur’an is abandoned. When Hadith abrogates a clear ruling of God, the Qur’an is abandoned. When Muslims first look to report for lawful and unlawful and then make the Qur’an follow report, the Qur’an is abandoned.
If the Messenger complains of the abandonment of the Qur’an, we have no right to build a religion in which the Qur’an is outwardly recited but practically buried under report.
14. The Qur’an and earlier scriptures: confirmation, not surrender before corruption
The Qur’an introduces itself as confirming earlier revelation. This does not mean every existing religious text in the hands of the People of the Book is final proof without measurement. The Qur’an confirms that divine guidance came in history, but it itself remains the final criterion.
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ ۚ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالْأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُوا مِن كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَكَانُوا عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاءَ ۚ فَلَا تَخْشَوُا النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
Indeed We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by what they were entrusted to preserve of the Book of The God, and they were witnesses over it. So do not fear people but fear Me, and do not sell My signs for a small price. Whoever does not judge by what The God sent down, those are the ones who cover the truth.
وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم بِعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ ۖ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْإِنجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ
We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus son of Mary, confirming what was before him of the Torah. We gave him the Gospel, in which was guidance and light, confirming what was before it of the Torah, and guidance and admonition for the people of taqwa.
The Qur’an acknowledges the divine origin of Torah and Gospel, but also critiques concealment, distortion, forgetting a portion, and judging by other than what God sent down. Confirmation does not mean surrender to every existing text. It means recognizing the root of revelation while the Qur’an remains the criterion over later corruption and human additions.
The same principle applies to Hadith. If Muslims accept that earlier communities could receive revelation and then human transmission, power, clergy, editing, interpretation, and sectarian conflict could obscure or distort it, Muslims have no right to exempt their own report heritage from examination. The Qur’an is not a tool for sanctifying every inheritance; it is the criterion over every inheritance.
15. Why is the claim “the Qur’an is incomplete without Hadith” dangerous?
When someone says the Qur’an is incomplete without Hadith, we must ask: incomplete relative to what? Guidance? Tawhid? Human responsibility? Ethics? The lawful and unlawful God wanted to state? The criterion of truth and falsehood?
If the meaning is that the Qur’an without Hadith is not sufficient for guidance, this contradicts the Qur’an’s own self-description. The Qur’an introduces itself as guidance, light, Furqan, clarification, no doubt in it, and detailing of the Book. If the meaning is that the Qur’an does not contain every historical detail of the Prophet’s life, that is true, but it is not a defect. The Qur’an is not a detailed biography or chronicle; it is the Book of guidance. God stated what was necessary for guidance.
If the meaning is that the Qur’an does not contain all later fiqh details, the answer is clear: perhaps those details were never the religion of God. Perhaps the problem is not the Qur’an, but a humanly manufactured religion that needs Hadith to justify itself. Some people first fill religion with report and fiqh details, then say that because these details are not in the Qur’an, the Qur’an is not sufficient. This is inverted reasoning. First one must see what the Qur’an calls religion, not assume inherited religion as certain and accuse the Qur’an of saying too little.
16. Love of the Prophet, or covering the Prophet’s message?
The people of Hadith usually present critique of report as disrespect toward the Prophet. But what is true respect for the Prophet? Is it accepting without question every statement attributed to him centuries later? Or refusing to allow lies to be attached to him? Is love of the Prophet burying the Qur’an he brought under report? Or making the Book he was commissioned to deliver the criterion?
If someone truly loves the Messenger, he must protect his messengership. His messengership brought the Qur’an. His complaint is about the abandonment of the Qur’an. His mission was clear delivery. He did not come so that thousands of conflicting reports would later take the place of the Book of God. Defending the Qur’an is defending the Prophet. Rejecting a report that contradicts the Qur’an is not disrespect to the Prophet; it is defending the Prophet against false attribution.
17. Conclusion
The Qur’an says to obey The God and the Messenger; but obedience to the Messenger is obedience to the messengership and delivered message, not sanctification of every later report. The Qur’an says the Prophet does not speak from desire; but that does not mean every historical report attributed to him is revelation. The Qur’an introduces itself as no doubt in it; Hadith does not have this station. The Qur’an forbids conjecture; Hadith, methodologically, remains in the field of historical conjecture. The Qur’an forbids following without knowledge; blind imitation of Hadith scholar, jurist, or mullah is not an excuse on the Day of Standing. The Qur’an forbids making lawful and unlawful without God’s permission; report-centeredness has repeatedly done exactly that.
The Qur’an says the clear verses are the mother of the Book. Ambiguities are not a field for fitnah. The Qur’an says the Messenger complains that the Qur’an is abandoned, not Hadith. Surah ash-Shu‘ara distinguishes preserved revelation from polluted hearings. Hadith is in the field of hearings, not in the station of preserved revelation. Ash-Shura 42:21 presents legislation without God’s permission as shirk-like. Wherever report turns something into binding religion without God’s permission, legislative shirk begins. Yunus 10:41 teaches the Prophet to separate responsibility in the face of denial, not repress. Therefore systems that answer critique, change of belief, leaving a madhhab, or rejection of report with prison, killing, legal takfir, and coercion depart from Qur’anic logic.
The Qur’an does not need Hadith to become divine. Hadith, if it has any value, needs the Qur’an to be measured. If a report agrees with the Qur’an, it may be accepted as historical support, admonition, or practical memory, but it does not become a second Qur’an. If it contradicts the Qur’an, it is rejected. If it tries to rule over the Qur’an, restrict it, abrogate it, manufacture lawful and unlawful, create killing and compulsion, or present itself as the condition of Qur’anic completeness, it is rejected.
The Qur’an is the criterion. The Qur’an is the ruler. The Qur’an is the Furqan. The Qur’an is no doubt in it. Every other speech, however famous, respected, ancient, popular, or attributed to great figures, must be measured before the Qur’an.
18. Closing supplication
Our Lord, do not make us among those who recite Your Book with their tongues but abandon it in judgment and ruling. Our Lord, protect us from following conjecture, fanaticism of forefathers, sanctifying transmitters, and making lawful and unlawful without knowledge. Our Lord, make us among those who, when Your verses are recited, their hearts soften, their intellects awaken, and they correct their path toward truth.
رَبَّنَا لَا تُزِغْ قُلُوبَنَا بَعْدَ إِذْ هَدَيْتَنَا وَهَبْ لَنَا مِن لَّدُنكَ رَحْمَةً ۚ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْوَهَّابُ
Our Lord, do not let our hearts deviate after You have guided us, and grant us mercy from Yourself. Indeed, You are the Giver.